The West wants to phase out hydrofluorocarbons along with hydrocholorofluorocarbons so as to contain global warming. But where are the alternatives to HFCsIJ
Negotiations over climate change offer an interesting insight into the way world leaders practice the art of ‘new diplomacy'. Over more than two decades now, climate change discussions have involved subterfuge, contradictory claims and diplomatic machinations of various kinds. One of the more interesting of these discussions revolves around the issue of hydrofluorocarbons. HFCs are greenhouse gases.
like carbon dioxide, they cause global warming — the only difference being, a tonne of HFC causes a thousand times more global warming than a tonne of carbon dioxide. HFCs are now being used to replace ozone-depleting gases such as chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons. The world is currently phasing out CFCs and HCFCs under the Montreal Protocol. There is a concern that increased consumption and emission of HFCs from refrigerators and air-conditioners will lead to more global warming. Presently, 80 per cent of all HFC emissions happen from developed countries; developing countries have just started phasing in HFCs.
Studies indicate that if the increase continues in its present pattern, it will offset the benefits of the Montreal Protocol. HFC emissions are projected to reach 5.5-8.8 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year by 2050. There has been a growing demand to put in place, an international mechanism to reduce HFC emissions.
Developed countries want to phase down HFCs under the Montreal Protocol, whereas some developing countries (like India, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia) want to discuss HFCs under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which is discussing global warming. To do this, the US and others want to amend the Montreal Protocol.
Developing countries have consistently argued against the inclusion of HFCs under the Montreal Protocol based on questions regarding the legality of action on HFCs under the Protocol, lack of information on alternatives, and concerns about costs. India and China prefer addressing HFCs under the UNFCCC, saying that parties to the Montreal Protocol can move away from high global warming potential alternatives without the proposed amendments.
Developed countries argue that the Protocol has the institutional and financial capacity, through multi-lateral funding, to pay for transition in developing countries. They also cite the track record of actions under the Protocol as evidence of a global agreement that can deliver fast results.
The discussions have become polarised, and the underlying reasons have an economic bulwark. Different developed countries are pushing their own patented low-GWP products as substitutes for high-GWP HFCs. HFC-23 is a potent greenhouse gas generated during the manufacturing of coolant HCFC-22. The gas has a limited industrial use in extremely low temperature refrigeration and speciality fire suppressants.
There are 19 HCFC-22 production facilities in developing countries that capture and destroy HFC-23. These are financed by carbon emission reduction credits under the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism. But the financial windfall has stopped. Since 2013, the European Union has banned the use of HFC-23 credits. Since the CDM programme began, 46 per cent of the credits were awarded to 19 factories, 11 of which are in China and four in India. The West realised that its decision to buy carbon credits, which developing countries obtained by destroying HFC-23, had boomeranged.
The economics is simple: Developing countries had an incentive for destroying HFC-23 as this earned them a high number of carbon credits. Under the UNFCCC methodology, carbon dioxide released by smokestacks and vehicles, is given a value of one. Other industrial gases are assigned values relative to that, based on their warming effect and how long they linger. For instance, methane is valued at 21, nitrous oxide at 310. HFC-23 is near the top of the list, at 11,700. The carbon credits earned by destroying one tonne of HFC-23 stand at 11,700 as opposed to one carbon credit earned by destroying one tonne of carbon dioxide.
This has driven the developing world to increase the production of HCFC-22. Data indicates that over 90 per cent of annual HFC-23 emissions originate from non-CDM HCFC-22 production facilities in China. This contributes to a rise in HFC-23 levels. Although there are HFCs with a lower global warming potential, just a handful of companies in developed nations have the knowhow to work with them. The argument is that unless HFCs are phased out along with HCFCs, the impact on global warming will be severe. But developing countries' are asking: Where are the alternatives to HFCsIJ