Preserving montreal protocol climate benefits by limiting HFCs

Science

Volumn 335, Issue 6071, 2012, Pages 922-923

  Velders, Guus J M ^a   Ravishankara, A R ^b   Miller, Melanie K ^c   Molina, Mario J ^d   Alcamo, Joseph ^e   Daniel, John S ^b   Fahey, David W ^b   Montzka, Stephen A ^b   Reimann, Stefan ^f  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT   (Netherlands)

^b EARTH SYSTEM RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

^c Touchdown Consulting   (Belgium)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e United Nations Environment Programme   (Kenya)

^f SWISS FEDERAL LABORATORIES FOR MATERIALS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORINATED HYDROCARBON;

CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON; CLIMATE CHANGE; DEVELOPING WORLD; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; GREENHOUSE GAS; KYOTO PROTOCOL; POLLUTION CONTROL; PRESERVATION;

ATMOSPHERE; CLIMATE; CLIMATE CHANGE; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; GREENHOUSE EFFECT; GREENHOUSE GAS; LAW; MONTREAL PROTOCOL; OZONE LAYER; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SHORT SURVEY;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84863405348     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1216414     Document Type: Short Survey

References (17)

1. UNEP, Report of the 22nd Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol, Annex III, Declaration on the Global Transition Away from HCFCs and CFCs (UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya, 2010).
2. 2.
3. V. Ramanathan, Science 190, 50 (1975).
4. Radiative forcing is a measure of how a climate-forcing agent influences the energy balance of Earth.
5. G. J. M. Velders et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 4814 (2007).
6. IPCC and Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP), Special Report: Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: Issues Related to Hydrofluorocarbons and Perfluorocarbons, B. Metz et al., Eds. (Cambridge Univ Press, New York, 2005).
7. TEAP, 2010 Assessment Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya, 2011).
8. The presence of HFCs in the atmosphere arises almost completely from their use as substitutes for ODSs. HFC-23 is an exception. It results primarily from unintentional production and release during the production of HCFC-22.
9. World Meteorological Organization (WMO), Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2010 (Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project Report no. 52, WMO, Geneva, 2011).
10. S. A. Montzka et al., Nature 476, 43 (2011).
11. G. J. M. Velders et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106, 10949 (2009).
12. IPCC, Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, J. T. Houghton et al., eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 2001).
13. TEAP, Progress Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya, 2010), vol. 1.
14. W. Schwarz et al., Preparatory study for a review of Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 on certain fluorinated greenhouse gases (Öko-Institute, Freiburg, Germany, 2011).
15. UNEP, HFCs: A Critical Link In Protecting Climate and the Ozone Layer (UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya, 2011).
16. 2 per ppb; typical values for commercially used HCFCs and HFCs. An annual release from the bank of 13% is assumed, typical for refrigeration and air conditioning (9). The low-GWP scenarios are based on the assumption that from 2015 onward all demand for HFCs [taken from (11)] is met by substitutes with shorter lifetimes.
17. The opinions expressed here are those of the authors and not of their institutions.