One could argue that the legislation that raised the minimum efficiency of air conditioners and heat pumps to 13 SEER resulted in thinner tubing walls, more evaporator coils leaks, and, as a result, more ozone-damaging freon released into the atmosphere.
Freon is a brand name, a company that makes (or used to make) refrigerants. The same refrigerants were made by Genetron, Isotron, Forane, and perhaps other companies.
Saying "Freon" is like saying Sunoco, or saying Tylenol, or Kleenex. It's a brand name.
Further, there are several different types of Freon, like there are different types of Sunoco, or of Tylenol.
snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:
You're posting the comment above as though you wrote it yourself. It is in fact a quote from the page you referenced aftwards. There is a correct way to quote excerpts from a reference, and what you did isn't it.
I find it odd that the article talks repeatedly about formaldehyde corrosion, but then includes a photograph of corrosion caused by salt- spray. Huh?
Freon is DuPont's trade name for their refrigerants:
formatting link
Chloro fluoro carbon compounds were banned as ozone depleting substances and replaced by fluoro carbons without chlorine. Chloro carbons like carbon tet also fell under the ban.
Which had its own unintended consequences. I used to do fire investigations in a heavily Amish area right about the time the Carbon tet ban was taking effect. The Amish, among others, used it heavily in their chimney fires. So, we rolled up on this pretty well gutted house and found 2-3 regular fire extinguishers just sitting there full loaded in the fireplace. The chief told us that he was going to have a couple of fire extinguisher sessions at the local Amish hall to let them know that you couldn't just throw them into the fireplace, have them bust open and take care of the fire.
I'm not sure I get this.... I remember the old carbon tetrachloride fire extinguishers that you pumped to squirt it on the fire. You're saying the Amish would just throw the whole thing in a fire to put it out? And that they then thought it would work with other fire extinguishers too? Even with carbon tet, it would take a while for the heat to cause it to finally burst. In the meantime, the fire spreads. Not a very effective way of using it. And throwing the fire extinguisher in the fire would destroy a perfectly good extinguisher that could be refilled. Really dumb.
Some of the early carbon tet units were glass balls. You'd throw them at the fire, the ball would break and release the liquid.
I've also heard of old guys turn a fire extinguisher upside down, because the old soda acids had to turn bottom up. With the new units, all you'd get upside down is propellant.
Freon is DuPont's trade name for their refrigerants:
formatting link
Chloro fluoro carbon compounds were banned as ozone depleting substances and replaced by fluoro carbons without chlorine. Chloro carbons like carbon tet also fell under the ban.
In the 40's we used carbon tet during radio repairs. Squirted it into radio cabinets to kill the cockroaches before removing the back covers. Also had a five gallon can to dip the chassis into to clean them. Bare handed no masks. Learned in later years how dangerous to health that was. Surprised I am still here to type this. WW
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 19:44:32 -0600, "WW" wrote in Re Re: The adverse effects of legislating efficiency::
Maybe it isn't as dangerous as the Feds claim. When I look at all stuff the Feds claim is "dangerous" and how much our society used all of it years ago, ISTM we should all be dead.
Yes, I'd have to guess they did come with a furnished manual. I wonder how many times in my life, I use the old instructions on the new device, and wonder why the freon thing doesn't work?
. Christ> >> That's a real shame. To lose a house, cause no one
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.