1 Report of the TEAP XXIII/9 Task Force

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 2 Outline Introduction Banks for Refrigeration and Air Conditioning (RAC) Alternative options and costs for RAC Alternatives for high ambient temperatures Foams, quantities, options and costs Fire protection, quantities, options and costs Solvents, quantities, options and costs

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 3 Introduction Decision XXIII/9 requests a report for consideration by the OEWG-32, which should contain info on 4 elements TEAP established a Task Force to prepare the report consisting of 15 members (FTOC, RTOC, HTOC, CTOC) Preliminary draft report discussed at the TEAP meeting in Berlin, March 2012 Second draft of Task Force report circulated to TEAP and some other experts in the course of April 2012 Report posted on Ozone Secretariat website in May 2012

4 Refrigerant banks for A5 and Non-A5 Parties - commercial refrigeration Commercial refrigeration sector in non-Article 5 Parties: HCFCs have largely disappeared The HFC bank will be about 128,000 tonnes The non-HFC alternatives bank will be about 14,000 tonnes Commercial refrigeration sector in Article 5 Parties: HCFCs will still be a dominant bank - about 260,000 tonnes The HFC bank will be around 124,000 tonnes The total refrigerant bank in Article 5 Parties will be more than 3 times higher than the one in non-Article 5 Parties

5 Refrigerant banks for A5 and Non-A5 Parties - commercial refrigeration

6

7 Refrigerant banks for A5 and Non-A5 Parties - stationary AC 2015: the stationary AC sector in non-Article 5 Parties: HCFCs will constitute 35% of the bank with 340,000 tonnes The high GWP HFC bank will be about 550,000 tonnes The alternatives bank will be about 25,000 tonnes 2015: the stationary AC sector in Article 5 Parties: HCFCs will be the dominant bank (66% of the total) at a level of 870,000 tonnes The high GWP HFC bank will be about 400,000 tonnes The alternatives bank will be a bit larger than 20,000 tonnes The refrigerant bank in A5 Parties will be 1.4 times larger than the bank in Non-A5 Parties

8 Refrigerant banks for A5 and Non-A5 Parties - stationary AC

9

Assessment of the technical, economic and environmental feasibility of RAC options The Task Force considered the following aspects: Technical feasibility: energy efficiency of the equipment, and aspects related to toxicity and flammability Economic feasibility: investment and operating costs Environmental feasibility: energy efficiency of the equipment and total greenhouse gas emissions

Assessment of……. (continued) (2) Present RAC technology using the vapour compression cycle will be dominant for the next decades HCFC replacement are categorised as low GWP and medium/high GWP alternatives Low GWP alternatives which are broadly suitable for replacement of HCFC-22 are: HFC-152a, HFC-161, HC-290, HC-1270, R-717, R-744, HFC-1234yf, HFC-1234ze Refrigerants considered to be in the set of medium/high GWP alternatives are: HFC-134a, R-410A, R-404A and HFC-32; a variety of other mixtures of HFCs also fall into this category

Assessment of……. (continued) (3) Other than vapour-compression refrigeration, technologies that could be used for HCFC phase-out are: absorption cycles, desiccant cooling and Stirling systems, thermoelectric and a number of other thermodynamic cycles Most of these technologies are not close to commercial viability for air-cooled air conditioning applications It is unlikely that they will significantly penetrate these markets, other than for potential niche applications (such as absorption cycle), during the next decade Alternative technologies other than vapour-compression will therefore have a minimal impact on the HCFC-22 phase-out

Costs – refrigerants Considered a variety of different cost elements for different alternative refrigerants Divided into direct product/societal costs and ICC/IOC/”other” Societal Direct Societal Direct Type ×Disposal costs ×Service and maintenance costs ×Technician tooling ×Technician training ×Production line conversion ×Installation costs ×System components (materials) ×Refrigerant cost (price) – service/ maintenance ×Refrigerant cost (price) – manufacturing OtherIOCICCCost

Costs – refrigerants (2) Refrigerant price – sourced from UNEP data and intl. suppliers Wide range for all refrigerants fluids; vary depending upon whether for service ($1 - $70/kg) or manufacture ($<1 - $60/kg); must normalise for relative charge size (refrigerant density) System component costs – (compressors, evaporator, condenser, piping/valves, safety features) In most costs cases within ±10% Installation costs – complicated parameter; only qualitative indicators are estimated Production line conversion – example costs presented for medium scale/large systems and large scale/small systems Overall cost within ±10% across different refrigerant choices

