Air conditioning &
Refrigeration
European
Association
AREA
October 2005
Newsletter
Items covered:
Editorial
p.2
- Environment
F-gas Regulation
Current situation during the Second Reading
Joint Industry position on legal basis
EPEE position on Rapporteur Doyle’s recommendations
EC attitude
Press articles
2037/2000 : no new deadline?
p.3
p.4
p.6
p.10
p.10
P.12
- Education & vocational training
News on The Refrigeration Craftsman (Leonardo) project
p.13
- Technical matters
News on the Miniref (research) project
p.15
- Standardisation
prEN 12693
p.17
-Member States
Germany on Climate Change
p.17
- News from our Members
SNEFCCA, VDKF
p.18
- Sister associations
EHPA, IIR, REHVA
p.19
- Business news
p.25
- Events
p.25
President
Immediate Past President
Vice-President
Treasurer
General Secretary
:
:
:
:
:
J. JACQUIN - SNEFCCA F - e-mail : contact@snefcca.com
N. MITCHELL - RACG/HVCA UK - e-mail : ncm@normanmitchell.co.uk
Ch. SCHOLZ - VDKF D – e-mail : info@vdkf.org
J. HOOGKAMER - NVKL NL - e-mail : joh@fme.nl
R. BERCKMANS - AREA - e-mail : robert.berckmans@area-eur.be
Beau Site Première avenue, 88 • B -1330 Rixensart • Belgium • Tel : +32 2 6538835 • Fax + 32 2 6523872
1
OFFICIAL NOTICE
In accordance with the new Royal Decree dated 31 May 2005, the Authority controlling the
international non-profit association AREA is now the Commercial Court of Nivelles.
The identification numbers of AREA are :
VAT (enterprise)
Commercial Register
AISBL
440.154.920
21 0106649
1075190
Editorial
Dear Members,
About the structural difficulty issuing European legislation
As you all know, the Commission proposes, the Parliament reviews and intervenes (sometimes
drastically : e.g. the single legal base in the Second Reading of the F-gas Regulation, against
the first Common Position and the initial Commission’s proposal) and only the Council takes
final decisions.
25 Member States share the 321 votes of the Council Members (Germany, France, UK, Italy
have the largest number of votes : 29 each; Malta, the smallest number of votes : 3). A
Qualified Majority is at least 232 votes, 13 Member States (17 if it is not a Commission’s
proposal) and 62% of the EU population. A Blocking Minority is at least 90 votes or 13
Member States or >38% of the EU population.
A document to be voted on, needs to be translated in all the EU languages.
As our industry is highly technological, another disadvantage is that Civil Servants in the
Commission, MEP, MS Representatives, … have generally no technical background which
leads to having technical details to be addressed in related documents and not in the core of the
legislative instruments.
Finally, as we witness during the present procedure concerning F-gases, the three EU
Institutions, Commission, Parliament and Council have very few real joint working sessions,
one works after or next to the others instead as simultaneously and commonly.
Yours sincerely,
Robert Berckmans
Secretary General
2
Meeting JRAIA Japanese Refrigeration & Air conditioning Industry Association
on November 4, 2005 at IKK
Past President Norman Mitchell, MM. Esa Aalto (FREA), Joop Hoogkamer (NVKL), Philippe
Roy (SNEFCCA) and Attila Zoltan (HKVSZ) have volunteered to meet the Japanese
delegation on recovery issues (how does recovery of ODS and CC gases work in Europe and
what are the results?).
Thank you to all of them!
Environment
F-Gas Regulation issue
IN SHORT
AREA has contacted by email, most of the MEP in the Environment Committee.
AREA has met the following MEP : Avril Doyle (Rapporteur EPP IRL), Dorette Corbey (PSE
NL), Karl Heinz Florenz (Chairman EPP DE), Johannes Blokland (IND NL), Françoise
Grossetête (EPP FR), Chris Davies (ALDE UK), Caroline Jackson (EPP UK), Vittorio Prodi
(ALDE IT), Holger Krahmer (ALDE DE) and Frederika Brepoels (EPP BE).
The vote in the Committee is still scheduled on October 11; the vote in Plenary should take
place on October 24.
Contacts in the EC are : Steve Hollins (DG Enterprise UK), Peter Horrocks (DG Environment
UK) and Laurence Graff (DG Environment FR).
The good news is :
 The article 5 of the proposed Regulation is gaining general support for harmonized
RAC training and certification for personnel AND companies; our CQC will have to
come with recommendations to the ODS/CC Member States’ Committee about
minimum requirements for qualifications (results of the Leonardo project) and
certification criteria (TO DO!);
 The article 3 will remain unchanged but the important details – the minimum standards
inspection requirements – will be established later by the ODS/CC Member States’
Committee; our TEC is presently working on a position to be forwarded before October
7 to the consultants ICF (US) in charge of advising the Committee.
