R134A Ban in Switzerland

[taz24]

This shows the people of Switzerland that the government is doing more than other euro states to protect the environment.
I think commentators call it 'for domestic consumption '

The UK will be phaseing out 134a soon.
The IOR are looking into it.

taz.

[Gary]

It's not about whether you or I is right, it is about use being here to fight about it and water that wont mutate your children/grand children.

The end of mankind? Mutant grandchildren? And you think I'm paranoid?

Does your fantasy include mutant ninja turtles?

[Peter_1]

Thats my point, a slight effort in changes habits gurentees a better futur, not to mention saves you money and opens more resources for a better way of life.

I find the middle, I balance every thing against its self so for there is no reason not to try and minimize waste and reduce energy uses and every reason to from savings to less polution!

MgPonny, this is exactly how I see it, slight effort in changes habits guarantees a better future.
And referring to the past Gary is mostly a wrong way to prove something or support your ideas.
You have to look forwards.
It's not because something went a certain way in the past that it will follow now the same way.

And what MGPonny says about mutating is perhaps exagerating a little bit but I live along the Belgium coast. This happened never when I was young but every ummer now, some parts of the sea are so poluted that they have to close some big parts of the beach.
Look around the widespread cancers, everybody know certainly someone around him who has cancer. When I was young, there were not so much peoples with cancer around me.
Look what happened in Tsjernobyl, in Bopal,.... These are facts my friend. We're destroying nature and those who don't see this are more than blind.

[Gary]

We are not talking about voluntary efforts, nor are we talking about persuasion. We are talking about laws. We are talking about forcing the non-believers to conform and punishing those who do not.

Are you willing to punish people on the off chance that they may be causing some ill defined and unproven harm in the far distant future? I am not.

Before I advocate punishment, I want to be damned awful sure that the harm is real.

Prove it.

[Gary]

And what MGPonny says about mutating is perhaps exagerating a little bit...

But he claims to be anti-alarmist and guided by solid science. What does "alarmist" mean if not exageration?

I can't wait to see the solid science behind the mutant grandchildren theory. But wait... he says he doesn't have to prove anything.

Not wanting to be spoonfed, I will do an online search for "Mutant Grandchildren Theory". I'm sure there must be volumes of solid scientific data on the subject.

[Gary]

And referring to the past Gary is mostly a wrong way to prove something or support your ideas.
You have to look forwards.

On the contrary, we must learn from our mistakes.

If/when the Ozone Depletion Theory is proven false, will all of the laws which were passed be repealed? Will those who have been punished as a result of it be compensated? Will the environmentalists who exagerated (just a little bit) humbly apologize for misleading the public?

Or will we ignore the past and continue to enact real laws with real punishments based upon exagerated claims and unproven theories?

The sane, measured, reasonable response to the Ozone Depletion Theory (whether ultimately proven right or wrong) was the phaseout of CFC refrigerants at the manufacturing level (as originally proposed by the involved scientists themselves)

... and nothing else.

All the rest of it was (and still is) unnecessary overkill based upon the 1980's equivalent of the Mutant Grandchildren Theory.

Is it unreasonable to demand proof before passing laws and punishing people?

[taz24]

Is it unreasonable to demand proof before passing laws and punishing people?

Gary I do not totaly agree with the evidence that claims we are causeing all the woes of the world.

That said though, if there was the slightest possible chance that we were to blaim for the changes in the worlds weather paterns, would it be worth any price to minimise the problem?

taz

[Gary]

There is a slight chance that you will be struck by lighting at some time in your life. Are you willing to pay absolutely any price (in the form of extraordinary precautions) in order to avoid that possibility?

Or is there some level of precautions that you would consider to be reasonable and some level of precautions that you would consider to be unreasonable... perhaps even insane.

[The MG Pony]

The end of mankind? Mutant grandchildren? And you think I'm paranoid?

Does your fantasy include mutant ninja turtles?

your inability to understand abstract thought is disapointing. Oh well some people just don't get the idea behind the words, sorry can't make it any simpler for you.

[The MG Pony]

But he claims to be anti-alarmist and guided by solid science. What does "alarmist" mean if not exageration?

I can't wait to see the solid science behind the mutant grandchildren theory. But wait... he says he doesn't have to prove anything.

Not wanting to be spoonfed, I will do an online search for "Mutant Grandchildren Theory". I'm sure there must be volumes of solid scientific data on the subject.

Ok Now I must ask are you realy this brain dead or are you just being asinine?

