REFRIGERANTS
Evaluating alternative refrigerant options
Emerson sales director Craig Vicary compares the sustainability and reliability of refrigerants
T
he transition to environmentally friendly refrigeration systems is well underway throughout Europe, the UK and globally. For
more than a decade, component manufacturers, OEMs, contractors and end users have been developing and introducing technologies based on natural and synthetic refrigerants that offer viable alternatives to traditional hydrofluorocarbon (HFC)-
based systems. This is no small feat. Implementing a sustainable refrigeration strategy in a highly competitive retail environment is a complex process, requiring a sophisticated understanding of the options available in the face of myriad climatic, architectural and financial constraints. The European F-Gas regulation has been the major driving force for the increased use of lower- GWP refrigerants in recent years, and its impacts will continue to be felt for years to come. In 2020, refrigerants above 2,500 GWP will be prohibited in most stationary refrigeration and, by 2022, new multi-compressor commercial refrigeration equipment in systems above 40kW will not be allowed to use refrigerants above 150 GWP, except secondary circuits, which are limited to refrigerants above 1,500 GWP.
By 2030, the F-Gas regulation’s phase-
down efforts will have achieved a nearly 80% reduction of refrigerant supplies (measured in
CO2
equivalency) from its 2009 to 2012 baseline. Despite some recent fluctuations in market pricing, these phasedowns will continue to increase the scarcity of HFC and hydrofluoroolefin (HFO) A1 refrigerants, driving up costs further. Today there is more data than ever to help end users make informed decisions about which of these new lower-GWP systems align best with their business and sustainability objectives. This includes experiential data about the primary refrigerant categories available to meet this challenge, as well as the more commonly applied refrigeration options proliferating in retail segments
Emerging low-GWP refrigerant alternatives Whether you’re preparing for compliance with the F-Gas regulation or generally seeking to lower your carbon equivalency, the following refrigerant types have emerged as proven, viable alternatives to HFCs. Propane (R290) — Propane is a natural refrigerant that’s prized for its energy efficiency and very low GWP of three. Its classification as an A3 (highly flammable) refrigerant has primarily limited its use to small-charge applications, such as integral display cases. A recent ruling from the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) has raised R290’s charge limits from 150g to 500g for commercial refrigerators and freezers, which should increase
its potential application capacity and flexibility. In addition, for refrigerating systems using a higher R290 charge, the EN378 standard (for refrigerating systems and heat pumps, safety and environmental requirements) applies.
Hydrofluoroolefins (HFO A2L) — The recent emergence of these synthetic blends offers widespread applicability within commercial refrigeration. Classified as A2L (mildly flammable), these blends come in a range of low-GWP to very low-GWP options, while covering a spectrum of cooling capacity and pressure ranges. A 2019 IEC ruling, which increased their potential charge limit to 1,200g for commercial refrigerators and freezers, should drive even wider adoption of these multipurpose, energy-efficient alternatives. Again, the EN378 standard must be used for systems with a higher refrigerant charge.
CO2 of 1, CO2
(R744) — Non-flammable and with a GWP has demonstrated its effectiveness
in both low-temperature (LT) and medium- temperature (MT) applications. Centralised, CO2
-based refrigeration systems — such as CO2
transcritical boosters — have been successfully deployed in Europe for nearly two decades.
Selecting a future-proof refrigeration system As we approach 2020, centralised direct-expansion HFC racks — once the standard of commercial
De-centralised installations in France 28 December 2019
www.acr-news.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56
