Emission profiles from the foam and refrigeration sectors comparison with atmospheric concentrations. Part 2: results and discussion
Emission profiles from the foam and refrigeration sectors comparison with atmospheric concentrations. Part 2: results and discussion
复制标题
泡沫和制冷行业的排放概况与大气浓度的比较。
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2004.08.003
复制
发表时间：
2004
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. Kuijpers
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. Ashford;D. Clodic;A. Mcculloch;L. Kuijpers
对消耗臭氧层化学品和温室气体的消费和排放进行建模一直是《蒙特利尔议定书》和《京都议定书》缔约方面临的一项挑战。其中一个特别的挑战是，在排放出现重大延误的部门，如何对消费量进行有代表性的建模，并由此造成“库存”的积累。包括本文作者在内的几位专家在过去5年中一直积极建立来源数据库，并随着新信息的出现继续完善估计。政府间气候变化专门委员会决定委托编写一份关于影响两项议定书之间相互关系的因素的特别报告，这促使人们从目前的知识状况中得出结论。本文件是这一举措的产物，因为它涉及延迟排放的两个关键部门：制冷设备和绝缘泡沫。如标题所示，该文件记录了这两个部门的消费量、库存量和排放量的发展情况，并利用这些数据来估算预期的大气浓度。然后将这些估计数与测得的大气浓度进行比较，以评价所用建模方法的适当性，并确定仍然存在差异的领域。已作出努力，尽可能解释这些差异，但人们认识到，这一过程仍需不断完善。这项工作的主要结论是，制冷剂和泡沫发泡剂的排放量将继续远远超出目前研究的范围（1990-2015年），到2015年，库存量将分别为250万吨和300万吨。然而，由于排放率较高和产品寿命较短导致制冷部门周转较快，因此每一库存的构成有很大不同。这意味着，在满足技术和经济标准的情况下，某些发泡剂库存中的氟氯化碳成分可能成为减少未来排放对气候变化影响的重要目标。对制冷部门而言，更好地控制、在寿命结束时回收、再利用或销毁以及更换制冷剂都是关键的选择。有明确的证据表明，对主要用作发泡剂的氟化化合物的大气浓度预测不太确定。这部分是因为预测对长期使用阶段假设的排放函数的高度依赖性。一个小的差异可以对结果产生重大影响。美国家用冰箱行业等主要市场部门的报废情景也存在持续的不确定性。这些领域是继续研究的重点。
The modelling of consumption and emissions of ozone depleting chemicals and greenhouse gases has been a challenge for the communities of both the Montreal and Kyoto Protocols. One of the particular challenges has been the representative modelling of consumption in sectors with substantial delays in emission and the resulting accumulation of ‘banks’. Several experts, including the authors of this paper, have been active in building databases of sources over the last 5 years and have continued to refine estimates as new information has come to light. The decision of the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change to commission a Special Report on factors influencing the interface between the two Protocols has acted as a stimulus to draw conclusions from the current state of knowledge. This paper is the product of this initiative as it relates to two key sectors of delayed emission: refrigeration equipment and insulating foams. As the title indicates, the paper documents the development of consumption, banks and emissions for both sectors and uses these to develop estimates of anticipated atmospheric concentration. These estimates are then compared with measured atmospheric concentrations in order to evaluate the appropriateness of the modelling approaches used and to identify areas where discrepancies remain. Efforts have been made to explain these discrepancies wherever possible, but it is recognised that the process remains one of continuous refinement. The major findings of the work are that emissions of refrigerants and foam blowing agents will continue well beyond the scope of the current study (1990–2015), with banks of 2.5 and 3 million tonnes, respectively, remaining at 2015. However, the composition of each bank is very different because of the more rapid turnover in the refrigeration sector led by higher emission rates and shorter product lifetimes. This means that the CFC component of some blowing agent banks may provide a significant target for reducing climate change impact of future emissions where technical and economic criteria are met. For the refrigeration sector better containment, recovery at end of life, re-use or destruction, but also change of refrigerant are the key options. There is clear evidence that the atmospheric concentration predictions for those fluorinated compounds predominantly used as blowing agents are less certain. This is partially because of the high dependence of the prediction on the emission functions assumed during the long use phase. A small variance can have a significant impact on the outcome. There are also continuing uncertainties about end-of-life scenarios for major market sectors such as the US domestic refrigerator sector. These areas are the focus of continuing study.