Us foam policy

1,263 views

Published on

Foam Policy in the United States by ms. Evelyn Swain

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,263
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Us foam policy

  1. 1. Foam Policy in the United States Evelyn Swain U.S. Environmental Protection Agency UNEP Workshop on Low-GWP Replacements for Asia's Foam Industry Seoul, Republic of Korea 6-7 May 2010
  2. 2. Overview • U.S. EPA’s Significant New Alternatives Policy Program (SNAP) • U.S. HCFC Foams Regulations • U.S. Transition to Low-GWP Alternative Foam Blowing Agents
  3. 3. SNAP Background • Why was SNAP created? – Part of the U.S. response to the Montreal Protocol – Domestic Clean Air Act directs U.S. EPA to evaluate and list substitutes for ODSs that reduce overall risk to human health and the environment • What does SNAP cover? – Covers 8 industrial sectors that used ozone depleting substances: • Refrigeration and air conditioning, foam blowing, cleaning solvents, fire suppression, aerosols, adhesives coatings and inks, sterilants, and tobacco expansion • What does SNAP do? – Provides menu of substitutes for ozone-depleting substances – Lists acceptable and unacceptable substitutes for ODS – Does not require substitutes to be risk-free; instead identifies substitutes that reduce environmental or health risks
  4. 4. SNAP Background • What Does SNAP Consider? – Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) – Global Warming Potential (GWP) – Toxicity – Flammability – Other Environmental Impacts • SNAP Achievements – Health/Safety and Environmental Benefits – Over 450 substitutes reviewed – Provided industry with trustworthy information to assist in transition
  5. 5. Low-GWP Foam Options • Low-GWP HCFC Alternative Options Do Exist for Foams! • SNAP Approved Low-GWP Alternatives: – Water – CO2 – HFO-1234ze(E) – Hydrocarbons – Methyl Formate
  6. 6. What Alternative to Choose? • Non HFC, low-GWP – alternatives are available, but must consider flammability and insulation efficiency • HFOs – may be good options where low flammability and insulation efficiency are important • HCs – may be good options where low flammability is not a concern • CO2 and Water – may be good options where insulation efficiency is not a concern
  7. 7. U.S. HCFC Foam Regulations • Nonessential Products Ban (1994) – Banned foam products that contain or are manufactured with HCFCs, but provided exemptions for insulating foams • HCFC-141b Ban (2003) – Limited to manufacture of foam • HCFC-22 & HCFC-142b Ban (2008) – Banned the use of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and blends thereof in commercial refrigeration, sandwich panels, slabstock, and other "pour foam" applications – Exemption for marine applications until 2009
  8. 8. U.S. HCFC Foam Regulations • HCFC Allocation Rule (2010) – Allows production & import of HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b ONLY for servicing existing equipment – All remaining HCFC foam blowing in the U.S. prohibited beginning Jan 1, 2010
  9. 9. U.S. Transition to Low-GWP Alternative Foam Blowing Agents Vintaging Model Estimates
  10. 10. PU Rigid: Domestic Refrigerator and Commercial Refrigeration Foam Freezer Insulation Non- Non- ODP/GWP ODP/GWP HFC-245fa HFC-134a HFC-245fa PU Rigid: Spray Foam Non- ODP/GWP HFC-245fa HFC- 245fa/CO2 Blend (50/50)
  11. 11. PU and PIR Rigid: Boardstock PU Rigid: Other: Slabstock Foam HC/HFC-245fa CO2 Blend (70/30) Non- Non- ODP/GWP ODP/GWP PU Rigid: Sandwich Panels: PU Rigid: One Component Foam Continuous and Discontinuous CO2 Non- HFC-134a ODP/GWP Non- HFC-134a ODP/GWP HFC-152a HFC- 245fa/CO2 Blend (50/50)
  12. 12. Flexible PU Foam: Slabstock Foam, Flexible PU Foam: Integral Skin Moulded Foam Foam CO2 Non- ODP/GWP HFC-134a XPS: Sheet Foam XPS: Boardstock Foam CO2 Non- CO2 ODP/GWP HFC-152a HFC-152a Non- HFC-134a ODP/GWP
  13. 13. Polyolefin Foam Non- ODP/GWP Phenolic Foam Non- ODP/GWP
  14. 14. U.S. EPA Contact Evelyn Swain 202-343-9956 swain.evelyn@epa.gov www.epa.gov/ozone
  15. 15. Extra Slides
  16. 16. U.S., Canada, and Mexico Propose Phasing Down HFCs via Montreal Protocol • Amendment proposal submitted 4/29/10 to be considered by 196 countries this year • Phasedown not phaseout – Stepwise reductions – 15% plateau by 2034/2044 • Covers 20 HFCs, including 2 HFOs • Limits by-product emissions of HFC-23 • Supports overall global efforts to reduce GHGs – Cumulative benefits ~3,100 MMTCO2 eq through 2020; ~88,000 MMTCO2 eq through 2050 • equals removing 59 million passenger cars each year through 2020; 420 million through 2050
  17. 17. North American Proposed Amendment Global HFC Phasedown Schedule 100% 90% 90% 90% Non-A5 Reduction Steps 80% 80% 80% A5 Reduction Steps Cap - Percent of Baseline 70% 70% 70% 60% 50% 50% 50% 40% 30% 30% 30% 20% 15% 15% 10% 0% 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Years
  18. 18. Potential U.S. Greenhouse Gases Legislation • House of Representatives passed HR 2454, American Clean Energy Security Act – Similar bills being considered in Senate • Comprehensive approach to U.S. GHG emitting sectors; creates overall cap/trade • HFCs treated separately; added to ODS framework – Production and consumption allocated with annual reductions • Uses direct allocation and auction – “Phasedown” not phaseout: plateaus 15% of baseline • Complementary measures similar to ODS program: SNAP, Labeling, Refrigerant Recovery, Products Ban

×