Thomas just moved into a new home and is committed to making it more energy efficient. He wants to replace the aged boiler, which relies on fossil fuels, with an electric heat pump. He has been reading about his government’s plans to support the rollout of millions of heat pumps to reach Europe’s decarbonization and energy independence goals. Unfortunately, the European Union has banned fluorinated refrigerants, and his home isn’t a suitable application for equipment using so-called ‘natural’ nonfluorinated refrigerants. It seems he’s stuck with his gas boiler — and Thomas is one of hundreds of thousands of EU citizens who will potentially experience the same issue.
This is the reality we could face if the EU goes ahead with broad F-gas bans, which are under serious consideration at the trilogue discussion between the European Parliament, European Commission and Council of Ministers. While exemptions have been offered as safeguards to industry, we risk an enormous impact on consumers due to the inability to fully rely on the safety, energy efficiency or suitability of alternative refrigerants. In addition, the original impact assessment carried out by the Commission is no longer fit for purpose, as the scope of the revision has spread so far beyond its intention.
What began as a well-meaning regulation has become political and dogmatic — disregarding all scientific fact and logic
There will be many in the same predicament as Thomas, while for others cost will become a factor, since equipment using nonfluorinated refrigerant can be more expensive. What began as a well-meaning regulation has become political and dogmatic — disregarding all scientific fact and logic.
And all this without any clear benefits in terms of climate impact. Thoughtless bans of HFCs and ultralow-GWP HFOs and their blends fail to consider the energy efficiency and safe performance of equipment and products that are part of Europeans’ everyday lives. What’s more, as temperatures rise across Europe, cooling has become a requirement for more Europeans, and combined systems that provide both cooling and heating are the best way to achieve this in an affordable manner.
What are refrigerants?
The refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pump sector need a working fluid to absorb and release heat. The sector uses a full range of refrigerants, including fluorinated refrigerants like HFCs and HFOs, and nonfluorinated refrigerants, such as carbon dioxide, ammonia and hydrocarbons. Refrigerants are selected based on many factors, including low global warming potential, efficiency, safety standards, and technical limitations demanded by the application and location. The sector must be able to choose the best refrigerant for each application to guarantee the safety and energy efficiency of the devices.
Challenges and solutions
Europe, in alignment with the Montreal Protocol and Kigali Amendment, needs to reduce the consumption of virgin HFC gases. This will require a combination of recycling HFCs, lowering the GWP and quantity of HFCs, and using ultralow GWP HFOs and their blends, as well as nonfluorinated refrigerants. No one option can solve the global HFC phasedown challenge on its own.
No one option can solve the global HFC phasedown challenge on its own
Banning all fluorinated refrigerants would make many of Europe’s sustainability goals inaccessible rather than reality. Thomas is just one example of the deceleration of heat pumps, rather than an ambitious rollout. We risk slowing down the decarbonization of buildings across Europe — buildings which hold so much promise to reduce our energy usage. According to Eurostat, half of all energy consumed in the EU is for heating and cooling, with most of it still powered by fossil fuels.
Supporting well-meaning citizens
Consumers across the EU want to do the right thing when it comes to protecting the environment, but thoughtless broad bans on fluorinated refrigerants would leave them with fewer options to decarbonize their homes. We have seen the political pitfalls of these actions play out again and again across the Continent: in the row regarding heating obligations and encouragement in Germany, while at EU level, certain policymakers are inconsistently supporting an F-gas ban while securing a long life for fossil-fuel boilers under the Energy Performance of Buildings trilogue negotiations. By ignoring the science and going beyond its mandate, the European Parliament is asking industry to invest millions in bad legislation and for consumers to carry the burden. It simply doesn’t make environmental sense to make it more difficult to install a heat pump and easier to install a fossil-fuel boiler.
By ignoring the science and going beyond its mandate, the European Parliament is asking industry to invest millions in bad legislation and for consumers to carry the burden
Manufacturers have an established track record of constantly innovating to offer more efficient, cost-effective and flexible heat pumps and other applications. While phasing down the use of virgin HFC refrigerants is a necessary step in reaching our climate goals, banning all fluorinated gases, including HFOs and their blends, will put these goals in jeopardy.
Everyone agrees heat pumps are the future. There are millions of homes and buildings across the EU that are ripe for change; let’s not make it difficult or impossible for well-meaning citizens to put heat pumps in these places by shrinking the market to only those with nonfluorinated or so-called ‘natural’ refrigerants.
Industry is proud to support an ambitious plan to decarbonize Europe, but it must work in practice. Passing unfeasible bans on all F-gases without a proper impact assessment will be worth no more than the paper it is printed on. Putting bans in place before assessment review will only serve to handicap manufacturer planning and innovation, sacrificing enormous potential to develop new, even better products that would otherwise contribute to an effective HFC phasedown. Days remain to pass an F-gas Regulation revision that is workable and balanced. Let’s not force well-meaning citizens into limiting options that are also expensive or unattainable. These products are not a luxury. They are essential for everyday life, and we can’t afford to leave consumers in the lurch.
