Obama Tells the World Yet Again That He’s Going After Air Conditioning

3
Share
obama in germany
Obama in Germany

While in Germany this week, Barack Obama again talked about the TPP and the urgency of climate change. He specifically mentioned banning hydrofluorocarbons which the EPA head Gina McCarthy described as a greater threat than CO2. They are after our air conditioning and they re after it soon.

Almost everything he does hurts the middle class.

“I should add by the way that given the urgency of climate change, and the economic and maternity of clean energy–economic opportunities of clean energy, we have signed an agreement and we believe it needs to be implemented quickly,” Obama said in his speech Friday.

gina-mccarthy-epa-commissar

Gina McCarthy wrote an op-ed for the guardian last year in which she emphasized the EPA’s attack on air conditioning. The title of the article is all you need to know – Potent greenhouse gases should have no place in our air conditioning units. 

Refrigeration, and insulation are also on the hit list because they contain HFCs (Hydrofluorocarbons). Without any proof, she’s declared them “hundreds or thousands” of times more damaging than CO2. “Hundreds…thousands”, no difference to her.

At the international meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol in Dubai, all parties agreed on a “Dubai Pathway” for controlling climate-change-inducing hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) worldwide, which the TPP will be used to foster. HFCs are chemicals used in air conditioning, refrigeration, foams and aerosols as replacements for many ozone-depleting substances that are being phased out under the Montreal Protocol.

We are now looking for “global laws,” according to McCarthy.

McCarthy wrote: President Obama’s Climate Action Plan is aimed at reducing HFC emissions both at home and through international leadership. Over the past year, the EPA has completed four separate actions that both expand “the list of safer alternatives to HFCs and prohibit them from certain uses in the refrigeration air conditioning, foam, and aerosol sectors where safer alternatives such as hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs), hydrocarbons and lower-polluting blends are available.”

This will cost us but two crony companies will rake in the money.

The EPA is going to ban HFCs and it will happen soon.

They will do this under the Clean Air Act which is one of the worst power grabbing acts passed by the EPA. It circumvents Congress as do the Clear Water Act and Clean Power Plan. Together, they will ruin our economy.

The EPA is writing legislation.

In 1990, Congress amended the Clean Air Act to create a regulatory regime for implementing the Montreal Protocol. The Clean Air Act §612 then established the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program, which is the device for achieving the ozone treaty’s goals. Under SNAP, the EPA is empowered to ban chemicals that deplete the ozone layer, if the agency concludes that there are alternatives that would do less environmental harm, according to globalwarming.org.

It allows the EPA to pick winners and losers.

HFCs were put in as a result of the Montreal Protocol which congress approved to close the hole in the Ozone layer. For 25 years, they have not posed a threat to the ozone layer, they are non-toxic, and they are non-flammable. Now they are seen as having high “potential” global warming footprints and as more dangerous than CO2.

The Montreal Protocol was never meant to mitigate global warming but he’s expanding the US version along those lines any way. Congress only passed the Protocol because they thought they were fixing a hole in the Ozone layer. The Protocol never approved banning HFCs but Obama is doing it by fiat via the EPA.

Du Pont and Honeywell are pushing for this change because Americans will be forced to buy their products.

Globalwarming.org pointed to the problem of banning HFCs which are nonflammable and can be operated under low pressures. The available products closest to market for commercial refrigeration are highly flammable or must be used under very high pressure. Yet the EPA is saying that non-flammable HFCs are a greater risk to human health than those that can can go up in flames or have to operate under high pressure due to the HFCs potential carbon footprint, which is totally abstract.

That is ridiculous, even for the EPA.

McCarthy has even said that the regulations won’t impact the climate so the change is worthless but using flammable chemicals could blow us up.

 

Share

3 COMMENTS

  1. The article hits some of the main points, but the issues are bigger and much is already carved in stone. R-22 is gone in 4 years and its replacement R410a will be gone soon too because it has a higher GWP (Global Warming Potential) than R22. There are no proven replacements, only the tightening fist of Goobermint demanding a pound of flesh for Mommy Earth.
    Jimmy Carter gave us sick building syndrome and it took years to unwind that. The new goal is “Zero Net” buildings coupled with efficiencies that are wholly unrealistic. The EPA is out of control, but that was the plan wasn’t it?
    The new rules and regs will be a s_it storm for everybody, all it will take is money, and you know, we have plenty of it.
    Have fun being the guinea pigs for all this new technology folks. All we ever had to do was ratchet down on refrigerant recovery and give ourselves time to develop alternatives and let technology prove itself. Instead, your stuff is going to have a shorter service life, be expensive to repair, and create a new set of problems that need fixing.

Comments are closed.