The negative news is :
 Despite the means efficiently displayed, EPEE may not be successful in keeping the
dual legal base; it appears, for the time being, that a small majority of MEP are in
favour of a single base : the articles 175 and 176 (Environment). This should bring
some distortion in the Internal Market as countries will be authorized to establish
further National restrictions (bans, for instance) provided it cannot be proved that they
are disrupting the good functioning of the Internal Market.
When we shall be over the Second Reading, we will have the essential stage of convincing the
National Authorities in the Council (Ministers of Environment, their National experts and their
Permanent Representations). The contribution of the AREA Member Associations will be
asked for at that critical time.
3
If the Council does not accept the main conclusions of the Second Reading, we should then
enter into a Conciliation procedure (a kind of Common Third Reading) that would of course
delay the whole process.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
EC proposal for a Regulation on certain fluorinated greenhouse gases1,2,3
Joint industry position on the legal basis
The undersigned Industry Associations strongly support the use of the Internal Market legal basis
(Article 95 EC) for the Articles 7 (Labelling), 8 (Control of use) and 9 (Placing on the
market) of the proposed Regulation on certain fluorinated gases.
We, the manufacturers, handlers and producers of fluorinated gases and products and equipment that use them,
representing over 200,000 employees, generating over 40 billion Euros in sales, have argued consistently for legislation
that provides for legal certainty and coherence across the EU that is proportional. The recent IPCC/TEAP Special Report
on HFCs and PFCs has stated that, “based on its business as usual scenario, the estimated direct radiative forcing of HFCs
in 2015 is about 0.030 Wm-2”, corresponding to “about 1.0% of the estimated radiative forcing of all well-mixed
greenhouse gases in 2015.4 “
We have assisted regulators throughout the phase out of ozone depleting substances, CFCs and HCFCs, and have
participated throughout the European Climate Change Programme with the continuous development of best practices.
We support the Council’s Common Position for a Regulation of certain Fluorinated gases (F-gases)
which ensures high environmental standards. The Regulation presents an important opportunity to
ensure fluorinated gases are used responsibly and properly contained. A goal that will be best achieved
under an Internal Market legal base (Article 95 EC):

The Internal Market legal base (Article 95 EC) is the best way to meet two goals simultaneously, a high degree of
environmental protection through F-Gas emission reduction across the Community whilst also ensuring an
efficient and competitive single market

Article 95 EC will support the political objective of ensuring a predictable, coherent and balanced EU regulatory
regime. The use of an Environmental legal base (Article 175 EC) will result in greatly increased costs and
unnecessary intra-EU trade barriers, such as a plethora of varying national laws, without guaranteeing a greater
protection of the environment

Moreover, the Internal Market legal base will quickly assist the EU in meeting its commitments under the Kyoto
Protocol by encouraging the development and wide dissemination of a choice of energy efficient equipment and
products such as refrigeration, air-conditioning, electrical switchgear and thermal insulation where they are
necessary
1
Commission proposal COM(2003) 492 of 11 August 2003.
2
EP position 1st reading T5-0237/2004 of 31 March 2004
3
Council Common Position 16056/04 of 7 March 2005
4
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)/Technology and Economic Assessment Panel of the Montreal Protocol (TEAP)
Special Report: Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: Issues related to HFCs and PFCs. Summary for
Policymakers. April 2005
4

It will also protect the livelihoods of many SMEs (and is, therefore, compatible with the Lisbon Strategy) for
whom alternatives to HFCs may not be economically viable or technically suitable and who may be unable to
offer their products and services to fragmented and distorted markets.
A fully functional, harmonised internal market, as can be achieved under Article 95, is crucial to the attainment of these
goals.
Associations:
Air-conditioning and
Refrigeration Industry Board
Federa
tion of
Europe
an
Rigid
Polyur
ethane
Foam
Associ
ations
CAPIEL
5
***
EPEE POSITION ON AVRIL DOYLE’S DRAFT RECOMMENDATION
FOR THE SECOND READING OF THE FLUORINATED GASES REGULATION
5 SEPTEMBER 2005
EPEE supports the EU taking concrete steps to reduce emissions of fluorinated
gases and thus helping its Member States meet their Kyoto obligations. We remain
strongly in favour of an EU-wide policy based on EU legislation, and realise that its
success will ultimately depend on all of the different industry sectors fulfilling their
obligations in the market place. However, certain aspects of the approach in Avril
Doyle’s draft Recommendation for the Second Reading of the Fluorinated Gases
Regulation worry us.
