3 ms·
Why actively destroy the refrigerant (at least for refrigerants still in use/production)? Most can be reclaimed and re-purified rather than destroying - with a
by aperson_hello 4y ago
Why actively destroy the refrigerant (at least for refrigerants still in use/production)? Most can be reclaimed and re-purified rather than destroying - with a less energy intensive process than making new.
- themitigating 4y agoThere are replacements for R12 that are much less damaging to the environment (like r134a). Eventually the gas will leave the system from a leak, unexpected damage, shoddy technicians, or the unit being destroyed
- aperson_hello 4y agoR12 isn't the only refrigerant though
- themitigating 4y agoI'm not sure what you mean, I said there are replacements
- aperson_hello 4y agoThere are direct replacements and refrigerants that require different equipment. And different refrigerants for different purposes. So all that amounts to a pile of really bad refrigerants (cfcs), newer refrigerants (high GWP), and the newest refrigerants (low GWP) with a half dozen or so varieties for each.
- exp1orer 4y agoGood question! In theory, reclaiming gases that are still unrestricted for production/import is at least as good as destruction from a climate perspective. However, virgin refrigerant is really cheap until import bans take hold -- so there is never a point where it is both economically worthwhile and impactful for climate. In theory you could use credits to boost the economics around reclaim but you end up with a very messy additionality story. My sense is that most reclaimers are very low-margin or even loss leaders for the companies that produce/sell the gas! Anyway the short answer is that it's harder for us to figure out in this first push, but we do intend to look into it more closely as we expand.