Front Refrigerator

DC Circuit Pours Cold Water on Global Warming Legislation

Posted by

Refrigeration technology has come a long way since ancient Chinese cultures harvested ice from frozen lakes and desperately tried to keep them insulated in ice cellars more than a thousand years ago. The technology advanced through the subsequent centuries, culminating in an exponential explosion of growth over the last hundred years or so, with the advent of artificial refrigerants in the 19-teens and 20s. Still, these early-model units relied on toxic, foul-smelling gases such as ammonia and sulfur dioxide as condensing agents, resulting in fatalities from exposure.

Through the middle of the last century, the industry transitioned almost entirely over to the use of the non-toxic chlorofluorocarbon (“CFC”) Freon as the primary refrigerant. This move virtually eliminated the health risks, reduced the price of refrigeration in general, and further fueled the mass-expansion of refrigeration in commercial and home use. That is, up until the 70’s, when scientists realized that Freon escaping from old, damaged, or abandoned refrigerators was disintegrating the protective ozone layer of the Earth’s atmosphere and letting in dangerous ultra-violet radiation from the sun. Enter a new class of refrigerants, hydrofluorocarbons (“HFC”); all the benefits of CFC’s, without that pesky risk of microwaving the planet. Up until roughly the turn of the century, that is,  when scientists have discovered that HFC’s trap heat in the atmosphere, contributing to global warming.

Recently, to combat the warming impact of HFC’s, Congress passed the American Innovation in Manufacturing Act (“AIM”), which authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) to do essentially three things; manage existing HFC’s, phase down their production, and facilitate the transition to next-generation replacement technologies.

In one of the first rulings on the new AIM legislation, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals has on June 20sided with proponents of the air conditioning industry, holding that AIM does not grant the EPA the unfettered right to ban certain methodologies used by the industry in transporting HFCs. 

While not a broad and sweeping rebuke of the AIM, it is notable and significant because the imposition of limits on the AIM suggests more industry players reliant on HFC’s may ‘smell blood in the water’ and be emboldened to further challenge what was, until recently, seen by some as the harbinger of the next sea-change in the ongoing story of refrigeration technology.