Cooling is no longer about comfort. It is a matter of survival. Underscored by this early and dangerous heat wave across Europe, access to cooling is quietly becoming one of the most important determinants of public health and social justice.  

If the world is not deliberate about expanding access to cooling, the “right to cool” will become a new dividing line. It will clearly divide wealthy neighborhoods from vulnerable ones, and those who can escape heat from those who cannot.  

More than one billion people worldwide still lack adequate cooling access, even as demand surges. Cooling demand is projected to more than triple by 2050, driven by rising temperatures, urbanization, and income growth. This is a story of two trajectories unfolding simultaneously, expanding access for some and deepening exposure for most. 

If cooling remains primarily a private good, those trajectories will diverge further. This is especially the case for Europe where air conditioning has not been integrated into construction as it has in the United States. In the US, nearly 90 percent of households use air conditioning, with most of those same households using central air. In Europe, it is closer to 20 percent, with some countries facing far lower coverage. 

Centralized air conditioning can increase energy strain and may not meet everyone’s needs: A temperature safe for a healthy adult may be too hot for an elderly resident. It is also inherently inefficient, frequently cooling empty spaces rather than people.  

However, seemingly conversely, central air can more easily be converted to sustainable models and it offers a foundation for integrating with district cooling networks or “ice battery” mechanisms.

The world cannot air-condition its way out of this crisis

Cooling is not just a social problem. It is also an energy problem. Cooling systems already account for roughly 20 percent of global electricity consumption. As consumption spikes with the rapid expansion of data centers and digital infrastructure, power grids will face even more stress. System-level approaches—often linked to district energy, thermal storage, and smart grids—can reduce peak demand, shift loads, and align cooling with renewable energy supply. They signal a shift away from standalone devices toward cooling as infrastructure. But without a clear equity framework, even these advances risk reinforcing existing divides. 

Cooling must be treated as essential infrastructure. That starts with reducing the need for active cooling in the first place. Passive solutions like shade, reflective materials, and natural ventilation can dramatically lower urban temperatures and energy demand. In fact, nearly two-thirds of the emissions reductions opportunities identified in the cooling sector come from passive and low-energy measures. These are not marginal interventions. They are foundational. 

They are also inherently more equitable. A shaded street cools everyone. A park lowers temperatures across an entire neighborhood. A well-designed, properly ventilated building protects its occupants regardless of income.  

The alternative—individual, energy-intensive cooling—cools some while heating the city around them and straining the systems everyone depends on. 

What’s the way forward?

A concern for equity must determine not only what the world builds, but also where leaders act first. If infrastructure in public spaces and buildings continues to be designed without considering summer heat, inequality will be locked into the built environment for decades. Minimum thermal performance standards, requirements for passive cooling, and protections for tenants from disproportionate energy costs are not technical details; they are instruments of justice. 

This is not just a question of temperature. It is a question of what kind of societies are being built in a warming world. The world faces a clear choice. It can allow cooling to become another axis of inequality, or it can build systems that deliver cooling as a shared public good that is embedded into the fabric of cities globally.