Go take a cup of water from a lake here, its called trout lake in Vancouver, if you live through the night remind me to send you a get well card, oh and some of the lovely chemicals in the pollutents cuase sever birth defects ie mutations, fatal ones but mutations non the less.

Denial only works for so long and in the end distroys you. I've sat back and watched the science and observed my environment, I grew up in a place where you could drink ditch water with out worry, now days it will kill you, odd thing is same ditch, differant time, why now is the water toxic that was once clean and safe?

Did nature put gasoline by products oil and tars into it for a luagh?

You are going off on wild as$umptions and taking quasie sarcastic statemts and prentending them to be serious, is reality so scary to you that you must do this? Frankly the out look is scary to see what living conditions are becoming, and attitudes like that have kept the USA the worlds worst polluting country, even more so then China! How is this possible is beyond me, but now they too are catching up, what then?

How maney have died in New york after 9/11 due to air pollution? Is this alarmist? How is informing people of the reality of the situation alarmist? Then what does that make you? Antireality alarmist?


Or is being a energy pig really so important to your culture that you will ignore a reality staring you in the face and change nothing to run to a polluted futur?

This is fact, other countries have all ready gotten there, past civilizations far stronger and superior have consumend them selfs to oblivion, and you are all ready on that road, we all are, but thank fully now we are realizing it and trying to get off it, well some of us.

[The MG Pony]

Oh and Garry LEARN WHAT THE WORD THEORY MEANS!

Christ at least then you'll have a bloody clue.

[Gary]

Have I, at any point in this discussion, stated that pollution doesn't exist... or that nothing should be done about it? I don't think so.

Does the pollution of Trout Lake in Vancouver prove that mankind is causing global warming... or that outrageous taxation and regulation can avert global warming? Hardly.

I am not opposed to reasonable solutions to proven problems, nor am I opposed to reasonable precautionary measures in response to solid scientific theories. The key word here is "reasonable".

But when have environmentalists ever been reasonable? The hallmark of the environmentalist movement is gross overkill. It is a movement that is heavily dominated by its lunatic fringe.

[WINJA]

Theres many lakes near me , one of them is toxic yet the one closest to town and the coal mine is ok for swimming and drinking , not all water pollution or toxicity is man made , and it certainly wont be the r134a doing it

[The MG Pony]

Have I, at any point in this discussion, stated that pollution doesn't exist... or that nothing should be done about it? I don't think so.

Does the pollution of Trout Lake in Vancouver prove that mankind is causing global warming... or that outrageous taxation and regulation can avert global warming? Hardly.

I am not opposed to reasonable solutions to proven problems, nor am I opposed to reasonable precautionary measures in response to solid scientific theories. The key word here is "reasonable".

But when have environmentalists ever been reasonable? The hallmark of the environmentalist movement is gross overkill. It is a movement that is heavily dominated by its lunatic fringe.

I ignore the main stream ones and look at the science, the evidince and data is there stop leting info be fed to you go out and read it your self, you have to pull it in from multiple streams, took me sh*t loads of hunting to get the info I did and sheer luck to be at the same point of space and time as some of the people who do the research.

For me it is a nearly closed case, every thing lines up logicaly and soundly, After all a pre-requsit of a theory is testible evidience.

[taz24]

For me it is a nearly closed case, every thing lines up logicaly and soundly, After all a pre-requsit of a theory is testible evidience.

Are you still talking about refrigerants or are you refering to pollution in the lakes around you?

If you have found proof and it is proveable then what proof have you found?

Cheers taz.

[Gary]

I ignore the main stream ones and look at the science, the evidince and data is there stop leting info be fed to you go out and read it your self, you have to pull it in from multiple streams, took me sh*t loads of hunting to get the info I did and sheer luck to be at the same point of space and time as some of the people who do the research.

For me it is a nearly closed case, every thing lines up logicaly and soundly, After all a pre-requsit of a theory is testible evidience.

In general, I refrain from criticizing other people's writing because I feel it is rude, but I would suggest that you remove the word "it" in that last paragraph and instead insert whatever "it" you are referring to so that I can tell what you are talking about. Too abstract for me.

[Gary]

Let's suppose that we can prove conclusively that global warming is caused by CO2 emissions.

Since human activity accounts for 1.3% of the total emissions, we can conclude that we have indeed accelerated global warming. The problems occuring 100 years from now would have occured 101.3 years from now, as nature intended.

If we divide the 1.3 years of acceleration by the number of humans on the planet, each person is responsible for some tiny fraction of a second.

