emissions and projections of hfcs, pfcs and sf6...

AEA Technology AEAT/ED50090/R01

Emissions and Projections of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 for the UK and Constituent Countries

Final Report prepared for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

July 2003


Emissions and Projections of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 for the UK and Constituent Countries

Final report prepared for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

July 2003


Title Emissions and Projections of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 for the UK and Constituent Countries

Customer Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Customer reference

EPG 1/1/128

Confidentiality, copyright and reproduction

AEAT in Confidence

This document has been prepared by AEA Technology plc in connection with a contract to supply goods and/or services and is submitted only on the basis of strict confidentiality. The contents must not be disclosed to third parties other than in accordance with the terms of the contract.

File reference ED50090

Report number AEAT/ED50090/R01

Report status Issue 1

AEA Technology EnvironmentE6 CulhamAbingdonOxfordshireOX14 3EDTelephone 01235 463689Facsimile 01235 463574

AEA Technology is the trading name of AEA Technology plcAEA Technology is certificated to BS EN ISO9001:(1994)

Name Signature Date

Authors Heather HaydockMartin AdamsJudith Bates Neil PassantStephen PyeGeoff SalwayAlison Smith

Reviewed and approved by

Debbie Buckley-Golder

AEA Technology ii


AEA Technology iii


Executive Summary

This is the final report from the project Emissions and Projections of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 for the UK and Constituent Countries (reference EPG 1/1/128) undertaken by AEA Technology Environment on behalf of Global Atmosphere Division (GAD) of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).

The UK has a target under the Kyoto Protocol to reduce emissions of a basket of six greenhouse gases by 12.5% (expressed in CO2 equivalents) from their 1990 levels by 2008-2012. The basket of greenhouse gases includes the fluorinated gases HFCs (Hydrofluorocarbons), PFCs (Perfluorocarbons) and SF6 (Sulphur hexafluoride), which together contributed about 2.5% to the total UK greenhouse gas emissions in 1995, the baseline year for the fluorinated gases.

The main objective of this project is to estimate annual UK and constituent country emissions of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 for the period 1990 to 2025, thereby updating previous emissions inventory estimates and projections prepared by March (now EnvirosMarch) in 1999. The project also assesses additional options for reducing future emissions of HFCs, PFCs and SF6, quantifies the effects on future emissions of any additional measures and assesses the cost implications of additional emission reduction options. In addition, the project provides emission estimates and projections for NF3, which is a greenhouse gas that is not included in the Kyoto basket.

Based on best estimates, total UK GWP-weighted emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6

fell from about 17,200 kt CO2 equivalent (eq.) in 1995 to about 12,100 kt CO2 eq. in 2000. Emissions are expected to increase again to about 14,500 kt CO 2 eq. by 2005, largely due to increased use of HFCs for stationary refrigeration, mobile air conditioning, metered dose inhalers and foam blowing as replacements for CFCs and HCFCs, and then steadily decrease to about 11,300 kt CO2 eq. in 2025. There is expected to be a 25% emissions reduction in 2010 compared with the 1995 baseline. These overall trends and the associated uncertainties in emissions and projections are shown below.

AEA Technology iv


UK HFC/PFC/SF6 emissions

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

.)LowMid

High

HFC, PFC and SF6 emissions for the UK (ktonnes CO2 equiv)

In 2000, HFCs contributed 81% of the total GWP-weighted emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6 while PFCs contributed 4% and SF6 contributed 15%. The total emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6 of 12,223 kt CO2 eq. in 2000 represent about 2% of total UK greenhouse gas emissions in that year.

The graph below summarises projected trends in UK emissions by sector, showing the GWP-weighted aggregated HFC, PFC and SF6 emissions. Emissions arise from a wide range of manufacturing sectors and end-use applications. The main sources in descending order of UK emissions in 2000 are stationary refrigeration and air conditioning (HFCs, PFCs), halocarbon manufacture (HFCs, PFCs), aerosols (HFCs), magnesium production (SF6), metered dose inhalers (HFCs), mobile air conditioning (HFCs), electrical transmission and distribution equipment (SF6), aluminium production (PFCs), the electronics industry (HFCs, SF6, NF3), foam blowing (HFCs) and fire fighting equipment (HFCs).

AEA Technology v


HFC/PFC/SF6 Emissions by Sector 1990-2025(Mid estimates)

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

.)OCFs

Solvents

Other

Fire f ighting

Foams

Electronics

Aluminium production

Electrical T&D

Mobile air con

MDI

Magnesium production

Aerosols

Fluid manufacture

Stationary refrigeration

HFC, PFC and SF6 emissions for the UK by sector (ktonnes CO2 equiv)

The following graph shows the breakdown of emissions by sector in 1995 and 2000 as estimated by this study and by March in 1999. The main reasons for differences in emissions estimates between the two studies are summarised in the table below.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

1995 March 1995 AEAT 2000 March 2000 AEAT

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

uiv)

OCFs

Solvents

Foams

MDI

Fire fighting

Mobile Air Conditioning

Electrical T&D

Other

Aluminium

Aerosols

Magnesium

Refrigeration

Electronics

Fluid manufacture

Comparison of Emissions Estimates for 1995 and 2000

AEA Technology vi


Sector % change compared with March (1999)

Main reasons for change

1995 2000Stationary refrigeration

32 39 Revised activity and equipment life-time data for certain sub-sectors; changes to calculation methodology; changes to emissions factors.

Mobile air conditioning

36 63 Faster penetration of MAC in vehicle fleet assumed than previously; changes to emission factors.

Foam Blowing 0 -49 Revised activity data as a result of further developments in alternative technologies and greater use of HFC blends.

Electrical T&D 298 11 Revised manufacturing and in-use emissions factors due to new information from industry;

Aerosols 0 6 Revised activity data supplied by trade association; changes to import / export assumptions .

Metered dose inhalers

0 175 Revised estimates of bank size based on data from individual manufacturers, consistent with EU estimates.


-23 26 Emissions data from industry revised, with actual 2000 estimate provided.

Magnesium production and casting


Fire fighting -14 187 Revised bank size; changes to emission factors.Electronics -88 -56 Revised fluid consumption data provided by industry.Halocarbon manufacture

1 -36 Changes in emission factors due to new pollution abatement equipment installed at one plant; updated information from industry.

Other end-use applications

-94 -84 Sector activity data revised, including new data from Nike on sports shoes.

Many of these sectors have already introduced measures to reduce emissions or are planning to do so. Measures include voluntary agreements between industry and Government, industry-led leak reduction programmes, installation of abatement equipment for process emissions and the introduction of alternative fluids. Of particular significance is a proposed UK scheme for the mandatory registration of refrigerant fluid handlers that is expected to reduce annual emissions of HFCs from this sector by about 20% in 2010 and more in subsequent years.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of illustrative measures for emissions reduction suggests that reductions of about 530 kt CO2 eq. in 2010 may be achieved at a cost of less than £100/tonne carbon equivalent. Many abatement options achieve some or all of their impacts in the disposal phase. This means the effect is not seen for up to 50 years from manufacture for some building foams. Because of this, cumulative costs and emissions savings to 2025 provide a more realistic measure of cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness estimates of each measure on this cumulative basis are summarised in the table below. This assessment is subject to significant uncertainties and further detailed analysis would be required before attempting to implement any of the measures.

AEA Technology vii


Cost-effectiveness of illustrative measures based on cumulative emission savings to 2025

Measure Emissions saving(kt C

equiv)

Cost of measure

(£k2000

discounted @3.5%)

Cost-effectiveness (£/tC eq.)

Registration scheme for refrigerant handlers 3236 51038 16HFC replacement for domestic & small refrigeration units 68 2167 32HFC replacement (by CO2) by 2010 for mobile air conditioning units 3733 566054 152Voluntary Agreement on leakage reduction from mobile air conditioning 1369 160987 118Phase-out of novelty aerosol products 1041 59629 57Voluntary Agreement on emissions reduction from fire-fighting equipment 1099 1912 2Installation of thermal oxidiser abatement technology for halocarbon production 5760 14561 3Phase-out of one component foams (OCFs) for non-retail applications 528 3619 7Recovery of HFCs from recycled OCF cans 12 18239 1497Recovery of HFCs from reject metered dose inhalers (MDIs) 262 492 2Destruction of used MDI units 253 21437 85Voluntary Agreement on HFC-based aerosols 69 605 9

AEA Technology viii


AEA Technology ix


Contents

1 Introduction 1

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY 11.2 BACKGROUND TO HFC, PFC AND SF6 EMISSIONS 21.3 STUDY AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 21.4 METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS 31.5 SCOPE AND STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT 8

2 Stationary Refrigeration 9

2.1 INTRODUCTION 92.2 METHODOLOGY, DATA SOURCES AND ASSUMPTIONS 162.3 EMISSIONS AND PROJECTIONS 262.4 ADDITIONAL MEASURES FOR EMISSIONS REDUCTION 36

3 Mobile Air Conditioning 38


4 Foam Blowing 49


5 Electrical Transmission and Distribution 56


6 Aerosols 62

6.1 INTRODUCTION 626.2 METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES 636.3 EMISSIONS AND PROJECTIONS 646.4 ADDITIONAL MEASURES FOR EMISSIONS REDUCTION 67

7 Metered Dose Inhalers 69

7.1 INTRODUCTION 697.2 METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES 717.3 EMISSIONS AND PROJECTIONS 73

AEA Technology x


7.4 ADDITIONAL MEASURES FOR EMISSIONS REDUCTION 77

8 Aluminium Production 79


9 Magnesium Alloy Production and Casting 84


10 Fire Fighting Equipment 89

10.1 INTRODUCTION 8910.2 METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES 9010.3 EMISSIONS AND PROJECTIONS 9110.4 ADDITIONAL MEASURES FOR EMISSIONS REDUCTION 95

11 Electronics 97


12 Halocarbon manufacture 105


13 Other End-Use Applications 109

13.1 SPORTING GOODS 10913.2 SOLVENT USE 10913.3 ONE COMPONENT FOAMS (OCF) 11113.4 OTHER END-USE APPLICATIONS 113

14 Summary of Emissions and Projections 114

14.1 GHG EMISSIONS BY EMISSION TYPE 11414.2 GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR 11414.3 COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS INVENTORY 11714.4 HFC EMISSIONS 118

AEA Technology xi


14.5 PFC EMISSIONS 11914.6 SF6 EMISSIONS 12014.7 NF3 EMISSIONS 121

15 Policies and Measures to Reduce Emissions 123

15.1 METHODOLOGY FOR COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS 12415.2 CUMULATIVE EMISSION SAVINGS FROM ADDITIONAL MEASURES 12415.3 COSTS OF ADDITIONAL MEASURES 12515.4 COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF MEASURES 135

16 Conclusions 138

17 References 144

18 Acknowledgements 148

Appendix 1: Emissions of HFC/PFC/SF6 for the UK

Appendix 2: Emissions of HFC/PFC/SF6 for Constituent Countries

Appendix 3: HFC emissions for the UK

Appendix 4: PFC emissions for the UK

Appendix 5: SF6 emissions for the UK

AEA Technology xii


AEA Technology xiii


1 Introduction

This is the final report from the project Emissions and Projections of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 for the UK and Constituent Countries (reference EPG 1/1/128) undertaken by AEA Technology Environment on behalf of Global Atmosphere Division (GAD) of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

The UK has a commitment under the Kyoto protocol to reduce emissions of a basket of six greenhouse gases by 12.5% (expressed in CO2 equivalents) from their 1990 levels by 2008-2012. The basket of greenhouse gases includes the fluorinated gases HFCs (Hydrofluorocarbons), PFCs (Perfluorocarbons) and SF6 (Sulphur Hexafluoride), which contributed about 2.5% to the total UK greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 1995, the baseline year for fluorinated gases. The other gases in the basket are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). Further information on the UK Climate Change Programme can be found at www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/cm4913/. Emissions of the fluorinated gases reduced by 40% between 1995 and 1999 mainly because significant abatement of HFC-23 emissions from HCFC-22 manufacture outweighed a net increase in HFC emissions from other sectors because of their use as replacements for CFCs and HCFCs.

The Government is concerned about the trend in emissions of HFCs and believes that action should be taken to limit the projected growth. The UK’s Climate Change Programme sets out the Government’s position as follows: HFCs should only be used where other safe, technically feasible, cost effective

and more environmentally acceptable alternatives do not exist. HFCs are not sustainable in the long term – the Government believes that

continued technological developments will mean that HFCs may eventually be able to be replaced in the applications where they are used.

HFC emission reduction strategies should not undermine commitments to phase out ozone depleting substances under the Montreal Protocol.

HFC emissions will not be allowed to rise unchecked.

To fulfil the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and EU reporting requirements, as well as to underpin the development of the UK Climate Change Programme, the UK is required to compile a reliable emissions inventory and an agreed set of projections for all greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol, classified by sector and by gas. The UK is required to submit the annual greenhouse gas inventory to the EU Monitoring Mechanism and the UNFCCC each year. Projections consistent with the latest inventory report are submitted to the UNFCCC periodically in the form of a national communication, usually every 3-5 years.

This report updates UK emissions and projections of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 from work carried out on behalf of Defra by March Consulting Group (now Enviros March),

AEA Technology 1


published in 1999. Emissions data for 1990 to 1997 were based on statistical information provided by fluid manufacturers and distributors. Projections were based on anticipated market developments and technological changes over the period to 2020, and are now provided to 2025.

1.2 BACKGROUND TO HFC, PFC AND SF6 EMISSIONS

Figure 1.1 summarises results from the inventory prepared by March in 1999. It shows the breakdown of GWP-weighted emissions of HFC, PFC and SF 6 by source for 1990 and 1995, and the projected emissions for 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020. The bars on the graph are ordered according to sector emissions in 2000. Total UK GHG emissions in 1995 were around 692 MtCO2 equivalent, so emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6 collectively contributed about 2.5% of this total.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Emis

sion

s (M

t CO 2

eq.

)

SolventFire Fighting FoamAluminiumElectrical T&DMDITrainers/OtherElectronicsMagnesiumGeneral AerosolFluid ManufactureRefrigeration

Figure 1.1: Previous inventory of UK emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6 (March 1999) in million tonnes CO2 equivalent

1.3 STUDY AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

This project updates annual UK and constituent country emissions of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 for the period 1990 to 2025. The specific objectives of the study were to:1. quantify annual emissions of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 for the UK and constituent

countries from 1990 to 2002;2. estimate projected annual emissions with appropriate uncertainty ranges of

HFCs, PFCs and SF6 from 2001 to 2025 for the UK and constituent countries, taking account of current measures;

3. provide emission estimates and projections for NF3;4. assess additional options for reducing future emissions of HFCs, PFCs and SF6;

AEA Technology 2


5. quantify the effects on future emissions of any additional measures; and6. assess the cost implications of additional emission reduction options.

Emissions are reported as tonnes of HFC, PFC and SF6 and the equivalent mass of CO2 of the emission. To estimate the CO2 equivalent it is necessary to know the speciation of the emission and in most cases this information was available from the producer or users. Standard mixtures of gases for particular applications were used in other cases.

1.4 METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS

This section provides an overview of the approach taken to estimate emissions from each type of source. Sections 2 to 12 provide further details of the methodologies and assumptions used, and how these relate to the IPCC’s recommended methodologies.

1.4.1 Generic emissions sources and methodology

Three distinct types of emission source can be identified:1) Process emissions from the production of HCFC-22, HFCs, PFCs and SF6, 2) Emissions from the use of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 in production processes,

including the production of PFCs as off-gases from aluminium production.3) Emissions from the production, use and disposal of equipment containing HFC or

SF6 fluids (e.g. refrigerators, switchgear).

For source types 1 and 2, emissions may be estimated from production volumes and emission factors, or from estimates of fluid consumption provided by manufacturers. The approach taken depends on the type and level of information available. In most cases, manufacturers have provided estimates of historical production levels, emissions and fluid consumption, and projections have been made on the basis of production trends and assumed trends in emission factors.

In Type 3 one can distinguish between equipment such as aerosols and fire-fighting equipment that releases its fluid at the near-instantaneous time it is used, and equipment such as refrigerators and foams where the release happens slowly over its lifetime and on disposal. The whole product life cycle must be considered, as must imported and exported goods, as illustrated in Figure 1.2. Production-related emissions are typically estimated from the amount of fluid put into the equipment during manufacture in the UK multiplied by a percentage loss rate during production. Production levels, unit fluid volumes and loss factors are based on information from manufacturers and trade bodies where available, and IPCC default values are used in other cases.

AEA Technology 3


EQUIPMENT

Recovered/ reused

Leaked

Exported

Scrapped

Imported

Produced

Figure 1.2 - Life cycle emissions from fluid-containing equipment

For many type 3 applications, the major source of emissions is gradual loss from a bank of fluid contained in a large number of similar products. This may be by leakage or by equipment failure. The types of products behaving this way are: refrigeration and air conditioning equipment; closed foams; fire extinguisher systems; electrical switch gear.

The definitions of emission factors used in this work to describe the three potential emission stages listed above were as used in March (1999) and were as follows:1. Product manufacturing factor (PM): losses during the manufacture, storage,

transport and installation of end product, expressed as a percentage of fluid consumed for manufacturing new products;

2. Product life factor (PL): average lifetime emissions of fluid from a product (combining ‘operational’ and ‘accidental’ releases) expressed as a percentage loss from the installed bank;

3. Disposal loss factor (D): defined as the proportion of fluid emitted at the end of a product’s life, during the decommissioning process (as opposed to being recovered and then re-used or destroyed). This is expressed as a percentage of the amount of fluid in products being decommissioned.

Thus, the annual emissions from these types of equipment are the sum of the manufacturing, usage and disposal emissions for all the different types of equipment.

The IPCC Good Practice guidance proposes a Tier 3b ‘top down’ approach and a Tier 3a ‘bottom up’ approach. It has become clear from our discussions with trade bodies that it is not possible to use Tier 3b for all sources. In order to apply Tier 3b it is necessary to obtain complete, accurate and precisely defined data. This is most likely to be possible when there are a small number of operators with well-established data collection systems in a given sector. This is the case for example in electrical switchgear manufacture and uses, but for the refrigeration and air conditioning sectors, there are large numbers of small and medium-sized service companies in addition to the main producers, distributors and equipment manufacturers. Hence, the likely accuracy and completeness of the data were not sufficient to apply Tier 3b. Therefore, a more reliable estimate was derived using Tier 3a, the methodology used by March (1999). Moreover, the form of data required for

AEA Technology 4


Tier 3a is more appropriate for producing projected emissions, as it requires data for the different equipment types.

The global warming potential (GWP) of a greenhouse gas is defined as the ratio of the time-integrated radiative forcing from the instantaneous release of 1 kg of a trace substance relative to that of 1 kg of a reference gas (in this work, carbon dioxide) (IPCC 2001). GWP values used throughout the work were the 100 year GWPs recommended by the IPCC in the Second Assessment Report (IPCC 1995), which comply with international reporting standards under the UNFCCC. Additional 100 year GWP values were taken from the Third Assessment Report (IPCC 2001) for those compounds for which GWP values were not available in the Second Assessment Report. It is necessary to define a time horizon because the gases each have different lifetimes in the atmosphere.

By weighting the emission of a gas with its respective GWP value, it is possible to aggregate or compare the relative UK contributions to global warming from these greenhouse gases. We express these relative contributions in tonnes of CO2

equivalent. The impact of the release of a gas on global warming is calculated by multiplying the tonnes released per year by its GWP relative to carbon dioxide. For example, the GWP for SF6 is 23,900. This means that an emission of 1 tonne of SF6

is equivalent to emissions of 23,900 tonnes of carbon dioxide.

1.4.2 Regional estimates

The projections of sector emissions for constituent countries were derived from UK emissions on the basis of drivers, or (where available) using point source data as shown in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 - Basis of constituent country emissions estimates

Sector Basis of constituent country emissions estimateDomestic refrigeration PopulationCommercial refrigeration GDPMobile air conditioning Car registration dataFoam blowing GDPElectrical switch gear Data from ESI Aerosols PopulationMDIs PopulationAluminium process emissions 3 point sources (confidential split)Magnesium production 1 point source + die-casting emissions split based on

AtkinsFirefighting PopulationElectronics Production output, based on data from March and

Atkins reportsTraining shoes PopulationHalocarbon process emissions Point sources (all in England)

AEA Technology 5


1.4.3 Uncertainty analysis

Historical and projected emissions are shown graphically as low, central and high estimates; the low and high estimates being derived from uncertainty analysis. The uncertainty analysis has been done using expert judgement of +x% or –y% from our sector experts, based on their confidence in the data and assumptions. We assume this range corresponded to the 95% confidence interval for a normally distributed population. We have also sought guidance from industry and trade bodies on the uncertainty inherent in the data they have provided.

Uncertainties in the combined total UK emissions were derived from a specific consideration of the individual sector uncertainty estimates using an iterative Monte Carlo procedure by @RISK uncertainty analysis software (Palisade Corp. 1996). Uncertainties were calculated as 2 standard deviations from the mean, corresponding to a 95% confidence interval.

Manufacturers and their representatives provided most of the data. Stakeholder workshops involving industry, NGOs and producers of alternative refrigerants and other interested parties helped to refine the emissions and projections, and narrow down some of the uncertainties.

1.4.4Sensitivities and additional measures for emissions reduction

Baseline emissions and projections have been developed for all major source sectors. For many of these sectors we have also investigated sensitivities and the possible effect of additional measures for emissions reduction. Table 1.2 summaries the sensitivities and additional measures addressed by this study. Further details are given in the relevant sector sections of the report.

Table 1.2 – Baseline assumptions, sensitivity analyses and additional measures

Sector Baseline Sensitivity analyses

Additional policies and measures


Excluding a mandatory registration scheme for refrigerant handlers

1. With registration scheme.

2. Using March emission factors and methodology.

3. Using March activity data

HFC replaced by 2005 for domestic fridges and small sealed units

Mobile air conditioning

Business as usual with some limited introduction of CO2 systems assumed

1. Different refrigerant recovery efficiencies at end of life.

2. As 2 above.

HFC replacement by CO2 in new systems by 2010.VA to reduce average leakage to 5% pa in 2010 and 3% pa in

AEA Technology 6


3. As 3 above 2020

AEA Technology 7


Electrical T&D

Projections based on National Grid data assuming ongoing industry improvements

Compare projected growth in activity data with electricity demand and GDP projections

None

Foams Projections using data supplied by Paul Ashford of Caleb Management Services

None None

One component foams (OCF)

Projections based on data from Harnisch & Hendriks (2000) scaled for UK

None Phase out for non-retail applications by 2005.Recycling of used OCF cans, and recovery of HFCs

Aerosols Steady market for critical uses; growth related to economic growth rate of 2.25%

None Phase out of novelty aerosol applications by 2005.Proposed voluntary agreement under discussion with Defra

MDIs Future growth related to population

More rapid introduction of DPIs reaching 50% penetration by 2010

Recovery of reject MDIs.Destruction of old MDIs units

Aluminium Industry forecasts based on climate change levy agreements and steady demand

None None

Magnesium manufacture

Industry forecasts based on climate change levy agreements and steady demand

None None

Fire fighting equipment

Industry forecasts (revised upwards since stakeholder meeting)

None Proposed voluntary agreement under discussion with Defra

Electronics DTI forecasts based on industry input

None None

Fluid manufacture

Business as usual assuming emissions trading and HCFC 22 phase-out

None Thermal oxidiser abatement equipment fitted to all plant by 2005 (whether under voluntary agreement or regulation)

AEA Technology 8


1.5 SCOPE AND STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT

This report presents separate sections on each of the main sources of HFC, PFC and SF6 in the UK, namely:Section 2. Stationary Refrigeration and Air Conditioning (HFC, PFC)Section 3. Mobile Air Conditioning (HFC)Section 4. Foam Blowing (HFC)Section 5. Electrical Switch Gear (SF6)Section 6. Aerosols (HFC)Section 7. Metered Dose Inhalers (HFC)Section 8. Aluminium Process Emissions (PFC)Section 9. Magnesium Production (SF6)Section 10. Firefighting (HFC)Section 11. Electronics (HFC, SF6, NF3)Section 12. Halocarbon Process Emissions (HFC, PFC)

Sections 2 to 12 each include: An introduction describing applications of HFCs, PFCs and SF6, alternative

technologies, the status of any existing agreements on emissions reduction, emission reduction options and any energy efficiency issues.

A summary of the methodology and assumptions used to develop emission projections.

Emissions and projections of HFCs, PFCs, SF6 and NF3 between 1990 and 2025. Emission reduction options for each sector.

Section 13 describes other end-use emission sources including sporting goods (SF6, PFC), speciality solvent use (HFC, PFC) and one component foams (PFC). Estimates of these emissions have not been presented for reasons of confidentiality or because they are considered negligible in comparison with the major sources listed above.

Section 14 pulls together the results of sector analyses to give an overview of emissions and projections of HFC, PFC and SF6 in the UK and constituent countries.

Section 15 describes a cost-effectiveness analysis of different policies and measures to abate HFC, PFC and SF6.

Section 16 summarises the main conclusions and recommendations from this work.

Section 17 shows the references used and Section 18 acknowledges the assistance received from stakeholders.

Appendices provide tabulated emission estimates.

AEA Technology 9


2 Stationary Refrigeration

2.1 INTRODUCTION

2.1.1 UK Refrigeration market

This analysis uses the same sector sub-divisions that were used in previous reports (March 1999, WS Atkins 2000). This is a natural sub-division by end use and technology type and also ensures results are comparable with those published previously. The sector sub-divisions are:

R1 Domestic refrigeration (including refrigerators, chest freezers, upright freezers and fridge-freezers);

R2 Other small hermetic refrigeration units (including through the wall air-conditioners, retail equipment, drinking water coolers etc.);

R3 Small commercial distributed systems (including pub cellar coolers, small chill and cold stores)

R4 Supermarket systems; R5 Industrial systems; R6 Building air conditioning systems (direct use of refrigerant); R7 Building air-conditioning chillers (indirect use of refrigerant); R8 Refrigerated transport (refrigerated lorries, containers etc) using conventional

refrigeration technology; and R9 Mobile air conditioning (air-conditioning systems for cars and other vehicles).

Sectors R1-R8 are addressed in this section under Stationary Refrigeration, while R9 is separately addressed in Section 3. It is conventional for refrigerated transport applications (R8), apart from mobile air conditioning, to be considered in the stationary refrigeration category as their operation employs similar refrigeration technology. The refrigeration units used in refrigerated transport applications are typically installed on the roofs of vehicles and so there is rarely fluid leakage due to accident damage, unlike mobile air conditioning units which may be damaged by front-end impact.

2.1.2 Use of HFCs and HFC blends as refrigerants

HFCs and HFC blends have been widely used as replacement refrigerants across virtually all refrigeration sub-sectors. They generally share many of the properties of CFC and HCFC refrigerants, namely low toxicity, zero and/or varying degrees of flammability and acceptable materials compatibility. Unlike CFCs and HCFCs however, HFCs have zero ozone depleting potential (ODP) and therefore have been promoted by industry and others as being suitable as long-term replacement fluids from the ODP perspective. However, ODP substances may be used as a chemical feedstock in the manufacture of HFCs, and can also be produced as a chemical by-product during the manufacturing process.

AEA Technology 10


One difference of HFC and blend use from an operational perspective is the requirement for most HFCs and blends to be used with synthetic lubricating oils and not the conventional mineral-based oils previously used. This has consequently led to a range of refrigerant blends compatible with mineral oil being developed for retro-fill.

Emissions of HFCs can occur: during the refrigeration equipment manufacturing process; over the operational lifetime of the refrigeration or air-conditioning unit; and at disposal of the refrigeration or air-conditioning unit.

One area of concern in relation to HFC use has been the high operational leakage rates traditionally associated with several market sub-sectors. Annual leakage rates in the range of (or even exceeding) 20-30% have previously been estimated in developing emission projections for various types of commercial refrigeration, air-conditioning equipment and mobile air-conditioning systems March (1999). Leakage also occurs due to human influences on installation, servicing, maintenance and disposal practices. However, it should be recognised that improved design, servicing and maintenance of such systems over recent years has led to higher energy efficiency and lower operating emissions for many systems. Endeavours to further reduce leakage rates through improved design should continue in the future.

2.1.3 Alternative refrigerants

Until the 1990s, CFC-12 was the standard refrigerant used world-wide for most applications. Prior to the implementation of the Montreal Protocol restrictions (and resulting regional (EU) and national legislation) on the use of CFCs and HCFCs, industrial refrigeration was the only sub-sector using alternative refrigerants (primarily ammonia) in significant quantities. However, as CFC-12 has been phased out under the requirements of the Montreal Protocol, it has largely been replaced by HFC-134a. In addition to this and other similar HFC-based refrigerants, a number of alternative substances have been used, or proposed as refrigerants.

However, the relatively large global warming potential of many HFCs used in the refrigeration sector has raised concerns and calls from many environmental organisations for the use of alternative refrigerants throughout the refrigeration sector.

AmmoniaAmmonia has been used in refrigeration applications for a number of years, and is widely used in the food refrigeration and cold storage industries due to its good thermodynamic and refrigeration properties. It has also been used on a more limited scale for building air-conditioning systems (BRE 2001). Unlike HFCs, ammonia is toxic and, under certain conditions, flammable. It is also a recognised air pollutant for which emission targets have been set under the EC National Emission Ceilings Directive and the UNECE Gothenburg Protocol agreements. Defra and the Devolved Administrations are currently developing an ammonia abatement strategy for the UK. Quantification of any air pollution impacts arising from a potential increased future use of ammonia as a refrigerant is beyond the scope of this work. However, it can be

AEA Technology 11


considered a sound alternative to HFCs in those markets where safety and materials compatibility can be resolved. It is also suitable, in some circumstances, for use in central systems with a secondary refrigerant e.g. building air-conditioning or supermarket refrigeration equipment. The secondary circuit minimises the risk of ammonia release in areas to which the public may have access.

HydrocarbonsCertain hydrocarbons have excellent refrigeration properties and have relatively low environmental impact although, like other air pollutants classified as non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs), they contribute to the photochemical formation of ozone in the atmosphere. However, in the context of the total UK NMVOC emissions (1,680 kt in 2000, (Goodwin et al 2002)), the contribution of hydrocarbon emissions from the refrigeration sector can be considered negligible. For their refrigeration properties they have become increasingly popular for domestic refrigerators in the UK (and across Europe generally) and for similar small commercial refrigeration and air-conditioning systems (BRE 2001). The 2002 UK market share of hydrocarbon-based domestic refrigerators was estimated as being around 45-55%, based on discussions with UK industry. The remaining major UK manufacturers are expected to switch production to hydrocarbons from HFC-based units over the next few years, so probably most new domestic refrigerators (around 95%) will be hydrocarbon-based by 2005. The main obvious hazard of hydrocarbon use is its flammability. The risk of fire largely depends upon the quantity of refrigerant used and the location of the equipment. For example, a large chiller installed in an outside area may have a lower risk associated with its use (and an associated smaller consequence of ignition) compared with a smaller unit installed in a sealed space. Safety standards and industry guidance are employed at the design stage to account for such considerations. The risk will typically be higher during on-site servicing and maintenance of equipment.

Carbon dioxideFrom a safety and environmental viewpoint, CO2 is an excellent refrigerant, being non-flammable, of low toxicity, with zero ODP and a low global warming potential (GWP). The main barrier to its widespread use is its low critical temperature (31.3oC), which generally results in low energy efficiency. Energy efficiency concepts and the method of calculating a total equivalent warming impact for equipment are described in Section 2.1.5. Carbon dioxide also operates at higher pressures (100 bar) than conventional refrigerant fluids and needs higher volumetric capacity than most other refrigerants. This means that existing designs and components (e.g. compressors) are unsuitable for its use, which until now has limited its widespread application for refrigeration purposes. However, significant development effort is being put into investigating the use of CO2 systems in the mobile air-conditioning sector (see Section 3).

WaterFor applications above 0oC, water has obvious environmental advantages. However, water has a high specific vapour volume for temperatures in the region of 0-10oC, which is around two orders of magnitude greater than a conventional HFC refrigerant (BRE 2001). This means that water systems require large specialised compressors

AEA Technology 12


that are not available off-the-shelf, are expensive and have long delivery times. At present, this effectively rules out water as a replacement in general air-conditioning applications, at least in the short to medium term.

AirAir can be used to produce cooling in air cycle systems that are widely used for cooling aircraft cabins. The air cycle is inherently less energy efficient than conventional vapour compression refrigeration systems based on HCFCs or HFCs (see Section 2.1.5). . However, recent research has indicated that, in certain situations, air cycle-based systems could provide simultaneous cooling and heating in buildings with higher energy efficiency than conventional cooling and heating systems (Gigiel et al., 2000). . These systems are not commercially available and would require a manufacturer to invest in mass production to bring unit costs down.

Other alternative refrigerant technologiesThere are a variety of other refrigeration technologies that are currently under development, or are not yet commercially viable or available on a wide scale. For example, one such technology, absorption cooling with CHP, is currently encouraged by the Government under its Enhanced Capital Allowances Scheme. Other technologies and concepts that may impact upon global warming emissions in future years include improved building design (as a consequence of the expected EU Directive on building design), free cooling, ground water cooling and specialised refrigeration cycles such as Stirling Cycle technology.

2.1.4 Safety of alternative refrigerants

Safety is a primary concern with alternative refrigerants such as ammonia and hydrocarbons. The main parameters that affect safety are the size of refrigerant charge, location of equipment and the standards of servicing and maintenance.

Medium-sized refrigerant applications (e.g. supermarket systems) comprise a significant sub-sector of the refrigeration market and are one of the largest potential future sources of HFC emissions (together with the mobile air-conditioning sector). Opinions in this sub-sector differ between those who favour the use of alternative refrigerant fluids and those who oppose their use on safety and technological grounds. Although HFCs are routinely used in direct expansion (DX) systems, there are alternative systems using hydrocarbons, ammonia and carbon dioxide throughout Northern Europe. The use of alternative refrigerants in such systems requires additional safety features as part of the equipment design, and appropriate safety training covering the manufacture and use stages. Properly designed and suitably installed systems should provide an equivalent level of safety comparable with other technologies.

