Challenges to Replace ODS in PU Appliance Foams in Developing Countries

Challenges to Replace ODS in PU Appliance Foams in Developing Countries Paulo Altoe Dow Brazil April 2008

Blowing Agent Status - Phase Out of CFC and Growth Predictions for Blowing Agents Source UNEP Report 2001 Source TEAP Report 2006

HCFC Major Volume for Replacement Developing Countries Source TEAP Report 2006

HCFC Major Volume for Replacement Developing Countries Blowing Agent PU Rigid Foam ~ 200 MT Source TEAP Report 2006 Blowing Agent Consumption - Breakdown per Foam Type Total ~ 360.000 tonnes Flexible PU 29% Rigid PU 53% Source: TEAP Report, 2006 Phenolic 1% Polyethelene 1% Polystyrene 16%

HCFC Major Volume for Replacement Developing Countries Decreasing, % 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 48% Simulaton of HCFC Phase-Out In Developing Countries Original and New Agreement of Montreal Protocol 52% Montreal Protocol - Agreem ent 2007 Montreal Protocol - Original Rules Decrease 5% from 2015 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Blow. Agent in Appliance Foam most important volume 2010 Base Line 2013 Freeze Prod., consumption 2015 Reduction 10% 2020 Reduction 35% 2025 Reduction 75% 2040 Reduction 100% 2015 Base Line 2016 Freeze Prod., Consumption 2040 Reduction 100%

Driving Forces in PU Rigid Foams for Appliances Energy Environment Cost Low K Bl. Agents Vacuum Panels Compressor Efficiency Design Multi-injections Wall Thickness Energy Labels Energy Efficiency Montreal Protocol Industrial Hygiene Product Lifetime Eco-design Renewable RM Recycling Energy labels Environment & Regulations Cost & Productivity Low Density Low Blow. Ag. Level Low voids Flow ability Fast Demold Mech. Properties Dim. Stability

Blowing Agents History in PU Rigid Foams Technology for Appliances CFC 11 CFC 11 50% red. HCFC 141b c-pentano HFC 134a HFC 245fa HFC 365mfa/227fa Iso-/n-pentano c-pentano/lbhc

Energy Eficiency and Marketing Need: Refrigerator s energy classes 1992 2005 (CECED) 15% A A >75%% Differentiation Class A has become market reference

Challenges of HCFC Replacement > Right Choice of Blowing Agents Physical and Environmental Properties of Blowing Agents How to address Energy Efficiency Environment & Regulations and Costs?

Challenges of HCFC Replacement > Advances in Rigid Foam Technology for Appliances Closed cell : Thermal conductivity contribution factors ~ 60% ~20% ~20% λ Foam = λ gas + λ solid + λ radiative λ gas λ solid = Gases inside foam cells = Bulk polymer {215-245 [mw/mk]/[g/cc]} λ radiative = Radiative processes (10-16 [mw/mk]/[mm of cell diameter]} Developments are focused on Bl. Agent and Radiative factor with cell size reduction

Challenges of HCFC Replacement > Advances in Rigid Foam Technology for Appliances Lambda, mw/mk @ 10 C 20.8 20.6 20.4 20.2 20.0 19.8 19.6 19.4 19.2 19.0 18.8 18.6 18.4 18.2 1 2 3 4 5 Pos-Expansion, Jumbo Mold (mm) at 8 minutes CP Gen 3 CP Gen4 Iso-/N-Pentano Gen 1 Iso-/N-Pentano Gen 2 CP Gen 2 CP Gen 1 HFC134a CP Gen 2+ CP/HFC245fa HFC245fa HCFC 141b CFC 11 50% Molded Density Trend CP Gen 1+ HCFC 22/142b Low K Technology for HC & HFC 245fa 0.1442 0.1428 0.1414 0.1401 0.1387 0.1373 0.1360 0.1345 0.1331 0.1317 0.1303 0.1290 0.1276 0.1262 6 BTU.in/ft²hr F