Obviously then, we must pass a long list of very strict laws by which every human being on the planet is heavily taxed, micro-managed and beaten into submission (apply thumbscrews liberally). Only then can we successfully delay the inevitable for 1.3 years.

If this solution seems excessive to you, it is because you are motivated by selfish greed and you don't care about your grandchildren, you evil heartless prick.

On the off chance that the theory is wrong and/or global warming doesn't happen... we can just say, "Oops" and move on to the next theoretical global crisis... and the next... and the next...

[The MG Pony]

you see you fixated on just one thing, CO2, it is not just CO2 it is refrigerant, methanes, and other such pollutants. At the same time we cut down massive amounts of forrest that just happen to filter out an aspect of it.

See it is a multiple of issues converging to attenuate the problem. So we are pumping out ever increasing amounts while cuting down on the best of the filters for the job!

We are doing so much to make the problem worse and have people in denial refusing to looking at the issue!

[The MG Pony]

Oh so you rather shoot your self in the foot for what?

Worst thing if we're wrong we have clean air and less polluted land, holy sh*t what a scary thought clean land and air!

[Gary]

Oh so you rather shoot your self in the foot for what?

Worst thing if we're wrong we have clean air and less polluted land, holy sh*t what a scary thought clean land and air!

No, the worst that can happen if you are wrong is that we will be enslaved by our governments and still have global warming.

But no, that isn't quite right. Slavery is involuntary servitude and your servitude will obviously be voluntary. So let's rephrase that:

The worst that can happen if you are wrong is that some will be enslaved by their governments, some will voluntarily obey their masters, and we will still have global warming.

Oops... there I go with the conspiracy nut thing again, right? No sane person would believe there are conspiracies. Well... there is organized crime, but they don't conspire, do they? Nor do the middle east terrorists?

But governments don't conspire, right? Well... there was that little incident where Stalin killed off 25 million people, but he did that all by himself, didn't he?

Oh.. and there was the Hitler thing. No conspiracy there.

Nope, there are no conspiracies... although there are sometimes minor incidences of like minded people working together toward a common goal.

But our governments are the good guys, aren't they? Our governments are immune from the old "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" axiom.

They are just going to pass law after law after law until every waking moment of our lives comes under government scrutiny and every move we make must have government approval... for our own good, of course.

Some people might call that dictatorship, but they are just being paranoid conspiracy nuts.

[Andy]

Hello

I would say the co2 production will slow up in about 30 years when the oil run out

In the meantime what we do will make little differance unless we all do it

Kind Regards Andy

[Gary]

According to the scientists, Florida will be under water in 100 years. I strongly suspect that everyone will have vacated the premises by then.

On the other hand, according to the well known scientific documentary film "Waterworld" some of the mutant grandchildren will have developed gills by then.

[Gary]

you see you fixated on just one thing, CO2, it is not just CO2 it is refrigerant, methanes, and other such pollutants. At the same time we cut down massive amounts of forrest that just happen to filter out an aspect of it.

See it is a multiple of issues converging to attenuate the problem. So we are pumping out ever increasing amounts while cuting down on the best of the filters for the job!

We are doing so much to make the problem worse and have people in denial refusing to looking at the issue!

And you fixate on the problem, rather than the solution. Show us the price tag.

[Gary]

Hello

I would say the co2 production will slow up in about 30 years when the oil run out

In the meantime what we do will make little differance unless we all do it

Therefore we must do whatever it takes to force everyone into submission.

[The MG Pony]

My last post as you seem too disconected from reality, seek help and for christ sake learn the meaning of theory.

I'll tell you what it is not, just becuase you think it is true does not mean it is a theory, just becuase you do not like it does not make it a theory.

Your attitude is pathetic and sad, who needs air quality, who needs clean water.

I shall do as I have all ways don, save energy and be efficient and save money while at it (Holy sh*t being energy efficient SAVES MONEY? )

[Gary]

My last post as you seem too disconected from reality, seek help and for christ sake learn the meaning of theory.

Well... let's see.

Ozone Depletion is theory.

Government micro-management of the entire refrigeration industry is reality.

How's that for definitions?

[The MG Pony]

Gravity is just a theory too, why don't ya jump off a cliff and test it?

[Gary]

That's how environmentalists test theories, by pushing everyone off a cliff (after removing their wallets). Then they proclaim far and wide that at least they did something about the problem rather than sitting back and doing nothing. Anyone who objects to being pushed off the cliff is accused of being afraid of change. Well... yeah.

[Gary]

My last post as you seem too disconected from reality, seek help and for christ sake learn the meaning of theory.