There will always be a degree of risk to people or buildings where quantities of flammable hydrocarbons or toxic ammonia are present. Recognising this, quantitative risk-based approaches have been used to assess hazards posed by the use of alternative refrigerants. These quantitative methods have been successfully used to assess risk for a variety of domestic and commercial refrigeration and air-

AEA Technology 13


conditioning applications (e.g. IEA 1995; IEA 2000). These assessments have concluded that dependant on the type of refrigeration technology employed, and with appropriate safety measures in place, the risks inherent to the using of alternative refrigerants can be deemed acceptable.

In any large and diverse industry sector, it will always be difficult to exclude every unlicensed or rogue operator. If this results in sub-standard work on hydrocarbon or ammonia based systems, then there could be higher risk of harm to people or buildings occurring in these situations than if a non-flammable/low-toxic HFC system had been installed.

Advances in indirect refrigerant systems have good potential for reducing future HFC emissions. Such systems are increasingly being used commercially and achieve reduced refrigerant charges because the refrigerant does not circulate around the entire system. Instead it passes only into a heat exchanger containing a secondary non-hazardous refrigerant (which is subsequently circulated around equipment as necessary), therefore reducing potential risks and leakage.

2.1.5 Energy efficiency

The indirect global warming impact of all sizes of refrigeration and air-conditioning systems through consuming fossil-fuel generated electricity is in most instances larger (and often substantially so) than the impact of direct refrigeration leakage (CNE 2000). For any given country, the weighting of direct to indirect greenhouse gas emissions will be dependent upon the fuel mix used to generate electricity. For example, in countries with a higher proportion of nuclear-generated power, the direct greenhouse gas emissions of a refrigeration system would be proportionally increased (relative to the indirect emissions) than in a country that relies solely on fossil-fuel generated power. In order to properly assess the global warming impact of equipment, both direct and indirect emissions require evaluation under a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach. Industry guidance (BRA 1996) is available for estimating the Total Equivalent Warming Impacts (TEWI) of refrigeration equipment. In any assessment, it is important to consider all factors that influence emissions in order to draw accurate and reliable conclusions.

In using an LCA approach, the direct impact of any released refrigerant is added to the indirect effect from the energy consumed over the lifetime of the unit. As described above, a key result from this is that the energy consumption of modern refrigeration systems is generally of far higher magnitude than the contribution from refrigerant emissions to the overall CO2 equivalent emissions of the system over its working lifetime. This implies that the operating efficiency of units is the most significant parameter to consider and that alternative fluids, insulation and/or technologies must not reduce efficiency.

A number of studies comparing the energy efficiencies of different refrigeration systems have reported a range of results with respect to operating efficiencies. However, given optimal engineering and installation, and without consideration of cost-effectiveness issues, some systems using hydrocarbons are capable of achieving equivalent or improved operating efficiencies compared to those same

AEA Technology 14


systems using HFCs. However, if an indirect system is required for safety reasons, the initial cost of a hydrocarbon system can be higher than an equivalent direct system (Arthur D. Little 2001).

For any refrigerant (HFCs, hydrocarbons or ammonia), optimum energy efficiencies will only be obtained with a correctly charged system. Historically, relatively high leakage rates experienced with medium and large-sized HFC systems have meant that systems not regularly maintained may have been operating for long periods of time without their optimum charge, and consequently at reduced energy efficiencies. In contrast, the safety measures and low leakage rates required by hydrocarbon and ammonia systems mean that lower leakage rates can lead to more constant (and arguably higher) operational energy efficiencies. However, improved maintenance procedures associated with the future introduction of a mandatory refrigerant registration scheme (see Section 2.1.7) are expected to reduce operational leakages and hence improve the energy efficiencies of HFC systems.

2.1.6 Additional policies and measures for emission reductions

Several abatement options are possible for the various sub-sectors that make up the refrigeration sector. These can generally be divided into two groups:

Reduction of operating and end of life emissions through improved operating leakage reduction and recovery processes respectively;

Replacement of HFCs with alternative refrigerants.

Large-scale penetration of HFC alternatives in the non-domestic market would potentially require significant Government legislative intervention in the industry. For example, in the case of CFCs and HCFCs, legislation with mandatory elimination dates was necessary to ensure reduction targets were met.

The specific additional policies and measures evaluated for the stationary refrigeration sectors are:1. Introduction of a mandatory registration scheme for handlers of refrigerant fluids;

and2. Elimination of HFCs in new domestic refrigeration units and other small hermetic

refrigeration units (sectors R1 and R2) by 2005.

The mandatory registration scheme is anticipated in the UK Climate Change Programme and is discussed in the next section. Elimination of HFCs for new domestic fridges and small hermetic units is discussed in Section 15 as a possible additional measure.

2.1.7 Policy influences on sector

The UK Climate Change Programme (DETR, 2000) identifies a number of technical opportunities for ensuring HFCs are handled and used responsibly, thereby reducing HFC emissions. Amongst these is the option to define minimum qualifications for people handling refrigerants (a measure to be considered with industry).

AEA Technology 15


Reflecting this, a proposed UK scheme for the mandatory registration of refrigerant fluid handlers has been developed and is currently nearing finalisation. In defining the elements of such a scheme there has been an on-going consultation process between the Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Industry Board (ACRIB) and DTI/Defra. The proposed scheme is outlined in the report by ACRIB (2003); the background to the scheme was described in an earlier report (ACRIB, 2001b).

It is proposed (ACRIB 2003) that the mandatory registration scheme will apply to the following sectors: Commercial/industrial refrigeration and air conditioning; Motor cabin air conditioning; Domestic appliance servicing; and Manufacturers.

It is envisaged the scheme will be limited to only those handling refrigerants, i.e., those who handle refrigerant containers, or who break into refrigerant circuits. Carriers/transporters of refrigeration equipment or fluid would therefore not be required to register. All refrigerants with a GWP of greater than 15 would be covered, this would therefore include ozone depleting and HFC refrigerants. Under the proposed scheme it would be illegal to handle refrigerants unless competent to do so, or for companies to use a non-certified business for refrigerant handling work.

The Netherlands STEK scheme provides a reference for the UK registration scheme, although the proposed UK approach differs from STEK reflecting the particular requirements of the UK situation. The main differences are that the UK approach does not propose the inspection of systems, auditing of refrigerant/equipment systems containing more than 3 kg of refrigerant, quality assurance of contractors, leak detection of systems, or the administration (log book etc) and monitoring of refrigerant registration. Note however that the final UK Scheme will be subject to any requirements set out in the proposed EC Regulation on certain fluorinated gases.

The STEK system has been in operation for about 10 years. It is likely that comparable actions in the UK over the period to 2010 would be expected to reduce the emission rates below those used by March (1999) and WS Atkins (2000) for a number of stationary refrigeration sectors. ACRIB (2001b) indicates that from leakage rates at the level of 30% in the early 90's, emissions in the Netherlands are now at an average level of 4.8 %. The research indicates that 92% of the installations have no emissions at all in the reference year 1999, and so 8% of the installations are responsible for the remaining emissions. However, as the ACRIB scheme is not directly comparable to STEK, it is unlikely that a similar magnitude of leakage reductions will be achieved without further measures.

The EU Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (2002/96/EC) states that all gases having a global warming potential above 15 CO2 equiv. must be removed from separately collected waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) (European Commission 2003). In addition, gases that are ozone depleting must also be properly extracted and treated in accordance with EC Regulation 2037/2000. The implementation date for the WEEE Directive is 13 August 2004, with producers

AEA Technology 16


required to meet specified equipment treatment/recovery targets by 31 December 2006.

To evaluate the effects of implementing the mandatory registration scheme, operating and disposal emission factors, PL and D, respectively, have been reviewed and, where judged appropriate, reduced compared to those used in the baseline model. This reflects the likelihood of decreased emissions occurring as a result of the scheme, and specifically improved leak detection and correction through more rigorous maintenance practices and improved recovery practices at end-of-life (as identified in discussions with industry).

2.2 METHODOLOGY, DATA SOURCES AND ASSUMPTIONS

2.2.1 Domestic refrigeration

Data sources and assumptions

The UK stock estimates for 1990-2020 of refrigerators, fridge-freezers, chest-freezers and upright freezers were obtained from the UK Market Transformation Programme (MTP 2002). Estimates of annual sales for 1990 to 2020 were derived from 1994 sales data of white goods (Mintel 1995) and the MTP values used to scale sales data for each year. Annual sales data for the period 2020-2025 (for which MTP stock estimates were not available) were projected based on the mean percentage growth of the estimated sales of domestic refrigeration sectors for the previous five-year period. Where possible, historical sales data for individual years were verified against National Statistics sales data (National Statistics 2000: Product Sales and Trade PRA 29710 Electric Domestic Appliances).

Based on discussions with industry, UK estimates of average fluid fill were 0.3 kg for 1990-1995 decreasing to 0.13 kg by 2000, and constant thereafter. Current Environment Agency guidance on the recovery of ozone depleting substances contained in refrigerators also gives 0.13 kg as the average refrigerant charge in a domestic refrigerator (Environment Agency 2002).

The percentage of the UK market share of HFC-based units sold (also based on discussions with industry), was estimated to increase from 0% in 1990 to a maximum of 90% in 1998, before decreasing to 40% in 2002 and to 5% by 2005 to reflect the expected (and to date, largely observed) transition by UK manufacturers and importers to hydrocarbon-based refrigerants). A small amount of imported stock (5%), is assumed to contain HFC refrigerant in the years after 2005.

For the domestic refrigeration sector a methodology change was made compared with that used by March (1999), to reflect more accurately the lifetime operating emissions of equipment. This revised calculation methodology (see Table 2.2) ensures changes made to the annual average operating loss emission

AEA Technology 17


factor (PL factor) applies only to fluid used in manufacture (i.e. to units produced) in that year, and not to the entire fluid bank as was previously the case.

The lifetime of white goods was estimated as ten years (BRA 1996).

HFC emissions during manufacturing were estimated to be 1% for the period 1990-2025 (IPCC 2000).

Based on discussions with industry (BRA and fluid manufacturers), UK estimates of lifetime operating emissions were assumed to be 1% p.a. until 1998, before decreasing to 0.3% p.a. by 2002 and constant thereafter. This is also the mid-point of guidance values as given in IPCC (2000).

Fluid recovery efficiency for products at end of life was estimated as 50% for all years until 2000, before increasing to 95% efficiency by 2005, and 97% thereafter to reflect improved recovery practices that are likely to occur in the future. The values used in this work probably underestimate recovery (i.e. are conservative), given that the Environment Agency guidance on the recovery of ozone depleting substances contained in refrigerators sets a maximum permissible emission rate of 2.7% from a 130g average refrigerant charge in a domestic fridge (Environment Agency 2002). Current IPCC guidance for end-of-life recovery efficiency is 70% (IPCC 2000).

Table 2.1 summarises the key assumptions used in the emissions model for the domestic refrigeration sector. Comparative values for parameters that were used by March (1999) are shown in brackets.

AEA Technology 18


Table 2.1 – Key Assumptions: Domestic refrigeration.1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Specific HFC

HFC 134a

Activity data

Total UK stock refrigerators and freezers

31998000 34087000 37003000 39158000 40656000 42043000 43285000 -

Derived annual sales UK refrigerators and freezers

2227336 2355666 2540942 2676373 2769311 2858238 2942393 3028161

Average fluid fill (kg) 0.3 0.3 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13% of goods containing HFC 0 75 80 10 5 5 5 5

Used for manufacture (t) This work (March 1999)

0(2)

530(400)

264(400)

35(400)

18(400)

19(400)

19(400)

20(400)

Equipment lifetime (yrs)

10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Emission factorsA

PM % This work (March 1999)

1.0(1.0)

1.0(1.0)

1.0(1.0)

1.0(1.0)

1.0(1.0)

1.0(1.0)

1.0(1.0)

1.0(-)

PL % This work (March 1999)

1.0(1.0)

1.0(1.0)

0.65 (1.0) 0.3(1.0)

0.3(1.0)

0.3(1.0)

0.3(1.0)

0.3(-)

D % This work (March 1999)

65(50)

65(50)

65(50)

5(20)

3(20)

3(20)

3(20)

3(-)

A For definition of emission factors see Section 1.4.1.

AEA Technology 19


Table 2.2 summarises the model calculation parameters used for the domestic refrigeration sector. The general methodology was based on that of March (1999), itself adapted from a model developed for the DETR (now Defra) (DOE, 1996). The calculation methodology within the model is considered to provide a relatively conservative approach to the estimation of emissions, which are presented in Section 2.3 as graphs and tables.

Table 2.2 Model Parameters - Domestic refrigeration.Row Field Field

typeADescription

1 Used for manufacture (t) D Annual tonnage for manufacture of new products=[Annual sales]*[average fluid fill (kg)]/1000*[% goods containing HFC]

2 Net proportion exported D Proportion of new products exported (negative if there is a net import)

3 Size of bank (t) C Bank size in year X = [Row3,X-1]-[Row4,X-1]+([Row1]-[Row8])*(1-[Row2])

4 Decommissioning (t) D Annual tonnage of fluid in decommissioned equipment in Year X= [Row1, X-n] where n = equipment lifetime

5 PM factor % D Product Manufacturing factor: losses during the manufacture, storage, transport and installation of end product

6 PL factor % D Product Life factor: average lifetime emissions of fluid from a product

7 D factor % D Disposal Factor: proportion of fluid emitted at the end of a product’s life, during decommissioning

8 PM emissions (t) C Product manufacturing emissions:[Row1]*[Row5]

9 PL emissions (t) C Product lifetime emissions in year X: ([Row1,X])*[Row6,X]+([Row1,X-1])*[Row6,X-1]+([Row1,X-n])*[Row6,X-n] where n = equipment lifetime

10 D emissions (t) C Disposal emissions [Row4]*[Row7]11 Total tonnes emitted C [Row8]+[Row9]+[Row10]12 GWP of fluid/s D Average 100 year GWP of fluid/s13 Ktonnes CO2 equiv.

ConsumedC ([Row1]+[Row9])*[Row12]/1000

14 Ktonnes CO2 equiv. emitted

C [Row11]*[Row12]/1000

A D = data field; C = calculated field.

AEA Technology 20


2.2.2 Commercial refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment

Data sources and assumptions In the absence of new activity data being available from industry for the

commercial refrigeration sectors, emissions for these sectors (R2-R8) have been based on the activity data supplied by industry and used by March (1999) and WS Atkins (2000). Data for sectors R4 (supermarket systems) and R5 (industrial systems) were revised to reflect an anticipated greater use of alternative refrigerants than was previously assumed, based on discussions with industry and suppliers of alternative refrigerant fluids. Based on discussion with industry, activity data from sector R2 (small hermetic units) were also substantially revised compared with the earlier figures to reflect an increased use of hydrocarbon refrigerants.

Some refrigeration sub-sectors such as the domestic refrigeration sector use only one type of HFC fluid (i.e. HFC134a), others, such as the commercial and air-conditioning sub-sectors employ a range of fluid types. Information on trends in refrigerant blend composition was obtained from stakeholder consultation, and from March (1999), BSRIA (1998), BSRIA (1999a), BSRIA (1999b) and Schwarz and Leisewitz (1999). It is assumed that the proportion of fluids used in the respective sub-sectors remains constant throughout the 1990-2025 period.

Equipment lifetimes used for the commercial refrigeration sectors, after discussion with stakeholders fall within the ranges given in IPCC guidance (IPCC 2000), except for the R3 systems where a lifetime of 13 years was assumed. This value is the midpoint of a 10-15 life-time range for these sectors as identified in discussion with UK industry.

Product manufacturing emission (PM) factors, based on discussion with the stakeholders, are within the ranges given in IPCC guidance (IPCC 2000).

The calculation methodology for lifetime operating emissions is summarised in Table 2.10. This methodology allows changes made to the annual average operating loss emission factor (PL factor) to apply only to fluid used in manufacture (i.e. to units produced) in that year, and not to the entire fluid bank as previously assumed by March (1999).

Emission factors for lifetime average operational (PL) and decommissioning losses (PD) that were used by March (1999) have been re-evaluated for the baseline scenario in certain sub-sectors on the basis of questionnaire responses from industry and trade bodies. These decreased emission factors reflect increased awareness and progress made within the industry in minimising refrigerant losses through improved maintenance and leak detection procedures.

The anticipated impact of the future mandatory registration scheme for refrigerant handlers, outlined in Section 2.1.7, is assumed to decrease operational and decommissioning operational leakage losses in the sector as a result of improved leak detection and correction through more rigorous maintenance practices and

AEA Technology 21


efficient fluid recovery practices. Tables 2.3-2.9 show the revised emission factors for this scenario compared with those used for the baseline scenario.

Tables 2.3-2.9 summarise the key assumptions used in the emissions models for the respective commercial refrigeration and air-conditioning sectors. Emission factors used for the baseline scenario, registration scheme scenario, and by March (1999) (in brackets), are shown for comparison.

Table 2.10 summarises the generic model calculation parameters used for the commercial refrigeration and air-conditioning sectors. The general methodology was based on that of March (1999), itself adapted from a model developed for the DETR (DOE, 1996). The calculation methodology within the model is considered to provide a relatively conservative approach to the estimation of emissions.

Table 2.3 – Key Assumptions: R2 Other small hermetic refrigeration units.1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Specific HFCs

Various: 50% HFC134a, 45% HFC404a, 3% HFC407c, 2% HFC507.

Activity data


0(0)

80(80)

90(90)

65(80)

50(80)

50(80)

50(80)

50(-)


10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Emission factorsA

PM % Baseline scenario, Registration scheme scenario, (March 1999)

1.0, 1.0

(1.0)

1.0, 1.0

(1.0)

1.0, 1.0

(1.0)

1.0, 1.0

(1.0)

1.0, 1.0

(1.0)

1.0, 1.0

(1.0)

1.0, 1.0

(1.0)

1.0, 1.0 (-)

PL % Baseline scenario, Registration scheme scenario, (March 1999)

5.0, 5.0

(1.0)

5.0, 5.0

(1.0)

5.0, 5.0

(1.0)

3.0, 3.0

(1.0)

3.0, 3.0

(1.0)

3.0, 3.0

(1.0)

3.0, 3.0

(1.0)

3.0, 3.0

(1.0)

D % Baseline scenario, Registration scheme scenario, (March 1999)

50, 50 (50)

50, 50 (50)

50, 50 (50)

10, 10 (20)

5, 5 (20)

3, 3 (20)

3, 3 (20)

3, 3 (-)


AEA Technology 22


Table 2.4 – Key Assumptions: R3 Small commercial distributed systems.1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Specific HFCs

Various 65% HFC134a, 20% HFC404a, 13% HFC407c, 2% HFC507.

Activity data


0(0)

80(80)

110(110)

106(106)

117(117)

129(129)

143(143)

158(-)


13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13

Emission factorsA


3, 3 (3) 3, 3 (3) 3, 3 (3) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (-)


30, 30, (30)

18, 15 (20)

15, 12 (17)

10, 8 (12)

8, 5 (10)

8, 5 (10)

5 5 (10)

5, 5 (-)


10, 10 (10)

10, 10 (10)

8, 8 (10)

5, 5 (6) 5, 5 (5) 5, 4 (5) 5, 4 (5) 5, 4 (-)


Table 2.5 – Key Assumptions: R4 Supermarket systems1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Specific HFCs

Various: (25% HFC134a, 50% HFC404a, 5% HFC410a, 15% HFC407c, 5% HFC507.

Activity data


0(5)

450(450)

600(600)

275(300)

250(300)

250(300)

200(300)

200(-)


7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

Emission factorsA


3, 3 (3) 3, 3 (3) 2, 2 (3) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (-)


30, 30 (30)

25, 25 (25)

20, 17(20)

15, 10 (15)

10, 6, (10)

8, 6 (10)

6, 6 (10)

6, 6 (-)


10, 10 (10)

10, 10 (10)

8, 8 (9) 5, 5 (5) 5, 4 (5) 5, 4 (5) 4, 4 (5) 4, 4 (-)


AEA Technology 23


Table 2.6 – Key Assumptions: R5 Industrial systems.1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Specific HFCs

Various: 35% HFC134a, 20% HFC404a, 25% HFC407c, 10% HFC507, 10% HFC410a.

Activity data


0(1)

25(25)

500(500)

275(300)

275(300)

250(300)

250(300)

250(-)


15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Emission factorsA


3, 3 (3) 3, 3 (3) 2, 2 (3) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (-)


20, 20 (20)

20, 18 (20)

12, 10 (15)

10, 8 (10)

8, 5 (6) 8, 5 (6) 5, 5 (6) 5, 5 (-)


10, 10 (10)

10, 10 (10)

8, 8 (10)

5, 5 (6) 5, 4 (5) 5, 4 (5) 4, 4 (5) 4, 4 (-)


Table 2.7 – Key Assumptions: R6 Building air conditioning systems1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Specific HFCs

Various: 60% HFC410a, 40% HFC407c

Activity data


0(0)

10(10)

150(150)

300(300)

200(200)

200(200)

200(200)

200(-)


12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

Emission factorsA


3, 3 (3) 3, 3 (3) 2, 2 (3) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (2) 2, 2 (-)


30, 30 (30)

20, 18 (20)

12, 11 (15)

10, 9 (10)

8, 5 (10)

8, 5 (10)

5, 5 (10)

5, 5 (-)


10, 10 (10)

10, 10 (10)

8, 8 (10)

5, 5 (6) 5, 4 (5) 5, 4 (5) 4, 4 (5) 4, 4 (-)


AEA Technology 24


Table 2.8 – Key Assumptions: R7 Building air-conditioning chillers1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Specific HFCs

Various: 40% HFC134a, 20% HFC410a, 40% HFC407c.

Activity data


0(2)

30(30)

150(150)

250(250)

175(175)

175(175)

175(175)

175(-)


12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

Emission factorsA


1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (-)


10, 10 (10)

10, 10 (10)

5, 5 (5) 3, 3 (3) 3, 3 (3) 3, 3 (3) 3, 3 (3) 3, 3 (-)


5, 5 (5) 5, 5 (5) 5, 5 (5) 5, 5 (4) 5, 4 (4) 5, 4 (4) 4, 4 (4) 4, 4 (-)


Table 2.9 – Key Assumptions: R8 Refrigerated transport1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Specific HFCs

Various: 30% HFC134a,50% HFC404a, 10% HFC410a, 10% HFC507.

Activity data


0(0)

10(10)

65(65)

72(72)

79(79)

87(87)

97(97)

107(-)


8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

Emission factorsA


1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (1) 1, 1 (-)


15, 15 (15)

15, 15 (15)

10, 10 (12)

8, 8 (9) 8, 5 (8) 8, 5 (8) 5, 5 (8) 5, 5 (-)


15, 15 (15)

15, 15 (15)

10, 10 (15)

8, 8 (5) 5, 4 (5) 5, 4 (5) 4, 4 (5) 4, 4 (-)


AEA Technology 25


Table 2.10 Model Parameters - Commercial refrigeration and air-conditioning sectors.Row Field Field

typeADescription

1 Used for manufacture (t) D Annual tonnage for manufacture of new products=[Annual sales]*[average fluid fill (kg)]/1000*[% goods containing HFC]









10 D emissions (t) C Disposal emissions [Row4]*[Row7]11 Total tonnes emitted C [Row8]+[Row9]+[Row10]12 GWP of fluid/s D Average 100 year GWP of fluid/s13 Ktonnes CO2 equiv.

ConsumedC ([Row1]+[Row9])*[Row12]/1000


C [Row11]*[Row12]/1000


AEA Technology 26


2.3 EMISSIONS AND PROJECTIONS

Figure 2.1 shows estimated UK emissions of HFC from stationary refrigeration and air conditioning between 1990 and 2025.

HFC Emissions from Stationary Refrigeration

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s) High

MidLow

Figure 2.1: HFC emissions from domestic and commercial refrigeration sectors (tonnes HFC)

Estimated Level of Uncertainty Historical data +/- 20% Future projections +/- 45%

The levels of uncertainty are AEA Technology’s estimates based on our understanding of the uncertainties within the sector and from discussion with industry.

Emissions rise to a peak around 2005 and then decrease, largely due to ongoing improvements in design, lower leakage rates and maintenance. Improvements in design, leakage and maintenance are assumed to occur to a greater extent and/or sooner with implementation of the mandatory registration scheme scenario, in comparison to the baseline (see sub-sector graphs and tables below). There is also an anticipated increased use of alternative fluids in domestic refrigeration (R1) and small in hermetic chiller units (R2), and in the R4 (supermarket systems) and R5 (industrial systems) sectors, as described previously. The assumed lifetime of 7 years for supermarket systems has also caused emissions to decrease significantly in this sub-sector (see graph below) compared with emissions in March (1999), who assumed a lifetime of 15 years. The emission uncertainty range in 2025 is lower than that in 2010 as the error value is calculated as a percentage of the mid-scenario value.

Figure 2.1 excludes the effect of the mandatory registration scheme, which is expected to reduce emissions by about 20% in 2010 and more in subsequent years, as shown in Tables 2.11 and 2.12.

AEA Technology 27


2.3.1 Domestic refrigeration

Figure 2.2 shows estimated UK emissions of HFC from domestic refrigeration between 1990 and 2025. Two data sets are shown: the baseline, or mid-estimates from our work, and the baseline estimates given by March (1999). The mandatory registration scheme for refrigerant handlers is not expected to have any significant impact on emissions in this sector.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

R1:

HFC

134a

em

itted

(ton

nes)

This work

March (1999)

Figure 2.2: Sub-sector R1: HFC emissions from domestic refrigeration

There are several reasons for the lower forecast emissions compared to the previous studies of March (1999) and WS Atkins (2000). The first of these is that alternative refrigerant fluids (e.g. hydrocarbons) capture a significantly greater share of the domestic refrigeration sector than previously recognised. However revised emission factors including end-of life recovery are at least as important in the time frame until 2010. All major UK manufacturers now use hydrocarbon-based refrigerants. It is therefore expected that use of alternatives will increase, reflecting the general European trend towards alternative refrigerants in this sector.

In the emissions model, HFC use decreases from 90% market share in 1998 to 10% by 2005, and a further decrease to 5% by 2010 (and constant thereafter, to represent a small amount of imported stock containing HFCs). Although there are large uncertainties in the percentage of HFC-containing equipment, this has only a small effect on overall emissions from the domestic refrigeration sector due to the low manufacturing and operating emission factors, and the high refrigerant recovery rates assumed for this sector.

2.3.2 Commercial Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

Figures 2.3 to 2.9 show HFC emissions and projections for each sub-sector of commercial refrigeration and air conditioning based on: a baseline scenario assuming no mandatory registration scheme is introduced; a scenario which includes the registration scheme as currently envisaged;

AEA Technology 28


the March (1999) baseline estimates.

In all sectors the initial increase in emissions occurs as HFC use increases in the respective sub-sector, and so as the refrigerant bank builds up, operating emissions increase. The main differences between the baseline estimates for this study and for March (1999), as shown in the following graphs, are as follows:

R2 (small hermetic refrigeration units): The reason for the initial high increase in emissions compared with March (1999) is a combination of the higher emission factor for lifetime operating emission losses used (Table 2.3) and the revised calculation methodology. In the longer term emissions decrease to a lower level, due to reduced activity rates predicted (i.e. a greater rate of uptake of hydrocarbon-based refrigerants is assumed), and improvements in the recovery of refrigerant at equipment end-of-life.

R3 Small commercial distributed systems: Emissions are initially similar to those of March (1999), although they are higher from around 2002 due to the revised methodology used. After 2012, emissions are predicted to be lower than in the March study due to improvements in the operating lifetime emission rate assumed (Table 2.4).

R4 Supermarket systems: From 2005 emissions are predicted to be significantly lower than predicted by March (1999). This is due mainly to the shorter equipment lifetime assumed (Table 2.5). In the longer term (from 2015 onwards) the reduction in the emission factor used for the lifetime operating emissions also contributes to the decrease observed. The lower activity data assumed (i.e. an increased use of alternative refrigerants) does not make a large difference to the total estimated emissions (see Table 2.15).

R5 Industrial systems: The differences observed between 2005 and 2015 for the projected emission estimates from this work and those from the March (1999) are due to the revised methodology, which results in higher emission estimates than previously calculated when equipment has a longer lifetime (15 years, Table 2.6). The revised emission factors for lifetime operating emissions, together with the lower activity data assumed, contribute to the decrease in emissions that are evident from 2014 onward.

R6 Building air conditioning systems (direct use of refrigerant): Estimated emissions from this work and March (1999) are broadly similar until 2010. Emissions after that are predicted to decrease, due to a reduction in the operating lifetime emission rate assumed (Table 2.7).

R7 Building air-conditioning chillers (indirect use of refrigerant): The differences between the emission estimates from this work and those of March (1999) are primarily due to the revised calculation methodology.

R8 Refrigerated transport (refrigerated lorries, containers etc) using conventional refrigeration technology: Baseline emission estimates of this work and March (1999) are broadly similar, although in the longer-term emissions in this work decrease due to the lower lifetime operating emission factor used.

AEA Technology 29


05

10

1520253035

404550

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

R2:

HFC

em

issi

ons

(tonn

es) Baseline

Registration scheme scenario

March (1999)

Figure 2.3: Sub-sector R2: HFC emissions from small hermetic refrigeration units (including through the wall air-conditioners, drinking water coolers etc.)

0

50

100

150

200

250

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

R3:

HFC

em

issi

ons

(tonn

es)

BaselineRegistration scheme scenario

March (1999)

Figure 2.4: Sub-sector R3: HFC emissions from small commercial distributed systems (including pub cellar coolers, small chill and cold stores)

AEA Technology 30


0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

R4:

HFC

em

issi

ons

(tonn

es)

Baseline

Registration scheme scenarioMarch (1999)

Figure 2.5: Sub-sector R4: Supermarket systems

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

R5:

HF

C e

mis

sion

s (to

nnes

)

Baseline

Registration scheme scenarioMarch (1999)

Figure 2.6: Sub-sector R5: Industrial systems

AEA Technology 31


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

R6:

HFC

em

issi

ons

(tonn

es)

Baseline


March (1999)

Figure 2.7: Sub-sector R6: building air conditioning systems (direct use of refrigerant)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

R7:

HFC

em

issi

ons

(tonn

es)

Baseline


March (1999)

Figure 2.8: Sub-sector R7: Building air-conditioning chillers (indirect use of refrigerant)

AEA Technology 32


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

R8:

HFC

em

issi

ons

(tonn

es)

Baseline


March (1999)

Figure 2.9: Sub-sector R8: Refrigerated transport (refrigerated lorries, containers etc)

Tables 2.11 and 2.12 show the sub-sector emissions for the baseline and mandatory registration scheme scenarios, respectively. Data for the mobile air-conditioning sector have been brought forward from Section 3 and are shown in each table to allow comparison.

Table 2.11 - Subsector trends in refrigeration – baseline mid estimated emissions in tonnes HFC

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025R1 Domestic refrigeration 0 13 29 35 15 3 1 1R2 Other small units 0 6 31 44 23 16 16 16R3 Small commercial systems 0 28 124 184 194 154 141 131R4 Supermarket systems 0 263 976 769 328 216 160 120R5 Industrial systems 0 9 173 359 474 488 343 281R6 Air conditioning systems 0 2 69 189 286 286 216 174R7 Air conditioning chillers 0 5 37 75 109 138 140 127R8 Refrigerated transport 0 2 27 51 52 57 54 47R9 (Mobile air-conditioning) 0 140 604 1122 1270 1181 1017 876

Total R1-R8 0 329 1465 1707 1480 1358 1070 896

AEA Technology 33


Table 2.12 - Subsector trends in refrigeration – registration scheme scenario mid estimated emissions in tonnes HFC.

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025R1 Domestic refrigeration 0 13 29 35 15 3 1 1R2 Other small units 0 6 31 44 23 16 16 16R3 Small commercial systems 0 27 105 152 148 106 96 105R4 Supermarket systems 0 263 896 608 219 151 132 116R5 Industrial systems 0 8 156 315 401 382 252 217R6 Air conditioning systems 0 2 66 175 235 210 152 142R7 Air conditioning chillers 0 5 37 75 108 136 140 127R8 Refrigerated transport 0 2 27 51 45 38 40 45R9 (Mobile air-conditioning) 0 140 604 1122 1270 1181 1017 876

Total R1-R8 0 327 1347 1455 1194 1041 830 768


The projections of HFC refrigerant sector emissions for constituent countries were derived from a top-down disaggregation of the UK emissions. This approach assumes that projections for each constituent country are based upon the same underlying assumptions as were made for the UK and, therefore, are not sensitive to local issues, such as ownership levels or environmental differences. This follows the approach used by WS Atkins (2000). The following summarises the disaggregation methodologies used:

Domestic refrigeration emissions were disaggregated according to population: England 83%Scotland 9%Wales 5%N. Ireland 3%

All other refrigeration sectors were disaggregated based on the basis of GDP:England 85%Scotland 9%Wales 4%N. Ireland 2%

Table 2.13 shows the estimated emissions and projections of HFCs from refrigeration and air conditioning for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. These values were disaggregated from UK data using the methodology described in Section 2.2.3. Data for the mobile air-conditioning sector has again been brought forward from Section 3 to allow comparison.

