US president, Donald Trump, has rolled back the HFC phase down extending compliance deadlines to 2032.
While the US government is still committed to an overall 85 per cent cut in HFC production and consumption by 2036, the new timeline has rolled back the 150 GWP limit for refrigerants used in refrigeration equipment from 2027 to 2032.
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also announced plans to exempt transport refrigeration from HFC leak restrictions introduced in 2024.
US EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said these two actions will save American families and businesses more than $US2.4 billion.
Zeldin told a media conference the initial timeline was a 'rushed, frantic, reckless sprint.”
“Today, the Trump EPA is fulfilling President Trump’s promise to lower costs and is fixing every problem we can under the authority Congress gave us,” he said.
“Our actions allow businesses to choose the refrigeration systems that work best for them, saving them billions of dollars. This will be felt directly by American families in lower grocery prices."
While a number of major retailers are supporting the new timeline, trade bodies and climate groups have been critical of the changes.
Heating, Air Conditioning & Refrigeration Distributors International (HARDI) figures show the changes will likely produce the opposite of their stated goal.
HARDI CEO, Talbot Gee said the changes undermine the market certainty needed to support the ongoing HFC phase down and risks increasing refrigerant demand beyond what the industry is legally allowed to supply.
“Rather than lowering costs or easing the transition, extending the use of high-GWP refrigerants in major commercial refrigeration applications will increase demand for refrigerants whose supply is already being reduced by law, putting upward pressure on prices and increasing the likelihood of shortages across the HVACR market,” Gee said.
According to HARDI estimates, the increased demand for these refrigerants could cost the refrigeration industry nearly $8 billion in refrigerant costs alone, with economic ripple effects increasing the total cost to $13 billion.
HARDI warned that the impacts will not be limited to supermarkets or cold storage facilities, but will affect the broader HVACR market, including contractors, distributors, building owners, manufacturers, and consumers.
Gee said the final rule appears to reflect the preferences of a narrow segment of the food retail sector that supported the changes over the well-being of the most-affected HVACR businesses and their customers.
“That is not how sound rulemaking should work,” he said.
“Many food retailers are already moving toward lower-impact refrigeration systems, and advocacy efforts to delay the transition are increasingly disconnected from the direction many businesses have already chosen.”