TL: GREENFREEZE: A REVOLUTION IN DOMESTIC REFRIDGERATION SO: JOHN MATE, GREENPEACE INTERNATIONAL (GP) DT: NOVEMBER 1996 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2. THE OZONE CRISIS AND CFCs 3. OZONE LAYER DEPLETION SETS NEW RECORDS EACH YEAR 4. IMPACTS OF INCREASED LEVELS OF UV-B RADIATION 5. KEEPING A PLANET CHEMICALLY DEPENDENT : THE CHEMICAL INDUSTRY'S AGENDA 6. HCFCs/HFCs : INDUSTRY'S SOLUTIONS TO THREATENED PROFITS 7. REPLACING CFCs IN DOMESTIC REFRIGERATION 8. DEVELOPMENT OF GREENFREEZE 9. GREENFREEZE FROZEN OUT IN NORTH AMERICA 10. DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: THE MAIN BATTLE GROUND APPENDIX A: GREENFREEZE INFORMATION UPDATE APPENDIX B: COMPRESSOR MANUFACTURERS Greenpeace Report Prepared for Workshop of the Central America, Mexico and Spanish Speaking Caribbean ODS Officers Network 13-17 November 1996, San Jose, Costa Rica Written by: John Mat‚, Ozone Project Coordinator EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There are approximately 64 million domestic refrigerator-freezers manufactured worldwide each year. The annual growth rate in the refrigerator sector, especially in rapidly developing countries like China, India and Indonesia is 15%, while the growth rate in industrialized countries is 7%. In addition, there are hundreds of millions of domestic refrigerator units in use worldwide. Until recently, most domestic refrigerators were manufactured with the use of ozone depleting CFC-11 in the insulation, and CFC-12 as the refrigerant. In 1990, the combined total of CFC-11 and CFC-12 used in domestic refrigerators was approximately 40,000 metric tonnes. In 1992, Greenpeace initiated the development of the world's first ozone safe refrigerator technology - Greenfreeze. Greenfreeze uses hydrocarbons as the blowing agent for the insulation foam, and for the refrigerant. Hydrocarbons are completely ozone friendly, and have minimal global warming potential. Greenfreeze technology has revolutionized the domestic refrigeration industry. It has spread like prairie wild-fire throughout Western Europe and to other parts of the world, such as China and Latin America, with extensive interest from countries such as India, Cuba, Taiwan. Greenfreeze technology is in direct competition for market share with HCFC-141b and HFC-134a technologies, which are environmentally unsustainable and technologically inferior. Without the action of Greenpeace, the world would now be on a different course, heading for a future in which millions of consumers and businesses would be using chemicals which destroy the ozone layer and which cause global warming. THE OZONE CRISIS AND CFCs 10 to 30 miles above the Earth, in the stratosphere, a thin shield of gas, the ozone layer, encircles the planet and protects it from the deadly UV-B radiation of the sun. This protective shield makes life on Earth possible. Ozone is naturally created when the ultraviolet radiation of the sun split oxygen (O2) molecules into single oxygen atoms, which then link with oxygen molecules to form ozone (O3). While ozone is constantly produced if all the ozone were compressed at earth's surface pressure, to would only be as two ply tissue paper, approximately an eigth of an inch. There is an average of about 3 ozone molecules for every ten million air molecule. In the early 1970's scientists discovered that a class of chlorine containing industrial chemicals called halocarbons were harmful to the ozone layer. The most commonly used halocarbons are chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). CFCs are stable, non-toxic and inflammable compounds. They have numerous industrial applications as refrigerants, foam blowing agents, electrical circuit-board solvents and aerosol propellants. Other prominently used ozone depleting substances include HCFCs, carbon tetrachloride, halons and the pesticide methyl bromide. Once CFCs are emitted, they have an atmospheric lifetime of 100-150 year. Because they are insoluable in water, they don't get washed out of the atmosphere by rain or snow. Consequently, eventhough CFC molecules are heavier than air, they get carried by winds and aircurrents and are distributed throughout the atmosphere,. Eventually they accumulate in the stratosphere. As the CFCs move above the stratosphere, beyond the ozone layer, they get broken down by UV light, releasing the chlorine atom. The chlorine atom then combines with the highly unstable ozone molecule to form chlorine monoxide (ClO) and oxygen (O2). In a second chemical reaction, the chlorine monoxide combines with a single oxygen atom resulting in a free chlorine atom and an O2 molecule. The chlorine is then free to start the cycle over again. This chemical interaction not only destroys existing ozone molecules, but each time it prevents another ozone molecule from forming. One chlorine molecule can destroy up to 100,000 ozone molecules. OZONE LAYER DEPLETION SETS NEW RECORDS EACH YEAR Ozone layer depletion is accelerating globally. The worst ozone layer depletion is expected to occur during the next five to ten years. We may be in for even nastier surprises than what our scientists predict. Certainly, a clear pattern towards greater crisis has become a permanent feature over the past decade. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) reported that in 1994 the ozone hole over Antarctica opened up two weeks earlier than in 1993, with a record low of over 70% ozone depletion. The previous record was set in 1993 with just over 60% ozone loss." On March 3O, 1995, scientists from the Second European Stratospheric Arctic and Mid latitude experiment (SESAME) reported alarming thinning of the ozone layer over the Arctic, Siberia and Scandinavia. In some altitudes ozone levels were 50% below those previously observed. On average, a 20-30 percent reduction in Arctic ozone levels was reported. The British newspaper, The Guardian , headlined its front page story on the SESAME Report as the "First Ozone Hole Found Over Arctic". Recently released data from the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) indicate that the 1996 Antarctic ozone hole peaked at a record 10 million square miles - an area greater than the total surface area of North America. According to Dr. Rumen Bojkov, special advisor to the World Meteorological Organization, ozone levels over the Antarctic are now at the lowest level possible; all of the ozone subject to depletion by existing chemicals has been destroyed. IMPACTS OF INCREASED LEVELS OF UV-B RADIATION With the depletion of the ozone layer comes greater dangers to life on Earth. The scientific 'rule of thumb' has been that every 1% ozone depletion results in 2% increase in the amount of harmful UV-B radiation that reaches the surface of the earth. This linear relationship seems to be correct up to about 15% ozone loss. However, recent studies indicate that the ratio between ozone loss and increases in UV-B radiation becomes exponential at higher levels of ozone depletion. Thus, for example, 5% ozone loss corresponds to a10% increase in UV-B radiation but 30% and 50% ozone losses result in up to100% and 350% increases in UV-B radiation, respectively. In light of the high levels of ozone depletion observed over the Northern and Southern Hemispheres during the past five years, such non- linearities have major consequences for the biosphere and human health. Higher levels of UV-B radiation increase the risk of severe damage to human health, e.g. eye diseases, skin cancer, immune system suppression. Increased dosages of UV-B also endanger crops, forests, plants, marine life and wildlife. Highlights from the 1994 UNEP Assessment of the Environmental Effects of Ozone Depletion include: SKIN CANCER RATE ON THE RISE: Between 1979 and 1993, the incidence of non-melanoma, the most common form of skin cancer, is already believed to have risen an average of 10% in the Northern Hemisphere, between the latitudes 55 0N and 35 0N. Even bigger increases are believed to have occurred in the Southern Hemisphere. UNEP forecasts that a sustained 1% decrease in stratospheric ozone will result in a 2% increase of this type of skin cancer. IMMUNE SYSTEM AT RISK: Exposure to UV-B is now known to lower the effectiveness of the immune system. There is mounting evidence that UV-B has the ability to activate latent viruses such as papillomaviruses, herpes, and perhaps HIV. UNEP suggests that UV-B exposure might adversely influence immunity to infectious diseases, such as leishmaniasis, malaria, trichinosis, Lyme disease and fungal infections. SUN SCREEN INEFFECTIVE: There is further evidence that sunscreens are not effective in preventing suppression of the immune system on exposure to UV-B radiation. FISH STOCK AT RISK: 16% ozone depletion could result in 5% loss in phytoplankton (the basis of all food in the seas), which would lead to a loss of about 7 million tons of fish per year - about 7% of fishery yield. ANIMALS SUFFER: UV-B is implicated in the formation of skin cancer for several animals, especially commercially important ones such as cows, goats, sheep and also cats and dogs. DAMAGE TO PLANTS: UV-B radiation can alter