The principle areas of concern to us relate to the proposed change in legal
base, the push for aggressive promotion of alternative refrigerants and the
recommended extension of use restrictions to equipment with an F-gases
refrigerant charge of less than 150 grams (Amendments 1, 5, 16 and 17
respectively). We believe that these elements put the effectiveness of the future
Regulation at risk. These changes benefit neither European industry nor –
more importantly – environmental protection efforts. They jeopardise the wellbalanced proposal and compromise reached in the course of 2004.
1. The proposed change to a single environmental legal base would disrupt the internal
market and would introduce legal uncertainty.
2. The proposed ban on the use of F-gases in equipment with less than 150g of
refrigerant charge represents a disproportionate measure to reduce emissions, which
are already extremely low for this type of equipment as end-of-life treatment is
required under the WEEE Directive. The Draft Recommendation shows no real
understanding of the consequences of such a ban.
3. The support of refrigerants other than F-gases would come at the expense of some
valuable innovation and environmental gains yet to be made as a result of F-gas use.
For example, if F-gas use had been marginalised several years ago, the
technological innovation that led to a new generation of energy-efficient, low-emission
HFC systems in 2000 would probably not have had such ground-breaking
environmentally-friendly results.
1.
EPEE is concerned by the Rapporteur’s choice of a single environmental legal base for
the entire Regulation. 4
a.
A single article 175 legal basis, even with the inclusion of single market clauses, would
not protect free movement as it would lead to a plethora of national laws, therefore risking a
successful legal challenge against it.
b.
The Common Position aims to assist the EU and Member States in fulfilling their
commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. Some provisions meet exclusively environmental
protection objectives (and are therefore rightly based on Article 175 EC). Other provisions deal
primarily with the internal market (Articles 7 (Labelling), 8 (Control of Use) and 9 (Placing on
the Market)) whilst still affording the highest level of environmental protection possible. In
accordance with the consistent case law of the European Court of Justice, the latter provisions
require an internal market legal base (Article 95). A split legal base is the best way to achieve
these two goals simultaneously.
c.
Article 95 makes sense for the Type Approval Directive for car air-conditioning, with the
Rapporteur stating that ‘it is hard to believe that anybody would want to create different typeapproval procedures for each individual Member State’. In limiting this legal base to car air4
This comes despite the Parliament’s first reading choice of an internal market legal base and the Council’s choice for a
split legal base in the Common Position.
6
conditioning units, however, the Rapporteur seems to be oblivious to the market similarities
between cars and stationary refrigeration air-conditioning. Both are complex and highly
specified, requiring dedicated development and manufacturing facilities to deliver the
necessary reliability and performance, thus necessitating a single market approach.
2.
EPEE considers the ban on F-gases from refrigeration systems with less than 150g of
refrigerant charge (Amendment 17) to be unnecessary, disproportional, costly and unjustified.
a.
A product ban is the most drastic policy measure available, being inappropriate and
disproportionate in this case given the very low to negligible leakage rates during use (end-oflife recovery is required by the WEEE Directive).
b.
The gases in these applications are highly reliable and manufactured to the highest
standards, as well as being contained in hermetically sealed systems (i.e. systems are airtight
and there are very low to negligible leakage).
c.
F-gas refrigerant is recovered from any rare service operation of this sealed system
(approx. 2% during an appliance’s lifetime) and reused. Under the Waste of Electrical and
Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive, both refrigerant and insulation foam gases must be
recovered at end of life. These two factors in themselves wholly fulfil the 'containment'
objective of the F-Gases Regulation.
d.
The ban proposed by the Draft Recommendation encompasses a wide range of
specialist hermetic equipment with a charge size of less than 150g, not just domestic
appliances. Contrary to the assertions made in the Justification, it would be very expensive for
manufacturers to convert to hydrocarbons in, say, countries where low volumes or niche
products are manufactured for export into the EU. The fact that alternative refrigerants are
used in this product sector, the only substantial justification made by the Rapporteur in the
Recommendation, does not in itself justify a ban.
3.
EPEE is also very concerned by the Rapporteur’s Amendments 4, 5 and 16 which
aggressively push the promotion of alternative refrigerants.
a.
The perfect refrigerant does not exist. It is crucial that users choose the optimal
refrigerant for each specific application: in order to do this, users must carefully weigh the
different properties of each refrigerant, taking into account safety and energy efficiency.
b.
