If F-gases are obsolete because safer solutions already exist, why are they still used? Fluorinated gases, or F-gases, account for nearly two-thirds of all PFAS emissions – by far the largest source of PFAS pollution. At the same time, the main use of F-gases in heating and cooling systems is technologically unnecessary.

ChemSec spoke to Fredrik Strengbohm of Assemblin, who has been installing PFAS-free systems for 20 years.

Fredrik, if F-gases are obsolete, then why are they still a problem?

It’s because the large chemical producers are trying to squeeze every last penny out of F-gas production. The EU has a plan to phase them out, but there is loophole for gases known as HFOs, which decay into a highly problematic PFAS called TFA.

There is also resistance to switching to natural refrigerants — even if it means big efficiency savings. It’s not possible to simply swap F-gases with natural refrigerants in existing heat pumps, companies need to install new technology.

‘F-gases are not needed because safer solutions already exist’

Is it because this technology isn’t “sexy”?

This year, the experiments ATLAS and CMS in the world’s largest particle accelerator at CERN in Geneva will start to install a new cooling system using CO2. The aim is to achieve a drastic cut in F-gas emissions. It will achieve temperatures as low as -53°C.

On the contrary, developments in natural refrigerants are astonishing!

This year, the world’s largest particle accelerator at CERN in Geneva will start to install a new cooling system using CO2 for its ATLAS and CMS experiments. The aim is to achieve a drastic cut in F-gas emissions. It will achieve temperatures as low as -53°C.

CERN is well-known as an incubator for cutting-edge “deep tech”, which then spreads into the global economy. The internet originated there.

There are more examples. Since 2008, all of Unilever’s ice cream freezers have operated entirely on natural hydrocarbons, such as propane. This ice cream business (now called Magnum) is the largest in the world. The Coca-Cola Company began a similar shift to F-gas-free refrigeration 17 years ago.

The latest generation of cooling systems for supermarkets, which began switching to natural refrigerants more than 15 years ago, can achieve 70% energy savings compared to legacy systems.

To me, this is quite sexy!

Some say F-gases are much simpler to use than natural refrigerants.

I don’t agree with that. There are several major technical problems with F-gases. First, at certain temperatures and pressures, they can harden and polymerise. This clogs valves, restricts flow, lowers efficiency and capacity, and means you need to replace the refrigerant in the system

Second, synthetic refrigerants are dangerous when incinerated at the end of the machine’s life, producing highly corrosive and toxic byproducts. You therefore need specialist technicians and facilities to safely dispose of them.

There are some limitations on cryocooling (very low temperatures) in pharmaceutical manufacturing, but there are projects underway to develop this technology. For the vast majority of uses, F-gases are obsolete because safer solutions already exist.

Speaking of limitations, aren’t some natural refrigerants dangerous?

Some are flammable like propane, some are toxic like ammonia, and some require high pressure to function, which is the case for CO2. But with today’s control technology, these obstacles are easily overcome and not really a problem.

‘The technological shift is happening, so why not do the right thing?’

If F-gases are obsolete, will natural refrigerants replace them?

The short answer is yes. But I get frustrated every time I see new installations of F-gas refrigerants when there are zero technical or commercial reasons to do so.

The green transition depends on low-carbon cooling systems and heat pumps. But what’s the point if these systems are full of PFAS?

Natural refrigerants are more efficient and more profitable. As more F-gases are phased out due to EU regulations, lower production volumes will reduce their profitability. In other words, it will become more and more expensive to continue with them.

What impact do you think an EU PFAS ban will have on F-gases?

The F-gas regulation is not enough on its own. We need the PFAS restriction to provide certainty for businesses, which will in turn put pressure on the market. The restriction would provide greater clarity and predictability, which are lacking today.

The technological shift is already under way, so why not do the right thing? Why should we continue with old, dangerous technology when alternative solutions already exist?