TECHNET Archives

April 2000

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Tue, 11 Apr 2000 10:13:46 +0300
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (54 lines)
David

You are correct. Kyoto mentions specifically PFCs and HFCs, but this is
understood to include derivatives, such as the ethers, which also have
very high GWPs. The problem is that the F-C bond is short and strong
(bond dissociation energy 552 kJ/mol @ 25 °C), as opposed to Cl-C (397)
or, weaker still, Br-C (280). It is for this reason that PFCs are
virtually non-toxic, because the bond will not readily break down in the
body, nor in the atmosphere (nor, for that matter, at even 200+°C in the
vapour-phase machine). It is this stability which is so desirable, yet
also so harmful. Unlike chlorocarbons and bromocarbons, there is almost
no tropospheric (or even stratospheric) hydrolytic or photolytic
breakdown of the fluorocarbon molecules, which is why molecules
containing F but no Cl, Br or I are considered non-ozone depleting. The
3M HFE cleaning solvents are also classed with the DuPont HFC ones,
having GWPs of the same order, albeit 2 orders less than PFC/Es. It is
probable that the first amendment to the KP will specifically correct
this semantic anomaly, but this cannot happen until after ratification
by the appropriate number of countries.

Hope this helps.

Brian

David Suihkonen wrote:

>  Brian, I should have contacted two gentlemen via land line, I took
> the easy way out on a Friday afternoon, my apologies. To respond to
> your further comments, it is my understanding that the Kyoto Protocol
> lists 6 gases.carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide,
> hydroflourocarbons, perflourocarbons, and sulphur hexaflouride. Both
> Dupont and Ausimont vapor phase fluids are a perflouropolyether. Not a
> perflourocarbon.You may be correct in the assumption that the 3M FC
> product is a perflourocarbon, but because I do not know for sure, I
> will not comment. If requested, I will post my results of
> conversations with 3M when available. I am unfamiliar with the F2
> product you mention. If you would like more clarification these 3
> fluids, I can relay contact information on these fluid
> manufacturers. Best Regards,David Suihkonen

##############################################################
TechNet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
##############################################################
To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the body:
To subscribe:   SUBSCRIBE TECHNET <your full name>
To unsubscribe:   SIGNOFF TECHNET
##############################################################
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information.
If you need assistance - contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
847-509-9700 ext.5315
##############################################################

ATOM RSS1 RSS2