United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) DEC/Information Unit for Conventions International Environment House, Geneva Win-win solutions for the climate and 11-13, chemin des Anémones CH-1219, Châtelaine, Switzerland the ozone layer. [email protected] - www.unep.ch/dec

A simplified guide to the Special Report on HFCs and PFCs from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Technical and Economic Assessment Panel

UNEP Pollution2.indd 3-4 2/06/06 17:47:18 Win-winWin-win ssolutionsolutions fforor tthehe cclimatelimate aandnd the ozone layer

1 A guide to the acronyms

CFCs – Chlorofl uorocarbons have caused the greatest amount of ozone depletion. They are also powerful greenhouse gases. They will soon be almost completely phased out under the Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer.

HCs – Hydrocarbons are ozone- and climate-friendly substitutes for CFCs. They are fl ammable and toxic, however, which currently limits their applications.

HCFCs – Hydrochlorofl uorocarbons were the fi rst CFC substitutes to reach the market. Although much safer than CFCs, they do harm the ozone layer and contribute to global warming. They will therefore be phased out under the Montreal Protocol over the next several decades.

HFCs – Hydrofl uorocarbons are completely ozone-safe substitutes. However, because they are powerful greenhouse gases, they are included in the Kyoto Protocol on climate change.

PFCs – Perfl uorocarbons are completely ozone-safe substitutes. However, because they are powerful greenhouse gases, they are included in the Kyoto Protocol. Introduction

After some 20 years of effectiveeffective action under the MontrealMontreal ProtocolProtocol onon Substances that Deplete the Ozone LayerLayer,, govergovernmentsnments araree now aaddressingddressing the fact that chlorchloroflofl uoruorocarbonsocarbons (CFCs) and some of the chemicchemicalsals ususeded as substitutes for them areare greenhousegreenhouse gases that together contributecontribute signifi cantly to global warming.

Policymakers face a serious dilemma. Stopping the destruction ofof thethe ozoneozone layer is vital for protectingprotecting human health and vulnerable ecosystems.ecosystems. But minimizing climate change and its expected consequences forfor bothboth man-man- made and natural systems is also essential. What can be done to ttackleackle bbothoth the ozone and climate change challenges without making una unacceptablecceptable trade-offs or compromises?

ToTo answer this question, the governinggoverning bodies of the MontrealMontreal ProtocolProtocol and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeChange jointlyjointly requestedrequested a scientifi c and technical assessment. WorkingWorking GroupsGroups I (science)(science) and III (mitigation) of the IntergovernmentalIntergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeChange (IPCC),(IPCC), together with the ozone regime’sregime’s TechnologyTechnology and Economic AssessmentAssessment Panel (TEAP), respondedresponded by producingproducing a Special Report in AprilApril 20052005 entitled “Safeguarding“Safeguarding the ozone layer and the global climate system:system: issuesissues relatedrelated to hydrhydroflofl uoruorocarbonsocarbons (HFCs) and perfl uoruorocarbonsocarbons (PF(PFCs)”.Cs)”.

Based on the most up-to-date scientifi c and technical literaturliteraturee aavailable,vailable, the reportreport concludes that it will indeed be possible to maintain the MontrealMontreal Protocol’sProtocol’s momentum while achieving the goals of the ClimateClimate ChangeChange Convention and its Kyoto PrProtocol.otocol. It identifi es a portfolio of solutsolutionsions tthathat – if energetically applied – could cut the global warming contribution of CFCs and their rreplacementseplacements in half by the year 2015 compcomparedared to 2002 levels. This reductionreduction can be achieved even though global economic growthgrowth will boost demand for the functions traditionally prprovidedovided bbyy CCFCs.FCs.

UNEP has pr producedoduced this short public information booklet w withith t thehe a aimim of making the Special Report’sReport’s technical fi ndings moremore accessibleaccessible toto thethe general reader.

2 3 CFCs → HCFCsHCFCs → HFCs

Climate change and ozone depletion araree essentially two separaseparatete iissues,ssues, with their own sets of causes, impacts and solutions. NevertheleNevertheless,ss, ttheyhey aarere linked to one another in important ways by the chemistry of certaincertain man-man- made gases and by the chemistry of the atmosphere.