AEA Technology 34


Table 2.13 Constituent country HFC emissions from refrigeration - baseline mid estimated emissions (kt CO2 eq.)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025England domestic refrigeration R1

0 13696 31192 38101 15961 3241 1562 1491

England commercial refrig/air-con R2-R8

0 623934 2732283

2983030

2424645

2194572

1717001

1426745

England mobile air-con R9

0 155144 667015 1240324

1403321

1305466

1124168

967831

England total R1-R8 0 637630 2763475

3021131

2440607

2197813

1718563

1428236

Scotland domestic refrigeration R1

0 1485 3382 4131 1731 351 169 162

Scotland commercial refrig/air-con R2-R8

0 66064 289301 315850 256727 232366 181800 151067

Scotland mobile air-con R9

0 14602 62778 116736 132077 122867 105804 91090

Scotland total R1-R8 0 67549 292683 319982 258458 232718 181970 151229Wales domestic refrigeration R1

0 825 1879 2295 962 195 94 90

Wales commercial refrig/aircon R2-R8

0 29362 128578 140378 114101 103274 80800 67141

Wales mobile air-con R9

0 7301 31389 58368 66039 61434 52902 45545

Wales total R1-R8 0 30187 130457 142673 115062 103469 80894 67231N Ireland domestic refrigeration R1

0 495 1127 1377 577 117 56 54

N Ireland commercial refrig/air-con R2-R8

0 14681 64289 70189 57050 51637 40400 33570

N Ireland mobile air-con R9

0 5476 23542 43776 49529 46075 39677 34159

N Ireland total R1-R8 0 15176 65416 71566 57627 51754 40456 33624

2.3.4 Sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity analyses have been undertaken to assess the effects of changes made since the previous report March (1999) with regard to the emission factors and the calculation methodology used. Tables 2.14 to 2.16 show the results of these sensitivity analyses for the domestic refrigeration sector and the two commercial refrigeration sectors having the largest emissions: supermarket and industrial systems.

The four sets of data shown comprise:a) Baseline data as mid-point emission values from this work.b) Mid-point emission values from March (1999).c) Values obtained using March (1999) emission factors and methodology, but using

the revised activity data (fluid usage) from this work.

AEA Technology 35


d) Values obtained using the revised emission factors and methodology from this work, but using the previous activity data (fluid usage) from March (1999).

Table 2.14 - Emissions (tonnes) from the domestic refrigeration sector showing the significance of changes to activity data, emission factors and calculation methodologies.Year a) Baseline

from this work

b) Mid-point from March

(1999)

c) Activity data this work; but with March (1999) emission factors & methodology

d) Emission factors & methodology this work; March activity data

1990 0 0.02 0 01995 13 10 13 102000 29 32 30 302005 35 94 68 452010 15 142 83 332015 3 131 17 292020 1 131 6 292025 1 - - -

Table 2.14 shows that the lower projected estimates for baseline values calculated in this work compared with those from March (1999) are due to the changes in both the emission factors and activity data used.

Table 2.15 - Emissions (tonnes) from the R4 supermarket system sector showing the significance of changes to activity data, emission factors and calculation methodologies.Year a) Baseline

from this work


(1999)

c) Activity data this work; but with March emission factors & methodology

d) Emission factors & methodology this work; March activity data

1990 0 0.2 0 21995 263 250 249 2672000 976 838 837 9722005 769 885 880 7732010 328 669 651 3502015 216 489 446 2512020 160 446 373 1972025 120 - - -Note: The significant difference between baseline values in this work, and those of March (1999) is due to the different value for equipment lifetime assumed, i.e. 7 years and 15 years respectively.

Table 2.15 shows that the differences between projected estimates from this work and those from March (1999) are mainly due to the shorter equipment life-time, and revised emission factors and methodology used. Changes made to activity data caused only a relatively small change to the projected emission estimates.

AEA Technology 36


Table 2.16 - Emissions (tonnes) from the R5 industrial system sector showing the significance of changes to activity data, emission factors and calculation methodologies.Year a) Baseline

from this work


(1999)

c) Activity data this work; but with March (1999) emission factors & methodology

d) Emission factors & methodology this work; March (1999) activity data

1990 0 0.03 0 0.21995 9 8 9 92000 173 188 188 1732005 359 297 294 3612010 474 269 260 4882015 488 357 333 5232020 343 445 406 3932025 281 - - -

The differences observed for the R5 industrial system sector (Table 2.16) between the projected emission estimates from this work and those from the March (1999) results, are mainly due to the revised emission factors and methodology used. Changes made to activity data caused only a relatively small change to the projected emission estimates.

2.4 ADDITIONAL MEASURES FOR EMISSIONS REDUCTION

The effect of introducing a mandatory registration scheme for refrigerant handlers on emissions is shown above in the sector graphs; data are given in Tables 2.11 and 2.12.

The other additional measure investigated in the stationary refrigeration sector is an elimination of HFCs in new domestic refrigeration units and other small refrigeration units (sectors R1 and R2) by 2005. Table 2.17 shows the effect of such a measure.

Table 2.17. HFC emissions (tonnes) in new domestic refrigeration units and other small refrigeration units with a 2005 replacement

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

R1 Domestic refrigeration – baseline

0 13 29 35 15 3 1 1

R1 Domestic refrigeration – replacement of HFCs

0 13 29 35 14 2 0 0

R2 Other small units – baseline

0 6 31 44 23 16 16 16

R2 Other small units – replacement of HFCs

0 6 31 44 21 7 0 0

The effect of eliminating HFCs by 2005 in new equipment in the R1 and R2 sectors is relatively modest. This is largely due to the pre-existing low leakage rates in the two

AEA Technology 37


sectors and the increased rates of refrigerant recovery at end of life that are already assumed to occur. Total cumulative emissions (1990-2025) from the R1 and R2 sectors with the HFC replacement are 474 and 455 tonnes respectively. The baseline emissions over the same period are 495 and 727 tonnes respectively. The cost effectiveness of the emission reduction potential from this measure is discussed in Section 15. .

AEA Technology 38


3 Mobile Air Conditioning

3.1 INTRODUCTION

As in other parts of Europe, mobile air-conditioning (MAC) market for passenger and commercial vehicles grew rapidly in the UK during the 1990s. Until around 1993, CFC-12 was the common refrigerant used in vehicle mobile air-conditioning, after which it was replaced by HFC-134a, the current standard.

Mobile air-conditioning units in vehicles are not hermetically sealed. Due to design and the mechanically demanding working conditions of MAC units and the maintenance regimes likely to have been encountered in practice, lifetime emissions equivalent to 4 charges/vehicle have historically been estimated for CFC systems (assuming 1 system recharge every 3 years) (UNEP 1998). New systems are estimated as leaking around 6-8% per year (Stakeholder Workshop, September 2002), and industry believes leakage rates of 4-5% or lower will be achieved in the future (CNE 2000).

The reduction in leakage rates has largely been because of improved design and efficiency gains (early MAC units contained on average 1-1.2 kg of charge, whereas the current average charge is around 650-700 g (Stakeholder Workshop, September 2002)), together with improved fluid recovery at maintenance and decommissioning. Further improvements in leakage and recovery rates will undoubtedly occur, but the underlying penetration of MAC technology in the automotive sector means that HFC emissions are predicted to increase steadily until 2010.

The first controlled investigation of HFC-134a leakage from MAC systems has recently been reported (Siegel 2002). Leakage rates from 28 cars and light trucks (5 manufacturers and of various ages), with mileages ranging from 0 to 150,000 were measured in a sealed apparatus with the vehicles not operating. The average leakage rate was found to be 0.08 g/day or 29 g/year (annual operational leakage rate of 3.2% if an average 900g charge is assumed). A second study (Baker 1998) found losses of HFC-134a due to servicing and end-of-life disposal that averaged 0.12 g/day when recovery and recycling occurred. This gave total lifetime losses of 0.08 + 0.12 = 0.20 g/day or 730 g over a 10 year vehicle life. This is similar to the average charge volume used on current MAC units, and so is equivalent to around a 10% annual emission loss. Slightly lower but similar results were found in a German study (Schwarz 2002), when the MAC maintenance records from a number of garages were analysed. Annual emission rates from normal use were found to be 6.3%, and those arising from accidental emissions were 1.9%, leading to a combined lifetime annual emission rate of 8.2%.

The annual lifetime emission rates used in this work, and the assumption that older vehicles are not routinely topped up with refrigerant fluid, implies that many air-conditioning units will reach end-of life without containing recoverable amounts of fluid. This reflects what is currently observed in UK practice. A similar situation occurs in the United States, a country where mobile air conditioning has been

AEA Technology 39


common in vehicles for many years. Here the servicing of mobile AC systems generally ceases long before the vehicle is scrapped. This means that in the emissions model, and especially for years before 2005 (before which vehicle MAC units have relatively high operational leakage rates), emissions are relatively insensitive to the percentage end of life recovery factor assumed.

Several alternative refrigerants to HFC 134a have been assessed for suitability in the MAC sector. The main options are carbon dioxide, HFC 152a and hydrocarbons. Electrically-powered air-conditioning units are a further option that currently are regarded as offering future potential.

The HFC and vehicle industries have raised safety concerns regarding the use of hydrocarbons, because the MAC system is in a forward area of the vehicle where it is potentially vulnerable to impact. Similarly, as existing MAC systems tend to leak and are not designed to handle flammable refrigerants, there remains a danger of explosion and/or release into the passenger compartment. Hydrocarbons (propane or propane/isobutane blends) have been used in some countries (e.g. Australia) as a retrofit refrigerant for CFC-12 systems, a practice that has been described as extremely dangerous by UNEP (1998) due to the systems never having been specifically designed to handle such refrigerants. Their use in existing CFC-12 systems has been banned in the United States. The use of flammable refrigerants in HFC-134a mobile air-conditioning systems has also been banned in the United States and some Australian states.

Although there seems to have been no systematic analysis of the risks of hydrocarbon refrigerants relative to, say, fuel tank or fuel line rupture, European vehicle manufacturers have preferred to investigate the use of trans-critical CO2 as an alternative to HFC and hydrocarbon use. Carbon dioxide was used in early refrigeration systems, but was largely replaced by ammonia and CFCs largely due to its higher operating pressures and less efficient refrigerant performance. As these systems operate at higher pressures than HFC systems, their use therefore necessitates a different set of components.

The requirement to increase component thicknesses to tolerate higher operating pressures has led to industry concern over possible weight increases and hence decreased fuel economy. However, proponents of CO2-based systems claim that using higher operating pressures can reduce internal dimensions of components, resulting in systems of comparable weight. Although recent prototypes are reportedly promising in terms of their cooling effectiveness and operating efficiency, other assessments note that the designs require substantial additional development by manufacturers to allow the cost, performance, reliability and safety requirements for vehicle customers to be fully addressed (Arthur D Little Inc. 2002).

3.1.1 Policy influences on sector

The UK automotive air conditioning industry, which is represented by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders Ltd (SMMT), has a voluntary agreement with Government (Declaration of Intent on the Use of Hydrofluorocarbons) under which estimated HFC usage and emissions data are reported annually. Data comprise the

AEA Technology 40


amount of HFC contained in new vehicles (both UK installed and imported HFC refrigerant) and maximum estimated HFC losses from new UK vehicles.

The EC Directive 2000/53/EC on End-of Life Vehicles contains provisions for the recovery of refrigerant fluids at decommissioning. Under the minimum technical requirements for treatment (given in Annex I of the Directive) the removal and separate collection and storage of air-conditioning system fluids is required, unless it is necessary for the re-use of the system itself. At present the UK is not meeting these requirements, as the Directive has not yet been transposed into national law. Transposition is expected to occur in the summer of 2003. We have assumed that improved recovery efficiencies will be achieved thereafter, as described in Section 3.2.

There is no specific detail for the MAC sector concerning training, compliance and certification issues in the ACRIB (2003) paper on the mandatory registration scheme for refrigerant handlers. Although refrigerant handlers from the mobile air-conditioning sector would fall under the scope of any mandatory registration scheme for such fluids (as discussed in the preceding stationary refrigeration section), the implementation of a scheme would probably not result in significant additional emission reductions, because MAC systems are often empty at the end of life of the vehicle. Operating emissions would not be affected by implementation of a scheme, while recovery of refrigerant at vehicle end-of life is covered by the requirements of Directive 2000/53/EC as described above. Some reduction in servicing emissions may occur however, due to improved training and servicing practices.

The European Commission has recently indicated that increased attention will be paid to reducing emissions from the MAC sector (European Commission 2003). It is likely that some proposals affecting the sector will be included in a wider regulation of HFC, PFC and SF6 due around mid-2003. The global MAC industry is evaluating several MAC technology options, but at the time of this study it is not yet certain which of these (if any) may be partly or widely introduced in the future (or on what time-scale). As one of several options to reduce emissions, the Commission has raised the possibility that use of HFC-134a may be phased out in the future for MAC, which would have a large effect on projected emissions. It is not clear which of the potential abatement options industry favours, or the length of time that would be needed by industry to develop the necessary technical capabilities required for alternative technologies. For calculation of the emission projections in this work, we have anticipated that from 2010 the market for HFC-based refrigerants will decrease, reflecting the introduction of alternative CO2 refrigerant systems from this point on. An accelerated introduction of CO2 systems resulting in a 100% HFC replacement in mobile air-conditioning units is evaluated as a possible additional measure. However, as noted above, this measure will be dependent on the widespread availability of reliable and cost effective CO2 systems, which is not yet certain.

AEA Technology 41



Data sources and assumptions Data for UK new and projected vehicle numbers (new passenger and commercial

vehicle registrations) were obtained from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT). The data were used without modification, except that commercial vehicle numbers were assumed to grow 0.5% per annum throughout the period 2005-2020 based on historical trends, rather than remaining constant. A constant lifetime of twelve years per vehicle was assumed (IPCC 2000).

The percentage of vehicles having HFC air-conditioning systems is estimated to increase from 10% in 1993 to 50% by 2000 (SMMT). For 1996-2000 the percentage of new and imported vehicles having mobile air conditioning systems was based on data received: i.e. vehicle registration data, and knowledge of the total amount of HFC 134a fluid used in new and imported cars (SMMT).

The percentage of new vehicles having MAC systems is anticipated to increase from the present-day (2002) estimate of around 55% (SMMT), to 70% by 2005 and 75% by 2010, as MAC becomes a standard feature in vehicles. From 2010, the market for HFC-based air-conditioning systems is assumed to decrease, reflecting the introduction of alternative CO2-based refrigerant systems from this time forward.

The average charge of HFC per unit (passenger and commercial vehicles) at manufacture was assumed to decrease from 1.2 to 0.8 kg between 1993 and 2000 (IPCC 1997). IPCC guidance (IPCC 1997) provides default values of 1.2 and 0.8 kg for older and more modern cars, respectively. The current average charge for MAC units in new UK passenger vehicles is probably between ca. 650-700 g (Stakeholder Workshop, September 2002). The higher 0.8 kg average charge volume used for 2000 in this work reflects the contribution of commercial vehicle systems that contain larger volumes of refrigerant. After 2000, based on discussion with industry, improved operating efficiency is taken to result in further reductions of average charge volumes for passenger and commercial vehicles to 0.75 kg in 2005, 0.65 kg in 2010, 0.6 kg in 2015 and constant thereafter.

The PM product manufacturing emission factor was assumed to be 1% for all years, consistent with that used by March (1999). This is a higher estimate than the updated default value of 0.5% in IPCC (2000), but is lower than the original IPCC guidance default range of 4-5% (IPCC 1997).

The effective lifetime leakage rate (incorporating emissions from normal operating losses and accidental releases arising from, for example, collision damage) of mobile air-conditioning units was assumed to decrease linearly from 15% p.a. in 1995 to 10% p.a. in 2000 (leakage rates from the range of default values given in IPCC 2000). Based on discussion with industry, continuing improvements to design and to the standard of components (such as hoses and joints) is expected, resulting in lower emission rates, specifically to 7.5% p.a. by 2005 until 2010. After 2010 a further decrease to 6% p.a. is assumed to occur

AEA Technology 42


during the period 2010 to 2020, reflecting anticipated technological improvements during this period.

From a 0% recovery efficiency in 1990 and 1995, decommissioning has been assumed to recover 20% of HFC in 2000, increasing to 80% in 2005, 90% in 2010 and 95% in 2020, reflecting implementation of the End-of-Life Vehicle Directive and the expected greater use of fluid recovery equipment. However, as discussed in Section 3.1, in the absence of servicing and regular topping-up of older air conditioning units, the annual rates of loss assumed during the lifetime of a vehicle implies that until about 2010, many air-conditioning units will reach end-of life without containing recoverable amounts of fluid.

The amount of fluid decommissioned from an end-of-life vehicle has been calculated using the following equation:

Decomm in year x= (amt used for manufacture)x-n - amt leaked during lifetime; i.e.= (amt used for manufacture)x-n - (factor x PLx-n (annual leakage factor) x amt used for manufacturex-n).

where n = vehicle lifetime = 12 years

A factor of 10 was used so that with current annual leakage rates (PL) approximately one charge volume will have leaked and end-of-life vehicles will have no charge remaining.

Table 3.1 summarises the key assumptions used in the emissions model for this work. Comparative values for parameters that were also used by March (1999) are shown in brackets.

Table 3.2 summarises the model calculation parameters used for the MAC sector. As for the stationary refrigeration sector, the methodology was based on that of March (1999), itself adapted from a model developed for the DETR (DOE, 1996). The calculation methodology within the model provides a relatively conservative approach to the estimation of emissions. For the MAC sector a change was made to the methodology used by March (1999) to calculate operating emissions, so that changes to the operating loss factor, DL, apply only to fluid introduced into the bank after the change and not to the whole bank.

AEA Technology 43


Table 3.1 – Key Assumptions: MAC sector.1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Specific HFC

HFC 134a

Activity data

Vehicle registrations (passenger and commerc.)

2302407 2195294 2519690 2600000 2732575 2865342 2998305 3131469

% of vehicles having HFC MAC systems

0 15 50 70 75 70 60 60

Average charge size (kg) at manufacture

1.2 1.1 0.8 0.75 0.65 0.6 0.6 0.6


0(5)

358(330)

1008(720)

1365(835)

1332(949)

1203(1048)

1079(1157)

1127(-)

Equipment lifetime (yrs) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12Emission factorsA


1.0 (1.0) 1.0 (1.0) 1.0 (1.0) 1.0 (1.0) 1.0 (1.0) 1.0 (1.0) 1.0 (1.0) 1.0 (-)


20 (15)

15 (15)

10(10)

7.5 (8)

7.5 (8)

6.75 (8)

6.0 (8)

6.0 (-)


100 (50)

100 (50)

80 (35)

20 (20)

10 (20)

7.5 (20)

5.0 (20)

5.0 (-)


AEA Technology 44


Table 3.2 Model Parameters - MAC sectorRow Field Field

typeADescription

1 Used for manufacture (t) D Annual tonnage for manufacture of new products=[vehicle registrations]*[% vehicles having HFC MAC systems]*[Average charge size (kg)]/1000



4 Decommissioning (t) D Annual tonnage of fluid in decommissioned equipment in Year X = [Row1, X-n] - ([Row6,X-n]* [Row1, X-n]*10)where n = vehicle lifetime, and where factor of 10 reflects an average 10% lifetime operating leakage.







10 D emissions (t) C Disposal emissions [Row4]*[Row7]11 Total tonnes emitted C [Row8]+[Row9]+[Row10]12 GWP of fluid/s D Average 100 year GWP of fluid/s13 Ktonnes CO2 equiv

consumedC ([Row1]+[Row9])*[Row12]/1000


C [Row11]*[Row12]/1000


AEA Technology 45



Figure 3.1 shows estimated UK emissions of HFC from mobile air conditioning for the period 1990 to 2025.

HFC Emissions from Mobile Air Conditioning

0200400600800

10001200140016001800

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)

HighMid

Low

Figure 3.1: UK emissions from Mobile Air Conditioning (tonnes HFC)

HFC134a

Estimated Level of Uncertainty Historical data +/- 10% Future projections +/- 25%


Emissions initially rise rapidly due to the observed growth of HFC-based air conditioning in new passenger cars (from 10% in 1993 to 50% by 2000). HFC-based systems are estimated to reach a maximum of 75% in new cars by 2010, which is the main reason for the levelling off in emissions around this time. The decrease in emissions predicted after 2010 is due to reduced charge volumes (Table 3.1) and lower in-use leakage achieved through improved product design, coupled with the envisaged future use of alternative CO2-based refrigerant systems and the subsequent decreased market share for HFC-based systems. . The End of Life Vehicle (ELV) Directive will also improve the future recovery efficiency of fluids. However, as noted in Section 3.1.1, many air-conditioning units currently reach end-of life without containing recoverable amounts of fluid.

AEA Technology 46



Projections of mobile air-conditioning emissions for the constituent countries were derived on the basis of car registration data from the SMMT:England 85%Scotland 8%Wales 4%N. Ireland 3%

Estimated HFC emissions from mobile air conditioning for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are shown in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3. Constituent country HFC emissions from refrigeration (kt CO2 eq.)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025England mobile air-con 0 155144 667015 124032

4140332

1130546

6112416

8967831

Scotland mobile air-con

0 14602 62778 116736 132077 122867 105804 91090

Wales mobile air-con 0 7301 31389 58368 66039 61434 52902 45545N Ireland mobile air-con

0 5476 23542 43776 49529 46075 39677 34159


For comparative purposes, and to allow assessment of the effect of changes made since the previous report March (1999) concerning emission factors and the calculation methodology used, four sets of emission data are given in the following table.

The four sets of values shown comprise: Baseline values from this work. Baseline values from March (1999). Values obtained using March (1999) emission factors and methodology, but using

the revised activity data from this work (i.e. amount of HFC-134a used in MAC systems).

Values obtained using the revised emission factors and methodology from this work, but using the previous activity data from March (1999) (i.e. amount of HFC-134a used in MAC systems).

The results suggest that the revised emission factors and methodology contribute to the lower emissions projected in the long-term.

AEA Technology 47


Table 3.4 - Emissions (tonnes) of HFC-134a from the mobile air-conditioning sector showing the significance of changes to activity data, emission factors and calculation methodologies.Year a) This work b) March

(1999)c) Activity data this work; but with March (1999) emission factors & methodology

d) Emission factors & methodology this work; March (1999) activity data

1990 0.0 0.1 0 11995 140 104 118 1232000 604 370 477 4782005 1122 610 891 8072010 1270 1008 1459 8282015 1181 1173 1708 8422020 1017 1314 1652 8622025 876 - - -


The specific additional policies and measures evaluated for the mobile air conditioning sector are:1. Introduction of high pressure CO2 systems resulting in a 100% HFC replacement

in new vehicles by 2010;2. Voluntary agreement with industry to reduce average unit operating leakage to

5% p.a. by 2010 and 3% pa from 2020.

The effect of these measures on UK HFC emissions is shown in Table 3.5. Section 15 of this report presents estimates of the cost-effectiveness of these measures.

Table 3.5 - Effect of additional measures on HFC emissions (tonnes) in MAC sector

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

MAC – baseline 0 140 604 1122

1270

1181

1017

876

CO2 systems by 2010 0 140 604 1122

1157

627 107 0

Leakage reduction 0 140 604 1122

1169

952 745 585

The table above suggests that substantial reductions in emissions are possible through the implementation of the two additional measures in this sector although CO2 systems are unlikely to penetrate the market significantly without further technological developments. Total cumulative emissions (1990-2025) for the emission reduction scenarios are 18,694 and 25,362 tonnes respectively. Total baseline emissions over the period 1990-2025 are 29,222 tonnes, which indicates the potential for significant emissions reduction in this sector.

AEA Technology 48


Due to the diverse and international nature of the vehicle manufacturing sector, a voluntary agreement with national or even regional (EU) manufacturers may not offer the most practical method of achieving emission reductions. A regulatory mechanism may be more feasible, ensuring that significant technological progress continues to be made in the MAC sector. However, the global nature of the car industry requires that the relative performance of the various technologies have to be assessed for a range of climatic and traffic conditions. For example, experimental CO2 systems generally exhibit inferior performance compared to enhanced HFC 134a systems in hot climatic conditions (where many air-conditioned vehicles are located).

The rate of uptake of alternative CO2-based systems is difficult to predict. The vehicle industry is reasonably well positioned to take rapid advantage of step-changes in technology, and so the actual uptake of alternative technology in the future could occur rapidly. This measure could be implemented via a voluntary agreement or regulation. Any such agreement or regulation is likely to be implemented at the European level, due to the nature of the industry.

A wider and more detailed cost benefit analysis would be required to consider wider external issues before introducing high pressure CO2-based systems; this is beyond the scope of this work. These include issues such as increased servicing, maintenance and training costs that may be required for the CO2-based systems. The possible increased weight of CO2-based units compared with HFC-systems could also result in higher fuel consumption and increased CO2 tail pipe emissions. The increased size/weight of CO2 systems may also generate safety issues with respect to the conflicting needs of pedestrian friendly car front design, and for front-end accidents with high pressure systems.

AEA Technology 49


4 Foam Blowing

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Prior to the Montreal Protocol, a wide range of foams was produced using CFC blowing agents. As use of these chemicals was banned, the industry moved to alternatives including HCFCs. For applications such as packaging and cushioning, the use of HCFCs was banned under the EC Regulation on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (EC 3093/94) and these sectors moved to blowing agents such as water or CO2. Use of HCFC was still permitted in rigid insulating foams and integral skin foams for safety applications, but a new EC Regulation on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (EC 2037/2000) has or will shortly ban all HCFC use in these remaining sectors. Table 4.1 shows the applications that have recently been banned or will shortly be banned.

Table 4.1 Banned Uses of HCFCs under EC Regulation

Date of ban Banned in production of :1 October 2000 Polyurethane (PU) integral skin foams

Polyethylene foams1 January 2002 Extruded polystyrene (except in insulated

transport)1 January 2003 PU foams for appliances

PU flexible face laminate foamsPU sandwich panels (except in insulated transport)

1 January 2004 All foams including PU spray and block foams and foams used in insulated transport

These sectors are moving or could potentially move to using HFCs as an alternative to HCFCs. For some sectors alternative blowing agents are available (typically hydrocarbons such a pentane, and CO2). Table 4.2 shows alternatives to HCFC in different applications.

The agent used to blow the foam influences a number of its properties including the fire behaviour of the foam and its insulating properties. Structural properties and moisture resistance can also be important. HCFCs and HFCs are relatively inert gases and give good fire properties. The foam also has a low thermal conductivity, and achieving the same insulating performance with other blowing agents can require a greater thickness of foam. For some applications, where space is at a premium, or there are other design limitations, e.g. insulation in refrigerated transport, the use of highly efficient insulation such as HFC blown foam can be specifically beneficial.

AEA Technology 50


Table 4.2 - Foam Sectors where HCFCs are usedSector HCFC used AlternativesPolyurethane rigid foams (PU foams)

HCFC141b Pentane, HFCs

- Appliances- Discontinuous panels- Continuous panels- Integral skin- Spray- Injected - Flexibly faced laminate- Block foamPolyisocyanurate (PIR) and phenolic foams

HCFC141b Pentane, HFCs

Extruded polystyrene (XPS) HCFC142b and HCFC22

CO2, HFC 134a

Polyethylene (PE) HCFC142b and HCFC22

HCs

Buildings account for a high proportion of UK energy use and 40% or more of UK CO2 emissions. It is generally possible to save around 20% of the energy use of an existing building by cost-effective energy efficiency measures, including the upgrading of the building envelope through the use of additional insulation. Such measures include external cladding, internal lining, cavity wall insulation and internal spray foaming. In each of these approaches, space saving, process safety and ease of application are all elements that may have an impact on the uptake of such measures and each will be influenced by the choice of blowing agent.

In summary, while use of non-HFC alternatives to HFCs is possible in most sectors, the required end use and performance characteristics of the foam may make use of HFCs the preferred option for the manufacturer, user and even the environment. This is discussed in more detail on a sector-by-sector basis later in this section.

The other potential use of HFCs in foams is for ‘one component foams’ (OCFs). This application, which falls somewhere between a foam and an aerosol, is described separately in Section 13.3 and the emissions from OCFs are not included in the foams data.

Emissions of HFCs can occur: during the manufacturing process; over the lifetime of the foam; rigid foams are closed cell foams and the blowing

agent is designed to remain in the foam and contributes to its performance. Loss of HFCs is undesirable as it may affect the performance of the foam but is estimated to occur, albeit at a low rate;

at disposal of the foam.

Emissions at each point vary according to the type of foam, but typically, of the HFC used in the production process, less than 10% is emitted during manufacture

AEA Technology 51


(although emissions may be as high as 40 to 45 % for some types of foam), less than 1% per year over the useful lifetime of the product and the remainder on disposal.

Sector trends can be summarised as follows. Polyurethane - Appliances Almost all UK manufacturers have moved to using HCs (typically iso-pentane and cyclo-pentane or blends thereof), although there are some specialist applications for particular models of fridges and freezers where HFC blown foam may still be required. It is also possible that in the future more stringent energy efficiency requirements for appliances could cause manufacturers to reconsider the use of HFC blown foam (due to its better insulating properties). In the US much of the industry is moving to using HFC 245fa1 and manufacturers with a US connection/parent company may be more likely to consider this.

Polyurethane - Spray Concerns over safety issues are leading most manufacturers in Europe to use HFCs (typically a HFC 365mfc/HFC 227ea blend or HFC-245fa/CO2), although a few are considering water blown foams. However, water-blown foams can only be used in non-insulating situations, as they are open-cell foams. No realistic estimate can be made of the current split between production of foams for insulation and consolidation applications.

Polyurethane – Flexibly faced laminates Many manufacturers in the rest of the EU have moved to HCs, but in the UK this trend is less apparent, partly as different fire safety regulations and standards mean that it is harder to get HC blown products accepted. New EU classifications on fire testing for building products may reinforce this trend, particularly as there is parallel environmental pressure on the increased use of flame-retardants. However, there is still much uncertainty, both in the UK and the rest of Europe, surrounding the technical implications of using HCs; for example, regarding possible interactions between facing materials and blowing agents. In principle, a significant proportion of the market could use HFCs.

Phenolic FoamOwing to the fire performance properties required in the internal applications (e.g. pipe insulation) and other specialist markets that have emerged for this foam, most UK manufacturers are moving from HCFC to HFC use (typically a HFC 365mfc/HFC 227ea blend)

Extruded Polystyrene (XPS)All HCFC usage has now been phased out in this sector. Larger producers have turned to CO2 and CO2/ethanol blowing systems for some products. However, even among the larger producers, HFCs are being used for a significant part of the product portfolio according to UK industry experts. Smaller producers are likely to be even more reliant on using HFCs because of the high investment cost associated with CO2

technologies. Estimated average conversion cost is around 3.5m euro per plant

1 The small letters after the number provide further information on the chemical structure of the HFC.

AEA Technology 52


(Harnisch & Hendriks 2000). Using CO2 based systems can lead to practical difficulties as a result of such foams being poorer insulators. Thicker panels required to provide similar levels of insulation can have problems, for example, of dimensional stability. This has been a primary reason for greater HFC dependence than was originally envisaged.

PolyethyleneThis sector primarily uses hydrocarbons and is unlikely to use HFCs in future.

It might, in due course, be feasible to consider end-of-life recovery of HFCs from foams. For appliances, industry experts estimate the cost of recovery to be around $15 to $25 per appliance, each of which contains some 250g of blowing agent, although the discussion above suggests that use of HFCs in appliance foams minimal in the UK. Foams used in building materials have, hitherto, been inaccessible and impractical/uneconomic to recover, costing at least 10 to 20 times more than recovery from appliances (Paul Ashford pers com.). However, the growing use of pre-fabricated elements and modular units in building construction could mean that, at the end of life, it could be both technically and economically feasible to recover materials. As these building techniques are only now beginning to enter the marketplace, with lifetimes of 30 to 50 years, end-of-life recovery of blowing agents from such materials is beyond the timescale and scope of this study.


Foam blowing emissions are currently near zero and are increasing now on the basis of the replacement of HCFCs by HFC alternatives. The approach was to contact trade bodies to assess the likely future use of HFCs. Unfortunately we were unable to get any response from the trade bodies within the timescales of this study. Consequently the emissions and projections shown in the following section are based on two sources: Historic emissions provided by March Consulting March (1999) for the years

1990 to 2002. Projected emissions provided by Paul Ashford of Caleb Management Services

for future years (2003 to 2025).

The key assumptions used for emission projections are summarised in Table 4.3. The methodology is based on that of March (1999), itself adapted from a model developed for AFEAS by Caleb in 1997/8. The calculation methodology within the model provides a relatively conservative approach to the estimation of emissions.

AEA Technology 53


Table 4.3 – Key Assumptions: HFC Consumption in Insulation Foams

2000 Foam Production

Growth Rate

% Uptake % in Formulation

Year 1 Emissions

AnnualEmission

sFoam Type

(tonnes) (%) (%)

PU Commercial Appliance

1,058 6 40 6 6 0.25

Boardstock 16,160 5 30 6 6 1Cont. Panel 2,863 5 100 4 5 0.5Disc. Panel 1,431 5 100 4 6 0.5Spray 450 5 100 5 25 1.5Block - Pipe 610 5 50 3 45 0.75Block – Panel 500 5 50 5 15 0.75Reefers 250 6 35 6 6 0.5

XPS Boardstock 8,000 5 100 6 25 2.5

PF Boardstock 750 6 91 14 6 1Block - Pipe 1600 6 91 14 45 0.75Block – Panel 400 6 91 14 15 0.75Disc. Panel 250 6 91 14 10 0.5


Figure 4.1 shows projected UK emissions of HFC from foams between 1990 and 2025. The small discontinuity in the trend at 2003 is due to discontinuities between the March (1999) data used for historic emissions and the Caleb methodology used for emission projections.

HFC Emissions from Foams

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)

HighMid

Low

Figure 4.1: UK emissions from foams (tonnes HFC)

As little use of HFCs was required to replace HCFCs in the manufacture of integral skin foams and polyethylene foams, the first real use of HFCs in foams has occurred in the extruded polystyrene sector. Further use of HFCs will be introduced to replace

AEA Technology 54


HCFCs in other foam applications between 2002 and 2004 according to the timetable of the EC Regulation on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. This leads to a rapid increase in HFC emissions from foam manufacture over the period 2000-2004, as HFCs become the dominant blowing agent in these sectors, followed by a gradual increase in emissions from foams in use in future years. As foams in most applications are expected to last for more than 25 years, there are no significant disposal losses over the period of this study. Use of HFCs in appliance foams will be minimal.

The general assessment of future uptake of HFCs in the foam sector is much lower than it was when assessed by March (1999) in 1999, as shown in Figure 4.2. The reasons for this are threefold:

There have been further developments in alternative technologies; The financial pressures on the industry have increased, making it more difficult to

carry the additional cost of HFCs compared with HCFCs or, in certain circumstances, HCs;

The use of HFC-containing blowing agent blends has been promoted in order to optimise foam properties at least incremental cost, thus replacing a proportion of the anticipated HFC use with other agents in the blend.