I'll tell you what it is not, just becuase you think it is true does not mean it is a theory, just becuase you do not like it does not make it a theory.

Your attitude is pathetic and sad, who needs air quality, who needs clean water.

I shall do as I have all ways don, save energy and be efficient and save money while at it (Holy sh*t being energy efficient SAVES MONEY? )

Never once, in this very long discussion, have I stated or even implied that I am opposed to clean air, clean water, saving energy, being efficient, or saving money, yet you insist that I have.

And you think that I have a problem with reality. You are seeing words that aren't there. Get a grip. Learn to read.

I have stated repeatedly that I am in favor of reasonable solutions and opposed to unreasonable solutions. Show us your solutions to global warming.

[WINJA]

Instead of banning R134a they should just tighten up on its use, IE our local boat shop sells r134a propelled air horns ,surely theres an alternative, whats worse than that our electrial wholsaler still had the old cans of "FREEZE" on the shelf for sale which is pure r12 that you spray onto electrical stuff , he had lots for sale and still left it for sale after I told him what it was

[davidk]

Gentlemens, I have read all your posts and I saw no numbers. I see that R134a has GWP of 1300, but in every second more CO2 (GWP=1) is released than R134a in one year. You can make a simple math and agree that a single kilogram of R134a is equal to 1300kg of CO2.
So, we are debating now about banning a refrigerant which contributes to the global warming by only an insignifiant fraction compared to the CO2 emissions. I think this is like a bunch of tobaco smokers debating about lungs cancer risk induced by eating chocolate.

[paul_h]

Instead of banning R134a they should just tighten up on its use, IE our local boat shop sells r134a propelled air horns ,surely theres an alternative, whats worse than that our electrial wholsaler still had the old cans of "FREEZE" on the shelf for sale which is pure r12 that you spray onto electrical stuff , he had lots for sale and still left it for sale after I told him what it was

Gentlemens, I have read all your posts and I saw no numbers. I see that R134a has GWP of 1300, but in every second more CO2 (GWP=1) is released than R134a in one year. You can make a simple math and agree that a single kilogram of R134a is equal to 1300kg of CO2.
So, we are debating now about banning a refrigerant which contributes to the global warming by only an insignifiant fraction compared to the CO2 emissions. I think this is like a bunch of tobaco smokers debating about lungs cancer risk induced by eating chocolate.

I think the point here is R134a is a mis-used substance.
People are happy to spray it everywhere, mechanics and other people are happy to regas everyones car annually without finding leaks.
If it was used responsibly it wouldn't be so much of an issue.
Rather than banning it, I say it should be restricted to just licenced people, and the authorities worldwide should have the power to prosecute anyone releasing it intentionally, including running a service for car owners to complain if their newly regassed a/c needs regassing within a year of the last one. ie. no steps were taken to repair a leak the last time.
I don't buy this BS about cars inherently leaking, most of the cars I have owned, I've had for more than four years, and I've never had to regas them.
I've also worked with really big and old open drive systems with heaps of old joins and thread taped joins that don't leak. Also a variety of systems that have flexible lines, these and the old open drive systems run more than a car a/c, Why are car manufacturers, mechanics, auto electrictians etc allowed to get away with the "top ups are normal, all cars eventually leak, it's too hard to find, we'll just put some dye in it and catch it next time" mentality?
I've used dye as a last resort, as I could not find the leak. It seems the car industry uses i as th main leak checking tool, meaning that the r134a they just put in will definitely leak out before they even get around to leak checking.

[Gary]

Here is a much simpler solution: Just stop manufacturing R134a and dispose of the on-hand supply. What (relatively) little remains will eventually go away.

[Gary]

Instead of banning R134a they should just tighten up on its use, IE our local boat shop sells r134a propelled air horns ,surely theres an alternative, whats worse than that our electrial wholsaler still had the old cans of "FREEZE" on the shelf for sale which is pure r12 that you spray onto electrical stuff , he had lots for sale and still left it for sale after I told him what it was

Buy his entire supply and dispose of it properly. Consider this your contribution.

[WINJA]

Buy his entire supply and dispose of it properly. Consider this your contribution.