Costs – refrigerants (3) Technician training – requires extra days for handling flammability, higher pressure, toxicity characteristics Technician tooling – new tools for handling flammability, higher pressure, different compatibility Typically unique manifold gauge, gas detector, recovery machine Service and maintenance costs – negligible difference for alternative refrigerants Disposal costs – could be negligible difference between refrigerants, but highly sensitive to local regulations (e.g., waste)

Costs – refrigerants (4) In general, it is not possible to estimate specific relative costs for each alternative Costs generally sensitive to Type of product, range of models/capacity of product, design options adopted for product, charge quantity of existing models Size of the enterprise, extent of product development, maturity of the product/option, extent of internal components (heat exchangers, compressors, etc.) Existing spread penetration and scale of the technology, status of patents/licences, region, etc. The Task Force report provides tabulated relative cost data from a study on low-GWP alternatives to HFCs

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 18 Stationary AC at high ambient temperatures Small packaged equipment in common usage for air conditioning is mass produced The refrigerant choice is based on a number of criteria: cooling capacity at high outdoor (ambient) temperatures energy efficiency input power required refrigerant GWP safety costs

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 19 Stationary AC at high ambient temperatures R-410A, a blend of hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) refrigerants is less efficient than HCFC-22 for ambient temperatures higher than about 45°C (higher condenser temperatures)

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 20 Stationary AC at high ambient temperatures There are many options one can theoretically choose from, dependent on whether emphasis is on safety, energy efficiency or GWP.

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 21 Commercial refrigeration at high ambient temperatures The refrigerant choices for commercial refrigeration are directly related to the cooling capacity and the evaporation temperature required HFC-134a, which has a relatively low volumetric capacity, is still the preferred refrigerant for small equipment HCFC-22 or R-404A, both having higher refrigeration capacities, are used in large commercial systems but also in small systems with low evaporation temperatures

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 22 Commercial refrigeration at high ambient temperatures High ambient temperatures lead to the choice of “medium pressure” refrigerants such as HFC-134a (or HFC-1234yf in near future) for low capacity single stage systems HC-290 is only applicable in smaller systems due to safety concerns Currently there is a lack of low GWP refrigerants with a large refrigeration capacity to replace R-404A or HCFC-22 in single stage refrigeration systems

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 23 Commercial refrigeration at high ambient temperatures Cascade systems with CO 2 used at the low evaporation temperature and refrigerants (such as HFC-134a, HFC-1234yf or HC-290) used at the high condensation temperature are energy efficient designs for high ambient temperatures Med. temp. refrigerant CO2 at low temperature Cascade system

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 24 Foams

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 25 Foams The main market segments using HCFCs are 1) rigid polyurethane insulating foam (PUR), including polyisocyanurate (PIR), and 2) extruded polystyrene (XPS) foam Hydrocarbons (HCs), mainly pentanes, are the preferred choice for HCFC replacement in rigid PU foams in large enterprises (annual consumption > 50 tonnes) For very stringent applications in terms of thermal insulation, such as appliances, HCs are sometimes blended with saturated HFCs to enhance the foam performance

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 26 Foams (2) The incremental capital cost (ICC) for the conversion to HCs in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) is, in most of the cases, not cost effective Saturated HFCs are used in significant amounts in Article 2 Parties for PUR -- mostly in North America This well proven technology using saturated HFCs has two drawbacks: high incremental operating cost (IOC) because of the blowing agent cost and high GWP. This constitutes a barrier for the conversion away from HCFCs in Article 5 Parties

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 27 Foams (3) There are current and emerging options to replace HCFCs in the different foam market segments that exhibit GWP values lower than 50: HCs, oxygenated hydrocarbons (HCOs), CO 2 (water) and unsaturated HFCs & HCFCs (HFOs) Small quantities of HCOs, specifically methyl formate and methylal, both low GWP options, are being used in integral skin foam and some PUR applications where thermal performance is not critical. Compared to HCFC-141b, operational costs are higher and thermal efficiency is lower

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 28 Foams (4) A new generation of CO 2 (all water blown) formulations have shown an improved dimensional stability relative to the traditional applied technology but they still provide foams with higher thermal conductivity than HCFC-141b Recent evaluations of unsaturated HFCs and HCFCs, commercially known as HFOs, done in a commercial household refrigerator/freezer line, showed improved thermal performance compared to saturated HFCs It is estimated that HFOs with GWP values lower than 10 will be commercially available in 2014/ The major obstacle for their use at SMEs will be the high unit cost compared to HCFC-141b

