This weekend, Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh and US president Barack Obama are meeting in Washington DC. An environmental tussle is predicted: the two-steps-forward one-step back battle to phase out HFCs.
HFCs, or hydrofluorocarbons, are gases used in air conditioners, refrigerators and fire retardants. They don't deplete the ozone layer, but they trap heat and contribute to global warming. For a while now, the US and other developed nations have lobbied hard for HFCs to be brought under the widely accepted Montreal Convention, which expects HFCs to be phased out by 2020 for developed nations and 2030 for developing nations. So have green groups worldwide, which claim that phasing out HFCs will reap huge global warming benefits.
But India, China, Brazil and South Africa have all resolutely argued for HFCs to be dealt with under the UN Framework on Climate Convention and Kyoto Protocol , which allows for a more gradual phase out, subject to alternative technology and funding being available. In June, China backpedalled, and signed a compromise agreement with the USA agreeing to allow the Montreal Protocol for phaseouts.
And earlier this month, Manmohan Singh did what appeared to be a rapid backtrack at the G20 summit, where India ended up agreeing to use the Montreal Protocol to phase out HFCs, while allowing the Kyoto protocol to track emissions. The Indian Ministry of Environment is reported to be dismayed by the PM's step, arguing that alternatives to HFCs have still not been found. But after repeated comments by John Kerry and Joe Biden on their recent visits to India, Barack Obama is expected to force the issue this weekend.
Why not just phase out HFCs immediately if everybody agrees they are bad for the environment? As always, money, technology, and the rich-poor divide get in the way. The debate over HFCs is complicated because, for years now, nations have been engaged in a chemical version of musical chairs. Before HFCs, the chemical most widely used was HCFC (hydrochlorofluorocarbons) a far more harmful gas which destroys the ozone layer. Essentially, developed countries have gone from one harmful gas to another, while many developing countries, such as India, have already begun the transition to alternative, less harmful substances. "The Montreal Convention says all HFCs should be phased out by 2020, in the case of developed countries, and 2030 in the case of developing countries. But the fact is India, especially in the refrigerator segment, has already made the leap to other hydrocarbons, while many developed countries are still using HFCs. Why the double standards?" says Chandra Bhushan, deputy director of the Centre for Science and Environment in New Delhi.
Despite calling out the Montreal Protocol, Bhushan, and many green groups in developing countries, agree that this is a great opportunity for developing countries to "leapfrog" to safe hydrocarbons in one go. "20 years ago, developed countries missed the opportunity to transition from HFCs to a safer option. India shouldn't," says Bhushan.
The actual impact that HFCs have on the environment is also controversial, with some saying their effect on the environment is overrated. "Yes, HFCs need to be phased out, but why are we concentrating only on them and not other greenhouse gases? This has become a issue of US prestige," says Bhushan. "The fact is, HFCs make up only 1% of greenhouse gases. I do not agree with the research that says they will grow to 18-20%. That's bogus. We should be talking about all F gases, and particularly carbon dioxide." Other greens believe HFCs are crucial to climate change. "Yes, HFCs are miniscule right now, and other gases are more important. But they are rapidly growing, and they make for an easy win," says Bhaskar Deol, India representative for the NRDC. Greens will be watching for the verdict of the upcoming climate control report this Friday to tell us more about the impact of HFCs.
Most controversial of all is the question of alternatives to HFCS. Every country is lobbying different alternative hydrocarbons, some untested, some expensive, some with safety risks such as flammability. India, and many developing countries, have a deep mistrust of US motives, because US firms such as Honeywell and Dupont hold most of the patents for many alternative products, especially in the cooling of cars. These firms stand to make a killing from the shift away from HFCS, just as they did in the shift from HFCS.
But a new report by the NRDC, "Cooling India Through Less Warming" argues that there is a strong business case for HFCs to be phased out, and that India already has much of the technology needed to do it. Several Indian refrigerator makers are already using safer alternatives to HFCS, such as R290 and HFC134A. "I am using a Daikin AC now which uses an alternative hydrocarbon. It's actually more energy efficient, and costs the same as the old one," says Deol. India needs to work on these alternatives before it finds itself in isolation from the international community.
Follow Kavitha on Twitter at @kavitharao