plant form, damage tree and plant growth, change the time of flowering, make plants more vulnerable to disease and cause them to produce toxic substances. There may well be losses of biodiversity and plant species, but our ignorance of the effects of UV-B on ecosystems as a whole is far too great to allow figures to be put on these losses. KEEPING A PLANET CHEMICALLY DEPENDENT : THE CHEMICAL INDUSTRY'S AGENDA The chemical industry has fostered a chemically dependent planet. CFCs are very stable compounds and consequently have numerous industrial applications as refrigerants, foam blowing agents, electrical circuit-board solvents and aerosol propellants. For many decades CFCs provided the industry with a worldwide monopoly. Even when it became evident in the early to mid 1970's that CFCs were harming the ozone layer, the chemical companies continued to vigorously market their dangerous products and steadily opposed regulatory measures on CFCs. The industry has yet to apologize for putting life on Earth at risk, and it has yet to be held accountable or compelled to pay reparations. The following quotes from Du Pont, the developer and largest manufacturer of CFCs, and related facts, are indicative of the chemical industry's response to the pending crisis: Du Pont says that the ozone depletion theory is "a science fiction tale...a load of rubbish...utter nonsense." - Du Pont Chair Scorer, Chemical Week, 16 July 1975. "Should reputable evidence show that some fluorocarbons cause a health hazard through depletion of the ozone layer, we are prepared to stop production of the offending compounds." - Du Pont advertisement, New York Times, 30 June 1975. After the aerosol ban in 1978, Du Pont deterred further legislation controlling CFCs by warning of dire economic consequences pending regulation. Charles Masten, Director of Du Pont's Freon products division, said, "A production freeze could drive up prices artificially, and could affect consumer safety, energy costs and jobs." In 1980, Du Pont initiated the formation of the Alliance for Responsible CFC Policy, an anti-regulatory industry lobby group that found a natural ally in the Reagan administration. In 1981: Du Pont abandons its research into alternatives for CFCs, anticipating no further regulation of CFCs. Meanwhile, it expands CFC production in Japan. "When you have $3 billion of CFCs sold worldwide and 70 percent of that is about to be regulated out of existence, there is a tremendous market potential." - Joseph Glas, Du Pont Freon division director. HCFCs/HFCs : INDUSTRY'S SOLUTIONS TO THREATENED PROFITS When the international community was compelled by the pending ozone crisis to phase out CFCs the chemical industry scurried to develop new products to maintain its lucrative worldwide monopoly. In fact, the industry manouvered to forestall regulatory measures until they had their substitute products in place. Dr. Mostafa Tolba, former head of the UN Environment Programme was quoted in the June 30, 1990 edition of The New Scientist, "...the chemical industry supported the Montreal Protocol in 1987 because it set up a worldwide schedule for phasing out CFCs, which [were] no longer protected by patents. This provided companies with an equal opportunity to market new, more profitable compounds." Since the signing of the Montreal Protocol, the industry has steered the international community towards the wide scale use of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) as replacements for CFCs. These products are patented by the chemical industry, and the industry maintains full control over production, supply and pricing. As long as non-in-kind alternatives could be prevented from entering the market, the industry's global monopoly would be safeguarded. The chemical industry maintains an extensive international lobby, and expends vast resources, promoting its products. For example, on December 1, 1992 the London Financial Times reported that Du Pont had invested $450 million in HCFC and HFC production, and expects to hit the $1 billion mark in 1995, with an expected recovery period for the investment of no less than ten years. The company claims to require another ten to twenty years of HCFC and HFC production to profit above and beyond recouping their investment. However, HCFCs and HFCs are not environmentally sustainable and therefore they represent oboslete technologies. HCFCs are ozone depleting substances and are now scheduled for phase-out under the Montreal Protocol. HCFCs are slated to be phased out in industrialized (Article 2) countries by 2020, and