Hi all, Anyone familiar with the UK and more generally EU legislation? I hear that it is not allowed to put refrigerant in underground pipes in the UK (which would mean DX systems are not allowed?). Is it correct? How about the rest of Europe? Thanks and regards, Fabien

I don't know, but there are all kinds of refrigerants, some of them already underground in pipes (like propane). In fact, a propane or propane/butane mix would be a reasonable choice for running a DX system with plastic loops.

What, and have a loop leak turn the basement, garage, or mechanical room into a fuel air bomb?

Pure barking mad.

That would run foul of codes prohibiting gas lines within dwellings exceeding certain (very low) pressures

You are making invalid assumptions, like such a system being inside, non-industrial use and US laws. Propane, R290, R600a, etc are compressed and decompressed all the time - safely and even in indoor home refrigerators (just not in the US - yet).

Pretty sure the UK allows it with R-407c. Europe doesn't accept R-410a, which is why EarthLinked has moved toward R-407c as their alternative to R-22.

Posted By engineer on 30 Mar 2010 11:16 PM
What, and have a loop leak turn the basement, garage, or mechanical room into a fuel air bomb?

Pure barking mad.

How much refrigerant is required for a typical (say, 3-ton) residential DX system?

I don't worry much about keeping a propane torch (14 oz cylinder) in the garage,
but there's NO WAY I'd store a 20 lb gas-grill cylinder inside.  Barking mad, indeed.

and yet millions of people have natural gas lines coming into their homes, capable of supplying an essentially infinite amount of flammable gas should there be a leak.
This argument is a red herring. For that matter, the objections about having refrigerant lines in the ground are misguided. It's not like a leak would do any serious damage to anything or poison people for miles around. Not that I'd WANT a leak, it's just that it's not the end of the world.

re·frig·er·ant (r-frjr-nt)
adj.
1. Cooling or freezing; refrigerating.

n.
1. A substance, such as air, ammonia, water, or carbon dioxide, used to provide cooling either as the working substance of a refrigerator or by direct absorption of heat.


They simply cant outlaw underground refrigerent , they can only outlaw specific refrigerents.

Posted By tinoue on 31 Mar 2010 04:23 PM
and yet millions of people have natural gas lines coming into their homes, capable of supplying an essentially infinite amount of flammable gas should there be a leak.
This argument is a red herring. For that matter, the objections about having refrigerant lines in the ground are misguided. It's not like a leak would do any serious damage to anything or poison people for miles around. Not that I'd WANT a leak, it's just that it's not the end of the world.

ummm I think these comments were in regards to propane as a refrigerant, not DX in general. I have mentioned before the over defensiveness of DX proponents......
J

The natural gas lines into homes are regulated down to a few IN WC. Certainly they can fill a house with gas, but with low pressures it takes time and the Mercaptan alerts occupants to leaks at low concentrations.

5-10 pounds of liquid propane or similar gas at high pressure in a cabinet within the home at high pressures, voltages, and currents is only asking for trouble - I envision a scenario where gas from a small leak in the unit encounters a spark such as from the unit contactor resulting in a small but well contained explosion within the unit cabinet. Overpressures from that rupture refrigerant lines resulting in the entire unit charge rapidly venting into the surrounding area, and somewhere along the way that large heavy cloud of flammable gas meets a source of ignition.

No, thank you.

Somewhere around 99' at least one luxury European car manufacturer switched to propane or hexane for refrigerant, for environmental concerns. It didn't last, a spectacular fire/explosion forced a recall.
I've heard propane and isobutane in an 80/20 mix is used as a substitute for R12 in wacky DIY A/C applications. Wouldn't recommend it in your house though. Really bad idea.

Europe, Japan, India, China and 300+ million buyers think otherwise. Can one even buy a non-greenfreeze home refrigerator in Germany now?

I remember reading that scammers were charging Propane into automotive AC units that originally used R12 after R12 was banned. Apparently it can be made to work from a refrigeration standpoint but fire risk is greatly elevated, as one would expect.

Again, no thanks.