HFC Emissions from foams

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Em

issi

ons

(Ton

nes)

This work March Report (1999)

Figure 4.2: Comparison with March results for Foam Blowing (tonnes HFC)

The impact of a strengthened UK Voluntary Agreement on limiting HFC emissions in the foam-blowing industry is still under discussion. At present, only the 1995 Agreement is in force with its primary objective of raising awareness of issue and ensuring an on-going dialogue between Government and the industry on the issue as it develops. In the last three years considerable effort has been invested in strengthening the Voluntary Agreement with a view to further formalisation of reporting responsible use provisions.

In the XPS sector, there are also some outline commitments to reduce emissions in the foam production phase, during which the existing XPS process leads to significant releases. However, these commitments are linked to a 1999 (HCFC)

AEA Technology 55


baseline and it is difficult to gauge how the commitments may be implemented in practice, even if the current text of the revised Voluntary Agreement is accepted. Nonetheless, the level of uptake of HFCs in the XPS sector could make the revised Voluntary Agreement highly relevant. Of course, any measures on use and emissions of HFCs for foam-blowing that might be included in the forthcoming European Commission proposal for a Regulation could supersede elements of a revised UK Voluntary Agreement.

4.3.1 Regional EstimatesUK projections of emissions from the foam blowing sector have been split into constituent country estimates on the basis of GDP. The results are shown in Table 4.4.

Table 4.4 - Emissions of HFC from Foam Blowing (tonnes HFC)1990 1995 2000 2010 2025

England 0 0 41 683 1037Wales 0 0 4 71 107Scotland 0 0 2 31 48Northern Ireland 0 0 1 16 24UK 0 0 48 801 1215


No additional policies and measures have been identified for this sector.

AEA Technology 56


5 Electrical Transmission and Distribution

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Sulphur hexafluoride has been used in high and medium voltage switch gear and transformers since the mid-1960s. The physical properties of the gas make it uniquely effective as an arc-quenching medium and as an insulator. Consequently it has gradually replaced equipment using older technologies, namely oil filled and air blast equipment. The advantages of SF6 equipment are that it is more efficient, more compact, less complex and less costly. Moreover, it avoids the problems associated with the earlier technologies, namely oil leaks, fire risk, safety and noise. The only disadvantages of SF6 are that it is a potent greenhouse gas; its breakdown products can be toxic or corrosive and that it is less effective at very low temperatures. Currently, there are no alternative fluids that have the same properties as SF6. There has been research in the use of nitrogen / SF6 mixtures with the aim of reducing the amount of SF6 contained in an item of equipment. However, such applications are confined to its use as an insulator since the arc quenching properties of the mixtures are inferior. Hence, it is not yet clear whether gas mixtures could be used to reduce consumption and emissions on a significant scale.


For the application of electrical switchgear, BEAMA (for equipment manufacturers) and the Electricity Association (for electricity transmission and distribution) were able to provide emission estimates based on Tier 3b, but only for recent years. Tier 3a estimates were available for the electricity distribution and transmission industry for 1995. In order to estimate a historical time series and projections, these emission estimates together with fluid bank estimates provided by the utilities were extrapolated using the March model (March 1999). This involved estimating leakage factors based on the collected data and using the March model to estimate the time series. Emissions prior to 1995 used the March SF6 consumption data to extrapolate backwards to 1990 from the 1995 estimates. Regional utilities provided data which allowed estimates of current emissions in Scotland and Northern Ireland and estimates of the fluid bank size. Again these estimates were extrapolated backwards to 1990 based on the estimated leakage factors. It was assumed there was no manufacturing outside of England. Projections were made using the March model based on an assumed increase in the fluid bank to 2025 based on advice provided by the utilities. Future leakage rates and recovery rates were estimated assuming improved equipment specification and improving repair and recovery practices. The same leakage rates were used in the regional projections though the growth in the fluid banks in Scotland and Northern Ireland were different.

Tables 5.1 summarises key assumptions used in the emissions model for this work. Comparative values for parameters used by March (1999) are shown in brackets.

Table 5.2 summarises the model calculation parameters used for this sector.

AEA Technology 57


Table 5.1 – Key Assumptions: Electrical T&D (March 1999 assumptions in brackets)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025Activity data

Total SF6 used for manufacture (tonnes)

140(140)

115(115)

70(60)

63(130)

63(130)

63(130)

61(130)

61(-)

Net proportion exported (%)

40%(40%)

40%(40%)

40%(40%)

40%(40%)

40%(40%)

40%(40%)

40%(40%)

40%(-)

Decommissioned (tonnes)

20(2)

20(10)

40(20)

32(25)

32(80)

32(80)

32(80)

32(-)

Bank size in 1990 (tonnes)

232(700)

- - - - - - -

Emission factorsA

PM % 0.08(0.01)

0.08(0.01)

0.08(0.05)

0.072(0.01)

0.064(0.01)

0.064(0.01)

0.064(0.01)

0.064(-)

PL % 0.0436

(0.01)

0.0436(0.01)

0.038(0.03)

0.032 (0.01)

0.031 (0.01)

0.029 (0.01)

0.028 (0.01)

0.028 (-)

D % 0.20 (0.2)

0.20 (0.2)

0.05 (0.1)

0.04 (0.1)

0.04 (0.1)

0.04 (0.1)

0.04 (0.1)

0.04 (-)


Table 5.2 Model Parameters – Electrical T&D sectorRow Field Field

typeADescription

1 Used for manufacture (t) D Annual tonnage for manufacture of new products



4 Decommissioning (t) D Annual tonnage of fluid in decommissioned equipment in Year X.





9 PL emissions (t) C Product lifetime emissions:[Row3]*[Row6]

10 D emissions (t) C Disposal emissions [Row4]*[Row7]

AEA Technology 58


11 Total tonnes emitted C [Row8]+[Row9]+[Row10]12 GWP of fluid/s D Average 100 year GWP of fluid/s13 Ktonnes CO2 equiv

consumedC ([Row1]+[Row9])*[Row12]/1000

14 Ktonnes CO2 equiv. Emitted

C [Row11]*[Row12]/1000



Figure 5.1 shows estimated SF6 emissions from the manufacture and use of electrical transmission and distribution equipment in the UK. The levels of uncertainty are relatively low because activity data and emission factors are based on industry data, the stock of SF6–containing equipment is well characterised and there are no alternative fluids for this application.

SF6 Emissions from Electrical T&D

05

1015202530354045

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)

HighMidLow

Figure 5.1: UK emissions from electrical transmission & distribution (tonnes SF6)

Estimated Level of Uncertainty Historical data 1995+/- 20%, 2000 +/- 10%, Future projections +/- 20%

The use of SF6 in electrical transmission and distribution equipment slowly increased between the 1970’s and the mid-1990’s, with new SF6 equipment gradually replacing older oil and compressed air systems. This increase was halted in 1995 when industry became aware of the greenhouse gas properties of SF6 and took action to reduce emissions. There are no suitable alternatives to SF6 in these applications, as oil and compressed air systems suffer from safety and reliability problems. Therefore mitigation actions centre on reducing the emissions of SF6 from new and existing equipment. A range of actions are already starting to take effect, including better switchgear design, improved handling procedures, better monitoring in service and

AEA Technology 59


improved end-of-life recovery. Voluntary actions by the European Industry Bodies CAPIEL and EURELECTRIC should encourage these trends.

Emissions arise from losses during the manufacture and installation of the equipment, leakage during its lifetime and the disposal of retired equipment. Historic emissions are based on data supplied by the Electricity Association for 1995 and 2000, BEAMA for 1997-98 and National Grid for 2001. Emissions up to 1995 are largely based on data supplied by March (1999). The latest estimates reflect IPCC methodologies and are estimated using a mass balance approach. These will be more reliable than the earlier estimates which are largely estimated by extrapolation. We assume a loss rate from installed equipment of 3.7% per year for 2002. This is lower than the National Grid estimate of 4.89% for 2002 because a smaller proportion of National Grid’s equipment comprises small sealed units with effectively no leakage during use.

Projected emissions to 2025 are estimated by extrapolating the historic 2000 baseline using a fluid bank model similar to that used by March (1999). The model assumes an increase in the size of the fluid bank of 15% between 2000 and 2025 based on estimates provided by National Grid (2002). This increase is less than the projected demand for electricity, since the SF6 content of new equipment is less than the older equipment. Electricity demand estimates were taken from DTI projections (Wilson, 2002). A sensitivity analysis presented later in this section shows how these results would be changed by assuming growth in the fluid bank in line with electricity demand.

The European Industry bodies (CAPIEL, EURELECTRIC) have agreed to reduce emissions on a voluntary basis by implementing a number of reduction measures. (Harnisch & Hendriks 2000). These include:

permanent improvements in switchgear design for minimal leakage and simplified handling in service as well as at end of life;

reduction of emissions during manufacture; improved gas handling equipment; improved filling procedure; better monitoring in service; use of "sealed for life" techniques , particularly in small equipment; target older existing equipment with known leakage problem for

repair/replacement; improved maintenance procedures including reliability centred/condition based

maintenance; improved end of life recovery and recycling; ensure re-use of SF6 is permitted in the relevant IEC standards and promote

re-use;

It is evident from discussions with utilities that many of these measures are already being implemented, in particular SF6 recovery and recycling and early leak detection and repair. Hence the projections assume that these measures will continue to be implemented.

AEA Technology 60


More specifically, the following assumptions are made in the projections. SF6 is recovered from retired equipment and equipment under repair. It is

assumed that 96% of fluid is recovered by 2004. Recovery equipment is 99% efficient, however the assumed efficiency allows for a number of transfers of gas.

Improved maintenance and leak detection systems result in leaks being repaired more quickly. It is assumed that total UK emissions from leaks from faulty equipment reduce by 20% by 2003 and an additional 10% by 2020. This assumption is based on National Grid’s experience of a prioritised programme of leak repair which enabled it to reduce losses by 10.6% between 2000 and 2002, with a further 10% reduction targeted by 2003.

New plant installed will have a better specification than the current stock. Plant currently in use has a specification of better than 1% leakage per annum, however, rates of 0.2% are feasible. It is assumed that 25% of equipment in 2020 will have a specification of 0.2% compared with current specifications of 1%, i.e. a reduction of 20% in leakage rates. The average lifetime of a circuit breaker is around 40 years, hence the effects of equipment replacement will be gradual.

Figure 5.2 shows the mid estimate UK emissions compared to the baseline developed by March (March 1999).

SF6 Emissions from Electrical T&D

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)


Figure 5.2: Comparison with March results for electrical transmissionand distribution equipment (tonnes SF6)

March assumed much lower loss factors for manufacturing and in-use emissions, both historically (1990–1997) and post 2000, but a higher future rate of growth in fluid bank size. It is difficult to draw any conclusions from this comparison since the two sets of figures were based on different historical data and different assumptions about future demand.

AEA Technology 61


5.3.1 Regional Estimates

The table below shows the emissions allocated to the constitutive countries of the UK. The Scottish estimates are based on emissions data and estimates of the fluid bank provided by Scottish Power and Southern Electric. Emissions in Northern Ireland are based on similar data provided by NIE. The assumptions made in the projections are similar to those made for the UK. However, for Northern Ireland a local estimate of the growth of the fluid bank was used and for Scotland little change in the fluid bank size is envisaged. The split between England and Wales is based on National Grid data.

Table 5.3 - Emissions of SF6 from Electricity Transmission and Distribution by Constituent Country (tonnes SF6)

1990 1995 2000 2010 2025England 22.6 30.3 22.8 18.4 18.1Wales 1.7 2.2 1.7 1.3 1.3Scotland 0.7 1.0 1.5 1.4 1.4Northern Ireland 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2UK 25.0 33.6 26.1 21.2 21.1

5.3.2 Sensitivity Analysis

As discussed above, the emission estimates for electrical transmission and distribution equipment assume a 15% growth in the fluid bank between 2000 and 2025. This is lower than the expected growth rate in UK electricity demand of 19.5%, based on an average of the central low (CL) and central high (CH) scenarios used for DTI forecasts (Wilson 2002). If the fluid bank is assumed to increase by 19.5%, with all other factors kept constant, then the UK emissions of SF6 would be 21.7 tonnes in 2025 compared to 21.1 tonnes based on current assumptions. This is not a large difference and is well within the range of uncertainty for 2025 figures.


No additional policies and measures have been identified for this sector as programmes of leak reduction are already underway on a voluntary basis and there is no suitable alternative fluid in this application.

AEA Technology 62


6 Aerosols

6.1 INTRODUCTION

In the UK, HFCs are generally used as propellants in specific aerosols where the use of HFCs is considered critical i.e. where safe alternatives are not available. Safety issues mainly arise from the need for non-flammable propellants. Historically many types of aerosols were, formulated with CFCs as propellants. However, for the vast majority of aerosols the use of CFCs ceased at the end of 1989 on account of concerns regarding their role in ozone destruction. Aerosol manufacturers could then choose between a number of options to replace CFCs including hydrocarbons, dimethyl ether (DME), compressed gases, or HFCs.

The vast majority of aerosols use hydrocarbon propellants, with a relatively small proportion of the market favouring DME. Compressed gases are used in very few aerosols since they suffer from a number of disadvantages compared with liquefied gas propellants such as DME and hydrocarbons. The two key disadvantages are that compressed gas propellants are not very effective at delivering fine particle sprays and that the spray characteristics change during product life because the internal pressure drops as the aerosol is used. Both result in products with poorer performance.

HFCs are used only in a few specialist applications, which can be categorised as industrial or non-industrial. Most of these are considered critical (as defined by BAMA and agreed by Defra) with regard to the use of HFCs as propellants. The most important industrial applications in volume terms are air dusters and pipe freezing products; other applications include specialised lubricants and surface treatments, and specialised insecticides. The main non-industrial applications in the UK are novelty products, such as ‘silly string’, where the use of HFC is considered critical due to the need for non-flammable propellants.

6.1.1 Emissions reduction measures

The requirement for a non-flammable propellant in these specialist aerosols limits the scope for reducing emissions from this sector. No alternative liquefied gas propellants are currently available and compressed gas propellants have inferior performance. The aerosol industry, as represented by the British Aerosol Manufacturers Association (BAMA), has since 1996 entered into a voluntary agreement with the UK Government under which the aerosol industry will continue efforts to limit HFC use and will investigate alternatives to HFCs. As a result of the voluntary agreement, a list of critical uses for HFCs has been drawn up and BAMA members have been asked to adhere to this list. However, some UK aerosol manufacturers of products using HFCs – such as novelty product manufacturers– are not members of BAMA.

It is understood that the UK government is considering a revised voluntary agreement with the aerosol industry, which may address measures that could further

AEA Technology 63


reduce emissions of HFCs from aerosols. The potential reductions achievable and costs of this strengthened voluntary agreement are assessed in Section 6.4.1 and Section 15 of this report.

6.2 METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES

Baseline HFC emission estimates have been derived on the basis of fluid consumption data provided by BAMA. Estimates of emissions from HFC-filled aerosols were derived by estimating the amount of fluid used annually in their manufacture. An average product lifetime of one year for all aerosols containing HFC has been assumed, based on discussions with BAMA, although this may be shorter or longer depending on the specific aerosol application. The number of HFC-based aerosols that are used in the UK is derived from data from BAMA, based on assumptions concerning imports and exports.

The assumptions used in the emission estimates can be seen below in Table 6.1. It is estimated that 1% of HFC emissions from aerosols occur during manufacture. The majority is released during the product lifetime (97%), with end of life emissions accounting for the other 2%. These emission factors are the same as those estimated by March (1999), and have been used in this work following consultation with stakeholders. The lifetime and end of life emissions are calculated after import and exports have been taken into account.

Table 6.1 – Key Assumptions: Aerosols sector.1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

HFC types (and ratio)

HFC 134a, HFC 152a 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10

Activity data

Total HFC used for manufacture (tonnes)

9 350 1203 Not applicable as future emissions based on growth rate applied to calculated

emissions% UK-filled – domestic market (relative to total UK manufacture)

March estimate

56.3 56.3 56.3 56.3 56.3 56.3

% UK-filled – export market (relative to total UK manufacture)

March estimate

43.7 43.7 43.7 43.7 43.7 43.7

% UK imports (relative to total UK manufacture)

March estimate

31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5

Product lifetime (yrs) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Sector growth rate (%) NA NA NA 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Emission factorsA


1.0 (1.0)

1.0 (1.0)

1.0 (1.0)

1.0 (1.0)

1.0 (1.0)

1.0 (1.0)

1.0 (1.0)

1.0 (-)


97 (97)

97(97)

97(97)

97(97)

97(97)

97(97)

97(97)

97(-)


2.0 (2.0)

2.0 (2.0)

2.0 (2.0)

2.0 (2.0)

2.0 (2.0)

2.0 (2.0)

2.0 (2.0)

2.0(-)


AEA Technology 64


The export and import factors shown in Table 6.1 have been calculated from data supplied by BAMA. Projected years have used the same factor as that calculated for 2001, in the absence of other data suggesting how the import-export market might change.


Figure 6.1 illustrates the baseline trend in UK emissions of HFCs from aerosols between 1990 and 2025, and the uncertainties attached to the estimates.

HFC Emissions from Aerosols

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)

HighMidLow

Figure 6.1: UK emissions from aerosols (tonnes HFC)

HFC emissions from aerosols increased rapidly over the period 1993 to 1998 as HFCs replaced CFCs in specialist applications where non-flammable propellants were required. Emissions reached a peak in 1998 and then reduced due to the impact of the voluntary agreement between the UK government and the aerosol industry. Under this agreement, HFC use is limited to specific critical applications and manufacturers are expected to switch to hydrocarbon or DME alternatives in all other applications.

The projected emissions are based on 2001 data, and show annual increases in the level of emissions up to 2025 based on an economic growth rate of 1% 2 (reflecting average annual growth in the manufacturing sectors that use these products), and as a result, increased demand for these aerosol products. Significant changes are not projected due to the assumptions that the markets for critical aerosol applications

2 Based on discussions with stakeholders, applying an economic growth rate of 2.25% to this sector is considered unrealistic. Based on discussions at the March stakeholder workshop, an economic growth rate for the manufacturing sector is understood to be more representative. The UK Government does not have any official figures specifically for the manufacturing sector, and therefore a rate of 1% has been assumed. This growth rate reflects that a manufacturing growth rate will be lower than 2.25%, and BAMA’s expectations that there will be only limited growth over the next 15 years. This seems a fair assumption given that the average annual growth rate in manufacturing over the past two decades was around 1.5%, but less than that over the last 10 years (ONS).

AEA Technology 65


that use HFCs will not change significantly, and that only critical aerosol applications use HFCs.

Estimates of emissions are compared to those made by March (1999) in the graph below, and are reasonably similar. Differences in projections are primarily due to the inclusion of the 1% annual economic growth factor in the baseline. Other differences in emission totals are due to increased data availability from the relevant trade association, and new assumptions about the import and export of aerosols.

Figure 6.2: Comparison with March estimates of UK HFC emissions from aerosols


The table below shows the baseline emission totals (tonnes of HFCs) allocated to the countries of the UK, based on population data. A more accurate allocation might be made on the basis of market sales but the necessary data are not available.

Table 6.2 – Emissions from aerosols for UK and constituent countries (tonnes HFC)


AEA Technology 66

HFC Emissions from Aerosols

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)



6.3.2 Uncertainty Analysis and Sensitivities

This section outlines some of the uncertainties, as shown in Figure 6.1, the assumptions that have been made, and the rationale for these. In summary, the following uncertainty estimates have been used:

Historical data (1990-1995): +/- 20%A 20% level of uncertainty has been used due to uncertainties surrounding the estimation of import and export markets, and reliance on estimates from previous reports (March 1999).

Historical data (1996-2001): +/- 15%The trade association, BAMA, has provided the data for these years and, therefore, uncertainties are lower. Estimates of imports and exports are still somewhat uncertain; this is particularly the case for the import market where many sales are made through catalogue marketing and the 15% uncertainty reflects this.

Future projections: +/- 30-40% (2002-2025)The projections are considerably more uncertain. An assumption has been made that the market will remain fairly constant, with no changes to aerosol products using HFCs. The uncertainties are much higher due to assuming this trend over a 23 year period.

The above uncertainty estimates are based on AEA Technology’s understanding of the aerosols sector and judgement based on discussions with industry.

There is significant uncertainty in the estimated exports of aerosols from the UK. BAMA data suggests that 85% of UK manufactured non-industrial aerosols that are HFC-filled are exported, while approximately 10% of UK manufactured industrial aerosols are exported. This means that 43.7% (see table 6.1) of HFC-based aerosols filled in the UK are exported. The proportion of aerosols exported is a key factor in the emissions estimate and, thus, a certain degree of uncertainty is introduced with this assumption about exports.

The quantity of aerosols being imported into the UK will have a significant bearing on emissions estimates – therefore, a significant amount of uncertainty arises through lack of data on such imports. Data supplied by BAMA for 2001 suggest that non-industrial aerosols account for the majority of imported aerosols. In terms of aerosols used in industrial-based applications, it is assumed that very few are imported.

Aerosol products containing HFCs are often imported through catalogue sales. Estimates of emissions from these imported aerosols are extremely uncertain, and have also been based on data provided by BAMA. In order to provide more robust estimates of emissions from aerosols, further research is needed into the size of the import market for these non-industrial aerosols.

Future projections have been made on the basis of the 2001 estimate in the absence of other data, with the assumption that the market will remain relatively stable. Discussions with industry representatives suggest that they expect the domestic markets to remain fairly stable (and therefore the level of emissions to remain reasonably constant). Emission totals do, however, increase annually due to the

AEA Technology 67


assumption that economic growth will lead to a greater demand for these aerosol products.

Industry predicts that emissions will remain at a fairly constant level, with few changes in critical applications. However, depending on growth in particular markets, and the possibility of new critical applications in the future, emissions could either increase or decrease. There is also the question of a proposed new voluntary agreement that is currently being considered by UK government, and the impact that this may have on projections.


The additional costs and cost-effectiveness of a strengthened voluntary agreement (VA) between the UK aerosols industry (as represented by BAMA) and UK government is included in Section 15. The banning of HFC-containing novelty aerosols is also considered. This section describes how the reduction potentials have been estimated for each of these measures.

6.4.1 Voluntary Agreement on HFC-based aerosols (Measure L)

A voluntary agreement is currently being considered between Government and the aerosols industry. There are a number of areas that the strengthened voluntary agreement would address beyond what is currently being undertaken by members. These areas of action include:

1. Information campaign to inform users of HFC-based products about best practice in terms of how they use these products.

2. Assessment of where emissions can be reduced in product life cycle.3. Encourage members to investigate the use of lower GWP blends.4. Monitoring of use of critical applications, and sectoral growth.

Other types of actions are listed in the voluntary agreement but it is understood that these have already been implemented.

In this analysis, it has only been possible to estimate an emission reduction potential for one of the actions – a campaign to inform users of HFC-based products about best practice in terms of how they use these products. Such a campaign would promote the full use of the can, rather than partial use and the purchase of a new can, thus reducing end-of-life emissions. We have made a broad estimate that such a campaign could potentially lead to a reduction of 35% in end-of-life emissions (2% of total emissions). This equates to a cumulative saving of 215 tonnes of HFC over 22 years (2003-2025).

AEA Technology 68


6.4.2 Phase-out of novelty aerosols (Measure E)

Based on discussions with BAMA, we estimate that 3 million novelty aerosol cans are used annually in the UK. 2 million of these cans are manufactured in the UK, while 1 million are imported into the UK.3

Novelty aerosols sold to the UK market that are manufactured by UK companies account for about 7% of the total UK emission (based on an estimate from BAMA).4

Based on this figure, 3.5% of UK emissions will be due to imported novelty aerosols, assuming that these aerosols have a similar fill volume. It has been estimated that there would be cumulative emission savings of 3223 tonnes over 22 years if manufacture (in the UK) and sale of these products (including imported products) was banned from 2003. It should be noted that the import figure for novelty aerosols is uncertain, and could be an underestimation. Detailed market studies would be needed to establish what the import market is for these types of product.

No further measures have been identified for the aerosols sector, as all current applications of HFCs are considered critical.

3 This figure of 1 million imported novelty aerosols is very uncertain due to lack of robust data, and the difficulty in tracking imports through catalogues and internet sales.4 This was the only estimate available, although BAMA does not represent any manufacturers of novelty aerosols.

AEA Technology 69


7 Metered Dose Inhalers

7.1 INTRODUCTION

Metered dose inhalers or MDIs are used to deliver certain pharmaceutical products as an aerosol. For patients with respiratory illnesses, such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), medication needs to be delivered directly to the lungs. MDIs are one of the preferred means of delivering inhaled medication to patients with these illnesses. With over 5.1 million sufferers of asthma (National Asthma Campaign 2001) in the UK, the market for inhalation drug delivery products such as MDIs is significant.

MDIs originally used CFC propellants but, as with industrial aerosols, concern over ozone destruction led to attempts to replace CFCs with HFCs. According to the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium (IPAC), other drug delivery systems that used CFCs were reformulated to non-fluorocarbon technologies where technically feasible and acceptable from a patient health perspective. However, in IPAC’s view, HFCs are the only viable alternative to CFCs in MDIs and, therefore, HFC MDIs are critical to the phase out of CFC MDIs under the Montreal Protocol (IPAC 2002). Unlike industrial aerosols, this process is not yet complete but is expected to be almost (approximately 98%) complete by 2005.

HFCs have been identified as the only viable replacement for CFCs in MDIs as no other compound has met the stringent criteria for a medical gas to be used for inhalation by patients. Criteria include the need for the gas to be non-flammable, non-toxic, liquefied, chemically stable, compatible with range of medicines, acceptable to patients, and to have appropriate density and solvent properties.

This switch from CFCs to HFCs has resulted in increasing emissions of HFCs from this sector (although a saving in terms of CO2 equiv.) - a trend that may be expected to continue for a few more years.

7.1.1 Emission reduction measures

Potential opportunities for reducing HFC emissions from MDIs do exist, and fall into four main categories (Enviros March, 2000):

Replacing MDIs with different treatments (dry powder inhalers (DPIs), nebulisers)

Reducing GHG emissions from HFCs by reducing propellant per dose and reducing manufacturing emissions.

Reducing emissions from waste MDIs. Using alternative MDI propellants with lower Global Warming Potentials

(GWPs).

All of the above options could reduce emissions of HFCs to differing degrees, although there is a range of issues involved when considering their implementation.

AEA Technology 70


A number of issues drive the use of MDIs in treating patients with asthma and other respiratory illnesses. The most important is the appropriateness of that treatment for the patient. MDIs are the most appropriate form of drug treatment for many patients and there are at present no acceptable alternative propellants. DPIs are not an appropriate alternative treatment for some patient groups, such as the elderly and young children, and are not, in most cases, an appropriate treatment for severe asthma attacks. Based on consultation with the Department of Health (DoH), it is important to point out that large volume spacer MDIs deliver good levels of drug to the bronchioles and less to the pharynx/larynx than most DPIs, and that for most patients, MDIs are an effective alternative to powered nebulisers while DPIs are not.

In addition, patients who have been prescribed MDIs might be unwilling to switch from a critical treatment to an alternative that they have not tried and tested. A further issue is that of costs. MDIs, relative to many other treatments, are much more economical. In the UK, for Salbutamol, the % increase costs on average for DPIs is 200%, relative to the costs of MDIs (Enviros March 2000), and the cost differential per dose is 0.055 Euros. A 200 dose MDI would cost around 5 Euros compared to 15 Euros at present for a 200 dose DPI. These increased costs are due mainly to the market costs of transition, but also on the costs of patient retraining and costs of health professionals’ time, both in terms of additional time needed and opportunity costs.

In the UK, nearly 70% of asthma patients are prescribed MDIs. The move from CFC to HFC-based MDIs was a costly process (for manufacturers and the healthcare sector), and is yet to be completed. Therefore, a transition to another new form of treatment would be both costly and time consuming, and would only be carried out on the basis of the best medical advice.

In theory, significant reductions in HFC emissions might be possible relative to current trends, if more patients switched to DPIs or other, yet to be developed, products. However, in practice, increasing the use of DPIs as an alternative treatment to MDIs is likely to be a slow process, and cannot be viewed as a complete alternative. Based on discussions with manufacturers, limited increased market penetration by DPIs is seen as possible in the UK but not to the extent observed in some other European countries, such as Sweden and the Netherlands, which have higher per capita usage of DPIs due to historical factors, such as locality of DPI manufacturers, and because DPI treatments are more appropriate given climatic factors.

Consultation with stakeholders indicates that there is a trend towards greater use of DPIs because they are becoming available for more drugs and because generic DPIs are now available. Guidance to the medical profession is an issue for policy makers, in terms of what treatments medical professionals should be prescribing and the availability and costs of those treatments. Other alternative treatments such as nebulisers and oral treatments are not used widely for various reasons, including medical and practical considerations for the patient. New technologies that could potentially be alternatives to MDIs take a long

AEA Technology 71


time to develop, and also to gain regulatory approval. At present, no alternative propellants for MDIs are available on the market.

Two other types of abatement options exist – minimising emissions from MDIs, and reducing waste emissions. Measures to minimise emissions include reducing manufacturing emissions, reducing propellant per dose, and using HFCs having lower GWP. Reducing waste emissions includes recovering HFC from reject MDIs and used units.

7.2 METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES

Table 7.1 summarises the key assumptions in estimating emissions from this sector.

The methodology was based on deriving the number of units (inhalers) used annually, and estimating the amount of HFC in each inhaler. Although the amount of HFC in each inhaler differs between manufacturers, an average amount has been assumed for the purposes of this estimate.

MDIs emit 96% of total HFC contained during the lifetime usage. 2% of emissions occur during manufacture, and 2% at end-of-life. These factors are similar to those used by March (1999) but have been slightly revised based on discussion with MDI manufacturers. Import and export levels have been based on data provided by manufacturers, and estimates of the UK market for MDI usage. Projections are based on EU HFC totals provided in Harnisch and Gluckman (2001) and on information relating to market size (March 2000). A reduction in the size of the MDI market of 1% per annum5 has been assumed to account for slow and limited penetration of DPIs into the UK market. Population growth has also been factored into the projection.

These factors and assumptions are applied to two calculated years – 2001 and 2010. The 2001 estimate has been derived on the basis of data supplied by MDI manufacturers (supplied on a commercial-in-confidence basis), while the 2010 estimate has been derived based on knowledge of the UK market size and data provided at the European level. Estimates for 2002 to 2009 have been interpolated, taking into consideration expert industry opinion about the trend in MDI use to the year 2010.

5 Several stakeholders believe that penetration of DPIs will be more significant than 1% per annum. However, this will be dependent on guidance from the medical profession, in terms of prescribing treatment, and on costs of the treatment (see section 7.1.1).

AEA Technology 72


Table 7.1 – Key Assumptions: MDI sector.199

01995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025


HFC 134a, HFC 227ea 80:20

80:20 80:20 80:20 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10

Activity data

Total HFC used for manufacture (tonnes)

1 1 1481 3109 3111 3111 3111 3111

% UK-filled exports (relative to total UK manufacture)

0 0 79 86 86 86 86 86

% UK imports (relative to HFC used for UK manufacture)

0 0 43 53 53 53 53 53

Product lifetime (yrs) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Percentage reduction in market size relative to 2003 due to increase in DPIs

NA NA NA 4% 9% 14% 19% 24%

Population growth (% change relative to 2000)

- - 0 1.7 3.5 5.3 7.2 8.8

Emission factorsA


2.0 (1.0)

2.0 (1.0)

2.0 (1.0)

2.0 (1.0)

2.0 (1.0)

2.0 (1.0)

2.0 (1.0)

2.0 (-)


96 (97)

96(97)

96(97)

96(97)

96(97)

96(97)

96(97)

96(-)


2.0 (3.0)

2.0 (3.0)

2.0 (3.0)

2.0 (3.0)

2.0 (3.0)

2.0 (3.0)

2.0 (3.0)

2.0(-)


UK industry data have been provided by a number of different manufacturers for 1997 - 2001 only; based on this data, estimates have been made for 1997 and 2001. Emissions for 1998–2000 could not be estimated directly from the industry data, as data were incomplete for the industry sector as a whole, and so interpolated values were used. Our bottom-up estimate of 601 tonnes for 2001 has been validated based on European data. We estimate from data provided by Enviros March (2000) that the UK tonnage of HFC used would be approximately 460 tonnes, based on the UK having 35% of the EU market. March (1999) estimated a projected tonnage of 201 tonnes.

Emissions are estimated to continue to rise significantly up to 2005 as HFCs replace CFC-based products. In the baseline, a very limited increased penetration of DPIs has been assumed which, in view of the current low levels of DPI usage in the UK, reflects a small percentage decrease in MDIs. The limited increase in DPIs has been estimated at 1% per annum. The decrease in emissions from MDIs, due to the increase in the use of DPIs, is reduced slightly by the incorporation of a positive population growth rate in the estimates.

AEA Technology 73


Estimates of 2010 emissions have been based on data provided in a report to the ECCP (Harnisch and Gluckman 2001), which states state that in 2010 emissions from MDIs will be 4,300 kt of CO2 equivalent (or 2792 tonnes of HFC, based on a GWP of 1540). It has been assumed that the UK market will account for approximately 35% of the EU market (Enviros March 2000).


Figure 7.1 shows estimated emissions of HFCs from metered dose inhalers between 1990 and 2025, and reflects the uncertainties surrounding this baseline case.

HFC Emissions from MDIs

0

200400

600

800100012001400

1600

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)

HighMid

Low

Figure 7.1: UK emissions from Metered Dose Inhalers (tonnes HFC)

HFCs started to replace CFCs as propellants in MDIs in 1995, driven by the international agreement on substances that deplete the ozone layer, the Montreal Protocol. Emissions increased from less than 1 tonne in 1990 to approximately 600 tonnes in 2001, as HFC propellants replaced CFC-based products.