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 29 Fire protection

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G – 3 2 m e e t i n g, 2 3 – 2 7 J u l y , B a n g k o k 30 Fire protection HCFCs and their blends were one of several options marketed as replacements for halon 1301 and halon 1211 in total flood and local/streaming applications respectively It has been estimated that clean agent alternatives, i.e. those that leave no residue, comprise approximately 51% of the former halon market Of this, HCFCs are used in approximately 1% of the applications, and therefore the use of HCFCs in fire protection is very small compared to other alternatives This is primarily due to tradition, market forces and cost compared with CO 2 and not-in-kind alternatives

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G – 3 2 m e e t i n g, 2 3 – 2 7 J u l y , B a n g k o k 31 Fire Protection - total flood applications Only HCFC Blend A is still produced, and its use today is primarily for re-charge of exiting systems. Even this is diminishing because of changes to national regulations in countries where it has been accepted Clean agent alternatives to HCFC Blend A include inert gases and their blends, HFCs, and a fluoroketone (FK) The inert gases have no environmental impact and the FK has almost negligible environmental impact However, the system cost of these alternatives are approximately one third more than the two closest HFC alternatives, and the footprint of the cylinders necessary for the inert gases is three times that of its competitors

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G – 3 2 m e e t i n g, 2 3 – 2 7 J u l y , B a n g k o k 32 Fire protection – local/streaming applications Only HCFC Blend B is marketed in both non-A5 and A5 Parties, with a market ratio of 4 to 1 respectively. HCFC Blend E and neat HCFC-123 (the primary agent of the blends) have limited acceptance in some A5 Parties Clean agent, HCFC or HFC, based portable extinguishers are significantly more expensive (3-10 times) than traditional options (e.g. multi-purpose dry powder, water, CO 2 ) for the same fire rating (extinguisher performance). Thus they are only used where cleanliness is a necessity HCFC Blend B has a very low ODP whereas its main competitor, HFC-236fa, has an ODP of zero. However, the climate impact of HFC-236fa is 40 times higher than that of HCFC Blend B

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G – 3 2 m e e t i n g, 2 3 – 2 7 J u l y , B a n g k o k 33 Fire protection – future options Development and Testing of alternatives to ODS in fire protection continues, as detailed in the 2010 Assessment Report of the Halons Technical Options Committee With the exception or aircraft cargo bays, alternatives to ODS in the form of zero ODP gases, gas-powder blends, and other not-in-kind technologies (i.e. non-gaseous), exist for virtually every total flood application once served by ODS. However, retrofit of existing ODS based systems may not be technically or economically feasible For local/streaming applications, an unsaturated HBFC, 3,3,3-trifluoro-2-bromo-prop-1-ene, is undergoing final testing for commercialization, and if approved it would be an effective substitute for HCFC Blend B

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 34 Solvents

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 35 Solvents - ODSs and HCFCs 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA), carbon tetrachloride and CFC- 113 were ODSs used in solvent applications Over 90% of the ODS solvent uses have been reduced through conservation and substitution by not-in-kind technologies Remaining uses are shared by in-kind solvents such as chlorinated solvents, one brominated solvent, HCFCs, HFCs and HFEs Many options are available with various levels of acceptance to eliminate HCFCs in solvent applications No single option, however, can replace HCFCs completely

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 36 Solvents - Not-In-Kind alternatives Aqueous and semi-aqueous cleaning can be good substitutes for metal degreasing or even precision cleaning when corrosion of the materials is not an issue The capital investment can be high, but operating cost is generally inexpensive Hydrocarbons and alcohols are effective solvents but flammable. Explosion proof equipment is necessary. Most of the commonly used hydrocarbons are VOCs Not-In-Kind alternatives have no ODP and low GWP

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 37 Solvents - In-Kind alternatives Chlorinated solvents and nPB are applicable in a variety of cleaning applications due to their high solvency. Retrofitting is available to lower the investment. Operating costs are also low. Their ODP and GWP are small Allowable Exposure Limits (AELs) of these chlorinated and brominated solvents are very low

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 38 Solvents - In-Kind alternatives (2) HFC and HFEs are similar to HCFCs except for their degreasing performance. Due to their mild solvency, additional ingredients may be necessary HFCs and HFEs are expensive; they have no ODP but a middle to high GWP

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 39 Solvents - future options Unsaturated HCFCs and HFCs (HFOs) are under development They have extremely small GWP values due to their very short atmospheric lifetimes. They also could be the candidates to replace the normal HCFCs They would be as expensive as HFCs and HFEs

M o n t r e a l P r o t o c o l O E W G m e e t i n g, J u l y , B a n g k o k 40 Thank you !