The usage of refrigerants is governed by two International agreements.
As per Montreal Protocol(MP) all member nations are required to reduce the emission of ozone depleting gases in a phased manner. Unlike UNFCCC, MP doesn’t have provision for developing nations to fund the transition of poor/developing nations.
MP was signed in 1987 during a period when ozone depletion was reigning in the public consciousness. MP targeted a list of ozone-depleting substances out of which the prime target was Chloro Fluoro Carbons (CFC) used as refrigerants and in aerosol sprays. So manufacturing and use of CFCs were totally banned thereafter. The developed nations then gradually switched over to Hydro Fluoro Carbons (HFC), which have much lesser ozone depletion properties than CFC but still are several fold harmful than Carbon dioxide in contributing to global warming. HFCs are costlier than CFCs due to the patents registered by industrialized nations. This made poor nations reluctant to adopt the HFCs due to the cost involved. But then developed nations came out with an alternative an option for poor countries to switch over to Hydro Chloro Fluoro Carbons (HCFC) which are cheaper than HFCs and also have much less ozone depleting properties than CFCs. HCFC are also patented by industrial nations with a significant price.
UNFCCC Kyoto Protocol was signed in 1997 and the time has now come for the developed nations to achieve the next phase of target to reduce green house emissions. HFCs due to their effect on global warming are also included under UNFCCC list. Industrialized nations have developed a new alternative to HFCs. These alternative refrigerants again cost 20 times more than HFCs due to patents registered. Also this is the time for developing nations which are still using HCFCs to switch over to HFCs. At this stage developed countries like US are pushing developing countries like India to skip the HFC phase to directly move to the new alternative refrigerant phase.
Here is where the great debate starts. Developing countries like India are contending that since HCFC is a green house gas, the cost involved in transition from HCFC to alternative refrigerant should be incurred by developed nations as per UNFCCC. Whereas developing nations are insisting that since the transition from HCFC to alternative refrigerants originated from the earlier aim of reducing CFC, a ozone depleting gas, it should be covered under MP and not UNFCCC. Here is where US is planning to score triple points. First the US wants to avoid the cost of funding the transition in India. Second, by forcing India to adopt alternative refrigerants US can open the market in India for US MNCs which have patented the technology. Third, the green gas emission savings achieved by US-led transition of India to alternative refrigerants can be accounted by US in its share of savings achieve as mentioned earlier. This will reduce the burden on US to reduce carbon footprint in coming years and would buy more time for them to achieve their targets.
The US envoy on environment has warned Indian officials that President Obama may raise this issue personally with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh if India doesn’t agree for the transition ahead of PM’s visit to US.
- Montreal Protocol (MP) - Aims to prevent ozone depletion by reducing ozone depleting gases emission.
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) - Aims to control global warming by reducing green house gas emissions.
As per Montreal Protocol(MP) all member nations are required to reduce the emission of ozone depleting gases in a phased manner. Unlike UNFCCC, MP doesn’t have provision for developing nations to fund the transition of poor/developing nations.
MP was signed in 1987 during a period when ozone depletion was reigning in the public consciousness. MP targeted a list of ozone-depleting substances out of which the prime target was Chloro Fluoro Carbons (CFC) used as refrigerants and in aerosol sprays. So manufacturing and use of CFCs were totally banned thereafter. The developed nations then gradually switched over to Hydro Fluoro Carbons (HFC), which have much lesser ozone depletion properties than CFC but still are several fold harmful than Carbon dioxide in contributing to global warming. HFCs are costlier than CFCs due to the patents registered by industrialized nations. This made poor nations reluctant to adopt the HFCs due to the cost involved. But then developed nations came out with an alternative an option for poor countries to switch over to Hydro Chloro Fluoro Carbons (HCFC) which are cheaper than HFCs and also have much less ozone depleting properties than CFCs. HCFC are also patented by industrial nations with a significant price.
UNFCCC Kyoto Protocol was signed in 1997 and the time has now come for the developed nations to achieve the next phase of target to reduce green house emissions. HFCs due to their effect on global warming are also included under UNFCCC list. Industrialized nations have developed a new alternative to HFCs. These alternative refrigerants again cost 20 times more than HFCs due to patents registered. Also this is the time for developing nations which are still using HCFCs to switch over to HFCs. At this stage developed countries like US are pushing developing countries like India to skip the HFC phase to directly move to the new alternative refrigerant phase.
Here is where the great debate starts. Developing countries like India are contending that since HCFC is a green house gas, the cost involved in transition from HCFC to alternative refrigerant should be incurred by developed nations as per UNFCCC. Whereas developing nations are insisting that since the transition from HCFC to alternative refrigerants originated from the earlier aim of reducing CFC, a ozone depleting gas, it should be covered under MP and not UNFCCC. Here is where US is planning to score triple points. First the US wants to avoid the cost of funding the transition in India. Second, by forcing India to adopt alternative refrigerants US can open the market in India for US MNCs which have patented the technology. Third, the green gas emission savings achieved by US-led transition of India to alternative refrigerants can be accounted by US in its share of savings achieve as mentioned earlier. This will reduce the burden on US to reduce carbon footprint in coming years and would buy more time for them to achieve their targets.
The US envoy on environment has warned Indian officials that President Obama may raise this issue personally with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh if India doesn’t agree for the transition ahead of PM’s visit to US.
If you find this article useful you are free donate to keep me going.
Here is my Bitcoin wallet address
1PGXWmomcG3dNMrt636UBR2s6SVHtS75U8
Comments
Post a Comment