The unforeseen impacts of the F-gas ban that we have overlooked.

Thomas recently moved into a new house and is determined to improve its energy efficiency. He is interested in replacing his outdated boiler, which runs on fossil fuels, with an electric heat pump. He has been reading about his government’s efforts to promote the use of millions of heat pumps to help Europe reduce carbon emissions and achieve energy independence. Unfortunately, the European Union has prohibited the use of fluorinated refrigerants, and Thomas cannot use equipment that uses alternative, non-fluorinated refrigerants in his home. This means he will have to continue using his gas boiler, and he is not alone as there are hundreds of thousands of EU residents facing the same challenge.

If the EU moves forward with extensive restrictions on F-gases, as is currently being discussed among the European Parliament, European Commission, and Council of Ministers, this could become our reality. Although exceptions have been proposed to protect industry, there is a potential for significant consequences for consumers due to the uncertainty and limitations surrounding alternative refrigerants in terms of safety, energy efficiency, and suitability. Furthermore, the initial assessment conducted by the Commission is now inadequate as the scope of the changes has extended far beyond its initial purpose.

Thomas is not alone in facing this situation. For some, the cost of nonfluorinated refrigerant equipment may be a concern as it can be more expensive. The initial intention behind this regulation was positive, but it has now become a political and dogmatic issue, ignoring scientific evidence and reasoning.

Without any apparent advantages for the climate, thoughtless prohibitions on HFCs, ultralow-GWP HFOs, and their blends neglect to take into account the energy efficiency and safe operation of equipment and products that are essential to the daily lives of Europeans. Additionally, with rising temperatures in Europe, cooling has become a necessity for many people, and the most cost-effective solution is to have combined systems that can provide both cooling and heating.

What are refrigerants?

The cooling, air conditioning, and heat pump industry requires a substance to absorb and release heat. This industry utilizes a variety of refrigerants, including fluorinated options like HFCs and HFOs, as well as non-fluorinated choices like carbon dioxide, ammonia, and hydrocarbons. Selection of refrigerants is based on various considerations, such as their impact on global warming, efficiency, safety regulations, and technical requirements specific to the application and location. It is crucial for the industry to carefully select the most suitable refrigerant for each use in order to ensure device safety and energy efficiency.

Challenges and solutions

Europe must align with the Montreal Protocol and Kigali Amendment in order to decrease the use of new HFC gases. This will involve a mixture of methods such as recycling HFCs, decreasing the amount and potency of HFCs, and utilizing ultralow GWP HFOs and nonfluorinated refrigerants. No single solution can fully address the global issue of reducing HFC consumption.

Prohibiting the use of fluorinated refrigerants would hinder Europe’s efforts towards sustainability instead of helping achieve it. Thomas serves as an illustration of how heat pumps are being implemented at a slower pace instead of being rapidly adopted. This could impede the progress of reducing carbon emissions from buildings throughout Europe, which have the potential to significantly decrease energy consumption. Eurostat reports that half of the EU’s energy consumption is for heating and cooling, predominantly from non-renewable sources.

Supporting well-meaning citizens

EU consumers are committed to protecting the environment, but imposing blanket bans on fluorinated refrigerants would limit their options for decarbonizing their homes. Similar political issues have arisen in various countries, such as Germany’s debate on heating requirements and the EU’s inconsistent support for an F-gas ban while allowing fossil-fuel boilers to continue under the Energy Performance of Buildings negotiations. By disregarding scientific evidence and exceeding its authority, the European Parliament is asking for costly investments from industry and placing the burden on consumers with ineffective legislation. It goes against environmental logic to make it harder to install heat pumps and easier to install fossil-fuel boilers.

Manufacturers have an established track record of constantly innovating to offer more efficient, cost-effective and flexible heat pumps and other applications. While phasing down the use of virgin HFC refrigerants is a necessary step in reaching our climate goals, banning all fluorinated gases, including HFOs and their blends, will put these goals in jeopardy.

All are in agreement that heat pumps will be the way of the future. There are numerous homes and buildings throughout the EU that are ready for a change. Let’s not hinder well-intentioned individuals from installing heat pumps in these locations by limiting the market to only those with nonfluorinated or “natural” refrigerants.

The industry is in favor of a bold plan to reduce carbon emissions in Europe, but it must be practical. Implementing bans on F-gases without a proper assessment of their impact would hold no value. Enforcing bans before conducting a review would hinder manufacturers’ ability to plan and innovate, preventing the development of new and improved products that could contribute to an effective decrease in HFCs. There is still time to pass a revised F-gas Regulation that is feasible and fair. Let’s not force well-intentioned individuals to limit their options due to high costs or unachievable goals. These products are not a luxury, but rather essential for daily life, and we cannot leave consumers without access to them.