Gina McCarthy wrote an op-ed for the guardian Monday in which she promoted 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. She is warring against air conditioners.
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.
We don’t only have to worry about the climate summit in Paris in December. We have to worry about the international meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol in Dubai where “the United States will make a powerful case for better management of HFC pollution worldwide”.
We are now looking for “global laws,” though the EPA is unilaterally enacting the laws no matter what is decided at the Protocol.
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 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.
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.
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.