many of these countries are aiming for a much faster phase out schedule. Meanwhile, Article 5, or industrializing countries are to phase out by 2040. In addition, both HCFCs and HFCs are potent global warming gases. Mr. Sven Auken, the Danish Minister of the Environment, expressed it well in his September 4, 1996 opening speech to the International Conference of the Use of Natural Refrigerants in Aarhus, Denmark: "Two of the global environmental problems which cause me the greatest concern are the greenhouse effect and the threat to the ozone layer....But we cannot solve one problem at the expense of another.... ...Concentrating exclusively on reducing CO2 emissions to prevent a rise on the greenhouse effect is not enough. We must also limit the emission of other greenhouse effect gases. HFCs are some of them....HFCs and other greenhouse effect gases must be regulated under the Climate Convention. I think that everybody agrees on that.... Recent estimates of the potential impact of HFCs upon the atmosphere indicate that by the year 2040, the total global HFC market could be around 1.35 million tonnes a year, which would be the equivalent to 15% of current fossil fuel emissions. REPLACING CFCs IN DOMESTIC REFRIGERATION The decision regarding which alternative refrigerants and insulation blowing agents are most suitable for replacing ozone depleting CFCs in domestic refrigeration, should be based on such criteria as: o environmental compatibility o safety requirements o energy efficiency o technological compatibility with existing equipment o appliance service considerations o cost factors o availability o recovery considerations o short and long term global market prospects. During 1993/94 the natural refrigerants, hydrocarbons R290 (propane) and R600a (isobutane), or blends of R290/R600a, have emerged as the major contenders against the synthetic compound HFC-134a for market acceptance as refrigerant substitutes to CFC 12. Similarly, another hydrocarbon, cyclopentane, is successfully competing for market share against HCFC-141b in insulation foam blowing. Greenpeace, along with an increasing number of engineers and scientists, maintains that the future of environmentally safer refrigeration lies with natural substances, such as hydrocarbons, CO2, ammonia, water, air. Among these natural substances, hydrocarbon technologies are the most readily available at the present time for commercial production of domestic refrigerators. The use of hydrocarbons in domestic refrigeration predates the invention of the "miracle" compounds - CFCs -in the early '30s. In the United States, in the mid '30s, out of 60 different refrigerator brands, 11 used isobutane as refrigerant. The refrigerant charge in those refrigerators is estimated to have been approximately 1.5 kg (3.3 lbs), of isobutane. In comparison, today's hydrocarbon refrigerators, with hermetically sealed compressor systems, use between 30 to 70 grams (1-2.5 oz.) of refrigerant, depending on the size of the refrigerator. That is 20-50 times less refrigerant used under much safer conditions. The recent advent of hydrocarbon technology in domestic refrigeration represents a positive technological reach "back to the future". A reach to the past in order to secure the future. Hydrocarbons are flammable, a risk factor which is over emphasized by the proponents of HFCs and HCFCs. The flammability of hydrocarbons can be easily mitigated through adequate safety measures in production and product design. This has been demonstrated both in engineering research, and in the marketplace, through the rapid spread of the hydrocarbon based Greenfreeze technology. Indeed, as one looks at the range of products and appliances that utilize flammable materials, such as electricity, natural gas, oil and gasoline, it is clear that society has chosen to mitigate and accept the risks posed by these flammable materials in exchange for the goods and services they provide. However, the negative environmental impact of both HFCs and HCFCs, that is, significant contributions to global warming, and in the case of HCFCs, significant contributions to ozone depletion, cannot be adequately mitigated. This factor was underscored by the October 3 draft decision of the Eco-Labeling Regulation Committee of the European Commission which states that the 'Eco-Label' should only be applied to refrigerators that have: (a) completely eliminated ozone depleting substances in use or manufacture of insulating materials and the operation of the cooling system; and (b) use refrigerants and foaming agents that have less than or equal to 15 GWP (global warming potential) over a 100 year time line. The Committee's recommendation rules out all refrigerators using HCFC 141-b or HFC 134-a. Refrigerators using the hydrocarbon based Greenfreeze technology will qualify for the 'Eco-Label'. The coveted 'Eco-Label' insignia informs environmentally concerned consumers that a product meets minimum standards for environmental protection. DEVELOPMENT OF GREENFREEZE In the spring of 1992 Greenpeace brought together scientists who had extensively researched the use of propane and butane as refrigerants, with an East German company DKK Scharfenstein. The meeting between the scientists and DKK Scharfenstein resulted in the birth of 'Greenfreeze' technology for domestic refrigeration. Greenfreeze uses a mixture of propane (R290) and isobutane (R60Oa), or isobutane as a pure gas for the refrigerant. The energy efficiency of the propane/butane refrigerators has proved to be as good as, or better than those cooled with CFCs or HFC-134a. Hydrocarbons are flammable but their flammability can be easily mitigated through adequate safety measures in production and product design. The content of propane or butane in a domestic 'Greenfreeze' refrigerator equals roughly the content of two cigarette lighters. When DKK Scharfenstein (renamed Foron) announced their intention to mass produce "Greenfreeze", Greenpeace gathered tens of thousands of pre-orders for the yet-to-be-produced new refrigerator from environmentally conscious consumers in Germany. This overwhelming support from the public secured the capital investment needed for the new 'Greenfreeze' product. The major European household appliance manufacturers, who had already invested in HFC-134a refrigeration technology as the substitute for CFCs, were at first resistant to the hydrocarbon technology. However, once DKK Scharfenstein proceeded with its plans, the major manufacturers also began to convert to hydrocarbons. Within two years Greenfreeze has become the dominant technology in Europe. Many models of 'Greenfreeze' refrigerators are now on sale in Germany, Austria, Denmark, France, Italy, Netherlands, Switzerland, and Britain. All of the major European companies, Bosch, Siemens, Electrolux, Liebherr, Miele, Quelle, Vestfrost, Whirlpool, Bauknecht, Foron, AEG are marketing Greenfreeze- technology based refrigerators. There are over 10 million hydrocarbon refrigerators in the world today. 100 percent of the German market has converted to Greenfreeze technology. Greenfreeze refrigerators are available in many sizes, and a wide variety of models, including no-frost freezer compartments. In countries like Germany and Denmark, there are over 100 different Greenfreeze models. There has not been one reported accident from the use of hydrocarbons as refrigerants. Hydrocarbon refrigeration technology has also spread to other continents. Most significantly, as a result of joint Greenpeace and GTZ initiatives in China, Haeier company has almost completed its conversion of at least one line to Greenfreeze. Other Chinese companies are expected to follow suit. Similarly, four projects in Argentina have been approved by the Multilateral Fund for conversion to Greenfreeze. GREENFREEZE FROZEN OUT IN NORTH AMERICA The North American refrigeration industry , like their European counterparts, has retooled to work with HCFC-141b and HFC -134a. However, unlike their European cousins, the North Americans are presently unwilling to make a second conversion by switching to hydrocarbons. Even some manufacturers, like Whirlpool and Electrolux, that market Greenfreeze in Europe have so far declined to do so in the North American market. Their rationale has been that Greenfreeze technology is incompatible with the large size and automatic defrost features of North American refrigerators because of the flammability isues. However, the larger European Greenfreeze models, with no frost features, demonstrate that these technological obstacles are in essence an excuse for a bad business decision. The future of 'Greenfreeze' in North America will ultimately be decided by the consumers. North American consumers are just as sophisticated and environmentally conscious as their European counterparts. Soon the major manufacturers will realize that a domestic 'Greenfreeze' refrigerator offers huge market potentials in North America, just as it has in other parts of the world. DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: THE MAIN BATTLE GROUND Clearly, the advent of Greenfreeze caught the chemical industry and the major North American refrigerator manufacturers off guard. A Du Pont newsletter, written in 1990 but circulated as late as 1992, ridiculed those, like Greenpeace, who were calling for an immediate ban on ozone depleting substances such as CFCs and HCFCs, by smugly remarking: "We certainly have the option of no longer refrigerating our food supply, 75% of which is refrigerated as it is harvested, processed, stored, distributed or served. Are we prepared to be totally dependent on food that is consumed as soon as it is harvested? Or food that is dry, canned, smoked, salted or pickled to prevent spoilage?" The newsletter then asserts that for "...40% of the CFC market, largely refrigeration, no completely environmentally neutral alternative has yet been developed, nor is any likely in the near future." Greenfreeze technology, all of a sudden, became a contender for a share of the world market. HCFC/HFC technology suddenly had to face competition from a technology which under most criteria is clearly superior. This was not part of the plans of the chemical industry, nor their corporate clients. The greatest battleground for marketshare is presently in developing countries with their rapidly expanding economies, and an annual growth of 15% in the refrigerator sector. Hydrocarbon technology offers many benefits to these countries. These benefits include: o independence and sovereignty in supply of non-patented foaming agents and refrigerants o lower costs for foaming agents and refrigerants resulting in lower operating costs o avoidance of the costs of a two step conversion which include retrofitting equipment, changing production lines, and training of personnel o easier maintenance and servicing than HFC-134a technology o environmentally sustainable As Dr. Sukumar Devotta (Engineering Services, National Chemical Laboratory, India) stated: "There are some developing countries, e.g. India and China...with a substantial domestic market...which are self reliant in the manufacture of both refrigerants and related hardware . The developing countries cannot afford double changes. They would prefer to assess the merits and demerits of the possible alternatives before making a final choice so as to continue to maintain their current technological independence...." Proponets of HCFC/HFC technologies argue that hydrocarbons are too expensive because of the extra costs of safety design and equipment. While it is true that there are additional capital investments involved, the Multilateral Fund provides a 35% incremental cost allowance to cover those safety related expenses. On the long run hydrocarbons are much more cost effective than HCFC and HFCs. Information provided in UNEP document ExCom 20/65 on Safety Related Costs in Projects Using Hydrocarbon Technology, clearly indicates in paragraph 24, that operating costs for141b/134a technology is nearly five times more than for hydrocarbon technologies. HCFCS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES The refrigeration and foams sectors account for more than 90% of HCFC use in the world. It is in these sectors where environmentally safe and competitive alternatives, in both domestic and commercial applications, have been most rapidly developed. It should also be emphasized that safety standards have been produced and that market-wise these alternatives have been very successful. As the March 1995 TEAP Report states: "... in many refrigeration and air conditioning applications, HCFCs are becoming less important for new equipment than for servicing existing equipment originally designed to use CFCs and HCFCs". (Non- Article 5(1) Party Scenarios, p.28) In the foam sector, the World Bank's Ozone Operations Resource Group wrote in 1994: "Cyclopentane technology is commercially proven and is the most cost effective of the zero ODS technologies." A 1994 UNEP document "Elimination of CFCs from Domestic Refrigeration Manufacture" wrote: "In most parts of the world (other than USA whose present interest is in HCFC-141b) cyclopentane now has the major share of all new conversions to alternatives." The 1995 TEAP Report noted: "In many cases developing countries can avoid investments in HCFCs technology that was at one time considered to be the best choice but has now been rendered unnecessary by newer and more environmentally acceptable technology". (Article 5(1) Party Scenarios, p.30) HFC-134A IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES The impact of HFC-134a technology upon the service sector of developing countries should be of special concern to governments