The story begins in 1928, with the invention of CFCs. ChemicallyChemically stable,stable, non-toxic, non-corrosive,non-corrosive, nonfl ammable and versatile, CFCsCFCs becamebecame increasinglyincreasingly important by the 1960s in rrefrigerators,efrigerators, air conditioneconditioners,rs, sspraypray cans, solvents, foams and other applications.

But because of their chemical stability,stability, CFCs and other relatedrelated substancessubstances remainremain in the atmosphereatmosphere for many years. They gradually drift up intointo thethe stratospherestratosphere wherwheree they fi nally decompose, but not beforbeforee cacatalyzingtalyzing tthehe destruction of the ozone molecules (O3) that prprotectotect life on earth frfromom solar radiation. In the mid-1980s, scientists discoverdiscovereded the AntarAntarcticctic oozonezone “ho“hole”,le”, revealingrevealing that the ozone layer had deteriorated much moremore thanthan predicted.predicted. Alarmed, governmentsgovernments moved quickly to adopt the 1987 MontrealMontreal Protocol.Protocol. The ProtocolProtocol established strict schedules for phasing out CFCs – thethe primeprime culprits – and other ozone-destroyingozone-destroying gases such as halons andand carboncarbon tetrachloride.

Corporations stepped up their researchresearch into substitutes for thethe soon-to-soon-to- be-banned chemicals. Developing alteralternativesnatives posed a rrealeal cchallenge,hallenge, aass CFCs in particular had come to play such a central rroleole in so manmanyy pproducts.roducts. But industry quickly succeeded in introducingintroducing hydrochloroflhydrochlorofl uorocarbonsuorocarbons (HCFCs), which had alralreadyeady been under development, as the fi rsrstt ggenerationeneration of replacement chemicals.

Unfortunately,Unfortunately, while much less destructive than CFCs, HCFCs alsoalso depletedeplete the ozone layer layer.. And, although much less potent than the C CFCsFCs t theyhey areare replacing,replacing, HCFCs areare greenhousegreenhouse gases. This caused concernconcern atat a time when climate change was just starting to become a majormajor globalglobal issue. Recognizing that HCFCs wer weree not completely ozone-safe, go governmentsvernments agreedagreed to treattreat them as transitional substances to be phased outout underunder thethe MontrealMontreal Protocol.Protocol. Developed countries areare to reducereduce HCFC consumptionconsumption by 65% by 2010 and 99.5% by 2020. HoweverHowever,, HCFC prproductionoduction ccontinuesontinues to expand in developing countries, which have until 2016 to freezefreeze theirtheir consumption of HCFCs and until 2040 to eliminate them c completely.ompletely.

In the 1990s, corporations started to market the second gene generationration o off CFC substitutes, notably hydroflhydrofl uorocarbonsuorocarbons (HFCs) and perfl uorocarbonsuorocarbons (PFCs). HFCs and PFCs areare 100% ozone-friendly,ozone-friendly, but because mostmost ofof themthem areare powerful grgreenhouseeenhouse gases, they have been included in ththee bbasketasket ooff six gases whose emissions araree contrcontrolledolled under the 1997 Kyoto PProtocolrotocol oonn climate change.

Other chemicals currentlycurrently seen as important alternatives,alternatives, suchsuch asas hydrocarbonshydrocarbons (HCs), ammonia and carbon dioxide, have alr alreadyeady b beeneen i inn use for a long time, particularly in refrigeratingrefrigerating equipment. TheyThey areare bothboth ozone-friendly and climate-safe. HoweverHowever,, due to their toxic and fl aammablemmable qualities they areare not yet fully compatible with all available technologiestechnologies andand applications.