The graph below compares the emissions estimates to those made by March (1999). Based on data collected from manufacturers, emissions are now expected to have risen much more steeply to 2000. Projected emissions continue to increase up to 2005, when the phase-out of CFCs for MDIs should be 98% complete, from when a flatter trend is observed. The annual emission totals then gradually decrease due to increased penetration of DPIs. This decrease is counterbalanced to some degree by limited growth in population.

There are significant differences between the two time series which are due to the methodologies used. March (1999) used an approach of estimating bank size in the UK, based on an estimate of UK manufacturing and export markets. Our method uses a similar approach, but also ensures that the UK inventory is consistent with European estimates, both in 2000 and 2010 (see Enviros March 2000; Harnisch and

AEA Technology 74


Gluckman 2001). Section 7.3.2 provides more information on the assumptions used in the compilation of our inventory.

HFC Emissions from MDIs

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Em

issi

ons

(Ton

nes)


Figure 7.2: Comparison with March results for Metered Dose Inhalers (tonnes HFC)


The table below shows the baseline emission totals (tonnes of HFCs) allocated to the constitutive countries of the UK. Allocation has been made on the basis of population data.

Table 7.1 – Emissions for the UK and constituent countries from Metered Dose Inhalers (tonnes HFC)


7.3.2 Uncertainties and Assumptions

This section outlines some of the uncertainties, illustrated in Figure 7.1, the assumptions that have been made, and the rationale for these. In summary, the following uncertainty estimates have been used:

AEA Technology 75


Historical data (1990-1996): +/- 40%High uncertainty estimates are applied to these years due to the use of approximations of the use of HFCs in MDIs for research work. The same numbers were used in the March Inventory.

Historical data (1997 & 2001): +/- 30% Estimates for these two years are based on data provided by various manufacturers. A high level of uncertainty has been placed on these estimates due to assumptions concerning the import / export market, domestic market and number of doses used in the UK annually.

Historical data (1998-2000): +/- 40% Data estimates are based on interpolation between less uncertain data for 1997 and 2001.

Future projections (2002-2025): +/- 40%These estimates are based on extrapolation from the 2001 estimate and on a single estimate of HFC usage in the EU-15 in 2010. Population growth and limited penetration of DPIs have also been taken into account in this baseline projection.

AEA Technology has made the above estimates on the basis of their understanding of the MDI sector and discussions with industry.

Industry data have been provided for 1997 and 2001 only – other data are interpolated, extrapolated or assumed which leads to relatively high levels of uncertainty, particularly for future emissions. Other uncertainties relating to the emissions inventory arise from the estimation of imports into and exports out of the UK.

Two key factors are important in determining how the trend of future emissions develops:

Increases in the use of other treatments for respiratory illness (including DPIs). Changes in the levels of respiratory illness.

Predicting either of these factors is very difficult. Levels of respiratory illness are considered to be stable at present (Woodcock 2002) and, if this remains the case, it is not likely that this factor will increase the use of HFC-based MDIs in the future. However, the use of inhaled therapy for new drugs could increase.

The projected estimates assume limited replacement of HFC-based MDIs with other treatments such as DPIs. The UK currently has a very small market for DPIs (relative to the potential number of users of such treatments), and we have assumed that this market share will increase by only a small percentage per annum (1%). This percentage increase is likely to be small because of the reasons outlined in Section 7.1.1. However, in section 7.3.3, a sensitivity analysis has been undertaken to assess the impact of increased usage of DPIs.

In general, it is very difficult to project MDI usage after 2010 as pharmaceutical companies are researching alternative treatments (e.g. tablets) for asthma and other conditions.

AEA Technology 76


Note that the projections in terms of tonnes of HFCs (Figures 7.2 and 7.2) do not illustrate the reduction due to the use of a greater proportion of HFCs with reduced GWPs. One fluid manufacturer suggests that in 2010, HFC 227ea will represent 10% of HFC used in MDIs (at present, the ratio between HFC 134a and 227ea is 80:20). This will have a significant effect on emissions as measured in terms of CO 2

equivalent. This reduction in HFC 227ea by 2010 has been included in the baseline estimates.


The baseline assumes an increased penetration of DPIs of 1% per annum, resulting in a reduction of just over 10% in emissions of HFCs by 2010, relative to 2010 emissions if no displacement occurred. A sensitivity analysis has been done to assess the likely annual reductions that could be observed if DPIs displaced 50% of the MDI market by 2010. This is simply to show potential reductions; it is not likely that such levels of DPI usage would be realised by 2010 or 2025 for reasons already discussed.

The graph below illustrates the potential reduction, and also includes a scenario based on no further penetration of DPIs in the UK market. Both scenarios assume no further penetration of DPIs beyond 2010. Under all scenarios emissions start to increase from 2010 due to population growth. The cumulative lifetime savings between 2003 and 2025 from moving to 50% DPI replacement by 2010 is estimated at 8,514 tonnes. No further increase in the rate of DPI penetration has been assumed beyond 2010.

Sensitivity Analysis - DPI penetration

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023

Year

Tonn

es o

f HFC

s

Baseline 50% penetration (by 2010) No further DPI penetration

Figure 7.3: Sensitivity of HFC emissions to the more rapid introduction of Dry Powder Inhalers as alternatives to Metered Dose Inhalers (tonnes HFC)

AEA Technology 77


Enviros March (2000) assessed the cost-effectiveness of certain emission abatement options in a study undertaken on behalf of IPAC. The marginal cost of switching to DPIs was assessed as very high relative to the benefits of emission reductions. In terms of cost-effectiveness, an 80% switch to DPIs was calculated at >500 Euros per tonne of CO2 equivalent for the EU as a whole. This was on the basis of a gradual timescale for change, of between 8-12 years. An accelerated transition period (5-8 years) meant a cost of >710 Euros per tonne of CO2 equivalent.

The comparable figures are much higher for the UK, for the reasons discussed in section 7.1.1. In the UK, the cost of a Salbutamol DPI is estimated to be 200% more than the cost of a MDI (Enviros March 2000).


Two additional measures have been identified for MDIs. These include the recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs and the destruction of old MDI units. This section describes how emission reduction estimates have been formulated. Some manufacturers may already be undertaking one or both of these measures to some extent.

7.4.1 Recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs (Measure J)

An estimate of reduction in emissions from the recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs manufactured in the UK is based on information in a EU-based MDI study by Enviros (March (2000)). A saving of 300 kt of CO2 equivalent has been estimated for the EU. The UK share of this saving has been estimated as 16%, based on the UK manufacturing market, rather than market sales. An annual saving of 47 kt of CO 2

equivalent (or 29 tonnes HFC) could potentially be saved in the UK. If this scheme were currently underway, a potential cumulative saving over a 22 year period would be 638 tonnes of HFC.

According to certain MDI manufacturers, many larger companies are already recovering fluid from reject MDIs, but this may not be true of smaller manufacturers. The extent to which this is an additional measure is therefore somewhat unclear in absence of specific information from manufacturers.

7.4.2 Destruction of old MDI units (Measure K)

An estimate of reduction in emissions from the destruction of old HFC-based MDIs is based on information in the EU-based MDI study by Enviros March (2000). A saving of 154 kt of CO2 equivalent has been estimated for the EU. The UK share of this saving has been estimated as 35% of this total, based on UK sales of MDIs. This equates to an annual UK saving of 46 kt of CO2 equivalent (or 28 tonnes HFC). If this scheme was initiated immediately, a cumulative saving, of 616 tonnes of HFC over a 22 year period could be achieved.

Certain manufacturers have noted that that recovery from used MDIs will be difficult, expensive and potentially hazardous. The cost of this measure (and Measure J) is

AEA Technology 78


considered in section 15, which describes the analysis undertaken to assess cost-effectiveness.

AEA Technology 79


8 Aluminium Production

8.1 INTRODUCTION

Primary aluminium smelting is one of the largest sources of PFCs in the UK. PFC emissions are formed during the production of aluminium in electrolytic cells, when normal operating conditions are upset and produce what are known as ‘anode effects’. These anode effects occur when the rate at which aluminium oxide(the input raw material) is fed into the cells drops too low and the electrolytic bath itself starts undergoing electrolysis. Fluorine reacts with the carbon anodes (used in the electrolysis process) to produce CF4 (90%) and C2F6 (10%). The amount of PFCs emitted will depend on the frequency of the anode effects and on their duration.

8.1.1 Alternative technologies

In the UK, large reductions in PFCs have occurred over the last 10 years through the switch to point feeder technology. Point feeder technology is regarded as the best technology for feeding aluminium oxide into the electrolytic cells. This technology allows more regulated feeding at controlled intervals, ensuring an operating process with fewer anode effects. The move to such a technology not only reduces PFCs but improves efficiency of the production process, and therefore is driven not only by environmental but also by economic factors. The following emission factors show the reduction potential of point feeder technology.

Table 8.1 - Emission Factors for Aluminium ProductionTechnology Emission factor

(kg CF4 eq. / t (Al)Point feeder Prebake 0.06Centre Worked Prebake 0.4Side Worked Prebake 1.9Vertical Stud Soderberg 0.7Source: Harnisch, J and Hendriks, C (2000).

All UK smelters are either retrofitted from Centre or Side Worked Prebake to use point feeder technology, or are Point feeder Prebake.

There has been some research into the development of inert anodes that would ensure no anode effects occurred. However, such technologies have not reached the commercial market.

8.1.2 Emission reduction opportunities

The aluminium industry has signed up to Negotiated Agreements under the Climate Change Levy and, as part of these agreements, has agreed reductions in PFC emissions up to 2010. Such reductions are forecast to be met through improved process controls, such as upgrading computer control systems, and other ‘in-house’

AEA Technology 80


measures. Such measures may include operational improvements, improved training and R&D into reducing anode effect frequency and duration.


The estimates were based on actual emissions data provided by the aluminium-smelting sector. All emissions of PFCs occur during the aluminium smelting process. The methodology used for estimating emissions, based on IPCC Good Practice Guidance (2000), was ‘Tier 2 Method – smelter-specific relationship between emissions and operating parameters based on default technology-based slope and over-voltage coefficients.’

Table 6.1 – Key Assumptions: Aluminium sector.1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

PFC types (and ratio)

CF4 / C2F6 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10 90:10

Activity data

Annual PFC production

196 42.1 37.9 25.1 17.7 17.7 17.7 17.7

Emission factorsA


1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Actual emissions data were provided by the primary aluminium sector. One operator also provided activity but, due to issues of confidentiality, these data cannot be published in this report. Emissions estimates were based on input parameters, including frequency and duration of anode effects, and number of cells operating. Emission factors were then used to derive the type of PFC produced. All emissions occur during manufacturing.


Figure 8.1 shows estimated UK emissions of PFC from aluminium manufacture between 1990 and 2025.

AEA Technology 81


PFC Emissions from Aluminium Manufacture

0

50

100

150

200

250

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)

HighMidLow

Figure 8.1: UK emissions from aluminium manufacture (tonnes PFC)

PFC emissions fell sharply in the early 1990’s due to the introduction of point feeder smelter technology, as seen in the above graph. All UK smelters are now either retrofitted from Centre or Side Worked Prebake to use point feeder technology, or are originally Point feeder Prebake. As shown in the section above, point feeder technology offers much lower emission factors than the alternative types of smelter. Estimates of future emissions up to 2010 are based on manufacturers’ commitments under Climate Change Levy (CCL) agreements, and beyond 2010 based on an assumption that there will be no change in the demand for UK-manufactured aluminium. Future UK aluminium manufacturing capacity may also impact on future emissions – current capacity will be reached in 2005. Extra capacity in this sector will be dependent on the economics of power generation, and the use of embedded on-site generation.6

Data supplied by the two main operators show that emissions of CO2 equivalent per tonne of aluminium produced have fallen since 1990 and that levels are projected to fall further by 2010 (the CO2 equivalent emission per tonne of aluminium fell to 20% of the 1990 value by 2000, and is projected to reach 10% of the 1990 figure by 2010).

The graph below shows a comparison between estimates made in this study, and estimates made by March (1999). The estimates show a similar pattern. The submission by the aluminium manufacturers shows lower emission totals in the early 1990s than those in the March 1999 report. This appears to be due to differences in reported data used in the March and current inventory.

6 Based on communication with Alcan - 2nd project workshop (26/3/03)

AEA Technology 82


PFC Emissions from Aluminium Manufacture

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)


Figure 8.2: Comparison with March results for aluminium manufacture (tonnes PFC)


Regional estimates cannot be published in this report for the Aluminium sector because this would disclose confidential site-specific information.


This section outlines some of the uncertainties, as shown in figure 8.1, assumptions that have been made, and the rationale for these. In summary, the following uncertainty estimates have been used:

Historical data (1990-2001): +/- 5%The uncertainty estimate for the historical data is low due to the provision of a robust and complete time series from the UK primary aluminium manufacturers.

Future projections (2002-2010): +/- 20% The uncertainty estimate for projected years up to 2010 is fairly low, reflecting that these data have been provided by the sector, based on the targets set under their Climate Change Levy (CCL) underlying agreements.

Future projections (2011-2020): +/- 40% A higher uncertainty value has been placed on post 2010 projections as in the absence of other data, an assumption of constant emissions has been made. This does not reflect the possibility of changes to the market after 2010. However, it is more likely that emissions would decrease, rather than increase, due to the current low emissive technology and potential future improvements.

It has been assumed that there is no introduction of inert anodes in the projections, which do not produce any PFCs; such technologies are under development but have

AEA Technology 83


not yet reached the commercial market. It is probable that such anodes will not be available within the next 10 years.


No additional measures have been identified for the aluminium sector. It is observed that aluminium smelters are currently using the most up-to-date technologies available and, therefore, significant emission reductions would be difficult to realise.

AEA Technology 84


9 Magnesium Alloy Production and Casting

9.1 INTRODUCTION

Magnesium alloy production and casting are significant emitters of SF6 in the UK. SF6 is used as a cover gas, to prevent molten magnesium oxidising when exposed to air. All SF6 used in this way is released to the atmosphere unless capture/recycle technologies are employed. SF6 is non-flammable and non-toxic and, therefore, a safe gas to use.

In the UK, there is one magnesium alloy producer, a single magnesium die casting operation and three magnesium sand casting sites. Alloy production involves the use of primary magnesium ingots, recycled scrap material and second-generation magnesium materials (i.e. material already made into alloys) for the production of different alloys. Both die and sand casters use these magnesium alloys to produce specific components for a wide range of industries. For the casting industry, SF6 is used for casting specific magnesium alloys where other cover gases, such as argon, are not suitable.

9.1.1 Alternative gases

In the UK, SF6 has been used as an alternative cover gas to SO2 in magnesium alloy production and sand and die-casting since the early 1990s. SO2 is equally as effective as a cover gas but has more health and safety implications, due to its toxicity. The potential for producers to switch back to SO2 certainly exists but would require significant investment to meet health and safety requirements. Such investment costs could be partly offset by the relatively high price of SF6. No gases exist presently that would be a satisfactory alternative to SF6 apart from SO2.7

The main magnesium alloy producer is actively looking for alternatives to SF6 and a switch to an alternative cover gas is a long-term goal. A significant amount of investment is going into research into alternative gases.


Beyond the use of alternative cover gases, there are other possible measures that can be used to reduce SF6 emissions. Technologies have been developed that can capture and recycle SF6, such as the Air Liquide system. Process improvements also have the potential to reduce emissions, and include:

Improved checking and maintenance. Ensuring up-to-date management practices on site.

7 In their submission to the ECCP Working Group (for which a report was produced by Harnisch and Gluckman, 2001), Hydro Magnesium stated that BF3 (used in the ‘MagShield’ system) would not be a suitable alternative as it is classified as ‘highly toxic’, while SO2 is classified as ‘toxic.’ Concerning HFC 134a, Hydro Magnesium recognise that HFC 134a is classified as non-toxic, but state that the gas reacts to produce HF in the casting system, which is highly toxic.

AEA Technology 85


Improved smelting and casting equipment.

Such process improvements are cited by the magnesium smelting industry as being part of their strategy for reducing emissions under the Climate Change Levy Negotiated Agreement they have with the UK government. This agreement has specific targets up to 2010 for reducing SF6 emissions. Therefore, such measures are included in the inventory baseline.

Other emissions reduction opportunities are possible through the dissemination of information and sharing of best practice. For example, the International Magnesium Federation has published brochures on conservation of SF6 in magnesium operations.


For magnesium alloy production, emissions were estimated based on SF6

consumption data supplied by the main manufacturer, on the basis that all SF6

consumed is emitted immediately. Data from 1998-2001 are considered accurate whilst earlier data are estimated and, based on consultation with the manufacturer. Future projections are based on manufacturers’ data to 2010, derived as part of their Climate change levy negotiated agreements, and are assumed constant thereafter. Constant emissions are assumed in the absence of data on which to base post-2010 projections.

Estimates of emissions from magnesium casting are based on those made by March (1999), based on discussion with the sector and the unavailability of more robust information. These estimates are significantly lower than those from magnesium alloy production.


Figure 9.1 shows estimated UK emissions of SF6 from magnesium manufacture between 1990 and 2025.

AEA Technology 86


SF6 Emissions from Magnesium Manufacture

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)

HighMidLow

Figure 9.1: UK emissions from magnesium manufacture (tonnes SF6)

In the late 1990s, SF6 started to be increasingly used as a replacement to SO2 as a cover gas in magnesium alloy production and casting. The majority of emissions come from the production of magnesium alloy. Emissions of SF6 from this source peaked in 2000, and dipped in 2001 due to an increase in scrap recycling abroad 8

and the temporary 6 month closure of a furnace.

Accurate historical SF6 usage data have been supplied by the magnesium alloy production industry for the years 1998-2001. Broad estimate of SF6 usage by this industry have been given for 1990-1997, based on manufacturers information. The magnesium casting sector’s usage of SF6 is based on estimates in previous reports March (1999). The methodology for calculating the inventory is simple, as all SF6

used is considered to be emitted during the manufacturing processes.

Reductions in emissions to 2010 are projected due to the Climate Change Levy agreement between UK government and the magnesium alloy production industry, which sets emission reduction targets. These projected emissions (considered as business as usual in this inventory) are based on the use of process management type controls to reduce SF6 usage where possible. The operators’ projections were made prior to the opening of a new scrap recycling plant in the Czech Republic and have subsequently been adjusted. In the absence of any other data, projections up to 2025 are based on the assumption that output from the sector is constant from 2010 onwards.

SF6 emissions from the casting industry are low in the UK, relative to emissions from magnesium alloy production. In Europe, the projected growth in emissions from the die-casting sector is considerable, due to forecast expansion in vehicle manufacturing, particularly in Europe. Based on discussion with the casting trade association, CMFED, this EU trend will probably not be seen in the UK, as it will be

8 A new scrap-recycling process has been opened in the Czech Republic and recycling has started to be transferred there.

AEA Technology 87


driven by growth in the automotive industry. It is possible that, in the UK, emissions from casting foundries could decrease.

The graph below shows a comparison between the estimates made in this study and those made by March (1999). The differences are due to revised information provided by main magnesium alloy producer. This information included projected SF6 usage estimated under the Climate Change Levy Agreement. In the absence of such information, March (1999) had assumed constant emissions in future years. New and revised historical data also result in differences between the two time series.

SF6 Emissions from Magnesium Manufacture

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)


Figure 9.2: Comparison with March results for magnesium manufacture (tonnes SF6)


The table below shows the baseline emission totals (tonnes of SF6) allocated to the constitutive countries of the UK.

Table 9.1 – Emissions from magnesium manufacture for the UK and Constituent Countries (tonnes SF6)

1990 1995 2000 2010 2025England 18.6 18.6 44.6 28.8 28.8Wales 1.4 1.4 3.4 2.2 2.2UK 20.0 20.0 48.0 31.0 31.0

The split has been based on the split used in the WS Atkins (2000) report on estimates of non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions. The largest emitter of SF6 is the magnesium alloy producer based in England. The casting sector is based in Wales

AEA Technology 88


and England. It is understood that there are no magnesium alloy production and casting producers located in Scotland or Northern Ireland.



Historical data (1990 – 1997): +/- 30%The main area of uncertainty is regarding emissions of SF6 from casting, which have been estimated, based on the previous March (1999) report and discussions with the sector Trade Association. In the absence of more up-to-date information, a high uncertainty level is assumed.Data from the main magnesium alloy producer is also uncertain for this period.

Historical data (1998-2001): +/- 10% The main area of uncertainty is regarding emissions of SF6 from casting which has been estimated from the previous March (1999) inventory and discussions with the sector Association. Data from the main magnesium alloy producer is considered to be reasonably robust and accurate.

Future projections (2002-2010): +/- 20%Estimates are based on projections from the magnesium alloy production industry, and on the projected trend for the use of die casting in the EU.

Future projections (2011-2025): +/- 45%An assumption has been made that the 2010 annual emission figure remains constant up to 2025. This significant assumption, made in the absence of other data, means that a high uncertainty level is assumed. This uncertainty leads to discontinuities in the high and low estimates in Figure 9.1.

One of the main uncertainties concerns future production levels and scrap recycling rates. If production moves, for example to Eastern Europe, levels of SF6 could decrease significantly. Levels of scrap recycling could also impact significantly on SF6 emissions from this sector.

In the above baseline estimates, replacement of SF6 with SO2 for both casting and magnesium alloy production has not been assumed to happen, implying continuing use of SF6. Such a switch could be forced through future legislation, and would have a significant impact on SF6 emissions though health risks would have to be dealt with. It is not currently considered as a feasible alternative, based primarily on the potential impact to health and safety, and because it would not be a technically appropriate cover gas for the casting of certain alloys.


No assessment has been made of additional measures for emissions reduction.

AEA Technology 89


10 Fire Fighting Equipment

10.1 INTRODUCTION

In the UK, manufacturers of fixed suppression systems for fire fighting have been using HFCs as an alternative to Halons for the past 7-8 years. Fluorocarbons currently take up some 25% of the market that would have previously been covered by Halons. This is primarily due to the specific requirements of certain industries where the use of HFCs is seen as necessary to reduce fire risks. Such systems have much faster discharge and suppression times, and do not damage equipment.

The systems are also compact and take up minimal space. The HFCs themselves are non-toxic. It is the combination of speed, space and safety that makes HFCs important alternatives to Halon in those applications where these properties are required. HFC-based systems are used for the protection of electronic and telecommunications equipment, and in military applications, records offices, bank vaults and oil production facilities.

The main HFC used in UK fixed systems is HFC 227, with some use of HFC 23 and HFC 125. The majority of emissions of HFCs will occur when the system is discharged, either when triggered accidentally or during a fire. Minimal emissions may also occur during filling or maintenance of the systems. The rest of the market for fixed system applications uses inert gases or non-gaseous agents, such as water mist, and non-extinguishing early warning systems.

As well as HFCs being used to replace halon-based systems in the mid-1990s, a small quantity of PFC (mainly C4F10) was imported by a US company into the EU to be used as an alternative fluid in fire fighting fixed systems. The main application of these PFC-based fixed systems is for fire protection of flooding closed rooms (e.g. control rooms). Imports for new systems stopped in 1999, as this application of PFCs was not regarded as an essential use. For purposes of recharge, PFCs are still supplied. By 2010 there will probably be no fixed systems using PFCs in the EU. Emissions of PFCs from these systems are thought to be insignificant relative to other PFC emission sources.

Portable extinguishers have moved away from Halons, with most manufacturers using water, dry powder and carbon dioxide as the replacement. A small number of niche applications use HFCs but emissions from such applications are thought to be insignificant.

10.1.1 Alternative gases

UK manufacturers of fixed systems indicated that HFCs are used because they are the best available gases for specific industry requirements. They are clean agents which means they do not damage the equipment that is being protected. They are considered ‘best available’ primarily due to speed of suppression, storage space and low toxicity.

AEA Technology 90


50% of halon-based systems have been replaced by non-gaseous agents, such as water mist, or by non-extinguishing technologies, such as early warning systems. A further 25% of systems have been replaced by gaseous systems, using alternatives such as inert gases. The fire fighting manufacturers consider that the remaining 25% of the market will be replaced by fluorocarbon-based systems due to the additional and necessary benefits that they bring in particular applications.

A new fluorocarbon product (a C6 ketone) has been commercially available since April 2002. This product is characterised by having a low global warming potential (GWP) in the range of 4-7, and is said to perform in a manner similar to other fluorocarbons (and could probably be used in all current and future applications). A toxicity test on this product is currently underway in the UK, overseen by Halon Alternatives Group.

In terms of the quantity needed to replace HFCs, it has been suggested that an additional 10% of this product would be needed. In terms of emissions from this system, there are expected to be no differences between HFC-based systems and systems using this product.


The submission by Eurofeu to the ECCP report (Harnisch and Hendriks, 2000) suggests that projected emissions of HFCs can be reduced by 50% by 2010. This 50% figure is based on emissions not related to discharge of HFC in actual suppression of fires. Previous reports have suggested that abatement options are not available due to manufacturers minimising leakage from systems. Eurofeu suggest the following ways to reduce HFC emissions: Proper assessment of whether suppression system is needed. Assessment of whether an HFC-based system is the best option. Selection of the technically most effective HFC with the lowest GWP for each

application. Regular review of emission controls to ensure that applications remain virtually

non-emissive.

Other reduction opportunities include the use of better fire detection systems, and reductions in systems being triggered and releasing HFCs unnecessarily. Emission reduction opportunities for PFC-based systems have not been investigated due to the small number of systems in the UK, and because such systems will be phased out by 2010.

10.2METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES

Historical data for 1997 to 1999 have been supplied by the representative trade organisation. Other historical data are based on estimates of installed capacity and an annual emission rate of approximately 5% per annum. The latter has been based on discussion with the industry, and with reference to the 1998 UNEP Halon

AEA Technology 91


Technical Options Committee (HTOC) report.9 There were no HFC emissions from fixed systems prior to 1995 according to an ECCP report (Harnsich and Hendriks 2000). Future emissions are based on assumptions about growth in installed capacity and changes to annual emission rates from these fixed systems, due to industry initiatives to reduce emissions from discharges not relating to fighting actual fires i.e. non-essential discharges.

Table 10.1 – Key Assumptions: Fire Fighting sector.1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025


HFC 227ea, HFC 23 97.5:2.5

97.5:2.5

97.5:2.5

97.5:2.5

97.5:2.5

97.5:2.5

97.5:2.5

97.5:2.5

Activity data

Size of bank (tnes) 0 20 390 2338 2668 2982 3333 3726

Sector growth rate (%)

- - - 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25

Emission factorsA

PM / PL combined % 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.8 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5


The bank size has been based on the replacement of halons by HFCs. Capacity data from halon-based systems was determined through discussion with the trade association, and a growth rate applied (of 2.25%) equal to GDP growth. Based on discussion with the trade association, limited improvement in the emission rate of 5% by 2010 has been assumed (10%), which reflects moves to best practice to prevent accidental discharge and leakage. A voluntary agreement that is currently under consideration by Defra states that a 50% improvement is achievable by 2010.10

Estimates have not been made for PFCs from fixed systems in the absence of available data. Emissions are thought to be insignificant relative to other sectors.

10.3EMISSIONS AND PROJECTIONS

Figure 10.1 shows estimated UK emissions of HFCs from fire fighting equipment between 1990 and 2025.

9 The UNEP 1998 Assessment report of the Halons Technical Options Committee predicts that emissions of halon from fixed systems in 2002 in Western Europe would amount to 5% of the installed bank and that this would be divided as follows: fire – 1.5%, servicing – 2.5% and recovery losses –1%.10 The revised voluntary agreement is assessed in terms of the reduction potential of this measure and its costs at the end of this chapter, and in section 15.

AEA Technology 92


HFC Emissions from Fire Fighting Equipment

0

50

100

150

200

250

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)

HighMid

Low

Figure 10.1: UK emissions from fire fighting equipment (tonnes HFC)

HFCs have been used as replacements for halons in fixed fire fighting equipment since 1995. Future growth trends are expected to be lower because of improvements in emission factors and a reduction in the number of new installations (as replacement of 25% of halon systems by HFC-based systems is expected to be completed by 2003). The number of new installations is likely to be in line with economic growth. Improvements in emissions factors are likely as the industry moves to reduce non-essential emissions of HFCs i.e. emissions not used to suppress actual fires.

Emissions increase sharply between 2000 and 2003 as replacement systems are installed, thus increasing the installed capacity of HFC. From 2003 to 2025, two factors are at work: emissions increase due to an increase in installed capacity as a result of new build through economic growth; this is counteracted by reductions in emissions factors between 2000 and 2010 as industry tries to reduce the annual emission rate from the installed capacity. These factors together produce the trend observed in the above graph.

Improvements in emission factors are incorporated into estimates up to 2025, due to the introduction of measures to reduce emissions of HFC not associated with actual fire suppression.

As shown in the graph below, there is a large difference between these estimates and those presented by March (1999), although the estimates are still low relative to other UK sectors. This is due to previous underestimations of installed capacity, and annual emissions rate. This was due at least in part to the assumption that 1 tonne of HFC is needed to replace 1 tonne of halon (whereas approximately 1.8 tonnes is needed as used in this inventory estimate), and partly because of economic growth. The Fire Industry Council (FIC) considers that this revision of the replacement factor is more accurate. Although the difference between the inventories and projections is significant, the fire-fighting sector is still one of the smallest emitters of HFCs (as measured in tonnes of CO2 equivalent).

AEA Technology 93



0

50

100

150

200

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Em

issi

ons

(Ton

nes)


Figure 10.2: Comparison with March results for fire fighting equipment (tonnes HFC)


The table below shows the baseline emission totals (tonnes of HFCs) allocated to the countries that make up the UK. UK estimates have been allocated to countries based on population statistics as no data on the location of fixed fire fighting systems were available from industry or elsewhere WS Atkins (2000) also used this methodology following discussions on this issue with Eurofeu, the European fire fighting trade association.

Table 10.2 – Emissions from fire fighting equipment for the UK and Constituent Countries (tonnes HFC)




AEA Technology 94


Historical data: (1990-1996) +/- 10% Emissions estimates were based on the March (1999) report. There are no emissions from HFC prior to 1995.

Other historical data: (1997-1999) +/- 5-10%The Fire Industry Council (FIC), the trade association of fire fighting equipment manufacturers, supplied actual emissions data for the above years. There could be some uncertainty in these data due to the revision of the methodology used to estimate emissions – this is explained in this section below.

Projections: (2000-2010) +/- 20%, (2011-2025) +/- 25%Projected emissions are based on a methodology that estimates the projected installed capacity of HFC-based systems. The present annual emission rate of 5% (of installed capacity) is reduced over the time series by 10% in 2010 to reflect improvements in reducing emissions from the fixed systems. This improvement has been estimated on the basis of discussions with the Fire Industry Council (FIC). Projected emissions estimates also include a factor representing general levels of economic growth (at 2.25% per annum).

The Fire Industry Council has calculated actual emissions data for years 1997-1999. Therefore, a low level of uncertainty has been predicted. According to a report by Harnisch and Gluckman for the ECCP (2001), there were no emissions of HFCs prior to 1995.

Emissions have been estimated up to 2025, based on calculations of tonnes of installed capacity. Estimates of installed capacity are based on the assumption that HFC-based systems replace 25% of halon system capacity. The Todd report (1991) estimated installed capacity of halon-based systems at 3800 tonnes. According to the FIC, HFCs systems will have replaced 25% (or 950 tonnes) of the old halon systems by 2003. 1.8 tonnes of HFCs are needed to replace 1 tonne of halon, which means that 1700 tonnes of HFC will replace 950 tonnes of halon. If an economic growth rate of 2.25% is used as the basis of projections, an installed bank of 2668 tonnes of HFCs will exist in 2010.

On current trends projected for Western Europe, emissions at 5% of the installed bank would be 133 tonnes by 2010. Even in this ‘business as usual’ scenario, fire protection would still be the smallest HFC emitter of any relevant sector.

Emissions levels depend on the introduction of improvements to reduce emission rates. Currently, a voluntary agreement is being discussed between industry and government, which if introduced, would mean greater reductions up to 2010 and beyond than estimated in Figures 10.1 and 10.2. An assumption has been made in the baseline trend that industry, through better practices and new technologies, will introduce some improvements even if there is no voluntary agreement in place. This would realise reductions of 10% by 2010 rather than 50% under the proposed voluntary agreement. Beyond 2010, uncertainties remain in the level of reductions that will be achieved by 2025 – emissions are thought to increase due to economic growth, and increased bank size, with no further improvement in emission rates.

PFCs in fixed systems were used during the mid-1990s in limited quantities in the EU as fire suppressants in fixed systems. Emissions probably peaked between 1999

AEA Technology 95


and 2002 in the UK. After 2002, emissions are projected to decrease rapidly due to the replacement of all PFC-based systems with HFCs. This replacement is estimated to be completed by 2010.

In the absence of data on PFC-based systems in the UK, estimates have not been made. The total amount of PFC imported into the EU market is thought to be quite small – even if the UK had 30% of the EU market, emissions of PFCs would be insignificant (less than 1%) relative to UK total emissions of PFCs.

10.4ADDITIONAL MEASURES FOR EMISSIONS REDUCTION

The graph below shows the emissions reduction potential on an annual basis through the introduction of a voluntary agreement between the fire fighting industry and the Government.


0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023

Tonn

es H

FC

Baseline Voluntary Agreement

Figure 10.3: Effect of a voluntary agreement for fire fighting equipment (tonnes HFC)

In the baseline scenario, the emissions rate of the installed equipment is assumed to have improved by 10% in 2010 and remain at that level up to 2025. Emissions increase after 2010 due to the assumption of no further improvement in the emission factor and continuing economic growth. The voluntary agreement scenario shows a similar trend to that shown by the baseline, but with emissions in 2010 at 44% below the baseline figure.

If the proposed voluntary agreement is in place by 2003, emissions of HFC could be around 75 tonnes per year by 2025, as opposed to 168 tonnes under the above baseline scenario. Overall, a reduction of 1426 tonnes could potentially be seen over a 22 year period (relative to the baseline) with the introduction of the voluntary agreement. Note that the trend up to 2025 does not decrease but remains fairly

AEA Technology 96


constant. This is due to economic growth counteracting an improving emissions rate. Section 15 provides an assessment of the cost-effectiveness of this voluntary agreement.