and industries, as well as to the Multilateral Fund of the Montreal Protocol and its Implementing Agencies. It is apparent that HFC-134a technology is being foisted upon domestic refrigeration industries in Article 5 countries without adequate information. Recent information from developing countries point to severe technological problems associated with HFC-134a in the area of servicing. These problems are associated with the synthetic ester oil lubricant that 134a requires. Ester oil is extremely sensitive to contamination from water vapour and other impurities. It makes home servicing very difficult at best circumstances, and even more so under most conditions prevalent in developing countries. In fact, HFC-134a may well prove to be a technological nightmare for the service sector of Article 5 countries. This may compel refrigerator manufacturers that have not yet converted to remain with CFCs, and convincing those that have converted to switch back to CFCs. Greenpeace, together with other NGOs, is calling upon the Parties to the Montreal Protocol to initiate an independent in- depth investigation of HFC-134a technology, which would examine the suitability of this technology for Article-5-countries, and include an evaluation of representative cases of HFC-134a projects executed so far by the Multilateral Fund and its Implementing Agencies. Such investigation should also focus on the needs and realities of the formal and informal service sectors in developing countries. APPENDIX A: GREENFREEZE INFORMATION UPDATE There are approximately 10 million Greenfreeze based refrigerators in the world today. With an annual global refrigerator production of 65 million, Greenfreeze is less than 10% of the production volume. It is nevertheless expanding. It is evident that Greenfreeze is by far a preferable product, especially for developing countries. HFC based refrigerators face large problems in servicing, as HFC 134-a needs synthetic ester oil as lubricant, and this oil is very sensitive to contamination by water vapour and other impurities. Worldwide, of all the conversion projects approved under the Multilateral Fund up to June 1996, out of a total of 8,070,800 refrigerator units, 5,884,400 will have hydrocarbon (cyclopentane) as blowing agent for the insulation, and 2,186, 400 will be using HCFC 141-b. Projected share of the market for hydrocarbon refrigerants in Western / Northern Europe is 80% by 1997, up from 40% in 1995. HFC 134-a is expected to have 20% of the market in 1997, down from 50% in 1995. Besides Europe, interest in Greenfreeze has been expressed in Argentina, Cuba, China, Taiwan, and India. Some Japanese companies have converted to hydrocarbons for insulation foam blowing, but none have yet selected hydrocarbons for the refrigerant. There is no Greenfreeze in North America (US and Canada) yet, although consumers are beginning to ask for it. All the North American manufacturers have switched from CFCs to HCFC and HFCs. APPENDIX B: COMPRESSOR MANUFACTURERS Compressor Manufacturers: Overview of regional distribution of compressor production capacity (in thousand units), share of hydrocarbon compressors (Source: World Bank- Hydrocarbon Technology Workshop Papers: Table-33) Type Western North Latin Eastern Japan/ Mid.East Total Europe America America Europe Asia /Other Domestic Compres. Electrol 10,300 8,000 1,500 400 20,200 Embraco 5,000 9,500 1,000 15,500 Matsushita 5,000 8,000 13,000 Danfoss 7,000 7,000 Daewoo 2,500 2,500 Sanjo 1,800 2,500 4,300 Turk Elektrik 1,500 1,500 Hitachi 1,000 1,000 Necchi 4,000 4,000 TOTAL 25,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 20,000 5,000 80,000 HC 4,500 0 100-500 100 1,000 100 500 Approximately 65 million compressors are produced annually for domestic refrigerators. The three largest manufacturers with over 15 million compressors annual production: o Matsushita (production mainly in Malaysia): Japanese/Korean o Electrolux (Italy, Austria, Spain, US, China, Egypt, India) -Zanusi (Italy) o Whirlpool (Embraco / Brasil : production sites in Brasil, Italy, China) -Espera (Italy) -Hermetic Unit (France) Hydrocarbon compressor producers include: o European factories of Electrolux, Zanussi, Unidad Hermetica, o Verdichter Oe, Embraco Brazil (Whirlpool), Matsushita o Independent European manufacturers: Danfoss (Denmark), Necchi (Italy), Foron (Germany) o Danfoss is the leadsing manufacturer with 2.5 million sold in 1995 o Americold (Electrolux subsidiary): North American isobutane prototype Total global market share for HC compressors is 10%, 40-45% for HFC-134a