Meanwhile, scientists discovereddiscovered new links between climate changechange andand ozone depletion. They found that the destruction of stratosphericstratospheric ozoneozone – which is itself a gr greenhouseeenhouse gas – indir indirectlyectly helps to cool t thehe c climate.limate. However,However, the amount of indirectindirect cooling is very likely less than the amountamount ofof warming caused dirdirectlyectly by ozone-depleting grgreenhouseeenhouse gases. In aaddition,ddition, these araree two difdifferentferent mechanisms that do not simply ofoffsetfset one aanother.nother. The net effecteffect is differentdifferent for each gas: ozone-depleting halons contributecontribute mainly to cooling, while CFCs and HCFCs contribute much moremore toto warmingwarming than cooling, and HFCs and PFCs contribute only to warming.

What this complex set of linkages boils down to is this: the transitiontransition fromfrom CFCs to HCFCs and later to HFCs providedprovided a rapid fi rst responseresponse toto thethe ozoneozone problemproblem and eliminated most uses of the mor more-harmfule-harmful CFCs CFCs.. H However,owever,

4 5 as recognizedrecognized by the MontrealMontreal Protocol,Protocol, HCFCs do eventually needneed toto bebe phased out. The use of second-generation replacementreplacement chemicals,chemicals, notablynotably HFCs, also raises policy questions because of their rolerole in climateclimate changechange and their inclusion in the Kyoto Protocol.Protocol. Fortunately,Fortunately, a growinggrowing numbernumber ofof technical and policy options areare becoming available that can minimize thethe need for HFCs and protectprotect both the ozone layer and the globalglobal climate.climate.

Schematic diagram of how CFCs and their substitutes contribute to ozone depletiondepletion andand climate change. Source: IPCC/TEAP Special Report, 2005. A portfolioportfolio ooff ssolutionsolutions

Some of the available policies and measur measureses for addr addressingessing t thehe o ozone-zone- climate policy dilemma involve prpreventingeventing CFCs and CFC rreplacementseplacements tthathat areare alreadyalready in use fromfrom entering the atmosphere.atmosphere. Others seek toto minimize the futurefuture demand for these grgreenhouseeenhouse gases.

The specifi c solutions that areare available vary fromfrom application to application.application. All of them will cost money.money. However,However, some solutions for replacingreplacing CFCsCFCs andand their currcurrentent substitutes appear to be rrelativelyelatively inexpensive when ccomparedompared with options for r reducingeducing carbon dioxide and other gr greenhouseeenhouse g gases.ases.

Emissions fromfrom yesteryesterday’sday’s prproductionoduction

VirtuallyVirtually all ozone-depleting substances and their rreplacementseplacements aarere ccurrentlyurrently used in closed, or contained, systems. As a rresult,esult, they araree ggenerallyenerally nonott emitted until years or even decades after being prproduced.oduced. Large aamountsmounts ooff CFCs still exist in refrigerators,refrigerators, air conditioners, insulating foams and chemicalchemical stockpiles, frfromom which they can leak. When equipment is decomdecommissioned,missioned, the chemicals areare typically (and unfortunately) releasedreleased into the atmosphere.atmosphere. In the technical literature,literature, the chemicals contained in productsproducts oror storedstored inin tanks are defi ned as banks.

Based on measur measurementsements of changing atmospheric conce concentrations,ntrations, a substantial proportionproportion of currentcurrent emissions of CFC-11 and CFC-12CFC-12 – tthehe two most common CFCs – come fromfrom these banks. Not surprisingly,surprisingly, globalglobal emissions of HFCs and HCFCs, which enteredentered into use moremore recentlyrecently thanthan CFCs, areare lower than their currentcurrent reportedreported production;production; nevertheless,nevertheless, banksbanks of these substitute chemicals araree still being built up. The risk iiss tthathat ttheyhey could be releasedreleased into the atmospheratmospheree at a later date.

Reducing leaks fr fromom banks would substantially lower gr greenhouseeenhouse g gasas emissions, benefi ting both the ozone layer and the climate system.system. MostMost ofof the bank-rbank-relatedelated emissions that can be prpreventedevented between nonoww aandnd 22015015 areare fr fromom r refrigeration.efrigeration. These emissions cuts could be achieve achievedd t throughhrough improvedimproved and expanded operations for the recoveryrecovery of equipmequipmentent ooncence it

6 7 has reachedreached the end of its useful life and for fi nal destruction.destruction. MeasuresMeasures and technologies for reducingreducing leaks and evaporation throughthrough improvedimproved containment could also be helpful.

