Talk:Refrigerant
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Toxic or not
article R-744 says:
R744 operates more efficiently than systems using R-134a. Its environmental advantages (GWP of 1, non-ozone depleting, non-toxic, non-flammable)
but this article says:
One of the most promising alternatives is the natural refrigerant CO2 (R-744). Carbon dioxide is non-flammable, non-ozone depleting, has a global warming potential of 1, but is toxic and potentially lethal in concentrations above 5% by volume.
please resolve that issue, cos those quotes contradict itself --Elthe (talk) 19:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Propane is nontoxic?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.150.72.183 (talk) 20:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Refrigerant Recovery
Shouldn't we have an article or a mention of refrigerant recovery? What about recovery machines? I'd do it myself, but I don't know enough about either to really make a good entry. What do you guys think? PantherFoxie 16:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Chage the wording from compound to chemical
Argon and Krypton are refrigerants, but are not compounds. GWatson • TALK 07:41, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GWP verse ozone depletion rating
[edit] Misinfomation?
"This will ban potent greenhouse gases such as the refrigerant HFC-134a—which has a GWP of 1410—to promote safe and energy-efficient refrigerants."
I am currently taking HVACR courses and the book says "HFCs are considered to have zero potential for ozone depletion... and ...only slight effect on global warming." Quoted from Mondern Refrigeration and Air Conditioning 18th Edition, Capter 9, pg337 section 9.1.4

