SNAP Stakeholder Workshop: Fire Protection Sector. December 2, 2015

Transcription

1 SNAP Stakeholder Workshop: Fire Protection Sector December 2, 2015

2 2 Welcome and Introductions

3 Climate Action Plan: HFCs Continue international diplomacy Lead negotiations under the Montreal Protocol to phase down HFCs Global phase down could reduce over 90 gigatons of CO2eq by 2050, equal to roughly two years worth of current global GHG emissions Work with partners in the Climate and Clean Air Coalition to Reduce Short- Lived Climate Pollutants to promote climate-friendly alternatives to high- GWP HFCs, address technical standards, and reduce emissions from HFC use Address HFCs through domestic actions Use existing Clean Air Act authority of Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program to approve climate-friendly chemicals, prohibit some uses of most harmful Provide federal leadership by purchasing cleaner alternatives to HFCs whenever feasible and by transitioning to equipment using safe, more sustainable alternatives 3

4 Background Scope of Meeting Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program Overview of Recent Actions & Future Considerations Alternatives for Fire Protection Sector Discussion 2

5 Evaluates alternatives & lists alternatives as: Acceptable - those that reduce overall risk to human health & environment Acceptable with use restrictions - if needed to ensure safe use Unacceptable Sectors include: Aerosols; Foams; Refrigeration and A/C; Solvents; Fire Suppression; Adhesives, Coatings, Inks, etc. Considers: 5 Ozone-Depletion Potential Global Warming Potential Flammability Toxicity Local Air Quality Ecosystem Effects Occupational & Consumer Health/Safety

6 SNAP Actions Issued two acceptability notices adding alternatives Issued new rule adding five low-gwp flammable refrigerants with use conditions Published Status Change Rule prohibiting certain HFCs in certain end-uses HFC Emissions Avoided: MMTCO2eq in Near term changes can provide both near and long term benefits 6

7 July 2015: Change of Status Rule Aerosols Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Retail Food Refrigeration & Vending Machines Foams HFC January 2016 HFC-227ea & blends - July 20, 2016 HFC-134a - July 20, 2016/January 1, 2018 HFC-134a in New Light-Duty Systems - MY 2021 HCFC & HFC Containing Blends in New Light-Duty Systems - MY 2017 New Supermarket Systems - January 2017 New Remote Condensing Units - January 2018 New Vending Machines - January 2019 New Stand-Alone Units (small medium-temp, large medium-temp, low-temp)- January 2019/January 2020 Retrofitted Retail Food Refrig Equipment and Vending Machines - July 20, 2016 All End-Uses, Except Rigid PU Spray Foam-Various dates between January 2017-January 2021

8 Some Key Principles Guiding Our Thinking SNAP rules will continue to consider individual end-uses No across the board GWP cut offs No prohibition on HFCs as a whole, or in any one sector New HFCs or HFC blends may be listed if risk not greater than other available substitutes Recognition that timing is a critical dimension and that each end use has unique considerations Status change actions will be issued through notice and comment rulemaking 8

9 September 11 Stakeholder Meeting EPA considering proposed rule that could include: Listing acceptable alternatives with use conditions Refrigeration & air conditioning end-uses for flammable refrigerants; Fire suppression: e.g., streaming agent for aviation Listing of unacceptable alternatives Certain HC and HC blends for stationary AC retrofits and MVAC systems Change of listing status from acceptable to unacceptable EPA considering later transition dates than in July 20 th final rule End-uses based on stakeholder comments, EPA analysis Refrigeration and A/C Rigid PU spray foam Fire suppression: e.g., PFCs, SF6, HFC-23 9

10 Next Steps Continue to expand SNAP acceptable list Continue to work with stakeholders E.g., Food Cold Chain Workshop in Montreal (held November 21st) Sector workshops and Stakeholder meetings Develop next SNAP Notice for acceptable listings Develop next SNAP Rule to include alternatives that are: Acceptable with use conditions Unacceptable Change of status 10

11 Total Flooding System Applications Commercial (including maritime) Telecommunication Computer rooms Data processing centers Maritime Museums Libraries Hospitals Medical Industrial Aviation Military Clean rooms Petrochemical Production lines Grain elevators Engine nacelles APUs Cargo compartments Aircraft lavatory trash receptacles Crew spaces of armored vehicles Aviation engine nacelles and dry bays Shipboard machinery spaces 11

12 Total Flooding Alternatives GWP HCFCs and HCFC Blends 609-1,546 HFCs and HFC Blends 1,598 14,800 PFCs 8,830 8,860 FK (Novec TM 1230) <1 CF 3 I 0.4 PBr 3 0 Inert Gas Blends 0 Inert Gas Generators <1 Carbon Dioxide 1 Water 0 Water Mist Systems 0 12 Powdered Aerosols 0

13 Streaming Agent Applications Commercial (including maritime) Cable trays Computer rooms Data centers Telecommunications Electronic compartments Ship control rooms Transmission Utility vaults Art galleries Banking Libraries Retail and wholesale Warehouses Industrial Aviation/Aerospace Military Process control Motor control rooms Manufacturing plants Clean rooms Oil and gas Conventional and nuclear power plants Hazardous materials storage areas Onboard aircraft Control towers Aircraft flight lines Aircraft ramps Aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicles Spacecraft Electronics Ship control rooms Training Aircraft flight lines 13

14 Streaming Agent Alternatives GWP HCFC Blend B 222 HFCs 3,220-9,810 PFC 9,300 FK <1 FK (C7 Fluoroketone) 1 CF 3 I 0.4 H Galden HFPEs 2,790 6,230 Dry Chemicals 0 Carbon Dioxide 1 Water 0 14

15 EPA considering a proposed rule that may consider: Listing of 2-BTP as acceptable in certain applications Change of listing status from acceptable to unacceptable for: PFCs (C 3 F 8 and C 4 F 10 ) in fire suppression total flooding uses PFC (C 6 F 14 ) in fire suppression streaming uses Request for comments and updated information on total flooding uses of SF 6 and HFC-23 Comments on July SNAP final rule, recent petitions suggested EPA also consider fire suppression applications Seeking stakeholder input pre-proposal given interest in applications 15

16 Open Dialogue Questions and Answers

17 Discussion Questions What specific end-uses and applications need additional low-gwp alternatives? Are additional submissions anticipated for fire protection applications (e.g., new chemicals, new blends, existing chemicals for new applications, new processes or technologies)? Under SNAP, a potential substitute is often submitted for review for more than one use in a particular sector. EPA reviews substitutes on an end-use by end-use (or end-use category) basis. Is it helpful for EPA to move forward with listings in particular end-uses where we have made a determination recognizing we may still be reviewing other end-uses? 17