It is important to note that this additional measure reflects the commitment to improve emissions up to 2010, as stipulated in the proposed voluntary agreement. Further improvements beyond 2010 are much more difficult to predict. The FIC, however, believe that the voluntary agreement will provide an impetus which, coupled with education and advancing technology, will lead to a continual decline in emissions. They suggest that evidence of potential emissions reduction can be seen in the reduction from 15% in the mid 1980’s to the present emission rate of around 5%, achieved over a 15-year period.

The FIC believe that an emission rate of 2.5% by 2010 can be achieved under the voluntary agreement, and that this improvement would continue beyond 2010 to 2025, potentially achieving an emission rate of 1.5%. They believe that this improvement to 2025 could be achieved for the following reasons:

Incidence of fires are expected to decline due to improved materials and design

Improvements in fire system performance and reliability Current state of the art systems in Germany achieving such emissions rates Improvements to systems due to inclusion of fire protection systems in the

Construction Products Directive, which demand adherence to certain standards

Such improvements may be possible and a reduction in the overall emission rate, to 2% by 2025, has been assumed in this assessment of the voluntary agreement. This estimate represents the study team’s judgement of likely emissions reductions taking account of the differing views of stakeholders. Many in the industry believe the emission rate could be as low as 1.5% but there are other stakeholders who believe that even 2% may not be achievable.

The emergence of alternative agents offers another potential means of reducing emissions. However, this depends on the future success of technical innovation within the industry as well as the cost-effectiveness of new agents.

AEA Technology 97


11Electronics

11.1 INTRODUCTION

The electronics industry is one of the largest sources of PFC emissions in the UK, accounting for 36% of emissions in 2000. The main uses of PFCs are: cleaning of chambers used for chemical vapour deposition (CVD) processes; dry plasma etching; vapour phase soldering and vapour phase blanketing; leak testing of hermetically sealed components; cooling liquids, e.g. in supercomputers or radar systems.

In addition SF6 is used in etching processes for polysilicon and nitrite surfaces, and there is some usage of CHF3 and NF3. The first two of these processes (cleaning and etching during semiconductor manufacture) account for the majority of emissions from the sector, with cleaning accounting for around 70% and etching 30%. During this project we have focused on emissions from the semiconductor sector, which are likely to dominate emissions from the sector as a whole.

The electronics sector is very difficult to evaluate. Previous studies found that trade associations had little data available and manufacturers have difficulties monitoring their current emissions of PFCs. March (1999) therefore based its estimates on estimated sales of PFCs to the electronics sector, using information from PFC suppliers. The sector as a whole considered that there were no viable alternatives to PFCs and SF6 currently available, and recovery of gases vented to atmosphere was not considered practical. One problem is that a fabrication plant typically has many small point sources (e.g. etching tools) and it is difficult and expensive to install gas recovery or abatement equipment on such tools.

However, in the mid-1990s many semiconductor manufacturers in the USA, Japan, Korea and Europe formed voluntary partnerships to try to reduce emissions. In April 1999 the World Semiconductor Council (WSC) set a voluntary goal of reducing PFC emissions from semiconductor manufacturing plants by 10% by 2010 relative to a base year of 1995.

In order to comply with this goal most companies now monitor their emissions. Emissions are reported privately to an accountant who aggregates the emissions by region, and therefore emissions for individual countries are not available. Companies and trade associations are unwilling to provide disaggregated data as they regard this information to be commercially sensitive.

A hierarchical strategy for reducing emissions has been introduced as part of a European Memorandum of Agreement via the European Semiconductor Industry Association (EECA/ESIA). This involves process optimisation, alternative chemistry, capture/recycle and abatement/destruction.

AEA Technology 98


The main way to reduce emissions from the chamber cleaning process is through a switch to using NF3 instead of CF4 and C2F6. NF3 is much more efficient and allows total usage to be reduced considerably. In addition, the process is quicker and so the plant can achieve considerable savings in processing time, which can cancel out installation and operating costs. The gas stream from the chamber must be collected and the emissions abated because they are toxic. This abatement method can easily be built into new equipment, but it is more difficult to retrofit to old existing equipment.

Another method is to switch to using C3F8 and C4F8 for etching instead of CF4 and C2F6. The increased efficiency of these PFCs allows smaller quantities to be used.

In cases where it is feasible to collect and treat the waste gas stream, emissions can be destroyed by combustion with an efficiency of around 90%. New plasma treatment processes may offer higher efficiencies. The industry claims that it is difficult to install post-combustion equipment in many existing plants because of lack of space. However, new state of the art fabrication plants can be built with integral gas collection and abatement equipment on all sources, even small point sources. One such plant has recently been opened in Plymouth.

In the longer term, technology changes could allow the organic solvents to be substituted by aqueous solvents. Also, Air Products have recently patented a PFC recovery and recycling system which can recover PFCs from etching and cleaning operations even when mixed with large volumes of nitrogen.

The industry is composed of large multinational companies and historically it has taken some time for process improvements and abatement technologies to filter through to UK based fabrication plants. We do not believe there is much abatement technology in operation in the UK at present with the exception of the recently opened new plant in Plymouth. Therefore, there are good opportunities for abating emissions in future, although it will prove much easier to abate emissions when equipment is being renewed than to retrofit abatement technology to existing plant. The recent closure of several plants during the downturn in 2001 provides opportunities for improving equipment as new plants are opened in future years. Our analysis shows that maximum use will have to be made of these opportunities if the UK industry is to achieve the WSC target. However, the degree of abatement actually achieved depends critically on the willingness of the UK industry to implement the technologies as they become available. In the past it has been difficult to monitor progress, due to lack of data from the industry. The recent provision of PFC consumption data to UK MEAC (the UK Microelectronics Environmental Advisory Committee) by electronics companies is a major step towards improving reporting mechanisms, and these data were used for the present study.

11.2METHODOLOGY, DATA SOURCES AND ASSUMPTIONS

The main source of PFC emissions in the electronics sector is from the semiconductor industry. We have not investigated use of PFCs in the electronics sector outside the semiconductor industry.

AEA Technology 99


Our initial approach was to request data and information from the industry, using a questionnaire, designed with the help of the UK trade association, the Federation of the Electronics Industry (FEI), which was sent via the FEI to around 20 companies. However, no responses were received. UK electronics companies are wary of providing data on PFC usage as this is perceived to be commercially sensitive.

Current PFC emissions are based on data supplied by UK MEAC - the UK Microelectronics Environmental Advisory Committee. UK MEAC gave total PFC consumption for the UK electronics sector based on 2001 purchases of PFCs as reported by individual companies. Not all gas purchased in the UK is used in the UK, similarly gas may be used which is purchased elsewhere. The consumption estimates provided by UK MEAC are much lower than the estimates in March (1999). The estimated consumption in 1999 is only 8% of the total consumption reported by members of EECA, the European trade association. This seems low (even allowing for recent plant closures) given that the UK wafer production capacity in 1998 was 28% of EU capacity. The recent ECOFYS report (Harnisch and Hendriks, 2000) assumed that UK production was 27% of EU production. The reasons for the comparatively low apparent consumption of PFCs by UK plant are not clear, but as no independent estimates of consumption are available we have used the UK MEAC estimates for this study.

Emissions were then calculated using the IPCC Tier 1 methodology, which subtracts the amount of gas left in the shipping container (10%), the amount converted to other products (between 20% and 80% depending on the gas) and the amount removed by abatement (currently assumed to be zero in 2001). We assume zero abatement for 2002. The exception is NF3 which must be abated as the gas stream from NF3

chamber cleaning is toxic. It was assumed that 90% of NF3 emissions are destroyed by the abatement process, which is the IPCC default value.

For past years, emissions are extrapolated backwards from 2001 assuming an annual 15% growth in the production of semiconductors in the UK up until 1999. We also assume an annual increase in the amount of PFCs used per unit production. This figure is 3% from 1990 to 1996, as production methods required more PFCs for finer and more complex etching processes. We then assume a gradual decrease to 0% in 1999 and –1% in 2000 as measures to reduce use of PFCs begin to be implemented.

For future years, our information is contradictory. For the EU semiconductor industry, EECA estimates an annual increase of 15% in emissions with no further abatement action (ECCA 2001). This figure is consistent with estimates of growth in the UK semiconductor industry made for the DTI by an independent consultant (Future Horizons 2002) which show a production volume increase of 160% by 2012 compared to 2002 – i.e. a growth rate of 16% per year. The ECOFYS report assumed a continued growth rate of 15% for the whole European semiconductor industry from 1995 to 2010. However, UK industry commentators including Nick Jolly of UKMEAC predict an (unquantified) decline in UK semiconductor production due to re-location of production facilities overseas, e.g. to the Far East. UK MEAC’s estimates show a decline in 2004 due to known planned closures of UK plant. To take account of these widely differing estimates, we have produced an intermediate

AEA Technology 100


estimate in which, after the sudden downturn observed in 2001 (a decline of 39%), the UK industry remains static until 2004 and then grows at 5% in 2005, 10% per year until 2012, gradually declining to 5% by 2017 and thereafter. This is significantly less than the growth predicted for the rest of the EU industry, but is more optimistic than the UK MEAC and UK industry predictions.

We also assume a decrease in the amounts of CF4 and C2F6 required per unit production as these gases are replaced by C3F8 and C4F10, or replaced by NF3 for chamber cleaning, and as process efficiency improvements are made. This decrease is substantial (8% annually) between 2005 and 2010 as the industry strives to achieve the voluntary World Semiconductor Council (WSC) target of a 10% reduction below 1995 PFC emission levels by 2010. Thereafter it is a more modest decrease of 1% annually. On top of this, we assume the application of end-of-pipe abatement technology with a 90% destruction rate to 40% of emissions by 2010 and 50% by 2012 (constant thereafter). It is the opinion of UK MEAC that abatement technology will be fitted to all PFC sources by 2025, as all fabrication equipment operating at that time will be new (i.e. fitted after 2002) and the latest state of the art equipment, as installed at the new Plymouth fabrication plant, allows collection and abatement of all PFC emissions. Therefore UK MEAC considers our estimate to be an overestimate of emissions in 2025. However, we have no evidence that all plants will follow the lead shown by the Plymouth plant in fitting the state of the art abatement equipment, so we have chosen to assume a maximum level of 50% of emissions collected for abatement.

The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change’s IPCC new Tier 2 and Tier 3 methodologies give a means of estimating emissions from well defined processes used in semiconductor manufacture, rather than the total fluid consumption approach of Tier 1. However, these approaches could not be used because there were no data on abatement options used or processes employed for the UK industry.

Table 11.1 summarises the key assumptions used to model emissions from the electronics sector.

AEA Technology 101


Table 11.1 – Key Assumptions: Electronics sector.1990-1996

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2010 2015 2020-2025

Activity data Annual growth in UK semiconductor prod’n

15% 15% 15% 15% 16% -39% 0% 0% 0% 5% 10% 7% 5%

Annual rate of change of usage per unit consumption

CF4 3% 2% 1% 0% -1% -1% -2% -2% -2% -8% -8% -1% -1%C2F6 3% 2% 1% 0% -1% -1% -2% -2% -2% -8% -8% -1% -1%C3F8 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% -1% -1%C4F8 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% -1% -1%CHF3 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%SF6 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%NF3 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 3% 5% 5% 5% 5% 0% 0%Consumption, kg*

CF4 3640 4269 4959 5752 3,474 3404 3336 3270 3158 3352 4859C2F6 14882 17456 20275 23519 14,203 13919 13641 13368 12914 13707 19867C3F8 582 669 770 893 550 556 561 567 601 1027 1489C4F8 37 43 49 57 35 35 36 36 38 65 95CHF3 2166 2491 2865 3324 2,027 2027 2027 2027 2129 3428 5225SF6 1379 1586 1824 2116 1,291 1291 1291 1291 1355 2183 3327NF3 2459 2828 3252 3772 2,301 2301 2301 2301 2416 3891 5931

Emission factors

Fraction fed to abatement

CF4 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 15% 40% 50% 50%C2F6 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 15% 40% 50% 50%C3F8 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 15% 40% 50% 50%C4F8 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 15% 40% 50% 50%CHF3 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 15% 40% 50% 50%SF6 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 15% 40% 50% 50%NF3 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 95% 100% 100% 100% 100%

*Derived from 2001 data, working backwards or forwards from 2001 consumption using annual growth rate and rate of change of consumption per unit production for appropriate year.

AEA Technology 102



Figures 11.1 and 11.2 show projected UK emissions of PFC and SF6 respectively for the period 1990 to 2025.

PFC Emissions from Electronics Sector

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)

HighMidLow

Figure 11.1: UK emissions of PFC from electronics sector (tonnes PFC)

Specific PFCs: CF4, C2F6, C3F8, c-C4F8.

SF6 Emissions from Electronics Sector

0

1

2

3

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)

HighMidLow

Figure 11.2: UK emissions of SF6 from electronics sector (tonnes SF6)

AEA Technology 103


Estimated Level of Uncertainty (PFC and SF6): Historical data +/- 30% Future projections +/- 60%

Figure 11.1 shows that PFC emissions are expected to fall slightly between 2000 and 2010 due to the emission reduction measures being implemented under voluntary agreements. Thereafter, emissions are expected to increase as semiconductor sales increase.

The ambitious baseline assumptions described above enable the UK plants to achieve a 10% cut below 1995 levels in PFC emissions by 2010, despite the rapid growth of production since 1995. However, it should be noted that the WSC target is set at a European level as most manufacturers have plants in several different countries. We have also estimated projected emissions if no abatement measures were applied, and if additional measures were applied which exceed the 10% target. The additional measures reduce usage of CF4 and C2F6 to 30% of 1999 levels by 2010. This assumes replacement of virtually all CF4 and C2F6 used for chamber cleaning with the NF3 process (assuming that 70% of the total PFC requirement is for chamber cleaning, in line with IPCC defaults). It is assumed that only 10% the amount of gas is required when PFCs are replaced by NF3. Further emission cuts could be made beyond 2010 by installing gas collection and abatement technology on all equipment, including etching point sources. This is only considered likely to happen when new plant is being commissioned, as it would be too costly and technically difficult to retrofit to existing equipment.

Our estimates of historic PFC emissions from the electronics sector are much lower than the March (1999) estimated emissions, as shown in Figure 11.3. This is mainly due to the much lower estimates of PFC consumption provided to us by UK MEAC. We understand that the March (1999) estimate was assigned a high uncertainty. However, it should be remembered that UK MEAC figures are supplied by manufacturers and that no independent check of their reliability has been made.

AEA Technology 104


PFC Emissions from the Electronics Sector

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (T

onne

s)


Figure 11.3: Comparison with March results for electronics sector (tonnes PFC)

In summary, without abatement measures there would be a significant increase in PFC emissions due to sustained growth in the industry. We can expect that the industry will make significant reductions as it strives to achieve the WSC target. However, the abatement measures implemented will need to be close to the limits of what is technically possible to achieve this target, and achievement of the target at the European level does not necessarily entail a 10% reduction in the UK as all companies involved have manufacturing plant across the EU. It will be crucial to monitor the progress of the UK industry towards the target. The recent provision of data to UK MEAC by the industry is a welcome step towards this monitoring process.


There has been no assessment made of additional measures for emissions reduction.

AEA Technology 105


12 Halocarbon manufacture

12.1 INTRODUCTION

Emissions arise from the UK manufacture of HFCs, PFCs and HFC 23 (as a by-product formed during HCFC 22 production). There are single manufacturers of HFCs (INEOS Fluor) and PFCs (F2 Chemicals Ltd) in the UK respectively, while two companies currently produce HCFC 22 (INEOS Fluor and Rhodia Organique Fine Ltd). Data from these sectors have been aggregated to protect commercial confidentiality.

In terms of their global warming impact (expressed as kt CO2 eq.), HFC 23 emissions are responsible for the substantial majority of emissions from this manufacturing sector. HFC 23 is emitted as a by-product of HCFC 22 production. It has a high GWP, and traditionally is emitted at levels of 3-5% of the amount of HCFC 22 produced. The market for HCFC 22 is made up of three elements:

end user markets, refrigerants for refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment; export markets; feedstock for production of certain plastic products, especially PTFE.

End use and production restrictions are contained in the EC Regulation on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (EC 2037/2000). This means production for end user markets in the EU will effectively be phased out by 2010 and quantities available for export will also decrease sharply due to the required production cuts. However, industrial rationalisation is possible within the EU under EC 2037/2000 that would allow production to increase in one Member State with a matching reduction in another Member State. The decreases in the market are offset by the on-going growth in the feedstock market which in the past has been growing at rates faster than the average growth of the chemicals industry as a whole. Due to the changing market situation there are large uncertainties in the forecast production and emission values.

Since the previous inventory was prepared by March (now Enviros March) in 1999, the UK has implemented an Emissions Trading Scheme. Both HCFC 22 plants which are sources of HFC 23 are included in the UK Scheme and the scheme should lead to lower emissions in the future than if the scheme was not in place.

Apart from on-going best-practice techniques, the main abatement option for this sector is the introduction of thermal oxidiser abatement equipment. One UK manufacturing plant installed this type of equipment in 1999. Although this type of equipment has relatively high installation and operating costs, the recovery/capture and incineration of waste gases can typically reduce emissions by ca. 95%. Following the implementation of the Emission Trading Scheme, additional methods for abating emissions are being considered and/or implemented in UK fluid manufacturing plants, and this should result in a further decoupling of emissions from production activity levels.

AEA Technology 106


12.2METHODOLOGY, DATA SOURCES AND ASSUMPTIONS

Emissions arise from the chemical production processes used to manufacture halocarbons. Halocarbons are emitted either as a by-product or as a fugitive emission. Emissions are estimated from the annual production and an appropriate emission factor.

Where Ek = Emission of fluid from production process k (tonnes)Pk = Annual production of process k (tonnes)epk = Emission factor for production process k (tonnes/tonne production)

For by-product emissions, the emission factor depends on the particular process used and whether there is any abatement equipment installed. For fugitive emissions, the emission factor depends on the design specification of the process plant components. Default values are available in the literature, though data from UK manufacturers have been used in this study.

Manufacturing emissions from UK production of HFCs, PFCs and HFC 23 (by-product of HCFC 22 manufacture) were estimated from reported data from the respective manufacturers. There is no UK production of SF6. Relationships were derived between reported emissions and the actual (or estimated) historical production data, and were used to calculate future projections based on estimated production levels using data from manufacturers or, where these were unavailable, from March (1999) and WS Atkins (2000). In some manufacturing sectors, future emission factors were modified to anticipate process improvements or the introduction of new abatement technologies. For reasons of commercial confidentiality, and due to the small number of manufacturers in the UK production sector, data have been aggregated and are reported as CO2 equivalents.

In the UK the most important emission from fluid manufacture is the emission of HFC 23 that is formed as a by-product during the manufacture of HCFC 22. One UK plant was recently fitted with new emission abatement measures that have greatly reduced the respective emissions.


Figure 12.1 shows UK emissions from halocarbon production. HFC and PFC data have been aggregated into a single line for for confidentiality reasons.

AEA Technology 107


Emissions from fluid manufacture &HFC23 byproduct formation

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

)

High

MidLow

Figure 12.1: Emissions from halocarbon production (ktonnes CO2 equiv.)

Estimated Level of Uncertainty: Historical data estimated +/- 15% Future projections estimated +/- 40%


Emissions from this sector declined sharply between 1998 and 2000 due to the installation of thermal oxidiser abatement equipment at one UK manufacturing plant. Further emission abatement technology is being considered and/or implemented at UK manufacturing plants. The level of emissions is expected to continue to reduce to 2010, which is the phase out date for HCFC-22 in end user markets.

Historical data appear to be fairly robust but there are uncertainties over future production levels. Thermal oxidiser emission abatement equipment causes emissions to be largely decoupled from production activity, which creates uncertainly in forecasting future emissions, even when estimates of future production activity may be available.


It is not possible to provide a breakdown of emissions by constituent country for confidentiality reasons. However, this information is available and is used in the regional estimates of total emissions from all sources.

AEA Technology 108



The main option for additional emissions reduction from halocarbon manufacture is the installation of thermal oxidiser equipment.

The capital cost of an advanced thermal oxidiser plant is about £6-7 million, from data reported by ENDS (March 2002) and provided by INEOS Fluor to DETR (now Defra) in 2000. The annual operating costs of a simple thermal oxidiser equipment are about £125,000, as reported by Harnisch & Hendriks (2000). This equipment is assumed to have a lifetime of 25 years and to reduce emissions to 95% of the unabated level. The overall operating costs for the thermal oxidiser plant at Ineos Fluor are suggested to be about £500,000 per year. Ineos Fluor indicates that this higher cost is due to the unusually complex plant with the thermal oxidiser being linked into numerous processes and emission streams, including the HCFC 22 plant and the HFC 134a plant.

The net effect of installing thermal oxidiser equipment at the two UK halocarbon production plants that do not currently have such equipment would be to reduce HFC emissions by 880 kt CO2 eq. in 2010 and by 891 kt CO2 eq. in 2020. Cumulative savings during the period 2005-2025 would be 21,121 kt CO2 eq.

AEA Technology 109


13 Other End-Use Applications

13.1SPORTING GOODS

Nike has used SF6 as a cushioning material in its Nike Air range of training shoes since 1990. Prior to 1990, it used perfluoroethane (a PFC) for cushioning. SF6 is well suited to this application because it is chemically and biologically inert and its high molecular weight means it cannot easily diffuse across membranes. This means the gas is not released until the training shoe is destroyed at the end of its useful life. SF6 has also been used for filling tennis balls, but this practice has now ceased (Ballardie, 2003).

Nike committed itself to eliminating SF6 from its training shoes by 30 June 2003. It had originally planned to replace all SF6 applications with nitrogen-filled cushioning but technical difficulties mean it now expects to switch temporarily to perfluoropropane (a PFC) in some high-performance applications. Nike still hopes to phase out PFCs in favour of nitrogen in all its training shoes by June 2006.

Cushioning units typically outlast the lifetime of the training shoe because the rate of diffusion of SF6 is so slow. In the UK, training shoes are generally sent to landfill at the end of their useful lives, where any SF6 or PFC will eventually leak to the atmosphere. In the USA Nike operates a scheme called Reuse-A-Shoe which involves shredding and recycling of used sports shoes, but without recovery of SF6 or other gases. It is claimed that gas recovery would be difficult and expensive, and cannot be justified in view of the phase-out programme. Discussions with US EPA have confirmed that this option is not being considered by US regulators.

No other manufacturers use SF6 or PFC in training shoe manufacture, as their technology is different. Adidas favours ethyl vinyl acetate and both Etonic and Reebok use pressurised air systems.

The emissions of SF6 from trainers, including the 2008 phase-out, are included in the overall emissions and projections in Section 14 but cannot be shown separately for confidentiality reasons.

13.2SOLVENT USE

March (1999) concluded that the potential existed for use of HFCs as solvents to replace CFCs, HCFCs or 1,1,1-trichloroethane, the use of all of which have been or will be phased out as a result of the Montreal Protocol. Particular end-use sectors identified by March (1999), include dry cleaning, metal cleaning, precision cleaning and electronics cleaning. In recent years, HFCs have been developed that are used for this application in sectors such as aerospace and electronics.

CFCs were used as solvents in precision cleaning before being replaced by certain HCFCs, namely HCFC-141-b. As an ozone depleting substance, this HCFC has started to be replaced by HFC-43-10mee, albeit slowly. Due to only being used as a

AEA Technology 110


replacement in recent years, the amount of this HFC being sold in the UK market at present is thought to be insignificant relative to other UK sources of HFCs. However, projected growth could be high, depending on their use as a replacement to HCFC-141b over the next 10 years.

13.2.1 Current and projected emission trends

There were no HFC emissions prior to 1995 from this sector; it is estimated that in 2000 emissions of HFCs in the UK were relatively low, with HCFC-141b still being phased out and the recent development of HFCs for use as solvents. Harnisch and Schwarz (2003) estimate that the EU market hardly exceeded 100 tonnes in 2001, and may have increased by 50 tonnes in 2002. This slow take up is considered to be due to the much higher costs of HFC-43-10mee relative to HCFC-141b.

It is the projected emissions from this sector that could be more significant; however, it is difficult to estimate emissions for this sector given the range of applications for solvents, and the number of sectors that use them. Projected estimates are based on a number of studies undertaken at the European level.Harnisch and Hendriks (2000) estimate that 40% of the 1996 use as solvents of HCFC-141b (6000 tonnes per year) for the EU as a whole will be taken up by HFCs in 2010. This equates to 330 tonnes of HFC emissions in 2010 for the UK (from an EU figure of 2400 tonnes). Harnisch and Gluckman (2001) quote a 2010 figure of 1200 tonnes for the EU, which would mean a UK figure of approximately 165 tonnes, based on the same EU:UK split. A figure of 600 tonnes per year by 2010 is considered to be more realistic by Harnisch and Schwarz (2003). This is due to a much lower conversion rate, from HCFC-141b to HFCs, than was previously predicted, and due to the potential impact of the EU Solvents Directive on demand for HFC-based solvents.

Our emissions estimates are based on a 2010 value of 600 tonnes of HFC. However, we note that some of the 600 tonnes of HCFC-141b replaced could be replaced by HFEs (Hydrofluoroethers ), particularly HFE-449s1 which has a GWP of 30, rather than HFC.


Harnisch and Gluckman (2001) outline 5 potential measures that could lead to the reduction of HFCs from this sector:

Reduction of fugitive emissions from HFC systems Use of hydrofluoroethers Use of alternative organic solvents Use of aqueous solvents Use of no-clean technologies.

They suggest that such measures could be implemented at relatively low cost. A reduction across the EU of 300 kt CO2 equivalent /year could be seen by 2010, where cost remained below Euro 20 per tonne of CO2 equivalent. Harnisch and Gluckman (2001) outline why, even at a low cost, such alternatives may be

AEA Technology 111


unsuitable. Fluorocarbon-based solvents may be necessary to use where high cleaning standards are required, when material compatibility is an issue, when non-flammability is important and when water based-cleaning is unsuitable.

Harnisch and Schwarz (2003) suggest that the main way to achieve emission reductions is through greater use of HFE-449s1, which has a much lower GWP than HFC-43-10mee. A scenario proposed is that if 50% of the 600 tonnes of fluorinated solvents consisted of HFE-449s1, the EU emission in 2010 would be 480 kt CO2

equivalent. This would equate to a saving of 300 kt CO2 equivalent.

13.3ONE COMPONENT FOAMS (OCF)

One Component Foams (OCFs) are used by tradesmen (and in the DIY sector to a lesser extent) to mount doors and windows, and to insulate different types of open joints and gaps. As an insulator, OCF helps improve energy efficiency, due to the insulating properties of the PU foam and because the foam adheres to the building materials providing air tightness. Therefore, use of OCFs could contribute to savings of CO2 through improved energy efficiency. When used as an OCF propellant, HFC (134a, 152a) is blended with various flammable gases. HFC escapes from the foam on application, leaving small residues, which remain in the hardened foam for up to a year.

These products are not manufactured in the UK, although they are imported. It has been very difficult to establish the exact size of the UK import market and, therefore, the emissions from the use of this product.

13.3.1 Current and projected emission trends

Harnisch and Schwarz (2003) estimated EU emissions from OCFs as follows:

1996: 4,000 kt CO2 equivalent per annum (3100 tonnes of HFC 134a) 2000: 1,700 kt CO2 equivalent per annum (1200 tonnes of HFC 134a; 1000

tonnes of HFC 152a) 2010: 2,320 kt CO2 equivalent per annum (1636 tonnes of HFC 134a; 1364

tonnes of HFC 152a)

Emissions in tonnes of CO2 equivalent have reduced between 1996 and 2000 due to the use of HFCs with lower GWP values, and the manufacture of cans containing less HFC. The emissions increase in 2010 due to greater use of this product within the EU market.

The UK emissions for these three years have been calculated on the basis of GDP, at 19% of the EU total. In 2000, 23 million OCF cans that contained HFCs were sold in Germany while 7 million where sold to the rest of the EU market. An assumption has been made that Germany accounts for 77% of the total EU emission. Out of the remaining 23%, the UK accounts for 24%, based on a percentage of total EU GDP (excluding Germany). This is equivalent to 1.68 million cans.

The UK totals are as follows:

AEA Technology 112


1996: 220 kt CO2 equivalent per annum (171 tonnes of HFC 134a) 2000: 90 kt CO2 equivalent per annum (66 tonnes of HFC 134a; 55 tonnes of

HFC 152a) 2010: 130 kt CO2 equivalent per annum (90 tonnes of HFC 134a; 75 tonnes

of HFC 152a)


There are two main ways of reducing emissions from the OCF sector:

Using lower GWP blends; Recycling of OCF cans, and recovery of remaining HFC (Germany, which

accounts for one third of the EU market, has a recycling and recovery scheme in place).

As there is no UK production of OCFs, the first of these measures is not applicable here except for emissions from the use of imported cans. The second, recycling of OCF cans, is potentially applicable to the UK situation. The EU as a whole is likely to see most significant reductions through use of lower GWP blends of HFCs than through the recycling of used OCF cans. In terms of these measures, Harnisch and Schwarz (2003) state that an annual reduction of 2,180 kt CO2 equivalent could be realised by 2010 for the EU. This is based on a move towards the use of lower GWP HFCs, such as 152a, a reduction in the fill of HFC-based cans, and a move towards using more non-HFC propellants, phasing out usage in the non-retail sector (which accounts for about 80% of HFC-based cans).

Despite consultation with one of the authors of the report Harnisch & Hendriks (2001), it has not been possible to establish what proportion of this saving is due to recycling. We have estimated emission reductions from a recycling scheme based on a EU market of 7 million cans (excluding Germany usage). Based on the UK share, the potential for recovery has been estimated at 11.9 tonnes of HFCs (10% of propellant (8g 134a; 6g 152a) left in each can multiplied by 1.68 million cans). The 10.1 tonnes of HFCs is 7.33 tonnes of HFC 134a and 4.58 tonnes of HFC 152a. If we assume a 20% take-up rate (Germany has 40%), an annual estimate of 2.38 tonnes of HFC saving could be realised. This is a potential cumulative saving over 22 years of 52.4 tonnes of HFC (or 2 kt CO2 equivalent). This is based on the can having the same HFC fill up until 2025. In reality, this fill is likely to decrease.

An assessment of the potential costs regarding the phase out of OCFs for non-retail applications has been described in Section 15. It is understood that if the non-retail trade used OCFs that only contained flammable propellant gases instead of HFCs, only 20% of the market would need to contain HFCs – those supplied to the retail or DIY market (Harnisch and Schwarz 2003). An 80% reduction in emissions would mean an emissions total in 2000 of 20 kt CO2 Equivalent. The 80% reduction in 2000 is 70 kt CO2 Equivalent (53 tonnes of HFC 134a; 44 tonnes of HFC 152a). A cumulative reduction of 2517 tonnes has been calculated over the 22 year period.

AEA Technology 113


13.4OTHER END-USE APPLICATIONS

Worldwide, SF6 is used in a range of other applications such as car tyres and sound insulating glazing for windows. However, we have found no evidence of such applications in the UK. At the stakeholder workshop in September 2002 it was suggested that SF6 might be used for tyres in professional UK motor sport but we have since determined that nitrogen is used as the filling agent for Formula 1 racing. A recent report from ECOFYS (2002) has confirmed that there are no UK emissions from car tyres or from windows. This report also identifies self-chilling beverage containers as a potential source of HFC emissions but, again, there are no emissions associated with UK usage at present.

AEA Technology 114


14 Summary of Emissions and Projections

This section summarises estimates of HFC, PFC, SF6 and NF3 emissions for the UK and constituent countries. It also compares these estimates with those given in the previous inventory developed by March (1999).

14.1GHG EMISSIONS BY EMISSION TYPE

Figure 14.1 and Table 14.1 summarise the UK estimated GWP-weighted emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6. These figures are based on the mid estimates from our analysis.

Figure 14.1: Total UK emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6 (ktonnes CO2 eq.)

Table 14.1 – Total UK emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6 (ktonnes CO2 eq.)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025HFC 11375 15673 9866 12659 11563 11172 10394 9894PFC 1394 448 505 327 267 292 314 337SF6 1082 1291 1852 1715 1300 1265 1262 1277Total 13851 17413 12223 14701 13131 12730 11971 11507

14.2GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR

Figure 14.2 and Table 14.2 summarise trends in UK emissions and projections by sector, showing the aggregated GWP-weighted emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6. These are based on the mid estimates from our analysis and are shown in order of sector emissions in 2000.

AEA Technology 115



0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

.)OCFs

Solvents

Other

Fire f ighting

Foams

Electronics


Electrical T&D

Mobile air con

MDI


Aerosols

Fluid manufacture


Figure 14.2: HFC, PFC and SF6 emissions for the UK by sector (ktonnes CO2

equiv)

Table 14.2 - HFC, PFC and SF6 emissions for the UK by sector (ktonnes CO2

equiv) (mid estimates)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025Stationary refrigeration

0 933 4037 5015 4523 4122 3344 2819

Fluid manufacture 11383 14039 2744 2223 1084 1092 1095 1095Aerosols 0 406 1256 1442 1515 1592 1674 1759Magnesium production

478 478 1147 860 741 741 741 741

MDI 2 2 894 1516 1393 1229 1158 1086Mobile air con 0 183 785 1459 1651 1536 1323 1139Electrical T&D 598 802 623 522 507 504 496 503Aluminium production

1327 285 257 170 120 120 120 120

Electronics 41 93 203 99 84 105 130 159Foams 0 0 61 563 867 1035 1188 1328Fire fighting 0 3 61 358 375 419 468 523Solvents 0 0 3 46 107 107 107 107OCFs 0 167 94 111 128 128 128 128Other 23 23 59 320 37 0 0 0Total 13851 17413 12223 14701 13131 12730 11971 11507

AEA Technology 116


These trends can be summarised as follows. 1990 – 1995: 25% increase. This increase was largely due to increased output

of HCFC production, which was the major emission source at this time. Emissions from aluminium production fell sharply as pointfeeder smelter technology was introduced. Stationary refrigeration emerged as a significant emission source after HFCs were first introduced as replacements for CFCs and HCFCs.

