The European Partnership for Energy and the Environment (EPEE) has released a report which examines the best options for Europe to reduce PFAS emissions from F-gas refrigerants.
Conducted by Environmental Resources Management (ERM), the report looks at three options comparing their environmental benefits, economic costs and technical feasibility.
The EPEE said the report’s conclusion is clear: the most cost-effective option is not to impose stricter restrictions at any cost, but to build on the existing EU F-gas Regulation, while doing more to reduce leaks and keep refrigerants in use for longer through recovery, recycling and reclamation.
According to the assessment, this approach would cut PFAS emissions by 39 per cent and limit the economic impact to $US5.34 billion (€4.6 billion) between 2030 and 2050.
More restrictive options would cost over $US40.6 billion (€35 billion), while delivering lower or comparable environmental benefits.
EPEE director general, Russell Patten, said Europe does not have to choose between reducing emissions and protecting its economy.
“This study shows that our industry can manage and reduce refrigerant emissions, delivering on environmental goals while safeguarding jobs, competitiveness and essential heating and cooling technologies,” Patten said.
The Executive Report also highlights that there is currently no universal alternative refrigerant suitable for all refrigeration, air-conditioning and heat pump applications. In many cases, alternatives are constrained by safety, flammability, toxicity, pressure and performance requirements.
EPEE underlines that heating, cooling and refrigeration technologies are essential for heat pump deployment, cold chains, industrial processes, district heating and cooling, and data centre cooling.
“The final regulatory framework should therefore reduce emissions while remaining technically feasible, proportionate and coherent with the EU F-gas Regulation,” he said.