Emissions from tomorrow’s production

In addition to reducingreducing emissions fromfrom banks, a number of optionsoptions areare available for reducingreducing emissions frfromom futurfuturee prproductionoduction and futufuturere bbanks:anks:

1. Reduce the amounts of harmful chemicals needed in any particularparticular typetype of equipment;

2. Incr Increaseease the use of ammonia, hydrhydrocarbonsocarbons (HCs) and otheotherr aalternativelternative substances that do not contribute to global warming; and

3. Adopt various emerging technologies that avoid the use o off o ozone-zone- depleting or gr greenhouseeenhouse gases. Determining which technolog technologyy o optionption is best for the climate can be diffi cult due to the limited qua quantityntity o off published data and comparative analyses. Ideally,Ideally, the indirectindirect energy-energy- relatedrelated emissions of carbon dioxide (which can be signifi cant) overover thethe full life cycle of a piece of equipment should be factoredfactored in.

Policies and measures

Policymakers have at their disposal a range of policies, measuresmeasures andand instruments that can be used to discourage emissions fromfrom bothboth pastpast andand future production. These include:

1. Regulations, such as performance standar standards,ds, certifi cation, r restrictionsestrictions and end-of-life management;

2. Economic instruments, including taxation, emissions trading,trading, fi nancialnancial incentives and deposit refunds; 3. V Voluntaryoluntary agreements,agreements, notably voluntary reductionsreductions in use and emissions,emissions, industry partnerships and implementation of good practice guidguidelines;elines; and

4. Inter Internationalnational cooperation mechanisms, such as the Kyoto P Protocol’srotocol’s Clean Development Mechanism and (for phasing out CFCs in developingdeveloping countries) the MontrealMontreal PrProtocol’sotocol’s Multilateral Fund.

DifferentDifferent applications, difdifferentferent solutions

The Special Report considers the most important options for minimizing thethe climate impact of CFCs and their replacementsreplacements sector by sector.sector. LookingLooking outout as far as the year 2015 (beyond which the resultsresults of technologytechnology innovationinnovation areare diffi cult to prpredict),edict), it rreacheseaches the following conclusions.

DirectDirect gr greenhouseeenhouse gas emissions fr fromom refrigeration can be reduced by 10-30% by 2015 (compared(compared to 2002 levels). ImprovedImproved energy effieffi cienciesciencies could also signifi cantly reducereduce emissions fromfrom fossil fuels used forfor producingproducing energy.energy. Refrigerating equipment (and air conditioners) have so farfar largelylargely used HCFCs to replacereplace CFCs. Newer equipment is increasinglyincreasingly usingusing replacementsreplacements with zerzeroo ozone-depleting potential, including HFCsHFCs,, aammoniammonia and hydrocarbons.

AvailableAvailable solutions for full supermarket systems include replacingreplacing CFCsCFCs andand HCFCs with alternativealternative refrigerants,refrigerants, improvingimproving containment andand adoptingadopting various innovative effi ciency improvements.improvements. For food processing,processing, coldcold storage and industrial refrigeration,refrigeration, HFCs will increasinglyincreasingly replacereplace HCFC-22HCFC-22 and CFCs; the use of ammonia and a combination of ammonia andand carboncarbon dioxide is also expected to rise. In certain refrigeratedrefrigerated transport applications,applications, ammonia and hydrocarbonshydrocarbons have alreadyalready been commercialized.commercialized. Similarly,Similarly, domestic r refrigeratorsefrigerators ar aree alr alreadyeady well advanced in their t transitionransition t too hydrocarbonshydrocarbons in several parts of the world (in EurEurope,ope, for exampexample,le, ttheyhey aarere already HFC-free).

