Zero and Low GWP HCFC Alternatives

1,253 views
1,151 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,253
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Zero and Low GWP HCFC Alternatives

  1. 1. Industry Roundtable on zero and low GWP HCFC alternatives<br />Waterblown PU Foams preliminary results<br /> <br />GIZ Proklima<br />Male, May 2011<br />Ir. Igor C. Croiset<br />Senior Advisor<br />Igor.croiset@proklima.net<br />
  2. 2. Content<br />HCFC Phase out schedule<br />Future replacement blowing agents for HCFC<br />PU Foam<br />Waterblowntests Iran<br />Concluding remarks<br />
  3. 3. Following the decision XIX/6 made in 19th Meeting of Parties (MoP) the accelerated HCFC phase-out strategy has been defined. <br /> <br />1. HCFC Phase out plan<br />Accelerated HCFC phase out schedule<br />The accelerated HCFC phase-out schedule for Article 5 countries for consumption and production as agreed in the 19th Meeting of Parties held in Montreal in September 2007.<br />
  4. 4. 2. Future replacement blowing agents for HCFCIntroduction<br />The phase out of HCFC (141b) reopens the chapter of selection of blowing agent.<br />There are several new developments which will require some years to mature and supply and costs will be the main issue<br /><ul><li> Insulation is a must and in Europe buildings account for 40% of energy use* making it the largest Greenhouse gas emission source. So insulation will increase as it is an immediate method to reduce emissions.</li></ul>Most important seeing developments in EU, further efforts to improve the climate is that anything above a GWP > 150 will be intermediate, following the on-going verification of the F-gas regulation<br />Health Safety Environment considerations have to be taken into account in the trade off for the replacement blowing agent. Whereby in particular waste management# for rigid foam, like practiced with domestic refrigerators, will be a top issue.<br />*: EurimaEcofys VII study 2007 #: Umweltbundsamt Oct 2008 <br />
  5. 5. 2. Future replacement blowing agents for HCFCIntroduction – Waste Management<br />The GIZ is implementing in Brazil, the line will go on-line 2nd quarter of 2011, a recovery and recycling plant for domestic refrigerators. <br />This is widely applied in the EU and is going to be implemented in the USA under the supervision of the EPA.<br />For understanding the trend, Austria-Denmark-Switzerland already banned HFC’s in foams. HFC’s are considered Hazardous Waste.<br />If refrigerants are easily recovered, vacuum pump and cylinder. The recovery of CFC-HCFC-HFC inside foams requires complicated and expensive plants. A management of collection and transport of large foam products and incineration plants.<br />A 6 m sandwich panel of 50 mm contains > 500 grams of blowing agent!<br />*: presentation F. Leutgeb, Bauxund, workshop XPS 9-11 Nov 2009 Beijing: WasteInventoryOrdinance2003, EnforcementofCD 75/442/EEC on waste:<br />
  6. 6. 2. Blowing agent principle<br />A blowing agent helps the nucleation process and creates a foam composed of cells (open or closed)<br />In these cells (closed) the blowing agent is enclosed and contributes to the thermal conductivity of the foam.<br />This cell gas is then composed of a mixture of air and blowing agent and together with the solid PU material provides the overall thermal conductivity.<br />Long term properties are determined by the remaining content of blowing agent inside the cells as diffusion out of the cells occurs. This is more dominant with XPS as no barriers or facings are used than with PU where with sandwich panels a metal facing provides a barrier.<br />
  7. 7. 2. Blowing agent principle<br />The gas in Liquid state is ejected together with the foam and during the transformation in gas state creates gas bubbles (Important temperature, enclosure pressure).<br />
  8. 8. 2. Thermal Insulationproperties<br />Factors that influence the thermal insulation<br />Design of the product, very important.<br />Cell size, distribution and orientation<br />Composition of the cell gas<br />Aging of the foam<br />Density of the foam, equipment<br />Storage, temperature control raw materials<br />Etc.<br /> Only when optimised conditions are met good results are achieved, if not : <br /> invest in low cost blowing agents<br />
  9. 9. 2. Insulation properties<br />As we already noted thermal conductivity (λ W.m/K) is one of the properties, although important but not determinant. The reason being that Architect, Engineers work with R or the reverse U-value to determine the insulation properties of a building.<br />This means that with increase of thermal conductivity the panel thickness increases. These changes are however little.<br />The compensation of a loss of insulation through increase of the thickness is a valid environment sustainable solution for the long term. Therefore that the GIZ is a promoter of Hydrocarbons or waterblown solutions in PU and XPS foams.<br />
  10. 10. 2. Example of Insulation of an existing housee<br />In order to meet energy standards (in several EU countries funded through tax deductions or incentives)<br />A specialist determines which foams and with which characteristics are required for meeting the standard.<br />08.05.2011<br />Depending on costsandstandardtheappropiateinsulationisselected.<br />
  11. 11. 3. Blowing agent overview – PU foams<br />U-HFC Flour based<br />New Generation<br />Expensive – Special<br />Available in 2-3 years<br />Methyl types<br />Renaissance of „old“ blowing agents<br />Also Flammable !<br />Hydrocarbons (Pentane)<br />More then 10 years development<br />Used by >90% Appliance and Sandwich panel<br />Cheap i.e. Low foam costs !<br />Higher equipment costs<br />Water blown<br />Immediate use<br />No need of mixing or special equipment<br />Slightly lower λ Foam HC<=Foam cost<HFC<HFO<br />HFC<br />Too High GWP !<br />Intermediate solution<br />Expensive<br />EU F-gas GWP < 150 !!<br />
