On the campaign trail

The trouble with starting a campaign is often the first bit requires a lot of explaining. No matter how much you think you have it crystallised in your own mind, there is always something that isn’t clear. I guess that is why people employ professional lobby firms.

However, for now at least, it is just us. So as we try to ensure the industry is allowed to keep using HFCs let’s try and put a few myths to rest.

Firstly no one is suggesting that we stop looking to use natural alternatives wherever feasible. What the campaign is all about is using the right refrigerant for the right job. And we believe strongly that for a number of applications that is still HFCs, whether it is for energy efficiency reasons, or for cost and practicality reasons.

Secondly, we are certainly not advocating standing in the face of progress, we firmly support all the efforts to move the industry forwards. The two should work side-by-side but we are concerned that over-zealous governments might try and accelerate the phase out of HFCs to win ‘green credibility’.

We believe that an early phase out will be hugely costly for the industry, especially since we have only just got a training regime in place for F-Gas – we are nowhere near the same level of infrastructure for carbon dioxide or hydrocarbons.

And finally, we are not becoming ‘apologists for leaks’ we just want government to give us a sensible time frame for review of the F-Gas regulations, since the work on stopping leaks is only just starting to bear fruit. It hardly seems fair for the industry to do all the work on leak reduction guidance – which by the way will have a big influence on standards of installation and workmanship for all types of refrigerant - only to have the whole lot sacrificed on the altar of green refrigerants.

If you have any more questions, feel free to send them to me at andrew.gaved@emap.com.

Andrew Gaved
Editor
RAC magazine

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.