Re: h-cfc's

[Mark Robinowitz <mrobinowitz@igc.org>]

At 08:23 AM 11/30/96 -0600, you wrote:
>Mark Robinowitz wrote:
>>depletors in 1988, when numerous CFCs were renamed H-CFCs.  (HCFCs are
>>>NOT banned by the Montreal Protocol, and are still produced.   They are
>>>several times more harmful to the ozone layer than Dupont/EPA claim.)
>
>not to forget epa disallowing, under lobbying from dupont & ici,
>hydrocarbon drop-in replacements to r-12 that are barely more of a fire
>hazard than a cigarette lighter, especially compared to a gasoline tank.
>
>but what's this about hcf's (& hfc's?) having greater ozone depletion than
>claimed?  some are potent greenhouse gasses, i know, but i thought leaving
>an H on made the whole molecule much more reactive in the troposphere?
>
>tony tweedale
>

the H does make it more reactive, but it doesn't make it safe.

freon-22, now called h-cfc-22, is 3 to 5 times worse for the ozone than
dupont claims, according to the institute for energy & environmental
research here in takoma park, md.  epa calculates the ozone impacts over 200
years, which is misleading.  (William Reilly is also now on the bored of
directors of dupont.)

i have a chemistry textbook from 1987 that merely discusses freon-22, since
it wasn't "pc" to call it an h-cfc yet.

If we're going to re-tool chemistry companies to avoid freon-12, why not do
it properly and switch to helium or propane based refrigerants, not renamed
ozone eaters such as h-cfc-22 or toxic greenhouse gases such as hfc-134a.

mark