Is there a hazard free refrigerant? Most old techs have had a sniff or two of phosgene (torch flame on refrigerant). I nearly wrecked a van once when a tank of R-22 leaked in the back.......Lots of high; no party.
I serviced more than a couple nat gas/amonia systems in the 80's. Nothing to go wrong there
Everything has it's risks, but as a person who is not sold on the "ozone depletion" theory, I'll take my HCFC's over explosives any day.
J

Eventually OSHA, NHSTA, or DOT is going to come down on us and prohibit pressurized tanks from being in same compartment as driver. We'll all need trailers or cube trucks.

Cool, they got smoking outta public places round here (come may first). Then they'll take my R-22 sniffing rights from me. LOL
Fortunately I quit smoking about 10 years after Sadam and the Republican Gaurd stopped shooting at me....(excuse a tad thin by then)
Next thing ya know they'll take away my PVC cement!

Posted By engineer on 01 Apr 2010 01:07 AM
The natural gas lines into homes are regulated down to a few IN WC. Certainly they can fill a house with gas, but with low pressures it takes time and the Mercaptan alerts occupants to leaks at low concentrations.

5-10 pounds of liquid propane or similar gas at high pressure in a cabinet within the home at high pressures, voltages, and currents is only asking for trouble - I envision a scenario where gas from a small leak in the unit encounters a spark such as from the unit contactor resulting in a small but well contained explosion within the unit cabinet. Overpressures from that rupture refrigerant lines resulting in the entire unit charge rapidly venting into the surrounding area, and somewhere along the way that large heavy cloud of flammable gas meets a source of ignition.

No, thank you.

Dear Kurt (and others),

Nice to see a robust discussion going on here.

We've been supplying refrigerant-grade hydrocarbons into various sectors across the refrigeration, heating, ventilation and air-conditioning markets for just on 20 years now.

Kurt, if I've not misinterpreted your comments, you are basically suggesting that flammable refrigerants are non-viable and (more importantly) sufficiently UNsafe so as to be disqualified from all but perhaps a few 'corner cases'.

If what your suggesting is true, we would have been dragged through the courts umpteen times, fined (or worse) for selling product that is "unfit for purpose" and shut down long ago. Either that or we've avoided prosecution by some kind of miraculous protection for just on two decades now.

As someone who's been in the RHVAC industry a while now, the reality is very different. At root, there is a lack of widespread understanding about refrigerants other than the 'halocarbon' class (R12, R134a, R22, R40xx etc) because the halocarbon manufacturers gained a virtual monopoly on a great number of RHVAC sectors some 50+ years ago. Monopolies are good for nobody except the monopolists, not only because the obtain the power to price-gouge, but (more importantly, I think) because they gain a large degree of control over communication channels up and down the supply chain. Their dominating existence in markets they monopolise also earns them undeserved trust in the the advice they give. Thus we have the situation today where a lot of false and misleading information about non-halogenated refrigerants has embedded itself in the marketplace. On top of that, potential purchasers on refrigerants and system engineers are often not even aware of alternatives or know people with the skills and training to implement them.

This is slowly changing however.

Now, to respond to some of your other comments:

1. In just the same way as natural gas, HyChill's hydrocarbon (HC) refrigerants are stenched with mercaptan.
2. Systems using hydrocarbons can be designed so that either (a) the amount of charge that can possibly leak into a potentially hazardous space is so low that a flammable mixture can never develop OR (b) reliable mitigation systems are included in the design to ensure a flammable mixture can never develop. Of course, indirect systems are also very feasible.
3. The benefit of using hydrocarbons (over halocarbons) is that they are more efficient, have no ozone depletion potential and have negligible global warming potential.
4. The suggestion that flammable refrigerants should not be used because they are flammable is erroneous, as testified to by the existence and use of flammable halocarbons (R152a and HFO1234yf for example) and toxic and flammable natural refrigerants such as ammonia. Safe systems can be designed from all these kinds of flammable and/or toxic refrigerants and are done so routinely, albeit it's not as well known in most RHVAC sectors because taking back market share from a monopolist is a difficult process. Generally speaking, for every halocarbon option there is a far technically superior and safe alternative using natural refrigerants (ammonia, air, water, CO2 or hydrocarbons), however the headwinds generated by the side-effects of a monopoly, as I already described, slow down the rate of market capture.