8 9 Direct greenhouse emissions from air conditioning and heating systems can be r reducededuced by impr improvingoving the r recoveryecovery of r refrigerantsefrigerants fr fromom o obsoletebsolete equipment, reducingreducing the amount of refrigerantrefrigerant used, improvingimproving containmentcontainment and using refrigerantsrefrigerants with a reducedreduced or negligible impact on thethe climate.climate. It may also be possible to reducereduce indirectindirect (energy-related)(energy-related) emissionsemissions throughthrough moremore energy-effi cient systems and imprimprovedoved building designs tthathat rreduceeduce heat gain or loss.

HFC mixturmixtures,es, ammonia and some hydrhydrocarbonsocarbons araree alralreadyeady bbeingeing ususeded as alternativesalternatives to HCFC-22 for many systems in developed countries.countries. For mobile air conditioners, better containment, end-of-life r recoveryecovery a andnd recyclingrecycling could rreduceeduce dirdirectect emissions of grgreenhouseeenhouse gases (ma(mainlyinly HHFCs)FCs) by up to 50%, or total directdirect and indirindirectect emissions by 30-40%30-40%..

Because foams tend to have such long lifetimes, the gr greatesteatest potential for reducingreducing emissions fromfrom existing banks will occur after 2015;2015; manymany banks of insulating foams contained in buildings will be decommisdecommissionedsioned between 2030 and 2050. TodayToday CFC-frCFC-freeee foams araree being prproducedoduced wwithith water,water, carbon dioxide, hydr hydrocarbons,ocarbons, HFCs and (decr (decreasingly)easingly) H HCFCs.CFCs.

Reducing emissions from medical aerosols has limited potential due to medical constraints, the relativelyrelatively low level of currentcurrent emissions andand thethe high costs of alternatives.alternatives. Non-medical aerosolsaerosols and solvents alsoalso offeroffer littlelittle potential because most rremainingemaining uses araree critical to performancperformancee oorr ssafety.afety.

Replacing the remaining halons still contained in fi re-protectionre-protection equipment also has limited potential. CurrentCurrent emission levels areare low,low, and muchmuch ofof thethe transition to alternatives has already taken place.

The price tag

EffortsEfforts to minimize emissions of CFCs and their replacementsreplacements w willill c costost money.money. The estimated costs vary widely and depend on the type aandnd ssizeize ooff each particular piece of equipment and the solution employed. InIn addition,addition, much of the data needed to assess likely costs araree prproprietaryoprietary and tthushus nonott available in published journals.

Nevertheless, the costs of a few options can be meaningfully assessed.assessed. Incinerators for destrdestroyingoying the HFC byprbyproductsoducts of HCFC manufacmanufactureture ccouldould cost hundrhundredseds or thousands of dollars per unit. Some studies sugsuggestgest tthathat replacingreplacing HFCs in a household rrefrigeratorefrigerator could cost frfromom zerzeroo ttoo US$US$30,30, while replacingreplacing HFCs in an automobile air-conditioningair-conditioning unit could costcost fromfrom US$48 to US$180. The costs for reducingreducing emissions fromfrom bigger equipment,equipment, such as large-scale supermarket systems, would be much higher.higher.

When comparedcompared to many other ways of reducingreducing greenhousegreenhouse gasgas emissions,emissions, some of these costs appear to be rrelativelyelatively lowlow.. In addition, sosomeme ooff tthehe climate-friendly alternativesalternatives to CFCs will also reducereduce energy use,use, aandnd tthushus yearly energy costs and associated carbon dioxide emissions.

10 11 SeizingSeizing oopportunitiespportunities

The history of the MontrealMontreal ProtocolProtocol gives cause for optimismoptimism thatthat greenhousegreenhouse gas emissions fr fromom CFC substitutes can indeed b bee r reducededuced by 2015. Under the Protocol,Protocol, the phase out of ozone-depleting substancessubstances has pproceededroceeded ffasteraster aandnd mmoreore ccheaplyheaply tthanhan aanyonenyone eexpected.xpected. SSustainingustaining tthehe fruitfulfruitful ccooperationooperation bbetweenetween ssciencecience aandnd iindustryndustry tthathat mmadeade tthishis ppossibleossible ccouldould leadlead toto similarsimilar successsuccess inin reducingreducing thethe climateclimate impactsimpacts ofof HFCsHFCs andand PFCs.PFCs.