Challenges of HCFC Replacement > Advances in Rigid Foam Technology for Appliances Nucleation Site per cc of foaming mixture 25,000,000 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 0 Maximum possible radius of initial bubbles (μm) 15.7 23.6 31.5 39.4 47.2 55.1 30,000,000 6.0 Nucleation Sites Area left for improvement We are here today with multi-injections Initial CP Foams Estimation of radiative conductivity 100 150 200 250 300 350 Cell Size (μm) Maximum gain of radiative contribution, ~3 mw/m.k Cell Size Reduction 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Radiative Thermal Conductivity mw/(m K)

Challenges of HCFC Replacement > Advances in Rigid Foam Technology for Appliances Response k-foam_usa HFC 245fa Actual by Predicted Plot 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08.08.09.10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18 k-foam_usa Predicted P<.0001 RSq=0.99 RMSE=0.0014 k-foam_usa Actual Summary of Fit RSquare 0.994215 RSquare Adj 0.993953 Root Mean Square Error 0.001433 Mean of Response 0.125992 Observations (or Sum Wgts) 301 Contour Profiler HorizVert Factor Temperature Bulk: HFC-245fa Cellsize Core Density 2 Response k-foam_usa 400 Cellsize 350 300 250 200 150 100 0.15 0.145 0.14 Contour 0.13 Current X 24 0.91 225 2 Current Y 0.1301849 0.135 0.13 0.125 0.12 Lo Limit. k-foam_usa 0.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9 1 Bulk: HFC-245fa Hi Limit. Low K Technology for HFC 245fa General rule is: 10 micron reduction in cell size yields 0.001 btu improvement in foam k-factor Target needs to be approaching 100 microns hoping to get a k-factor near 0.120 btu Maybe as large as 140 micron cells size if consider 100% HFC-245fa Issues: Density, Cost, Processing!

Challenges of HCFC Replacement - Advances in Rigid Foam Technology for Appliances Modeling Simulation

Challenges of HCFC Replacement Yes Cooling System Add Cost : C8 Evaporator Add Cost : C9 Compressor Add Cost: C10 New Cooling System Evaporator Compressor No Work Concluded Choosing the preferred Blowing Agent - Diagram Cabinet & Foam No No Initial Foam Characteristics Environment, Energy, Cost Choosing Blowing Agent Flammable Foam Review Foam Characteristic Needs Cabinet, Doors Redesign Yes Yes Cabinet Plant Processing Cabinet & Foam Machinery & Processing Storage Processing Operation Machinery Pre-Mix Fire Brigade Training Cabinet Mold Door Mold Fixtures Add Cost : C6 Cabinet Mold Door Mold Plastic Liners Add Cost: C7 Storage Bulk Drums Detectors Add Cost: C1 Pre-Mixing Piping Ventilation Detectors Add Cost: C2 Processing Piping Ventilation Detectors Add Cost: C3 Machinery Ventilation Detectors Add Cost: C4 Training Fire Brigade People Add Cost: C5

Challenges of HCFC Replacement - Energy Improvement - Options and Cost 40 1.9 2 Potential Energy consumpt. reduction in % Cost per % saving, Euro/% 1.7 1.8 1.6 Potential energy saving, % 30 20 1.4 0.9 0.8 0.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 Cost per % improvement, Euro/% 10 0.38 0.2 0.4 0.04 0.4 0.2 0 0.0 4.5 0.0 10.0 20.0 35.0 0.0 3.0 8.0 5.0 2.5 18.0 3.0 Cooling gas 134a Cooling gas isobutane Compressor Standard Compressor High Efficiency Compressor Very High Efficiency Compressor Variable Speed Blowing Agent c-pentane and blends Optimized PU System c-pentane Blowing Agent HFC-245fa Cabinet foam Thickness for each 10mm increase Door foam Thickness for each 10mm increase VIP Door Design 0

Challenges of HCFC Replacement-Simulation of Cabinet Costs

Challenges of HCFC Replacement-Simulation of Foam Cost vs Blowing Agent MUS$ 800000 Simulation - HCFC 141b Replacement - Brazil, China, India Annual Gains(+) or Losses(-) = 500M Units/Y 600000 400000 200000 0-200000 -400000 HCFC 141b Water C-pentane CP/isob C-isop HFC134a HFC245fa US HFC245fa China -600000-800000 Protocol: Foam = HCFC141b, 35 kg/m3 and lambda 18.5-19.5 mw/mk @ 24C Cabinet with 35 mm thickness Successfully Implemented: Europe India, China

Challenges of HCFC Replacement-Simulation of Cabinet Costs

Challenges of HCFC Replacement-Simulation of Foam Cost vs Blowing Agent MUS$ 600000 Simulation - HCFC 141b Replacement - Andean Countires & Mexico Annual Gains (+) and Losses in Foam = 500M units/y 400000 200000 0-200000 -400000-600000 -800000-1000000 HCFC 141b Water C-pentane CP/isob C-isop HFC134a HFC245fa US HFC245fa China Protocol: Foam = HCFC141b, 34 kg/m3 and lambda 18.0-19.0 mw/mk @ 24C Cabinet with 35 mm thickness

Challenges of HCFC Replacement- Simulation Incremental Cost per Cabinet vs Options Simulations - Incremental Cost per Cabinet vs Options Compressor, 10% + Efficient Cooling System Options Foam thickness, 10mm Plant Modification HC, 3 years Tooling Cabinet Redesign, 3years HFC 245fa USA Price 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 US$ Plant Modification to Hydrocarbons From 0.8 3.5 MM US depending on the size

Conclusion * HCFCs Elimination is a Very Difficult Task Apart From all Technology Advances * HCFC Elimination by HFC 24fa Favorable for Energy Efficiency, Non Flammable, High Cost, High GWP Additional costs - Predominantly in Cabinets - Less in Machinery & Processing Cost in cabinets - Remain until the cabinet model is produced, limited payback Investment - Low in Machinery, High in Raw Material (High cost of Blowing Agent) * HCFC Elimination by Hydrocarbons Favorable to the Environment, Medium for Energy, Very Low GWP Additional costs - Predominantly in Machinery & Plant Processing - Less in Cabinets -Cost in cabinets Depending on the re-design Investment - High in Machinery & Plant Processing with Payback, - Low in Raw Material (Low cost of Blowing Agent) * Other Options To be evaluated case by case Blends of HC/HCFC can be an option for China where HFC245fa has lower price Higher water blown content with other blowing agents will depend on applied molded density and Energy Efficiency requirements Modeling, Simulations and Formulation Science are great help for Bl. Agent comparison before final decision is taken

Back Up - Slides Paulo Altoe Dow Brazil April 2008

Challenges of HCFC Replacement - Energy Improvement - Options and Cost Freezer door 6% Refrigerator Door 10% Seals & accessories and others 19.6% Full foamed cabinet 24% Glass 5.4% Plastic for accessories 4.3% Condensor/evaporator 11.4% Compressor/condensor 20% Compressor 23.2% Accessories 18% PU Foam 12.2% Packaging 4% Liner Material 9.6% Manpower 8% Fixed cost 10% Metal 14.3% ** excludes Manpower and fixed costs

Conversion Cost to Hydrocarbon - Estimation Conversion Cost to Hydrocarbons US$ Storage 100000 Ventilation 80000 Safety Control - Cabinets 35000 White Book 22000 Safety Report 15000 Pre-Mix Polyol + Hydrocarbon 150000 PU Machine + Mixing Head 300000 Civil Construction Engineering Man Power Total 702000

Back Up - Slides Paulo Altoe Dow Brazil April 2008

Challenges to Replace ODS in PU Appliance Foams in Developing Countries Paulo Altoe Dow Brazil April 2008