Date: 17 Jun 2005 12:05:38 GMT From: Dave Hinz <DaveHinznospamcop.net> Subject: Re: 9000 air-conditioning service?
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 02:24:32 GMT, James Sweet <jamessweetnospamail.com> wrote: > >> >> You mean, the theoretical effect of an unproven poorly researched >> theory? That "hole in the sky"? > Well either way, the ozone layer is important enough that I'd rather make > some relatively simple changes today rather than risk finding out I was > wrong when it's too late. If we're going to "Do something...anything...", we should pick the right things to spend our efforts on. I haven't seen the research to show that R-12 is a real threat. Yes, it destroys ozone, but low-altitude ozone is a pollutant - it only becomes an asset at high altitude, where the heavy CFC can't get to. >> Yup. No different to the ozone layer, but not banned and doesn't work >> as well. Boy, I'm glad we're concentrating on _important_ environmental >> things, aren't you? > R-134a does NOT have the same effect on ozone, it's an HFC > (hydroflourocarbon), which lacks the chlorine molocules of both R-12 which > is a CFC(chlorofluorocarbon) or R-22 which is an HCFC > (hydrochlorofluorocarbon). It's the chlorine that reacts to rapidly break > down ozone, and CFC's are very stable compounds which means they hang around > for a long time in the atmosphere. The hydrogen molecule in HCFC's causes > them to break down much more quickly so they have only 5% the ozone > depletion factor as CFCs. Sorry, I should have said "on the ozone layer", not "on ozone". Unless you can show me a peer-reviewed study showing that CFCs can and do get into the ozone layer? > HFC's have no ozone depletion factor but they are > considered a greenhouse gas so it's still illegal to vent them to the > atmosphere, that part seems a bit strange to me since those little air > duster cans are tetrafluoroethane which is just R-134. Hm, I use this substance called "compressed air", which, depending on where the compressor is, is fairly neutral in that regard. Seems to work for me. > As for whether or not CFC's caused the hole in the ozone, we can measure > significant quantities of the compound in the upper atmosphere, it's just > basic chemistry that chlorine rapidly breaks down ozone, that's all the > evidence I need to say go with the nearly trivial change to R-134. Can you show me that information? I've tried a couple times and only come up with alarmist sites with lots of rants on them, which I have a hard time taking seriously.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
