Neither claim is true. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1991/09/29/the-costly-race-to-replace-cfcs/86e250e5-6031-4b77-88c4-9f9b6963b6b7/ https://

Neither claim is true. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1991/09/29/the-costly-race-to-replace-cfcs/86e250e5-6031-4b77-88c4-9f9b6963b6b7/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1991/09/29/t... "Eliminating CFCs and other ozone-depleting chemicals by switching to alternatives could cost as much as $36 billion between now and 2075, according to the Environmental Protection Agency." "Substitutes have drawbacks compared to the industrial perfection of CFCs, however, he said. Turpines are flammable. In addition, its toxicity in high concentrations has yet to be determined, so 'we use it with caution,' he said. 'It all comes under the grand scientific principle of no free lunch.'" For that matter, fixing LA's smog wasn't cheap either.