  12. 12. 4. Waterblown foam test Iran<br />The first question to ask why Waterblown for a commercial refrigeration company?<br />During the preparation of the HPMP we have seen that there are many small companies with a mean consumption of less then 7 MT HCFC for which a conversion is not feasible. Because most are second conversions, contribution for the phase out is not sufficient and the alternative: Hydrocarbon (Pentane) is not feasible because:<br />The companies are producing many different sizes<br />Foaming know how is not available<br />Their focus is mechanical workmanship and not foam or refrigeration<br />The consumption is too low for the investment component as well as the companies cannot contribute<br />
  13. 13. 4. Waterblown foam test Iran<br />The second important question to ask how important is the foam?<br />Commercial refrigerators in supermarkets, shops are partially open, vertical display cabinets open top refrigerators/freezers therefore the foam acts as insulator but equal important are the mechanical properties.<br />The largest source of heat leak are actually the openings and doors!<br />The models used are in general larger than domestic refrigerators but at the same time the number of models produced are often tailor made. The in-liner is of steel and when used the doors are window type.<br />Therefore the companies when foaming are focusing on the mechanical more then insulation properties. <br />
  14. 14. 4. Waterblown foam test Iran<br />Scope of our tests?<br />We are together with BASF (Lemförde) performing tests which will be finalised in 2-3 months time with the scope of:<br />Verifying the state of the art business as usual (BAU)<br />Optimising the foaming with HCFC to show to the beneficiary the potential benefit<br />Introducing waterblown foam<br />This BAU status is important to understand which benefits can be achieved within the context of a conversion and to which extend it needs to be implemented.<br />For this purpose we have procured a waterblown foam and foamed several cabinets which will be tested in Germany at an independent institute for measurement of the reverse heat leak test and mechanical properties at BASF. <br />
  15. 15. 4. Waterblown foam test Iran<br />Expectations commercial refrigeration companies<br />Before we started and discussed with BASF our view was that most of the companies have a low level of knowhow with regard to foaming. <br />Due to the large amount of models produced in small series or single pieces the foaming part is often challenging for the producers.<br />We were also expecting that the proper use of the foaming equipment and knowledge required for using blowing agents is an issue.<br />We believe that the substitution with a waterblown system will provide similar foam properties as with HCFC-141b. As well a substantial simplification for the producer with regard to foaming. <br />As it is quite a difference of using a system with incorporated blowing agent properties as a third component, i.e. blowing agent.<br />
  16. 16. 4. Waterblown foam test Iran<br />Preliminary results during the foaming already confirmed several of our expectations:<br />Machine settings<br />Foaming pressure too high ≈ 170 bar<br />Temperature of raw materials too low ≈ 18°C<br />Factory hall and therefore non preheated mould too cold 15°C<br />Foam<br />Ratio between polyol and Isocyanate had to be corrected<br />Too much foam has been used and was reduced<br />Drums with Polyol and premixed 141b not stirred (in summer a common mistake is also to underestimate the evaporation!)<br />Operators<br />Executers with no background knowledge of foam<br />
  17. 17. 4. Waterblown foam test Iran<br />We have first of all let the company produce the refrigerators as they normally do, in order to establish the BAU status.<br />Subsequently re-adjusted the foaming machine and first of all produced an optimized 141b cabinet.<br />On the basis of this data foamed with the waterblown system whereby excellent adhesion was accomplished with a heated and non heated mould.<br />
  18. 18. 4. Waterblown foam test Iran<br />Preliminary conclusions<br />Our expectations of the situation we would find were confirmed<br />The manufacture of commercial refrigerators is challenging with regard to foams which will lead to underperformance of the foams. The use of a blowing agent is not an insurance for properties but proper foam is.<br />We are quite confident that the waterblown foamed refrigerators will present the same performance as 141b. <br />We are awaiting the results of the laboratories in order to provide a more complete picture of the results but. The foamed units are in transit and laboratory tests will be made the coming weeks. Than we will also review the refrigeration system.<br />
  19. 19. 5. Remarks to - Blowing agent selection<br />The major challenge during the HCFC phase out is the availability of HCFC when replacements are more costly. <br />Secondly the application knowhow of the beneficiary as processes will need to change. The majority of HCFC141b users are small companies who do not have sufficient R&D in-house. <br />The base materials Polyol (PU) must be suitable for the use with a specific blowing agent. Therefore, verification with the major raw material suppliers in your country is important. As it will be valuable if the replacement blowing agent is well established so that an interchange of knowhow through associations and industry occurs.<br />The speed with which Industry can exchange and adapt is often underestimated but they require guidance for the direction to take.<br />
  20. 20. Contact Details<br />Head Office<br />GTZ PROKLIMA<br />Dag-Hammarskjöld-Weg 1-5<br />65760 Eschborn<br />Germany<br />For further information contact<br /> Ir. Igor C. Croiset Markus Wypior<br />Email: Igor.Croiset@proklima.net markus.wypior@GIZ.de<br />Thank you for the attention<br />http://www.giz.de/ or http://www.giz.de/proklima.<br />

×