Although HCFCs and HFCs araree grgreenhouseeenhouse gases, it is useful to kkeepeep iinn mmindind that the CFCs they rreplaceeplace had a much grgreatereater impact on both tthehe oozonezone layer and the climate. As a result,result, the relativerelative contribution that thisthis groupgroup ofof chemicals made to global warming fromfrom 1990 to 2000 declined fromfrom 33%33% toto 10% when comparedcompared to the emissions frfromom fossil-fuel combustcombustion.ion.

Nevertheless, this means that emissions of CFCs and their substitutessubstitutes stillstill contribute araroundound 5% of humanity’humanity’ss total grgreenhouseeenhouse gas emisemissionssions ffromrom fossil fuels and other sources.sources. This is a signifi cant amount. Furthermore,Furthermore, under a business-as-usual scenario (which assumes that existing regulationsregulations and practices continue unchanged), the total combined directdirect greenhousegreenhouse emissions of CFCs, HCFCs, HFCs and PFCs areare projectedprojected to declinedecline onlyonly slightly by 2015 comparcompareded to 2005. This is because the decline iinn CCFCsFCs wwillill be almost balanced by the increasedincreased reliancereliance on HCFCs and HFCsHFCs andand byby the higher overall demand for such substances in a grgrowingowing globagloball eeconomy.conomy. (The use of PFCs as substitutes for ozone-depleting substances, however,however, isis projected to decrease.)

Fortunately,Fortunately, the currentcurrent best practices and recoveryrecovery methods describeddescribed inin the IPCC/TEAP Special Report could – if moremore fully exploited thanthan underunder a business-as-usual scenario – cut the global warming contribution ooff oozone-zone- depleting substances and their gr greenhouseeenhouse substitutes in h halfalf b byy 2 2015015 (compared(compared to 2002). About 60% of this potential involves HFC eemissions,missions, 30% involves HCFCs, and 10% involves CFCs.

Thanks to an accident of chemistry,chemistry, CFCs and their replacementsreplacements – whichwhich have virtually defi ned the modernmodern lifestyle – have been implicatedimplicated in notnot one, but two of today’stoday’s most serious global challenges: the destructiondestruction ofof the ozone layer and climate change. The coming decade coucouldld pproviderovide a critical opportunity for moving beyond the consequences of this unforeseenunforeseen coincidence.

12 13 About the Assessment Panels

The United Nations Environment Programme’s Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) supports the Parties to the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. It provides objective and technical information about new technologies and substitutes for ozone-depleting substances. The TEAP and its Technical Options Committees engage some 200 experts around the world to produce a comprehensive assessment report every four years.

The TEAP also produces other reports, generally several per year, and establishes Task Forces to address specialized issues as they arise. Its rigorous approach to assessing the technological and economic literature relevant to ozone depletion has been widely recognized as a key reason for the Protocol’s success.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and UNEP. Its mandate is to make policy-relevant assessments of the worldwide literature on the scientifi c, technical and socio-economic aspects of climate change. The IPCC’s various assessment reports, special reports, technical papers and methodologies have become standard works of reference for climate change policymakers, experts and students.

The IPCC’s First Assessment Report, completed in 1990, helped inspire governments to adopt the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Its Second Assessment Report was published in 1996 and played a key role in the negotiations that led to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. The Third Assessment Report was released in 2001, and the Fourth Assessment Report will be fi nalized in 2007. 14 15

16 17 Published by the United Nations EnvironmentEnvironment Programme’sProgramme’s Division for EnvironmentalEnvironmental Conventions in May 2006. For additional copies, please contact UNEPUNEP,, Information Unit for Conventions, InterInternationalnational EnvirEnvironmentonment House, 15 chemin des AnémoAnémones,nes, CH-1219 Châtelaine (Geneva), Switzerland; [email protected]; or +41-22-917-8244/8196. See also www.ipcc.ch, www.unep.org, and www.wmo.int.

Printed on recycled paper.

Printed at United Nations, Geneva GE.06-01215–June 2006–3,000 - UNEP/IUC/2006/4