Skip to comments.A Novel Tactic in Climate Fight Gains Some Traction
Posted on 11/09/2010 10:14:24 PM PST by neverdem
WASHINGTON With energy legislation shelved in the United States and little hope for a global climate change agreement this year, some policy experts are proposing a novel approach to curbing global warming: including greenhouse gases under an existing and highly successful international treaty ratified more than 20 years ago.
The treaty, the Montreal Protocol, was adopted in 1987 for a completely different purpose, to eliminate aerosols and other chemicals that were blowing a hole in the Earths protective ozone layer.
But as the signers of the protocol convened the 22nd annual meeting in Bangkok on Monday, negotiators are considering a proposed expansion in the ozone treaty to phase out the production and use of the industrial chemicals known as hydrofluorocarbons or HFCs. The chemicals have thousands of times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide, the most prevalent greenhouse gas.
HFCs are used as refrigerants in air-conditioners and cooling systems. They are manufactured mostly in China and India, but appliances containing the substance are in use in every corner of the world. HFCs replaced even more dangerous ozone-depleting chemicals known as HCFCs, themselves a substitute for the chlorofluorocarbons that were the first big target of the Montreal process.
Eliminating HFCs under the Montreal Protocol is the single biggest chunk of climate protection we can get in the next few years, said Durwood Zaelke, president of the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, a nongovernment organization based in Washington. He noted that the ozone protection effort had begun under former President Ronald Reagan and continues to enjoy bipartisan support.
The United States has thrown its support behind the proposal and negotiators said there was a strong current of support for the move at the meeting on Monday. All the signatories to the Montreal Protocol would have to agree to the...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
This is called - one last try before dying.
Bring back the Freon, bring back Airwick, heck bring back that stoopit "The Dry Look" hairspray ... who cares! LOL
So we’ll just twist the meanings of things until it says what we want it too. :)
John Broder is the NY Times writer? Like the son of David Broder? Following in a “journa-LIST” father’s foot steps?
“Daddy - when I grow up can I be a leftist propaganda whore like you?” How pathetic.
C’mon demscum, try to shoehorn cap-and-trade into a 20 year old treaty. Go for it obama and the rest of you socialists, you fascist morons. You think the backlash over obamacare was bad in 2010? You have NO IDEA what the backlash from that will be in 2012.
Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
It was a VOLCANO that was blowing said hole, not spray cans.
Repeat a lie often enough...
I take it DuPont has a new refrigerant?
Of course it's hard to say it ever began when only one side gets any press.
How about banning “living, breathing” treaties for the gas that politicians emit from them?
“Eliminating HFCs under the Montreal Protocol is the single biggest chunk of climate protection we can get in the next few years, said Durwood Zaelke, president of the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, a nongovernment organization based in Washington. “
“Eliminating enemies, both external and internal to the United States is the single biggest chunk of climate protection we can get in the next few years, said Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison Jr. etc. signatories of the US Constition, our founding document based in Washington.””
There is a common gas that could be used as an almost exact pressure/gas replacement for R-12.
R-12 was commonly used in refrigerators, freezers and automobile ACs.
A gas we are all familiar with.
Of course that brings on other potential problems.
Most all the ‘new’ refrigerants are mixtures.
What that means is one component of the mixture has a different pressure/gas boiling point.
Any leak in the system requires all the refrigerant be removed, then new refrigerant added back after the leak repair.
You can’t simply add refrigerant as one component of the mixture likely leaked at a different rate than the other, changing the refrigerant percentages and capabilities of the charge.
Spot on. Bring back Freon.
Having just watched the technician work on my heat pump system, I can say that they have the necessary tools to do all that is required. A quite small portable vacuum pump extracts the old coolant into a container (to be emptied into a central collection tank "back at the shop" to be re-purified and reused), and then the new mixture is pumped (actually vented) in from pressurized cans. Even most R-12 and similar are recovered and recycled today. There is absolutely NO NEED for a "ban".
This is all about "continuing the momentum" of "banning things" in the name of environmental holiness. "Recover and recycle" is no longer "good enough" for the eco-nutcases.
Its always about the money.
Wow, isn't this great? We don't have to wait for the rubes to get on board with the settled science. This is too sophisticated for them to understand anyways and we need to save planet. It's about the planet boys and girls and we can't afford to wait. By whatever means necessary to save the environment.
How the wackos 'think'.
Thanks for the ping!
There is so much money (grant $$$) involved and so many scientists whose gravy trains are tied to it...this beast will still be twitching long after its death.
In other words, “Co2 doesn't really have any significant impact if the other chemicals have “thousands of times the global warming potential.” So then, if CO2 will cause the Earth's temperature to rise 1 or 2 degrees, then these other chemicals will raise the Earth's temperature 1000 or 2000 degrees? Why wasn't the Earth's temperature several thousand degrees when these chemicals were unregulated?
They got a lot of ‘splainin’ to do!
“The chemicals have thousands of times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide’
Why not “Billions of times” then they could sound like Carl Sagan?
Why not “zillions of times” as long as they are making things up?
I predict they will make a break-though that turns lead into gold and water into gasoline.....if only you will give them more grant money and more power to the government.
You can trust them, really. They claim to be scientists. Scientists never alter any data just because the government tells them too or because their paychecks depend upon it. Do they? Come on! Can anyone, anywhere site a single example where a government EVER uttered any misleading information?
“Well, as you know, I am working on a drug that will cure depression.
I really don't have my notes with me.
Apparently I do have my notes with me.
The results have been very positive.
Is it ready?
If it's not ready—
It's not that it isn't ready, sir.
It's that we have so much more testing to do.
Is it ready or not?”
The treaty, the Montreal Protocol, was adopted in 1987 for a completely different purpose, to eliminate aerosols and other chemicals that were blowing a hole in the Earth's protective ozone layer.There's zero direct evidence that this is the case. The Aqua-net vs the Ozone campaign was an earlier salvo in the current war on the people by the environazis. Thanks neverdem.
Ah, I well remember the choking smell of ammonia around the commercial ice houses back in the distant past.
Vinnie is correct. Functionally, propane is an excellent refrigerant. Unfortunately, it has some drawbacks, like being flammable when (not if) a leak develops.