Nothing says “climahypocrite” like taking fossil fueled flights to Dubai, then huddling in air conditioned hotel and meeting rooms while complaining about climate change caused by refrigerants
(Bloomberg) The biggest global warming battle you’ve never heard of kicks off in Dubai this weekend.
Climate negotiators from across the globe will gather in the Persian Gulf city to debate how to get rid of hydrofluorocarbons — a class of hundreds of artificial chemicals used in refrigerators, air-conditioners, fire suppressants and other widely used products. While less common than greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide or methane, HFCs can be thousands of times more potent, pound for pound, at heating up the planet.
HFCs were developed to replace ozone killing CFCs. Now we’re being told that they are bad for ‘climate change’. And, in all honesty, they tend to be more potent than CO2, the article isn’t wrong on that. But, the replacements are not ready for prime-time, and are considerably more expensive. Who does this hurt? The poor and middle class, of course, especially in “developing nations”
A global deal is proving elusive, however. Poorer countries and those in warmer climates have concerns about the reliability and expense of substitutes, which can cost ten times as much as the climate-threatening chemicals they replace. Advocates fear a new ban may boost the black market for HFCs. Chemical makers including Chemours Co. have found a significant amount of the refrigerants in use in some regions are labeled as the newer, safer products, but are actually older, cheaper products harmful to the environment.
HFCs are used in refrigerators, fire suppression systems, and air conditioners. But, hey, on the bright side, these Warmists are also looking to kill off the use of low cost old-school energy methods in the developing nations, so, there’s little to no energy for fridges and AC systems to start with.
But, don’t think that they are the only ones gunning for HFCs
Obama Is Coming For Your Air Conditioner
Air conditioners and refrigerators stay cool with the help of super-pollutant hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) — but not for long, if President Obama has anything to say about it. (snip)
That’s why on Thursday (Oct. 15), the Obama administration announced an aggressive new plan to phase them out. (snip)
Obama worked with the EPA to create the new rules, which include changing the way HFCs are sold, handled and recycled to reduce leaks; imposing new deadlines for replacing existing industrial HFCs with more climate-friendly alternatives wherever possible; and partnering with other countries including China, India and Brazil to reduce the use of HFCs worldwide. The White House announced phase one of this plan back in July, but the new rules allow the EPA to step up their game and make the phase-out process faster.
MTV and other Warmists are super excited about this plan. I wonder if they have given up the use of their own HFC air conditioning, refrigerators, and fire suppressent systems in favor of the new 10 times expensive ones? Has Obama in his own life?
As per your citing from Bloomberg HFOs cost from several percent to several times the cost. That is NOT 10 times.
Since the cost of the refrigerant coolant is usually about 5% of the cost of the unit (ac, frig, etc) IF the cost were to double the cost of the unit would increase by 5%
But Teach at least you are trying to show some empathy for those human beings who live in 3rd world countries/conditions.
As far as killing off the old school low cost energy methods in developing countries: even the Saudis know that solar is now on par with fossil fuel electricity in most developing countries. http://cleantechnica.com/2015/02/06/saudi-arabia-sees-end-oil-age-horizon/
http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060025361
Teach for a “tech” guy you seem hopelessly stuck in the past. The cost of solar is expected to go down 40% MORE in the next 2 years
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2877310/renewable-energy-costs-expected-to-drop-40-in-next-few-years.html
“Expected to go down 40%…” Yes, from the same people who “expected” the Arctic to be ice-free. And scores of other “expectations” that proved to be false. And the 40% is irrelevant unless it’s compared to the cheaper alternative. It could “expected” to be 90% cheaper, but if that’s still more than the fossil fuel alternative, it still sucks.
“We want real electricity.”
Another alternative ‘success’ story.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-trumps-solar-in-india/
Thanks Obama.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisprandoni/2014/02/21/obamas-wind-and-solar-infatuation-keeps-africas-poorest-in-the-dark/