Kurt these "scenarios" you envisage just aren't happening with any regularity that would indicate a safety defect trend. Yes, there have been a few instances of fire over the past 20 years. So far, every single one has been due to (multiple) serious failures to observe proper design or handling principles. Almost all those incidents, by the way, have occurred during servicing - that is to say, if there is any increased risk at all it is to service-persons, not consumers (e.g. householders living in a house with DX hydrocarbon systems).

Just because things are flammable in certain conditions doesn't mean they are unsafe. Many kinds of insulation is highly flammable. Many kinds of textiles are highly flammable. Natural gas is flammable. Many paints are flammable. Natural wood shaving insulation can be highly flammable. Of course, this doesn't mean they can't be used safely. The important difference here is that hydrocarbon refrigerants are flammble and are not widely and well understood - that increases the perception of risk (not the actual risk).

What would make it more funny if it wasn't so serious is that most refrigeration systems using halocarbons are flammable, even though the refrigerant has a handling and storage class of 'nonflammable'. Some time ago a large R134a refrigeration plant (which everyone tells you is non-flammable!) burned to the ground from a refrigerant leak. How? Because almost all systems contain lubricant which is flammable (and can also be highly toxic) in a leak scenario. That's something the halocarbon monopolists don't want you to know because it removes one of their biggest marketing/spin 'edges' - the flammability fear play.

Also note that: DX hydrocarbon room AC systems have been on the market for some time now (just as one example). Try Googling Benson Air conditioning for example. DeLonghi also makes them. One of the largest Chinese manufactuers, Gree, is coming on line any moment now also.

Kind regards,

John W Clark
Technical Advisor
HyChill Australia Pty. Ltd.
85a Canterbury Rd, Kilsyth, Victoria, Australia
Freecall (aus): 1300 492 445  Ph: +61 3 97285055  Fax: +61 3 97618799
http://www.hychill.com.au

Posted By gspike on 01 Apr 2010 07:58 PM
Somewhere around 99' at least one luxury European car manufacturer switched to propane or hexane for refrigerant, for environmental concerns. It didn't last, a spectacular fire/explosion forced a recall.
I've heard propane and isobutane in an 80/20 mix is used as a substitute for R12 in wacky DIY A/C applications. Wouldn't recommend it in your house though. Really bad idea.

Dear gspike,

No vehicle manufacturer has ever manufactured a motor vehicle using an AC system containing flammable refrigerant...

...ahem... until now that is... many car manufacturers have formally decided that the next generation refrigerant for their vehicle production lines will be flammable (and toxic) halocarbon going by the name of HFO1234yf. Now the marketing/propaganda war is on to try to make the perception gap between between HFO1234yf and hydrocarbons as wide as their multi-million dollar marketing and lobbying budgets will permit.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the refrigerant market is largely monopolised, and this couldn't be more true in the motor vehicle AC sector.

The thing you are probably thinking of is one of the many 'stunts' pulled by DuPont's various propaganda arms or motor vehicle manufacturers repeating similar sham 'experiments' at their prompting. There were many 'exploding cabin' stunts performed around the world to try to scare non-technical motor vehicle senior execs and influence legislators to ban hydrocarbons.

All of these stunts consisted of manually squirting a bunch any hydrocarbon they could get their hands on (usually household LPG) directly into a cabin containing some kind of automated strong ignition source, then filming the results and jumping up and down about how this proves hydrocarbons are unsafe.

These stunts were quite effective. Motor vehicle execs almost without exception were point-blank opposed to flammable refrigerants and no correspondence could be entered into. A number of legislative regions successfully implemented blanket bans on the aftermarket use of hydrocarbons in R12 and R134a vehicles (which has since become quite popular).

