1. Demand for the "old technology" is based on projection of the use of CFCs within Europe for:

a. refrigerant fluids,
b. precision cleaning solvents,
c. insulation foam blowing agents
d. aerosol and open cell foam propellants.

2. This was projected from the demand during the 1970s at an initial compound growth rate of 6%/year, falling in time exactly as described in Prather et al., referenced above. The actual level of transfer of demand to HCFCs (which are also Ozone Depleting Substances and are regulated in Europe) was small compared to the increase projected here and, for all practical purposes, can be ignored.

3. Emissions of HFCs during the 1990s are calculated from audited production and sales data and are consistent with atmospheric measurements. HFC emissions are projected forward from this baseline exactly as for CFCs.

4. The massive reduction in impact from HFCs compared to CFCs is due mainly to the much lower quantities used.

a. because leakage rates have been substantially reduced, the quantities charged to each refrigeration system can be much less (50% or less).
b. most (over 90%) of the requirements for precision cleaning are now met by other technologies.
c. HFCs are used only in critical applications for insulation foam, reducing the requirement by more than 90%
d. aerosols and open cell foams represented about half of the demand for old technology and, except for very specialised applications, CFCs have been replaced by non-fluorocarbon systems.

5. Furthermore, in applications where HFCs are the technically superior option, any release has a lower impact. The GWP conversion factors (to equate an emission to a quantity of CO₂) for HFCs are about one quarter those of CFCs.

(January 2004)

Visit: