TECHNET Archives

January 2013

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 <[log in to unmask]>, Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:11:40 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
There is no real alternative to HCFC-225, which was developed as a 
substitute for CFC-113. According to the Montreal Protocol, it is an 
Annex C, Group 1 Controlled Substance, all of which should already be 
phased down to 65% of all HCFCs on 1 Jan 2010 and 90% on 1 Jan 2015. The 
EPA are at liberty to tighten these rules beyond Protocol requirements 
or to trade off some essential HCFCs against the less essential ones. 
They are therefore in their rights to impose a 100% phase-out on 1 Jan 2015.

There are no direct drop-in substitutes, but there are two classes of 
near ones that may be worth exploring but they are both more expensive 
and their blends may have other characteristics which may restrict their 
use. One is an azeotrope of HFC-43-10mee which has a very high global 
warming potential. The other is an azeotrope of HFE-7100x with a 
somewhat lower GWP, but still significant. Both are poor solvents and 
are blended with trans-1,2-dichloroethylene to provide better solvent 
characteristics; this may attack some polymers. DCE is more toxic but 
has, so far, escaped regulation. There is no certainty that these 
substances will not be banned, particularly the former, or restricted at 
some unknown future date because of their GWP.

IMO, you have 2 years to explore substitutes. If I were you, I would 
certainly be exploring aqueous solutions. These are already widely used 
in industries such as yours.

Brian

On 17/01/2013 04:01, Mary Davis wrote:
> We are a manufacturer of high reliability electronics for aerospace.  Our defluxing if performed in vapor degreasers using AK225AES or Kleen ATMS, both solvents based on AK225.  The EPA has mandated phase out of AK225 by January 1, 2015 and we are looking for alternatives.  I am wondering - are there others in the same situation who would be willing to exchange ideas?
>
> Mary Davis
> Materials & Process Engineer
> Crane Aerospace & Electronics
> [log in to unmask]
>

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2