GET REAL , I DONT REALLY BUY ANY OF THE CFC AND GLOBAL WARMING B.S. LET ALONE HAVE THE INTENTION OF SHELLING OUT MY HARD EARNED$$ TO MAKE HIM RICHER, I JUST WANT HIM TO COMPLY LIKE I HAVE TOO , WE NEED TO SEPERATE THE ISSUES OF THE FACTS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE LAW REGAURDING CLIMATE CHANGE BECAUSE THE TWO SEEM TO HAVE NO RELATION, THE FACTS SEEM TO HAVE VERY LITTLE GOOD UNBIASED SCIENCE TO BACK THEM UP AND LOOKING AT WHAT OUR GOVERNMENT HAS DONE THE LAW IS JUST A BIG MONEY GRAB

[Peter_1]

........ Well... there is organized crime, but they don't conspire, do they? Nor do the middle east terrorists?

But governments don't conspire, right? Well... there was that little incident where Stalin killed off 25 million people, but he did that all by himself, didn't he?

Oh.. and there was the Hitler thing. No conspiracy there.
......

Here we go again.....Stalin, Middle East, Hitler...who else can we use to support our R134a discussion? Bush? Poetin?

[expat]

see TOMS for today's ozone layer http://jwocky.gsfc.nasa.gov/


I'm not a scientist but this doesn't look like a hole to me. And bear in mind that it is in spring in the south pole that the depletion process occurs due to very cold polar winds and the rising of the sun on the horizon.

[Gary]

Here we go again.....Stalin, Middle East, Hitler...who else can we use to support our R134a discussion? Bush? Poetin?

I'm not the one who brought up conspiracies.

[Gary]

... AND LOOKING AT WHAT OUR GOVERNMENT HAS DONE THE LAW IS JUST A BIG MONEY GRAB

Yep... our government, too. What a coincidence.

[expat]

Oh, and how come an ice cap is also melting on Mars?

This couldn't be anything to do with the giant burning ball we see in the sky everyday could it...?, nah it's probably the CFC's in the astronaunts' deodorants.

[pennswoodsed]

oh and the idiots are using R-134a as caned air duster along with R-152a

We as a society and species learnt sweet f*ck all from the whole R-12 fiasco[/QUOTE]

pretty much covers it
Regards,Ed

[davidk]

After ceasing The Cold War, humanity must be "threatened" by something, and some large amount of money must go somewhere else than in weapons. So, now we have "The Global Warming War", isn't it?
What's wrong in using R134a as a duster as a joke? I even breathe R134a in Ventolin CFC Free inhaler!

[Karl Hofmann]

Hmmm Thats got me thinking... I wonder if all this is the Swiss trying to start a war, perhaps they are running out of foreign gold to store in their vaults... I've got some scrap copper and lead pipe that they can look after for me...Its almost as dear as gold these days.. I really hate storing it in my shed just in case it gets swiped

[Gary]

We as a society and species learnt sweet f*ck all from the whole R-12 fiasco

According to the scientists, it can take up to 35 years for CFC refrigerants to reach the ozone layer. We should now be seeing the actual results of the many billions of tons of CFC's released to the atmosphere prior to 1973. The Ozone Depletion Theory should now be proveable. Where is the proof?

Why is this relevant to a discussion of R134a? Because if the Ozone Depletion Theory is false, then the proven, time tested, environmentally safe, thoroughly researched and well understood substitute for R134a is R12.

[Carlhui]

You make a series of unfounded assertions in the above statement. I would challenge you to prove any of it, but in order for it to be a true statement you must prove all of it.

I would suggest you to have a copy "Inconvenient Truth" by Gore.

[Carlhui]

Well... let's see.

Ozone Depletion is theory.

Government micro-management of the entire refrigeration industry is reality.

How's that for definitions?

In fact, I was in NZ south island for just abt 2 weeks. The whole skin colored dark, does extra UV make sense there. I would think the fact is NZ is too close the Antactic, under the giant ozone hole. can't imagin the whole world like that.

[Gary]

I would suggest you to have a copy "Inconvenient Truth" by Gore.

Hmmmm... I should get a book written by a politician... Isn't he the guy who invented the internet?

poli = many
tics = blood sucking creatures
politics = many blood sucking creatures

[TRASH101]

Is it safe to post on this thread yet

If the pen is truly mightier than the sword this must surely be the bloodiest thread of all

The truth = strength of conviction + (fact/ bol**cks)
actual event x I told you so

bearing this in mind both MG and Gary are completely right (so far)

[taz24]

Is it safe to post on this thread yet

If the pen is truly mightier than the sword this must surely be the bloodiest thread of all

The truth = strength of conviction + (fact/ bol**cks)
actual event x I told you so

bearing this in mind both MG and Gary are completely right (so far)

LOL

taz.

[DeB]

Did anyone find out if Switzerland was banning R134A?