The problem DuPont et al face now is that R134a is not acceptable going forward due to global warming impact. The only decent refrigerant they had left in their lineup that was suitable for auto AC was R152a or HFO1234yf. Unfortunately for DuPont, their preferred (and much cheaper) option - R152a - was less efficient than hydrocarbons, more toxic, and the flammability profile was so similar that their spin doctors realised they would have an impossible task trying to drive the a 'perception wedge' between R152a and hydrocarbons.

So the last string in their bow is HFO1234yf, it is also poorer-performing that hydrocarbons (although there is very little data on HFO1234yf yet) and is also more toxic than hydrocarbons, but is somewhat less flammable than hydrocarbons (in that it has a higher LFL concentration and requires a stronger ignition source and it burns more slowly, although I'm still flabbergasted how easily people swallow the notion that slower burning is better). Not surprisingly, a great deal of effort and money has been spent to try to separate HFO1234yf from hydrocarbons and thereby minimise the effects of 20+ years of campaigning against flammables in order to try and secure a future for their own flammable product.

Gspike, please be advised that HyChill (just one of many hydrocarbon refrigerant suppliers) is most active in the automotive AC aftermarket. Based on our yearly sales figures compared to the sales of halocarbons into this market (which is now public information due to the legal requirements in Aus for the halocarbon crew to publish their sales/emissions numbers), somewhere around 10-15% of all road vehicles in Australia are running on HyChill hydrocarbon refrigerant, and have been doing so safely for around 2 decades.

To put some firmer numbers on it, our total sales since first production equate to approximately 1 million vehicle AC system charges over that 20 year period. All without a single cabin fire.

Due to the propensity of our halocarbon competition to continually assert that we just-plain-lie about such figures, we are soon to employ Price Waterhouse Coopers to independently validate these figures and publicly report them.

Kind regards,

John W Clark
Technical Advisor
HyChill Australia Pty. Ltd.
85a Canterbury Rd, Kilsyth, Victoria, Australia
Freecall (aus): 1300 492 445  Ph: +61 3 97285055  Fax: +61 3 97618799
http://www.hychill.com.au

The problem DuPont et al face now is that R134a is not acceptable going forward due to global warming impact.

Any argument that suggests this is a given is subject to great debate. While I don't suggest we embark on this political discussion here, why don't we discuss products on their own merits.
Propane, CO2, Amonia et al have demonstrated usefulness as refrigerants. HCFC's are known to create toxic fumes if exposed to flame others are oxygen depleting or explosive. None are perfect.
J 

I'm enjoying the robust discussion as well.

In some ways vehicle use concerns me less since most of the system, and all its high pressure components are located outside the firewall. We do accept the explosive risks associated with gasoline every time we drive. (Although 2 out of 3 of my vehicles are Diesel, and I feel quite a bit safer with Diesel fuel's lower volatility.)

Yet another hat I wear is that of part time watercop, and I've worked a few boat fires, never a pretty sight. Most involve gasoline and an accumulation of vapors in low lying compartments aboard, combined with an electrical fault. I occasionally teach a vessel systems module to marine law enforcement officers who may be first responders to vessel accidents. I don't pretend to be an expert in the field, but I go over some basics and set a few things on fire, a nice break from the slow death by powerpoint that characterizes most cop training.

This being a geo site, let me steer back to course. One of the advantage of geo systems is being able to locate all of a system's components inside, out of the weather. Unfortunately for a system using hydrocarbons, that gives rise to the possibility of an explosive cloud forming quite quickly in a basement if a high side component lets go.

I agree that Mercaptan would annunciate that situation, and I don't ignore the risk of NG in the home. However home gas piping is limited to vapor only under very low pressure. NG does still blow up the odd house every now and then.

The father of a childhood friend of mine, a renowned plastic surgeon, blew up his own house 10 years ago after dislodging a gas line with a rented earthmover. No one was hurt but the house was reduced to kindling. I spent many nights there in the late 70s, so the incident sticks in my mind.

I'm always open to new ideas supported by data, but I remain guided by concerns of a basement bomb I described above.