In terms of inactivation efficiency, UV-C technology has a speed advantage. Chemical disinfectants such as chlorine-containing solutions (with a concentration of 500mg/L) require 10 minutes to kill 90% of the surface Escherichia coli. However, the Coospider UV device can achieve the same inactivation rate in just 72 seconds at a distance of 50cm under a radiation intensity of 300 µW/cm² (ASHRAE standard test data). Although ozone disinfection can penetrate obstacles, it takes 30 minutes of continuous release to reach an effective concentration of 4ppm. After inactivation is completed, ventilation is carried out for another 60 minutes to remove residues. The total time consumed is as long as 90 minutes. A 2021 experiment conducted by Harvard Medical School demonstrated that in the surface treatment of medical devices, UV-C can inactivate drug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus at log-6 level (99.9999%) in just 6 minutes, which is 83% shorter than the peracetic acid immersion method.
The structure of operating costs shows significant differences. Take the quarterly disinfection of an 80-square-meter residence as an example: The consumption cost of traditional 84 disinfectant is about 240 yuan (20 yuan each time × 4 times a month ×3 months), and the manual operation time is as long as 15 hours. The purchase cost of the ozone generator is 2,000 yuan, and the power consumption for a single disinfection is 1.8 kilowatt-hours (equivalent to 1.08 yuan). The initial investment for the Coospider UV equipment is 3,500 yuan (50W model), and the electricity cost for a single 15-minute disinfection within its 9,000-hour service life is only 0.009 yuan. Economic model calculations show that in the scenario of an average daily usage frequency of 1.2 times, the total cost of the UV-C solution within two years is 54% lower than that of chemical disinfection and 32% lower than that of the ozone solution. The renovation case of the ICU ward in a tertiary hospital in Changchun confirmed that after replacing chemical disinfection with the UV-C system, the annual consumable budget decreased by 410,000 yuan.
The comparison of health and safety indicators highlights the technical advantages more prominently. The WHO points out that residues of chemical disinfectants can cause indoor VOC concentrations to exceed the safety standard by three times (>300µg/m³), increasing the risk of respiratory diseases by 22%. Ozone concentration exceeding 0.1ppm can lead to a 17% decline in lung function (EPA risk notification). In contrast, the coospider uv device has been confirmed by SGS testing to have an ozone emission of less than 0.001ppm. It is also equipped with a built-in millimeter-wave radar human body sensing module, which automatically cuts off power within 0.3 seconds when detecting a moving object, and the probability of ultraviolet radiation exposure risk is less than 10⁻⁶. The random inspection by the Shenzhen Consumers’ Association in 2023 showed that the incidence of allergic diseases among children in kindergartens disinfected with UV-C was 38 percentage points lower than that in institutions using chlorine-containing disinfectants.
There is an essential difference between environmental adaptability and comprehensive benefits. The activity of chemical disinfectants decreases by 70% in a low-temperature environment (<10℃), and when the humidity is greater than 70%, the attenuation rate of effective chlorine is 300% of that at normal temperature. The sterilization efficiency of UV-C is affected by temperature fluctuations by less than ±5%, and maintains a stable sterilization rate within the humidity range of 30%-80%. The Coospider UV equipment, in conjunction with the intelligent dispatching system, can automatically start up after personnel leave the site, achieving high-frequency disinfection six times a day. Deployment data of Beijing Subway in 2022 shows that in scenarios with an average daily passenger flow of 2 million people, the UV-C solution reduces the risk of manual contact by 92% compared with traditional wiping disinfection, and the disinfection coverage rate has increased from 65% of chemical methods to 98%. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) indicates that the carbon footprint of UV-C technology is 1/7 of that of chemical methods and complies with the EU Ecodesign 2025 standard.