1995 – 2000: 30% reduction. This reduction was due to the introduction of new emission abatement technology at one UK halocarbon production plant. Emissions from other sectors, notably stationary refrigeration, aerosols and magnesium manufacture increased significantly over this period.

2000 – 2005: 20% increase. An increase in emissions is anticipated due to the increasing use of HFC in refrigeration, mobile air conditioning and foams manufacture.

2005 onwards: annual reductions of 1-2% p.a. Reductions are anticipated as emission reduction measures take effect, particularly in the stationary refrigeration and mobile air conditioning sectors.

Figure 14.3 shows the breakdown of greenhouse gas emissions by sector for the UK in 2000. It can be seen that the two largest sectors – stationary refrigeration and fluid manufacture – together contributed over 50% of the emissions.

Figure 14.3: HFC, PFC and SF6 emissions by sector in 2000 (ktonnes CO2 equiv)

A detailed breakdown of greenhouse gas emissions by sector for the UK by year from 1990 to 2025 is provided in Appendix 1. A similar breakdown for Constituent Countries cannot be presented for confidentiality reasons but Appendix 2 provides summary data split by emission type for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

AEA Technology 117


14.3COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS INVENTORY

Figure 14.4 shows the breakdown of emissions by sector in 1995 and 2000 as estimated by this study and by March in 1999. The main reasons for differences in emissions estimates between the two studies are given in Table 14.3 below.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

1995 March 1995 AEAT 2000 March 2000 AEAT

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

uiv)

OCFs

Solvents

Foams

MDI

Fire fighting

Mobile Air Conditioning

Electrical T&D

Other

Aluminium

Aerosols

Magnesium

Refrigeration

Electronics

Fluid manufacture

Figure 14.4: Comparison of Emissions Estimates for 1995 and 200011

Table 14.3: Changes since the previous inventory

Sector % change compared with March (1999)

Main reasons for change

1995 2000Stationary refrigeration 32 39 Revised activity and equipment life-time

data for certain sub-sectors; changes to calculation methodology; changes to emissions factors.

Mobile air conditioning 36 63 Faster penetration of MAC in vehicle fleet assumed than previously; changes to emission factors.

11 The 2000 (March) data includes the revised estimate for the fluid manufacture sector provided by Enviros March to the UK National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory

AEA Technology 118


Foam Blowing 0 -49 Revised activity data as a result of further developments in alternative technologies and greater use of HFC blends.

Electrical T&D 298 11 Revised manufacturing and in-use emissions factors due to new information from industry;

Aerosols 0 6 Revised activity data supplied by trade association; changes to import / export assumptions

Metered dose inhalers 0 175 Revised estimates of bank size based on data from individual manufacturers, consistent with EU estimates.

Aluminium production -23 26 Emissions data from industry revised, with actual 2000 estimate provided.

Magnesium Alloy production and casting


Fire fighting -14 187 Revised assumption about bank size; changes to emission factors.

Electronics -88 -56 Revised fluid consumption data provided by industry.

Halocarbon manufacture

1 -36 Changes in emission factors due to new pollution abatement equipment installed at one plant; updated information from industry.

Other end-use applications

-94 -84 Sector activity data revised, including new data from Nike on sports shoes.

14.4HFC EMISSIONS

Figure 14.4 and Table 14.4 show the UK GWP-weighted emissions of HFCs. Table 14.4 is based on mid estimates.

UK HFC emissions

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

.)

Low

MidHigh

Figure 14.4: Total UK emissions of HFC (ktonnes CO2 equiv.)

AEA Technology 119


The ‘low’ and ‘high’ ranges indicated on the graph represent 2 standard deviations from the total mean (the ‘mid’ line), calculated from the mean of emissions and error estimates of the individual sectors using @RISK (i.e. covering about 95% of results, the total UK emission derived from a summation of the individual sectors will fall within the bounds shown).

Table 14.4 – HFC emissions for the UK by sector (ktonnes CO2 equiv) (mid estimates)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025Stationary refrigeration

0 933 4037 5015 4523 4122 3344 2819

Mobile air con 0 183 785 1459 1651 1536 1323 1139Fluid manufacture 11374 13981 2677 2151 1005 1005 1005 1005Foams 0 0 61 563 867 1035 1188 1328Aerosols 0 406 1256 1442 1515 1592 1674 1759MDI 2 2 894 1516 1393 1229 1158 1086Fire fighting 0 3 61 358 375 419 468 523Solvents 0 0 3 46 107 107 107 107OCFs 0 167 94 111 128 128 128 128Total 11375 15673 9866 12659 11563 11172 10394 9894

HFC emissions closely follow the trends of overall HFC/PFC/SF6 emissions discussed above. Future trends are very dependent on the assumptions made for the refrigeration, mobile air conditioning and foams sectors. Critical assumptions include the rate of uptake of alternative refrigerant fluids, the annual leakage rates from mobile air conditioning and the uptake of HFCs for foam blowing.

14.5PFC EMISSIONS

Figure 14.5 and Table 14.5 show the UK GWP-weighted emissions of PFCs. Table 14.5 is based on mid estimates.

AEA Technology 120


UK PFC emissions

0200400600800

1000120014001600

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

.)LowMid

High

Figure 14.5: Total UK emissions of PFC (ktonnes CO2 equiv.)

Table 14.5 – PFC emissions for the UK by sector (ktonnes CO2 equiv) (mid estimates)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025Electronics 35 82 180 86 69 85 105 127Aluminium production

1327 285 257 170 120 120 120 120

Other (including fluid manufacture)

32 81 68 72 79 87 90 90

Total 1394 448 505 327 267 292 314 337

PFC emissions declined significantly during the period 1990 to 1992 due to the introduction of new technology in the aluminium sector. This is followed by a gradual increase from 1993 to 2025 due to increased emissions from the electronics sector, with a dip in 2001 due to plant closures in this sector. There are high levels of uncertainty associated with these projections due the uncertainties in the data from the UK electronics sector and uncertainties associated with future industry growth rates.

14.6SF6 EMISSIONS

Figure 14.6 and Table 14.6 show the UK GWP-weighted emissions of SF6. A breakdown by sector cannot be provided as Nike provided the data on emissions from sports shoes in confidence.

AEA Technology 121


UK SF6 emissions

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1990 1994 1998 2002 2006 2010 2014 2018 2022

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

.)LowMid

High

Figure 14.6: Total UK emissions of SF6 (ktonnes CO2 equiv.)

Table 14.6 – Total SF6 emissions for the UK (ktonnes CO2 equiv) (mid estimates)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025Total emissions 1082 1291 1852 1715 1300 1265 1262 1277

SF6 emissions are largely dominated by emissions from electrical transmission and distribution equipment and magnesium production. The overall trend is fairly flat with a peak in 2000 due to emissions from magnesium manufacture and another around 2003-2006 from end-of-life sports shoes.

14.7NF3 EMISSIONS

Figure 14.7 and Table 14.7 show GWP-weighted NF3 emissions from the UK electronics sector, which is the major source of NF3 emissions and the only sector for which we have emission estimates.

AEA Technology 122


NF3 Emissions from Electronics

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (k

tonn

es C

O2

eq)

HighMid

Low

Figure 14.7: Emissions of NF3 from the UK electronics sector (ktonnes CO2

equiv.)

Table 14.7 – Total NF3 emissions from the UK electronics sector (ktonnes CO2

equiv) (mid estimates)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025Total emissions 341 687 1393 470 756 1153 1486 1896

We have not determined whether NF3 is used for other purposes in the UK, e.g. as a fluorine source in high energy chemical lasers or as an intermediate in the production of specialised chemicals.

AEA Technology 123


15 Policies and Measures to Reduce Emissions

This section presents a preliminary cost-effectiveness analysis of the additional measures to reduce emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6 described in the earlier sections.

The measures considered are summarised in Table 15.1. This shortlist was developed in conjunction with Government officials as a representative selection of potential measures for the UK. Two of the measures - a mandatory registration scheme for refrigerant handlers and a voluntary agreement on fire-fighting equipment – are currently the subject of discussions between Government and industry, however, inclusion in this list does not imply any intent by UK policy makers to introduce these measures.

Table 15.1 – Additional measures for reduction of HFC, PFC and SF6 in the UK

Sector Measure Described in:A Stationary refrigeration Mandatory registration

scheme for refrigeration handlers

Sections 2.1.7, 2.2.2 & 2.3.2

B Stationary refrigeration HFC replacement by 2005 for domestic fridges and small sealed units.

Section 2.4

C Mobile air conditioning HFC replacement by CO2 in new systems by 2010.

Section 3.4

D Mobile air conditioning VA from 2005 to reduce average leakage to 5% pa in 2010 and 3% pa in 2020.

Section 3.4

E Aerosols Phase out of novelty aerosol applications by 2005.

Section 6.4

F Firefighting equipment Voluntary agreement to reduce HFC emissions.

Section 10.4

G Halocarbon manufacture Thermal oxidiser abatement equipment fitted to all plant by 2005.

Sections 12.1 & 12.4

H One component foams Phase out for non-retail applications by 2005.

Section 13.3

I One component foams Recycling of OCF cans, and recovery of remaining HFCs.

Section 13.3

J MDIs Recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs.

Section 7.4

K MDIs Destruction of old MDI units. Section 7.4L Aerosols Voluntary agreement to

reduce HFC emissions.Section 6.4

AEA Technology 124


It is difficult to obtain cost information on many of these measures, whether from the literature or from discussions with stakeholders in industry and Government. Previous studies in this area have tended to focus on specific technical measures, such as the introduction of abatement technologies, rather than policy measures such as the phase-out of HFC usage in specific applications or the introduction of voluntary agreements. The costs of such policy measures are more uncertain and the benefits are more difficult to quantify. Sectoral data are very useful in estimating costs of compliance or estimated effectiveness of policies but there are often no independent data sources to cross check. Our assumptions on costs and benefits were discussed with a number of relevant stakeholders before finalising the analysis.

15.1METHODOLOGY FOR COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS

For fluorinated gases, many of the abatement options have a proportion of their impacts delayed until the disposal phase when the gases are eventually released to the atmosphere. This delay can be as long as 50 years from manufacture for some building foams. In view of this, it was agreed with Defra economists that full lifetime costs and savings (as described below) should be considered when assessing cost-effectiveness. Although the standard Defra approach uses a snapshot of emission savings in 2010, the full lifetime approach is consistent with Defra’s recommendations that lifetime savings should also be considered, and that other methodologies can be used so long as they are transparent. Annual savings in 2010 are also presented for completeness. In line with Treasury guidelines, emission savings have not been discounted and costs have been discounted at the standard government rate of 3.5%.

15.2CUMULATIVE EMISSION SAVINGS FROM ADDITIONAL MEASURES

Cumulative (lifetime) emission savings from each measure have been estimated by totalling the annual emissions savings between 2003 and 2025 against the baseline emissions from that sector, i.e. projecting cumulative emissions to 2025 with and without the measure and calculating the difference. There are considerable uncertainties in both baseline projections and with-measure projections, as discussed in the earlier sections. The emissions savings for the UK are shown in Table 15.2 are based on mid-estimates of both baseline and with-measure emissions. This table also shows annual CO2 equivalent savings for 2010, as tonnes of carbon. It should be noted that all of the listed measures reduce HFC emissions rather than PFC or SF6 emissions; this is a function of the measures identified rather than any preference for HFC emissions reduction.

AEA Technology 125


Table 15.2 – Emission savings from selected measures

Measure 2010 saving (kt C

equiv)

Cumulative saving(tonne HFC)

Cumulative saving(kt C

equiv)A Registration scheme for refrigerant

handlers161 5869 3236

B HFC replacement – domestic & small refrigeration units

1 193 68

C MAC – HFC replacement by 2010 40 10,528 3733D MAC – VA on leakage reduction 36 3,860 1369E Phase-out of novelty aerosols 43 3,223 1041F VA on fire-fighting equipment 167 1,426 4450G Halocarbon production – thermal

oxidiser240 * 5760

H OCFs – phase-out for non-retail applications

24 2,517 528

I Recovery of HFCs from Recycled OCF cans

1 52 12

J Recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs 13 638 262K Destruction of old MDI unit 13 616 253L VA on HFC-based aerosols** 3 214 69* HFC savings from Measure H cannot be presented for reasons of commercial confidentiality.** Note that this reduction potential is based on action 1 of the VA as listed in section 14.3; it is not possible to quantify the benefits of the other actions listed.

15.3COSTS OF ADDITIONAL MEASURES

Table 15.3 shows indicative, undiscounted costs of implementing these measures. These include the costs to industry and industry bodies of implementing these measures, costs to distributors and suppliers, and costs passed on to the consumers of improved goods. The extent to which costs can and will be passed onto consumers is uncertain and will depend on factors such as industrial competitiveness and pricing structures. For the purposes of this analysis, we have assumed that any costs incurred by overseas manufacturers of imported goods will be passed on in full to UK distributors and consumers. The assessment of wider policy impacts, such as social, employment or competitiveness effects, is beyond the scope of this study.

The assumptions and methodology used to derive each of these estimates are presented below the table. In many cases we have drawn on estimates in Harnisch & Hendriks (2000) as little additional information has been forthcoming from relevant stakeholder groups. For the registration scheme for stationary refrigeration and voluntary agreements on aerosols and fire fighting equipment, we have derived bottom-up estimates of costs based on the activities expected to be involved in meeting industry’s commitments.

AEA Technology 126


Table 15.3 – Estimated costs of selected emission reduction measures

Measure Capital and one-off costs

£k

Average annual costs over lifetime

£k/yearA Registration scheme for stationary

refrigeration60 3,420

B HFC replacement – domestic & small refrigeration units

2,350 0

C MAC – HFC replacement by 2010 0 62,317**D MAC – VA on leakage reduction to be

implemented in 2005.0 12,326

E Phase-out of novelty aerosols 0 4,000F VA on fire-fighting equipment 800 84G Halocarbon production – thermal oxidiser 6,000 per plant 125 per plantH OCFs – phase-out for non-retail

applications0 456*

I Recovery of HFCs from Recycled OCF cans

0 1,224

J Recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs 0 33K Destruction of old MDI unit 0 1438L VA on HFC-based aerosols 125 35* For 10 years only.**From 2010.

Table 15.3 shows un-discounted costs. The cost-effectiveness analysis which follows in Section 15.4 uses costs discounted at 3.5%, as recommended in the latest version of the Treasury Green Book.

15.3.1 Measure A: Mandatory registration scheme for stationary refrigeration

We have estimated the costs of a mandatory registration scheme for UK refrigeration handlers using a bottom-up methodology based on our current understanding of the likely form of such a scheme. A basic structure of a scheme suitable for the UK is described within the report by ACRIB (2003), which recognises that any such scheme should be effective, lowest cost and self-funding (although the costs of initially setting up the scheme may need to be provided by Government). The scheme proposed by ACRIB is derived from existing schemes, which therefore helps minimise initial set-up costs. As the detailed costs of setting up and implementing the scheme have yet to be assessed by ACRIB, we have made the following estimates of the likely costs of each component of the scheme.

Elements of proposed registration scheme for refrigerant handlers, and cost estimates:

AEA Technology 127


1. A Board responsible for the running of the schemeACRIB (2003) envisages that Board members will be remunerated by their employing organisations and not by the scheme, therefore no specific cost to the scheme has been attributed.

2. Sector committees involved in standard setting and approval of sector registration organisations.

Assumed 20 members and 10 man-days a year respectively: 100 man-days @ £50,000 per man year On-going cost = ca. £14,000/year.

3. Sector registration organisations to maintain registers of individuals and businesses.

Initial set up cost: £50,000Ongoing cost (staff and administration costs): 10 staff at average £30,000/year = £300,000/year.

4. Six competence certification organisations (pre-existing) requiring UKAS accreditation (covering commercial/industrial refrigeration and air-conditioning; motor cabin air conditioning; and domestic appliance servicing sectors).

Initial accreditation fee £10,000; 4 yearly annual renewals at ca. £4000 (i.e. £1000 p.a.)Annual administration/running costs: 1 man year effort at each of 6 bodies @ £50,000 per man year = £300,000/yearInitial cost £10,000On-going cost £306,000/year.

5. Assessment centres (assumed existing) approved and/or run by the certifying organisations, carrying out assessments and issuing certificates.

Estimated annual operating costs per centre £80,000 (1-2 staff at £50,000 per man year and administration costs). Assume 30 centres throughout UK.On-going cost £2,400,000/year.

6. Optional training provided at assessment centres to enable people to meet the certification criteria.

One day training course per staff member at a cost of £400 including staff time. Training provided nationally to 1000 staff annually. On-going cost £400,000/year.

Total initial (set-up) costs: £60,000.Total on-going costs: £3,420,000 per year.

ACRIB (2001b) estimates there may be around 100,000 potential registrants if all refrigeration sectors are to be included in a future registration scheme. This implies that for the scheme be self-funded, an annual membership fee of ca. £34 would be sufficient to meet the initial estimates of the on-going cost. This cost is indeed identical to that estimated for the motor cabin air-conditioning sub-sector (£34) in

AEA Technology 128


ACRIB (2003). Although potentially ‘self-funding’, it is anticipated that consumers will actually bear the on-going costs of running the scheme through higher service prices.

15.3.2 Measure B: Replacement of HFCs in Domestic Fridges and Small Hermetic Units

We recently learned from industry sources that the remaining major UK producer of domestic refrigeration equipment is shifting from HFC to hydrocarbon-based production. It could therefore be argued that HFC use in these sectors is effectively already being phased-out and the emissions savings will occur at no additional cost. HFC only continues to be used in specific equipment that requires a charge size of >150g, which is the upper charge size limit specified in the current safety Standard for domestic refrigerators.

Based on Harnisch & Hendriks (2000) and estimates provided by Calor, we estimate that the general costs of converting a large manufacturing plant from HFC-based refrigeration units to hydrocarbon units to be around £350,000 per plant. General costs for smaller installations are estimated at being £40,000 per plant, but may be significantly lower depending on production rate, size and complexity etc. of the installation. It is assumed there is no change in annual operating costs. We have assumed that the conversion costs for the sector will involve one large plant and fifty smaller operators changing their manufacturing facilities. This gives a total capital one-off cost for the manufacturing sector of £2,350,000.

No costs have been attributed to importers of HFC-containing units, e.g. from the USA, as it is likely that they will be able to switch to importation of substitute products at minimal cost. Some additional efforts from Customs & Excise and other agencies in regulating the importation of these products may be required, but this is not included in our cost estimates.

15.3.3 Measure C: HFC replacement by 2010 in Mobile Air Conditioning

Harnisch & Hendriks (2000) estimated that the marginal cost of high pressure CO2 air conditioning systems in volume manufacture would be 50 Euro/vehicle (= £32/vehicle at the current exchange rate of 1.6 Euro = £1). This marginal cost is assumed to be constant over the full time period 2010-2025, in the absence of any other data. This cost is primarily due to the additional size and weight of these higher pressure CO2

systems, although it may be possible to reduce manufacturing costs over time as new materials become available. The average annual un-discounted cost between the time of introduction and 2025 is given in Table 15.3; the annual cost will vary according to the number of vehicles with air conditioning registered in the UK each year.

We have no information on whether these costs will be borne by industry, passed on to end-users or subsidised by Government, but this should not significantly affect the total cost. If a regulatory approach is taken, there may be some additional costs to Government in monitoring the rate of introduction of CO2 systems.

AEA Technology 129


15.3.4 Measure D: Voluntary Agreement on Leak Reduction for Mobile Air Conditioning

There are currently no plans for a voluntary agreement with the mobile air conditioning sector and so there is no information on how it might be structured and what cost elements might be involved. We have therefore estimated the costs of such a scheme from available data on leak reduction measures. Harnisch & Hendriks (2000) estimated the marginal investment cost of reducing leaks from HFC-based mobile air conditioning systems to a level of 5% per year by 2010 to be about 10 Euro/vehicle (= ca. £6.40/vehicle). We have assumed that further reductions to 3% per year would be possible by 2020 at the same marginal cost, and that this annual investment would be required subsequently to keep the leakage rate at 3%. The average annual cost (un-discounted) between 2003 and 2025 is given in Table 15.3. The annual cost varies according to the size of the UK vehicle fleet with HFC-based air conditioning.

We have no information on whether these costs will be borne by industry, passed on to end-users or subsidised by Government, but this should not significantly affect the total cost. As this is a voluntary measure, there should be negligible additional costs to Government in monitoring compliance.

Enhanced (next-generation) HFC134a systems should reduce leakage and also improve energy efficiency compared with conventional systems. Energy saving measures are not quantified in this report, but would need to be taken into account if a full life-cycle analysis approach was used to determine the cost-benefit of this measure.

15.3.5 Measure E: Phase-out of Novelty Aerosols

Novelty aerosols are currently produced in only one manufacturing plant in the UK, and the manufacturer involved reports that most of his products are exported. The majority of HFC-containing products that are sold in the UK, such as “silly string” and signal horns, are imported from non-EU countries such as China.

We have assumed that any phase-out of novelty aerosols would be UK-specific and would ban the use of HFC aerosols in the UK rather than their production for export. As there is an EC regulation banning the use of flammable propellants for novelty aerosol applications, the only possible response would be to stop selling these products in the UK.

On this basis, there would be two main costs involved: Loss of UK sales by the UK manufacturer of novelty aerosols. Loss of earnings by UK distributors and retailers of novelty aerosols.

Based on estimates from BAMA of UK sales of “silly string” (2 million cans per year) and novelty snow (1 million cans per year), the total loss of UK sales might be 3 million cans. Again based on BAMA estimates, we might expect about 2 million of these sales to have been produced by the UK manufacturer. If we assume that the mark-up for distribution and retail is about 50% of the average sales price of £2 per

AEA Technology 130


can, and manufacturing costs represent 25% of the average sales price, then the following costs can be inferred:

Costs to UK manufacturer: 25% x £2 x 2 million cans = £1 million/yearCosts to UK suppliers/distributors of UK made cans: 50% x £2 x 2 million cans = £2 million/yearCosts to UK suppliers/distributors of imported cans: 50% x £2 x 1 million cans = £1 million/yearTotal costs £4 million/year.

It should be noted that the UK manufacturer of novelty aerosols would be seriously affected by such a ban as 2 million cans represents over 10% of their total sales. It is therefore possible that the company may shut down or relocate, thus incurring additional costs to the UK.

If the phase-out were to be extended to the manufacture of HFC-containing novelty aerosols then the UK manufacturing plant would be forced to convert its production, cease operations or relocate. Harnisch & Hendriks (2000) estimates the cost of conversion to non-HFC propellants to be £1.60/ tonne CO2 equivalent (£5.87/tC), but it seems unlikely that flammable propellants would be acceptable in such applications anywhere.

15.3.6 Measure F: Voluntary Agreement on Fire Fighting Equipment

The fire industry has not assessed the costs of implementing the voluntary agreement. The Fire Industry Council (FIC) believes that there will be significant costs under the following headings:1. Staff training to meet minimum qualification requirements.2. Monitoring of emissions including independent auditing, collation and presentation.3. Promotion of the agreement, including preparation and printing of guidance documents.4. Upgrading of equipment and labelling.

We have made the following estimates of the likely costs of any agreement based on bottom-up estimates of the activities involved and their associated costs. These estimates have been discussed with the FIC before being finalised in this report.

Staff trainingOne day training course per staff member at a cost of £400 including staff time.Training provided to 500 staff.Total cost £20,000.Additional training in future years may lead to average annual costs of £4,000.

Emissions monitoring100 site audits carried out by independent consultants.£500 per site audit.1 man year effort in co-ordination and reporting @ £50,000 per man year.Total cost £100,000 in year 1.Ongoing costs of £50,000 in subsequent years.

AEA Technology 131


Promotion and guidance0.5 man year effort in developing guidance @ £50,000 per man year.£5,000 printing and distribution costs.Total cost £30,000.Ongoing average annual costs of £10,000 for updating promotional and guidance materials in subsequent years.

Equipment and labelling200 equipment upgrades @ £2,000 per site.500 more sites checked and labelled @ £500 per site.Total cost £650,000.Introduction of new installations may incur average additional annual costs of £20,000 for checking and labelling.

The total Year 1 cost is calculated at £800,000, while on-going average annual costs will be approximately £84,000.

We have no information on whether these costs will be borne by industry, passed on to end-users or subsidised by Government, but this should not significantly affect the total cost. As this is a voluntary measure, there should be negligible additional costs to Government in monitoring compliance.

15.3.7 Measure G: Thermal Oxidiser Abatement for Halocarbon Production

The main option for additional emissions reduction from halocarbon manufacture is the installation of thermal oxidiser equipment (taken to be operational in 2005). There are presently two UK manufacturing plants that use alternative abatement equipment and which could potentially install the thermal oxidiser technology to further abate emissions. In addition, one UK plant already has thermal oxidiser technology installed.

Harnisch & Hendriks (2000) estimated investment costs for a thermal oxidiser to be 3m Euro/plant with total operational costs of 200,000 Euro/year. However, a more recent estimate of about £6 million for the UK capital costs of an advanced thermal oxidiser plant was obtained from data provided by INEOS Fluor in the ENDS report of March 2002. The annual operating costs of operating simple thermal oxidiser equipment have been assumed to be about £125,000, as estimated by Harnisch & Hendriks (2000). This equipment is assumed to have a lifetime of 25 years and to reduce emissions to 95% of the unabated level. It is noted that the overall operating costs for the thermal oxidiser plant at Ineos Fluor are suggested to be about £500,000 per year. Ineos Fluor indicates that this higher cost is due to the unusually complex plant with the thermal oxidiser being linked into numerous processes and emission streams, including the HCFC 22 plant and the HFC 134a plant.

We have no information on whether these costs will be fully borne by industry or passed on to end-users, but this should not significantly affect the total cost.

AEA Technology 132


15.3.8 Measure H: Phase-out of OCFs for Non-retail Applications

No additional equipment or manufacturing costs have been assumed as there are no UK manufacturers of OCFs. However, there are likely to be additional costs to UK consumers passed down by non-UK manufacturers who are forced to convert their plant to alternative propellants. Harnisch & Schwarz (2000) estimates that conversion would mean annualised costs of £760,000/plant for 10 years for an average European plant producing OCFs containing HFC, with no ongoing cost once the plant has been converted.

We have calculated that an average European plant may produce approximately 3 million cans per year. We have estimated that the UK market is approximately 1.68 million cans, with 80% being consumed in the non-retail market. This means that the potential costs of converting 0.6 of a plant could be passed on to the UK consumer. If all costs were passed on to the consumer, these costs would be equivalent to a annualised costs of £456,000 over 10 years.

15.3.9 Measure I: Recovery of HFCs from Recycled OCF cans

The UK market for OCFs has been estimated at 1.68 million cans per year. This figure is based on UK GDP relative to EU GDP (excluding Germany). Germany accounts for most of the EU market, using 23 million cans of the 30 million HFC-based can market.

Germany has a recycling scheme, which has a return quota of 40% (Harnisch and Gluckman 2001). An optimistic assumption is that a recycling scheme in the UK might have a 20% return quota, and would therefore need to deal with up to 336,000 cans.

Significant investment costs would be needed to construct the facilities needed to take this large number of cans, unless current recycling facilities could deal with this. Another option would be to send the used cans to Germany where a recycling infrastructure is in place. A significant difficulty would be to put an effective and co-ordinated collection structure in place to collect cans for this specialist sector, and encourage users to send or take used OCF cans to recycling points.

There are no identified sources of cost information for this measure. The leading sector expert from Germany has been contacted to ascertain what costs might be but was unable to provide information. Similarly, BAMA have no information on the likely costs of recycling and recovery. All of the experts consulted consider this to be an expensive option for HFC emissions reduction. Using lower GWP blends in OCFs, or banning their use in non-retail applications (Measure H), is considered to be more practical and more cost-effective for this sector. As the UK does not manufacture OCFs, we have not considered the option of using lower GWP blends within this study.

However, to allow a preliminary estimate, we have used a bottom-up methodology to estimate the costs of recycling OCF cans in a potential scheme for the UK. These estimates will be discussed with industry and Government prior to finalisation.

AEA Technology 133


Estimates for the following costs are based on collection of 336,000 cans per year using existing UK recycling infrastructure. Collected cans will subsequently be sent to Germany for HFC recovery.

Collection of OCF cans in the UKCosts of separating cans at Municipal Recycling Facilities (MRF) in the UK are based on the estimated additional resource required at each MRF to separate OCFs from the other recycling streams. One extra staff year at each MRF: £15,000 per staff year.80 MRFs involved in the schemeTotal cost = £1.2 million/year

Transportation of cansEstimated transport cost of 2 pence per can for transport to German recycling facility.Total cost for 336,000 cans = £6,720.

Recovery of HFCsEstimated recycling cost of 5 pence per can for HFC recovery. Total costs for 336,000 cans = £16,800.

Based on the estimates above, the total annual costs of implementing this scheme are £1,223,520 /year.

We have no information on whether these costs will be borne by industry, passed on to end-users or subsidised by Government, but this should not significantly affect the total cost.

15.3.10 Measure J: Recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs

Costs estimates have been made on the basis of European analysis undertaken by Enviros March (2000). Costs of 0.33 million Euros have been estimated per year, based on a US recovery facility already being in place to take the MDIs, and recover HFCs. The costs would be incurred in transporting the rejected MDIs to the recovery facility, and in running a marketing campaign to ensure suppliers / users were aware of the potential to recover from reject MDIs. These costs assume that a current recycling facility that takes reject CFC-based MDIs could also incorporate HFC-based MDIs and overcome technical issues such as sorting the different types of HFC.

A UK cost has been determined on the basis of the UK market share of EU HFC-based MDIs manufacturing, which is considered as 16%. This means that the UK would incur an annual cost of 0.052 million Euros/year (or £33,000/year).

15.3.11 Measure K: Destruction of old MDI units

Costs estimates have been made on the basis of European analysis undertaken by Enviros March (2000). Costs of 7.8 million Euros have been estimated for the EU. A UK figure is derived on the basis of the size of the UK MDI market, estimated at 35%

AEA Technology 134


of the total EU market. This would mean annual costs of 2.3 million Euros (£1.44 million).

The costs are significantly higher than those in Measure K as no revenue is generated by recovery of HFCs. The costs of the energy taken to destroy HFCs are considerable as they are not flammable.

15.3.12 Measure L: Voluntary agreement on HFC-based Aerosols

We have estimated costs associated with a strengthened voluntary agreement that has been proposed by BAMA on behalf of the aerosol manufacturing companies that it represents. It is difficult to identify specifically what this strengthened agreement might cost due to many of the proposed actions having been fully or partly implemented. In this section, estimates of indicative costs for consideration have been proposed.

There are a number of areas that the strengthened voluntary agreement would address beyond what is currently being undertaken by members. These areas of action include:

1. Information campaign to inform users of HFC-based products about best practice in terms of how they use these products.

2. Assessment of where emissions can be reduced in product life cycle.3. Encourage members to investigate the use of lower GWP blends.4. Monitoring of use of critical applications, and sectoral growth.

Other types of action are listed in the voluntary agreement but it is understood that these have already been implemented. Annual costs have been estimated for the further actions outlined above. It is worth noting that manufacturers of HFC-based aerosols in the UK are all SME’s, most of them small enterprises, and therefore, the potential costs of the actions agreed as part of the voluntary agreement (as shown below) are significant.

For action 1, estimated costs of £10,000 are incurred in the first year by each of BAMA’s 10 members, who manufacture HFC-based aerosols, and £2,000 in subsequent years. First year costs are incurred due to changes to product labelling and employment of staff to coordinate the information campaign. Operating costs in subsequent years would be potentially lower as the information campaign would already be running. However, coordination would still be needed, and information materials updated. This could be centralised through the trade association, which would reduce operating costs. A total cost per year of £100,000 would be incurred by the sector in the first year, with costs of £20,000 in subsequent years.

Apart from the cost, the time frame for re-labelling can be quite long for some of these products as they have a long shelf life. Therefore, the need to plan ahead is important, and as many aerosols are currently undergoing re-labelling as a result of CHIP 3 (Chemical Hazards Information and Packaging Regulations), finalising the voluntary agreement will help with this action.

AEA Technology 135


Action 2 relates to identifying where emissions arise in terms of the product life cycle. However, most emissions occur during the product lifetime and would be difficult to control. A study to assess this might cost £25,000, undertaken in the first year. Emissions reductions have been difficult to estimate given the uncertainties surrounding what actions a study might set in motion.

Action 3 would be undertaken by BAMA, to encourage relevant members to explore the use of lower GWP blends of HFC. Certain BAMA members are already undertaking this. The costs of actively promoting this by BAMA may cost approximately £5,000 per annum. Actual emission reductions are very difficult to quantify given the uncertainty of whether lower GWP blends will be applicable. It is worth noting that BAMA have already conducted a scoping study to identify research areas that will result in aerosols that have lower GWP.

Action 4 is already being undertaken, in terms of reporting yearly estimates. It is currently based on confidential self-reporting to a third party (not BAMA). The aggregated data is then subject to an assessment/reality check by an expert. It may be possible for BAMA to ensure more rigorous reporting, through a regime of full independent auditing of each HFC user – this would, however, be much more expensive than the current procedures. As this is a monitoring action, it is unlikely to produce further emission reductions. Research could be undertaken into the export and import of HFC-based aerosols out of and into the UK, and has been estimated to cost £10,000 per annum.

Increased costs of monitoring would depend upon the rigorousness of the monitoring exercise, it is currently based on confidential self reporting to a third party (not BAMA). The aggregated data is then subjected to a follow up expert assessment/reality check. A regime of full independent auditing of each HFC user would be considerably more expensive.

This means total annual costs of approximately £35,000, except in the first year when the cost would be approximately £125,000.

15.4COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF MEASURES

Table 15.4 shows the cost-effectiveness of each measure calculated from the cumulative emissions savings shown in Table 15.2 and the costs shown in Table 15.3, as follows:

Cost effectiveness = One-off cost in 2003[1] + (NPV of annual costs 2003-2025)deflated

to 2000

(£/tC) Cumulative emissions savings 2003-2025

Note [1]: for Measure C, the year of implementation is assumed to be 2010 not 2003.NPV = net present value, discounted to 2003. Costs are then deflated to 2000 using the GDP deflator.

