3 ms·
I'm glad to see someone taking the initiative to mitigate this problem. I also wonder how much "canned air" dusters contribute overall. If I recall correctly, t
by tfvlrue 4y ago
I'm glad to see someone taking the initiative to mitigate this problem. I also wonder how much "canned air" dusters contribute overall. If I recall correctly, they're commonly just HFC-134a in a can. But because it's not used as a refrigerant, it's outside the EPA's purview and can just be sprayed into the atmosphere willy-nilly. Using one can is more or less equivalent to venting the refrigerant from a car's AC, yet for some reason it's a common practice.
- function_seven 4y agoI just looked up the MSDS[0] for my can of Dust-Off (which I believe is the most popular brand?). It lists the sole ingredient as "Ethane, 1,1-difluoro-", which turns out to be a refrigerant, but not 134a. It's HFC-152a[1]. Looks like it's a much "friendlier" refrigerant than 134 (and of course vastly better than R-12) [0] https://www.sisweb.com/referenc/msds/dust-off-sds.pdf https://www.sisweb.com/referenc/msds/dust-off-sds.pdf [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%2C1-Difluoroethane https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%2C1-Difluoroethane
- tfvlrue 4y agoInteresting. Did a little more digging and it looks like both are used for air dusters, with 134a being marketed for "energized circuits" because it's non-flammable (e.g. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B005DNR066 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B005DNR066). 152a has ~1/10 of the GWP as 134a. In any case, it's still amazing to me how restricted these are when used as a refrigerant, but then they're sold to consumers to spray on whatever they want. It really undercuts the environmental impact of these chemicals.
- kube-system 4y agoThe can of air duster on my desk is R-152a