AEA Technology 136


The costs were discounted using a 3.5% discount rate, as recommended in the latest Treasury Green Book. The previous Green Book recommended a 6% discount rate and so results are shown for this discount rate as well, to aid comparison with earlier studies.

Table 15.4 – Cost-effectiveness of measures (cumulative emissions basis to 2025)

Measure £ per tonne C equiv

(3.5% discount rate)

£ per tonne C equiv

(6% discount rate)

A Registration scheme for stationary refrigeration 16 13

B HFC phase-out – domestic fridges & small units 32 32

C MAC – HFC replacement by 2010 152 110D MAC – VA on leakage reduction to

be implemented in 2005. 118 92E Phase-out of novelty aerosols 57 46F VA on fire-fighting equipment 2 2G Halocarbon production – thermal

oxidiser 3 2H OCFs – phase-out for non-retail

applications 7 6I Recovery of HFCs from Recycled

OCF cans 1497 1208J Recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs 2 2K Destruction of old MDI unit 85 68L VA on HFC-based aerosols* 9 7*Note that this only includes the emissions saved from action 1 of the voluntary agreement.

It appears from these results that voluntary agreements and registration schemes are generally more cost-effective than regulatory approaches. Of the illustrative measures considered, the recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs (Measure J) and the voluntary agreement on fire-fighting equipment (Measure F) appear most cost-effective, while the recovery of HFCs from recycled OCF cans is least cost-effective, partly because it is assumed that the cans must be sent to Germany for processing.

Table 15.5 shows the cost-effectiveness of each measure on the basis of annual emissions savings in 2010, again for 3.5% and 6% discount rates, and the annualised costs of implementing the measure (deflated to 2000 values), as follows:

Cost effectiveness =(Annualised cost of measure over its lifetime)deflated to 2000 (£/tC) Emissions savings in 2010

These cost-effectiveness values are shown for completeness and for ease of comparison with other measures identified in the UK climate change programme. As these values are based on emissions savings in 2010 they do not properly account for the longer term emissions savings possible from sectors such as foam blowing.

AEA Technology 137


Table 15.5 – Cost-effectiveness of measures (2010 emissions basis)

Measure £ per tonne C equiv

(3.5% discount rate)

£ per tonne C equiv

(6% discount rate)

A Registration scheme for stationary refrigeration 21 21

B HFC phase-out – domestic fridges & small units 175 220

C MAC – HFC replacement by 2010 931 850D MAC – VA on leakage reduction to

be implemented in 2005. 297 292E Phase-out of novelty aerosols 91 92F VA on fire-fighting equipment 3 3G Halocarbon production – thermal

oxidiser 4 5H OCFs – phase-out for non-retail

applications 20 20I Recovery of HFCs from Recycled

OCF cans 2205 2240J Recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs 3 3K Destruction of old MDI unit 113 114L VA on HFC-based aerosols 13 14

AEA Technology 138


16 Conclusions

Based on best estimates, total UK emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6 fell from about 17,413 kt CO2 equivalent in 1995 to about 12,223 kt CO2 eq. in 2000. Emissions are expected to increase again to about 14,701 kt CO2 eq. by 2005 and then steadily decrease to about 11,507 kt CO2 eq. in 2025. These overall trends and the associated uncertainties in emissions and projections are shown in Figure 16.1.

UK HFC/PFC/SF6 emissions

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

.)

LowMid

High

Figure 16.1: HFC, PFC and SF6 emissions for the UK (ktonnes CO2 equiv)

In 2000, HFCs contributed 81% of the total emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6 while PFCs contributed 4% and SF6 contributed 15%. The total emissions of HFC, PFC and SF6 of 12,223 kt CO2 eq. in 2000 represent about 2% of total UK greenhouse gas emissions in that year.

The main sources of HFCs in order of emissions in 2000 were stationary refrigeration (4,037 kt CO2 eq.), fluid manufacture (2,677 kt CO2 eq.), aerosols (1,256 kt CO2 eq.), metered dose inhalers (894 kt CO2 eq.) and mobile air conditioning (785 kt CO2 eq.). There were also minor contributions from foam blowing and fire-fighting equipment. The main sources of PFC emissions were aluminium production (257 kt CO2 eq. in 2000) and the electronics sector (180 kt CO2 eq.). The main sources of SF6

emissions were magnesium production (1,147 kt CO2 eq. in 2000) and electrical transmission and distribution equipment (623 kt CO2 eq.), with minor contributions from the electronics sector and sporting goods such as training shoes.

Projected trends in sector emissions are summarised in Figure 16.2 (this is also shown as Figure 14.2 in Section 14). The following paragraphs summarise the trends for each sector, the reasons for these trends and the scope for emissions reduction through additional measures. More detailed graphical representations of these trends and associated uncertainties are shown in preceding chapters and are not repeated here.

AEA Technology 139



0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Emis

sion

s (k

t CO

2 eq

.)

OCFs

Solvents

Other

Fire f ighting

Foams

Electronics


Electrical T&D

Mobile air con

MDI


Aerosols

Fluid manufacture


Figure 16.2: HFC, PFC and SF6 emissions for the UK by sector (ktonnes CO2

equiv)

Stationary refrigeration: HFCs and HFC blends have been widely used as replacements for CFC and HCFC refrigerants in many applications since the early nineties. Emissions from stationary refrigeration are projected to rise to a peak of about 5,046 kt CO2 eq. in 2004 and then to decrease, largely due to ongoing improvements in design, lower leakage rates and better maintenance. Emissions are projected to fall to 4,523 kt CO2 eq. by 2010 and 2,819 kt CO2 eq. by 2025. The main abatement options in this sector are to reduce leakage during operation, to recover more fluid at end-of-life or to use alternative refrigerant fluids such as ammonia, hydrocarbons or carbon dioxide. A UK scheme for the mandatory registration of refrigerant fluid handlers has been proposed by industry; such a scheme would be expected to reduce annual emissions of HFCs by about 20% in 2010 and more in subsequent years.

Mobile air conditioning: The market for mobile air conditioning (MAC) units for passenger and commercial vehicles grew rapidly during the nineties, with CFC refrigerants replaced by HFCs from about 1993. Emissions of HFC from MAC were about 183 kt CO2 eq. in 1995 and 785 kt CO2 eq. in 2000. Leakage rates from MAC units have reduced and will continue to reduce but the underlying penetration of MAC technology means that HFC emissions are predicted to increase steadily to about 1,651 kt CO2 eq. in 2010, before levelling off and then slowly falling. Several alternatives to HFCs are being assessed for suitability in the MAC sector, of which high pressure CO2 systems appear to be the most promising. However, these CO2

systems require substantial further development by manufacturers to meet cost, performance, reliability and safety requirements.

AEA Technology 140


Foam blowing: HFCs have started to replace HCFCs as blowing agents for foams such as polyurethane sprays, phenolic foams and extruded polystyrene where their insulation and fire resistance properties are advantageous. Foam blowing HFC emissions were only 61 kt CO2 eq. in 2000 but are expected to rise to 867 kt CO2 eq. by 2010 and 1,328 kt CO2 eq. by 2025. A strengthened UK Voluntary Agreement on limiting HFC emissions in the foam blowing industry is currently under discussion and it is too early to judge what effect this will have on sector emissions, if adopted.

Electrical T&D: The use of SF6 in electrical transmission and distribution equipment slowly increased between the 1970’s and the mid-1990’s, with new SF6 equipment gradually replacing older oil and compressed air systems. This increase was halted in 1995 when industry became aware of the greenhouse gas properties of SF6 and took action to reduce emissions through leak reduction measures. As a result, emissions fell from a peak of 828 kt CO2 eq. in 1996 to 623 kt CO2 eq. by 2000. Further reductions to about 522 kt CO2 eq. are expected by 2006 with emissions levelling off after 2006. No additional policies and measures have been identified for this sector as programmes of leak reduction are already underway on a voluntary basis and there is no suitable alternative fluid.

Aerosols: HFCs are used as propellants in specific aerosol applications such as air dusters, pipe freezing products and novelty ‘silly string’. HFC emissions from aerosols increased rapidly over the period 1993 to 1998 as HFCs replaced CFCs in these specialist applications where non-flammable propellants are required. Emissions reached a peak of 1,576 kt CO2 eq. in 1998 and then reduced to 1,162 kt CO2 eq. the following year due to the impact of a voluntary agreement between the UK government and the aerosol industry. Under this agreement, HFC use is limited to specific critical applications and manufacturers are expected to use hydrocarbon or DME alternatives in all other applications. Future emissions are expected to increase at a rate of about 1% per year due to economic growth. Possible abatement options include a strengthened voluntary agreement with industry and the banning of HFC-containing novelty aerosols.

Metered dose inhalers: MDIs are used to deliver certain pharmaceutical products as an aerosol, such as treatments for asthma. HFCs started to replace CFCs as propellants in MDIs in the late nineties and HFC emissions increased from less than 10 kt CO2 eq. in 1995 to about 894 kt CO2 eq. in 2000. Emissions are projected to continue to increase up to 1,516 kt CO2 eq. by 2005, when the phase-out of CFCs for MDIs should be 98% complete. Thereafter, emissions should level off and then gradually decrease due to increased penetration of alternative dosing technology. Potential abatement options from this sector include the recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs and the destruction of used MDI units.

Aluminium production: PFC emissions are formed during the production of aluminium in electrolytic cells, when normal operating conditions are upset and produce what are known as anode effects. In the UK, large reductions in PFC emissions have occurred over the last 10 years through the switch to point feeder technology, with emissions falling from 1,327 kt CO2 eq. in 1990 to 257 kt CO2 eq. in 2000. The aluminium industry has signed a Negotiated Agreement under the Climate

AEA Technology 141


Change Levy (CCL) and is targeting further reductions in PFC emissions up to 2010. These reductions are expected to be met through improved process controls, operational improvements, improved training and R&D into reducing anode effect frequency and duration.

Magnesium production: SF6 is used as a cover gas for magnesium alloy production and casting to prevent molten magnesium oxidising when exposed to air. SF 6

emissions from this application rose from about 480 kt CO2 eq. for 1990-1997 to a peak of 1,147 kt CO2 eq. in 2000. In future, emissions are expected to fall to about 740 kt CO2 eq. due to process improvements undertaken by industry as part of its strategy for reducing emissions under its CCL Negotiated Agreement. The replacement of SF6 by SO2 is another possible abatement option for some alloys but this would have health and safety implications.

Fire fighting equipment: UK manufacturers of fixed suppression systems for fire fighting have been using HFCs as an alternative to Halons since 1995 in specific applications such as military sites and oil production facilities. Emissions are expected to rise sharply from 61 kt CO2 eq. in 2000 to 357 kt CO2 eq. in 2004 as new systems are installed, and then level off as industry acts to reduce leakage rates. A voluntary agreement is under discussion between the Fire Industry Council and UK Government. If agreed, this voluntary agreement is expected to reduce HFC emissions by 44% in 2010 (relative to the baseline 2010 total). Alternative fluids such as a new ketone product may also offer potential for HFC emissions reduction.

Electronics: PFCs are used in the electronics industry for a variety of applications such as the cleaning of chambers used for chemical vapour deposition and dry plasma etching. In addition SF6 is used in etching processes for polysilicon and nitrite surfaces, and there is some usage of CHF3 and NF3. PFC emissions are expected to fall from 180 kt CO2 eq. in 2000 to about 70 kt CO2 eq. by 2010 due to emission reduction measures being implemented under a World Semiconductor Council voluntary agreement.

Halocarbon manufacture: Emissions arise from the UK manufacture of HFCs and PFCs, and HFCs are also formed as a by-product formed during HCFC-22 production. Emissions from this sector declined sharply between 1998 and 2000 from 12,357 kt CO2 eq. to 2,677 kt CO2 eq. due to the installation of thermal oxidiser abatement equipment at a UK manufacturing plant. Further emission abatement technology is being considered and/or implemented, partly as a result of HCFC manufacturers joining the UK Emissions Trading Scheme. The level of emissions is expected to continue to reduce to 1,005 kt CO2 eq. by 2010, which is the phase out date for HCFC-22 in end user markets.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of illustrative measures for emissions reduction suggests that reductions of about 530 kt CO2 eq. in 2010 may be achieved at a cost of less than £100/tonne carbon equivalent. This assessment is subject to major uncertainties and further detailed analysis is recommended for any policies or measures being considered for implementation. The measures considered, their emissions reduction potential in 2010 and their cost-effectiveness are summarised in Table 16.1 below.

AEA Technology 142


Many of these abatement options have a proportion of their impacts delayed until the disposal phase when the gases are eventually released to the atmosphere. This delay can be as long as 50 years from manufacture for some building foams. Because of this, cumulative costs and emissions savings to 2025 provide a more realistic measure of cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness estimates of each illustrative measure on this cumulative basis are summarised in Table 16.2.

Table 16.1 – Cost-effectiveness of illustrative measures based on emissions in 2010

Measure Emissions saving in

2010(kt C

equiv)

Annualised cost of

measure (£k2000

discounted @3.5%)


A Registration scheme for refrigerant handlers

1613365 21

B HFC replacement – domestic & small refrigeration units 1 143 175

C MAC – HFC replacement by 2010 40 37321 931D MAC – VA on leakage reduction 36 10614 297E Phase-out of novelty aerosols 43 3931 91F VA on fire-fighting equipment 167 126 3G Halocarbon production – thermal

oxidiser240

960 4H OCFs – phase-out for non-retail

applications24

476 20I Recovery of HFCs from Recycled OCF

cans1

1203 2205J Recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs 13 32 3K Destruction of old MDI units 13 1413 113L VA on HFC-based aerosols 3 40 13

AEA Technology 143


Table 16.2 – Cost-effectiveness of illustrative measures based on cumulative emissions savings to 2025.

Measure Emissions saving(kt C

equiv)

Cost of measure

(£k2000

discounted @3.5%)


A Registration scheme for refrigerant handlers

323651038 16

B HFC replacement – domestic & small refrigeration units 68 2167 32

C MAC – HFC replacement by 2010 3733 566054 152D MAC – VA on leakage reduction 1369 160987 118E Phase-out of novelty aerosols 1041 59629 57F VA on fire-fighting equipment 1099 1912 2G Halocarbon production – thermal

oxidiser5760

14561 3H OCFs – phase-out for non-retail

applications528

3619 7I Recovery of HFCs from Recycled OCF

cans12

18239 1497J Recovery of HFCs from reject MDIs 262 492 2K Destruction of old MDI units 253 21437 85L VA on HFC-based aerosols 69 605 9

AEA Technology 144


17 References

ACRIB (2001a). Guidelines for the use of hydrocarbon refrigerants in static refrigeration and air conditioning systems. Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Industry Board, Carshalton.

ACRIB (2001b). Options for a mandatory registration scheme for UK refrigerant handlers. Report produced on behalf of the ACRIB steering group considering the feasibility of a mandatory registration scheme for refrigerant handlers in the United Kingdom. FETA programme HEVACR 2005.

ACRIB (2003). A mandatory registration scheme for UK refrigerant handlers. Report produced on behalf of the ACRIB steering group proposing the structure and operation of a mandatory registration scheme for refrigerant handlers in the United Kingdom. FETA programme HEVACR 2005.

Arthur D. Little Inc. (2001) Assessment of the commercial implications of ASHRAE A3 flammable refrigerants in air conditioning and refrigeration systems. Final report for the Air-conditioning and Refrigeration Technology Institute. Report ARTI-21CR/610-50025-01.

Arthur D. Little Inc. (2002) Global Comparative Analysis of HFC and Alternative Technologies for Refrigeration, Air Conditioning, Foam, Solvent, Aerosol Propellant and Fire Protection Applications. Final report to the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy (ref 75966). Arthur D. Little Inc. Cambridge, MA.

Baker, J.A., 1998: Mobile Air Conditioning and Global Warming. Proceedings of the Phoenix Alternate Refrigerant Forum 1998, Suntest Engineering, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

BRA (1996). Guideline Methods of Calculating TEWI (Issue 1). British Refrigeration Association.

BRE (2001). Life after CFCs and HCFCs. Prepared for CIBSE National Conference 2001. BRE Publication Draft number 204283. Building Research Establishment Ltd 2001.

BS EN 378 (2000). Refrigerating systems and heat pumps - safety and environmental requirements. British Standards Institute, London.

BSRIA, 1998. Building Services Research and Information Association, UK and European Market for Refrigerants. Status report 12147/12, Bracknell, UK, 1998.

BSRIA, 1999a. Building Services Research and Information Association, UK refrigeration equipment market, 1999. Status report 12147/2, Bracknell, UK, 1999.

AEA Technology 145


BSRIA, 1999b. Building Services Research and Information Association, The future for the UK market for air conditioning by refrigerant type. Status report 12147/3, Bracknell, UK, 1999.

CNE (2000). Climate Network Europe. Keeping cool without warming the planet: Cutting HFCs, PFCs and SF6 in Europe. Jason Anderson, Climate Network Europe.

DETR (2000). Climate Change. The UK Programme. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, London.

DOE (1996). UK Use and Emissions of Selected Halocarbons, HMSO, August 1996.

DTI (2001). Directive 2000/53/EC on End of Life Vehicles. UK Government Consultation Paper. DTI. August 2001.

Earthcare (2002). Correspondence from B. Gummer, Earthcare, September 2002.

ECCA (2001). PFC Data Collection 2001, European Semiconductor Manufacturing Industry, December 2001.

ECOFYS (2002) Costs and the impact on emissions of potential regulatory framework for reducing emissions of hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride. Draft report September 2002. (Note: this was used for general reference only as data had yet to be confirmed by the study team and European Commission. It was later superseded by Harnisch and Schwarz, 2003).

Environment Agency (2002). Guidance on the Recovery and Disposal of Controlled Substances Contained in Refrigerators and Freezers. Guidance note. Draft 2.

Enviros March (2000). The use of HFCs for Metered Dose Inhalers in the European Union. Study on behalf of the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium (IPAC).

European Commission (2003). Consultation paper. How to considerably reduce greenhouse gas emissions due to mobile air conditioners. DG Environment. Brussels, 4 February 2003.

European Commission (2003). Directive 2002/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). OJ L37 13.2.2003 pp24-38.

Future Horizons (2002). Estimate sent to Nick Jolly, DTI by Future Horizons on 15 th

November 2002.

Gigiel, A, Russell S, and Butler D.J.G. (2001) Air conditioning systems in building using air cycle technology. Design and application guide. CRC Ltd., London.

AEA Technology 146


Goodwin, J.W.L., Salway, A.G., Dore, C.J., Murrells, T.P., Passant, N. R., King, K.R. Coleman, P.J., Hobson, M.M., Pye, S. T., Watterson, J.D., Haigh, K.E. and Conolly, C.M. (2002) UK Emissions of Air Pollutants 1970-2000. A report of the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory. National Environmental Technology Centre. AEA Technology, Culham.

Harnisch, J, Hendriks, C. (2000). Economic evaluation of emission reductions of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 in Europe. Contribution to 'Economic evaluation of sectoral emission reduction objectives for climate change' on behalf of the EU Directorate General Environment, ECOFYS.

Harnisch, J, Gluckman, R. (2001). Final report on the European Climate Change Programme Working Group Industry, Work Item Fluorinated Gases', Prepared on behalf of EC (DG ENV and DG ENTR).

Harnisch, J, Schwarz, W. (2003). Costs and the impact on emissions of potential regulatory framework for reducing emissions of hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride. Prepared on behalf of EC (DG ENV).

IEA (1995). Quantitative Risk Aspects with New Working Fluids in Practical Applications. Van Gerwen, R.J.M. IEA Heat Pump Centre publication, 1 September 1995.

IEA (2000). Ammonia and hydrocarbons: safety and liability issues. IEA Heat Pump Centre newsletter: Vol. 18 Issue 02 2000.

Institute of Refrigeration (2001). Safety code for A3 refrigerants. Institute of Refrigeration Carshalton.

IPAC (2002). Personal communication from IPAC, 8th October 2002.

IPCC (1995). IPCC Second Assessment Report: Climate Change 1995. A Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland.

IPCC (1997). Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. JT Houghton, LG Meira Filho, B Lim, K Treanton, I Mamaty, Y Bonduki, DJ Griggs and BA Callender (Eds). IPCC/OECD/IEA. UK Meteorological Office, Bracknell.

IPCC (2000) Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. J Penman, D Kruger, I Galbally, T Hiraishi, B Nyenzi, S Emmanul, L Buendia, R Hoppaus, T Martinsen, J Meijer, K Miwa and K Tanabe (Eds). IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme Published for the IPCC by the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Japan. ISBN 4-88788-000-6.

IPCC (2001). Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). J. T. Houghton, Y. Ding, D.J.

AEA Technology 147


Griggs, M. Noguer, P. J. van der Linden and D. Xiaosu (Eds.) Cambridge University Press, UK. pp 944.

March (1999). UK Emissions of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 and Potential Emission Reduction Options. March Consulting Group (now Enviros March)

Mintel (1995). Mintel: Fridges and Freezers. Market Intelligence, July 1995.

MTP (2002). UK Market Transformation Programme. Defra. www.mtprog.com.

National Asthma Campaign (2001). Asthma Audit. http://www.asthmaplus.org.uk/about/factsheet18.php

National Grid (2002). Submission from National Grid dated 29 October 2002.

Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2003). Historical time series data on growth of manufacturing sector. www.statistics.gov.uk

Palisade Corp. (1996). @RISK for Windows v.3.5b. Palisade Corporation, Newfield, NY.

Schwarz,W. (2002). R-134a losses from car air-conditioning systems: Annual emission rate of up to seven years old passenger car air conditioners. Study performed by Öko -Recherche for Umweltbundesamt. VDA Alternate Refrigerant Winter Meeting. 30-31 January 2002. Saalfelden Austria.

Schwarz W. and Leisewitz A. (1999). Emissions and reduction potentials of hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride in Germany. Oko-Recherche for the german Federal Environmental Agency (UBA).

Siegel, W.O. et al (2002). R-134a emissions from vehicles. Environmental Science and Technology. 36, 561-566.

Todd, C.S. (1991), The Use of Halons in the United Kingdom and the Scope for Substitution, Department of the Environment (HMSO).

UNEP (1998). 1998 Report of the Refrigeration, Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps Technical Options Committee. 1998 Assessment.

Wilson, D, (2002). Personal communication from David Wilson of DTI.

Woodcock (2002). Personal communication from Professor Ashley Woodcock, 8 th

October 2002.

WS Atkins (2000). Projections of Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions for the UK and Constituent Countries. WS Atkins Environment.

AEA Technology 148

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/

http://www.mtprog.com/


18 Acknowledgements

This project has involved extensive stakeholder interaction and the study team would like to thank the 90+ experts who have contributed to this work through personal communication and participation at stakeholder workshops in September 2002 and March 2003. In particular we are indebted to Paul Ashford of Caleb Management Services for his assistance on the foams sector, Nick Jolly of UK MEAC on the electronics sector, Andrew Lindley of Ineos Fluor on the manufacturing sector, and representatives of National Grid on the electrical transmission and distribution sector.

AEA Technology 149


Appendix 1: HFC/PFC/SF6 Total emissions - UK BAU – Mid estimate, in ktCO2eq

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Stationary refrigeration

0 0 0 134 516 933 1428 2049 2711 3400 4037 4540 4803 4952 5046 5015 4928 4818

Mobile air con

0 0 0 32 112 183 256 359 508 654 785 933 1080 1220 1356 1459 1515 1577

Fluid manufacture

11383 11851 12319 12802 13305 14039 14402 15694 12420 5449 2744 2519 2359 2260 2215 2223 1919 1559

Electronics 41 48 57 67 79 93 109 129 151 175 203 123 121 119 106 99 96 93Electrical T&D

598 646 691 733 747 802 828 782 728 659 623 596 561 530 522 522 509 509

Foams 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 24 30 40 61 127 436 406 509 563 619 677Aerosols 0 11 12 29 116 406 730 1222 1576 1162 1256 1385 1399 1413 1427 1442 1456 1471MDI 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 64 425 706 894 986 1121 1256 1387 1516 1506 1490Fire fighting 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 10 11 14 61 134 257 356 357 358 362 366Aluminium production

1327 1091 490 381 344 285 281 220 217 190 257 222 209 203 175 170 140 138


478 478 478 478 478 478 478 478 521 734 1147 789 932 908 884 860 837 837

Other 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 46 60 59 59 87 107 204 320 171 121Total 13851 14149 14070 14680 15722 17246 18554 21054 19343 13243 12126 12413 13366 13731 14190 14545 14057 13655

AEA Technology 150


HFC/PFC/SF6 Total emissions - UK BAU – Mid estimate, in ktCO2eq (continued)2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025


4729 4639 4523 4445 4386 4228 4122 3970 3819 3669 3511 3344 3206 3085 2986 2895 2819

Mobile air con

1636 1666 1651 1631 1619 1565 1536 1487 1458 1416 1371 1323 1277 1233 1196 1164 1139

Fluid manufacture

1309 1158 1084 1085 1087 1090 1092 1094 1095 1095 1095 1095 1095 1095 1095 1095 1095

Electronics 90 87 84 85 85 99 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 141 147 153 159Electrical T&D

508 508 507 507 506 505 504 504 503 502 501 496 497 499 500 502 503

Foams 738 801 867 902 936 1003 1035 1067 1098 1129 1159 1188 1217 1246 1274 1301 1328Aerosols 1485 1500 1515 1530 1546 1577 1592 1608 1624 1641 1657 1674 1690 1707 1724 1742 1759MDI 1474 1458 1393 1286 1272 1243 1229 1215 1201 1186 1172 1158 1143 1129 1115 1100 1086Fire fighting 370 375 375 383 392 410 419 428 438 448 458 468 479 489 500 512 523Aluminium production

130 128 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120


813 789 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 741

Other 100 61 37 17 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Total 13382 13170 12896 12732 12700 12580 12495 12344 12211 12065 11908 11735 11600 11484 11398 11324 11272

AEA Technology 151


Appendix 2: Emissions of HFC/PFC/SF6 for Constituent Countries

Regional HFC emissions - tonnes

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007England 974 1021 1062 1174 1448 1899 2381 3152 3615 3191 3420 3851 4371 4590 4901 5099 5119 5119Wales 0 0 1 4 15 36 60 95 135 141 165 188 214 225 239 247 250 252Scotland 0 1 1 8 31 71 117 184 260 276 324 369 422 442 468 484 488 492N. Ireland 0 0 0 2 9 21 34 54 78 81 95 108 123 131 139 144 146 148UK 974 1023 1064 1188 1503 2027 2592 3486 4087 3689 4005 4516 5130 5388 5747 5974 6004 6010

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025England 5133 5157 5162 5165 5175 5174 5167 5150 5108 5069 5026 4977 4925 4885 4853 4833 4817 4808Wales 254 255 256 256 256 256 255 254 252 250 248 246 243 241 240 239 238 237Scotland 495 498 498 498 498 497 495 492 487 482 477 471 464 459 455 452 449 447N. Ireland 149 150 150 150 150 150 150 149 148 147 145 144 142 141 140 139 138 138UK 6031 6061 6066 6068 6079 6077 6067 6045 5995 5948 5896 5837 5775 5726 5687 5663 5642 5630

AEA Technology 152


Regional HFC emissions – ktCO2eq

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Eng 11375 11852 12321 12947 13897 15271 16376 18770 16798 10434 8674 9308 9988 10316 10677 10912 10635 10288Wal 0 1 1 8 31 65 105 162 230 257 305 348 390 412 433 444 446 446Sco 0 1 1 17 66 135 214 328 461 524 621 708 793 835 875 896 897 897NI 0 0 0 5 17 36 58 90 128 143 169 193 217 231 243 251 252 253UK 11375 11854 12323 12977 14010 15507 16753 19350 17618 11358 9769 10557 11389 11794 12227 12503 12231 11883

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Eng 10066 9922 9750 9629 9608 9563 9504 9427 9295 9179 9053 8918 8772 8653 8550 8472 8404 8355Wal 447 447 441 434 433 431 428 424 418 412 406 399 392 387 381 378 374 372Sco 898 897 886 872 869 863 855 846 831 817 803 787 771 757 745 735 727 720NI 254 254 251 247 246 245 243 241 237 234 231 227 223 220 217 215 213 211UK 11665 11520 11328 11183 11156 11101 11030 10937 10780 10642 10493 10332 10159 10017 9894 9800 9718 9659

AEA Technology 153


Regional PFC emissions – tonnes

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Eng 140 115 30 25 24 26 32 28 28 28 36 28 32 32 28 28 24 25Wal 45 37 32 28 29 22 17 11 11 10 15 17 11 10 9 8 7 7Sco 19 18 20 16 14 14 17 19 17 18 17 10 10 10 9 9 8 8NI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0UK 204 170 82 69 67 62 66 58 56 56 68 55 53 52 46 45 40 40

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Eng 24 24 23 13 13 13 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 16Wal 7 7 7 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Sco 8 7 7 6 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 11NI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0UK 38 38 36 38 38 38 39 40 40 41 41 42 42 43 43 44 44 45

AEA Technology 154


Regional PFC emissions – ktCO2eq

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Eng 23 25 27 43 63 85 111 106 96 106 113 95 94 95 94 93 94 94Wal 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 7 7 8 9 5 5 5 5 4 4 4Sco 40 45 50 57 64 73 83 96 94 109 126 76 75 73 65 60 58 56NI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0UK 67 73 81 103 132 163 200 209 197 223 248 176 174 174 164 158 156 154

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Eng 95 96 96 100 103 104 106 109 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 121 122Wal 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6Sco 53 51 48 54 58 56 57 60 63 65 68 71 73 76 79 82 86 89NI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0UK 152 150 148 158 164 164 166 173 179 183 187 191 195 199 203 208 212 217

AEA Technology 155


Regional SF6 emissions – tonnes

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Eng 41 43 45 46 47 49 50 48 48 54 68 53 58 56 56 56 53 52Wal 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4Sco 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0NI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0UK 45 46 48 50 50 53 54 52 52 57 73 57 62 60 60 60 57 56

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Eng 51 50 48 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47Wal 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4Sco 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0NI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0UK 55 53 51 51 51 51 51 51 51 51 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

AEA Technology 156


Regional SF6 emissions – ktCO2eq

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Eng 987 1030 1070 1108 1120 1169 1192 1149 1148 1279 1629 1270 1377 1333 1328 1333 1262 1249Wal 73 76 79 82 83 87 88 85 84 94 120 93 101 97 95 93 91 91Sco 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0NI 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0UK 1086 1106 1149 1190 1203 1256 1281 1234 1233 1373 1749 1363 1478 1431 1423 1427 1353 1340

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Eng 1220 1187 1138 1131 1127 1126 1125 1125 1124 1123 1122 1121 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122Wal 89 87 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 83 83 83 83 84 84Sco 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0NI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0UK 1309 1275 1222 1215 1211 1210 1209 1209 1208 1207 1206 1204 1200 1201 1203 1204 1205 1206

AEA Technology 157


Appendix 3: HFC emissions by sector - UK BAU – Mid estimate, in ktCO2eq

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Stationary refrigeration

0 0 0 44 173 329 517 749 982 1230 1465 1636 1704 1733 1740 1707 1673 1617

Mobile air con

0 0 0 25 86 140 197 276 391 503 604 718 831 938 1043 1122 1165 1213

Fluid manufacture and HCFC22 production

973 1013 1053 1094 1145 1213 1249 1368 1095 503 257 240 231 239 280 313 274 231

Foam 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 18 23 31 47 101 377 357 463 511 561 614Aerosols 0 9 10 25 98 343 616 1032 1331 981 1061 1170 1182 1194 1205 1218 1230 1242MDI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 40 262 436 552 609 724 813 901 988 984 977Fire fighting 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 20 43 83 114 114 115 116 117Total 974 1023 1064 1188 1503 2027 2592 3486 4087 3689 4005 4516 5130 5388 5747 5974 6004 6010

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025


1566 1521 1480 1458 1439 1419 1394 1358 1308 1247 1191 1131 1070 1022 982 952 921 896

Mobile air con

1258 1282 1270 1254 1246 1227 1204 1181 1144 1121 1089 1055 1017 982 948 920 896 876

Fluid manufacture and HCFC22 production

196 183 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 177

Foam 668 726 785 816 846 875 904 932 960 988 1015 1041 1067 1093 1118 1143 1167 1191Aerosols 1254 1267 1280 1292 1305 1318 1332 1345 1358 1372 1386 1399 1413 1428 1442 1456 1471 1486MDI 970 962 954 948 941 934 926 919 911 903 896 888 880 872 864 855 846 838Fire fighting 119 120 120 123 126 128 131 134 137 140 143 147 150 153 157 160 164 168Total 6031 6061 6066 6068 6079 6077 6067 6045 5995 5948 5896 5837 5775 5726 5687 5663 5642 5630

AEA Technology 158


Appendix 4: PFC emissions by sector – UK – Mid estimates ktCO2eq

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Electronics 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 14 16 19 22 13 13 13 11 10 10 10Aluminium production

196 161 72 56 51 42 42 32 32 28 38 33 31 30 26 25 21 20

Other incl. Fluid manufacture

3 3 3 5 7 10 13 11 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 10

Total PFC 204 170 82 69 67 62 66 58 56 56 68 55 53 52 46 45 40 40

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Electronics 9 9 8 8 8 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15Aluminium production

19 19 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18

Other incl. Fluid manufacture

10 10 10 12 12 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

Total PFC 38 38 36 37 38 38 39 39 40 41 41 42 42 43 43 44 44 45

AEA Technology 159


Appendix 5: SF6 emissions by sector – UK - Mid estimates ktCO2eq

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Electronics 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Electrical T&D 25 27 29 31 31 34 35 33 30 28 26 25 23 22 22 22 21 21Magnesium production

20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 22 31 48 33 39 38 37 36 35 35

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 2 2 4 4 9 13 7 5Total SF6 45 47 49 51 52 54 55 53 55 62 77 61 67 65 68 72 64 62

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Electronics 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Electrical T&D 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21Magnesium production

34 33 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31

Other 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Total SF6 60 57 54 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53

AEA Technology 160

emissions and projections of hfcs, pfcs and sf6...

Documents