Technological innovation is not limited to alternatives to F-gases. Nor are alternative
technologies always ‘more environmentally friendly’. The Rapporteur’s position implies that the
use of alternatives to F-gases always delivers better results in terms of energy efficiency. This
is misleading and inaccurate, since technological innovation in F-gases applications has
recently led to the development of a new generation of HFC systems with improved energy
efficiency and reduced refrigerant emissions compared to systems designed in 2000. When
undertaking considerations regarding energy efficiency, one should always take into account
the total global warming impact of the whole product throughout its life cycle – including all
aspects of the product’s manufacture, the energy consumption during its lifetime, and the
disposal of the product at end of life. EPEE is concerned that the proposals made in the Draft
Recommendations might provide incentives for the use of products only because they use
“alternative gases" rather than encouraging the use of what is most technologically innovative
and environmentally friendly overall.
4.
EPEE welcomes the proposed replacement of the wording “inspection” by “controls” in
the various provisions of the proposal (in Amendments 7 and 9). We fully agree with the
Rapporteur in that the word “inspection” often implies a control procedure by an outsider,
independent of the operator of the equipment. It is, however, important to underline that the
leakage control must be performed by educated and certified personnel in order to ensure the
best possible control and to minimize leakages. These amendments, among others, make the
future legislation more workable from an industry point of view.
***
7
EPEE Position on Amendment 17
Of the Draft Recommendation for a Second Reading -- Products Ban
EPEE is strongly against the products ban amendment, which is disproportionate,
unwarranted and based on incorrect facts and analysis. The scope of the proposed ban is
seriously greater than what was agreed in the First Reading: It intends to encompass not just
domestic appliances, but also a wide range of specialist refrigeration equipment with a charge
size less than 150g. Furthermore, the proposed Amendment shows no real understanding of
the consequences of such a ban.
EPEE IS AGAINST THE ADOPTION OF THIS AMENDMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING
REASONS:
1.
REFRIGERATION SYSTEMS WITH LESS THAN 150G OF REFRIGERANT CHARGE
HAVE VIRTUALLY NO EMISSIONS.
For applications covered by Amendment 17 - small, niche domestic and commercial
refrigeration applications - this ban is a grossly disproportionate and unwarranted. The gasses
in these applications, including a small number of high specification domestic fridges, are
contained in hermetically sealed systems which are airtight and do not leak. Refrigerant is
recovered during rare servicing (less than 2% require servicing during their lifetime) and at the
end-of-life. Under the WEEE Directive, refrigerant and foam gasses in these applications must
be recovered. This is consistent with the containment objective of the proposed Regulation.
Indeed, the Enviros report to UK Defra in 2003, providing a detailed review of the technical
and economic impact of the Commission proposal, concluded that ‘the environmental benefit
of a ban on HFCs for domestic refrigeration would be tiny’.
2.
REFRIGERATION SYSTEMS WITH LESS THAN 150G OF REFRIGERANT CHARGE
ARE ENERGY-EFFICIENT AND THEIR EMISSIONS ARE CONTAINED.
For these small hermetic refrigeration systems, the CO2 emissions from energy use by
the system is about 40 times greater than the direct refrigerant emissions due to existing
containment measures. Furthermore, the combination of HFC refrigerant and HFC foam in
these small hermetic refrigeration systems provides better energy efficiency, often rendering
them the most energy-efficient option (with up to 10% better efficiency than alternative
approaches).
The March Report to the European Commission on opportunities to minimise emissions of
hydrofluorocarbons states that:
“Many energy efficiency opportunities are intrinsically more cost effective than
direct HFC reductions measures which usually have no ‘upside’.”
Within a regulatory framework of containment, the decision to use HFCs, hydrocarbons or
other refrigerants should be based on each refrigerant’s ability to deliver reliable, efficient, high
quality refrigeration systems. Granted, hydrocarbons are very energy-efficient when used in
small refrigeration, but HFCs are equally environmentally responsible.
3.
THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE AMENDMENT OVERSTATES THE COSTS OF HFC
RECOVERY AND UNDERESTIMATES THE COSTS OF CONVERSION TO
HYDROCARBONS.
The estimated cost of HFC recovery given in the justification is equivalent to about 15
€/refrigerator (when the refrigerator is scrapped and recycled) and is based on data from 2000.
Since then, however, Regulation 2037/2000 and the WEEE Directive have made refrigerator
recovery mandatory, resulting in an increasing number of large automated refrigerator
treatment facilities across Europe. One of these plants has confirmed that the cost of removing
8
the refrigerant is typically at most about 24 €/tonne CO2 (not the 90 €/tonne CO2 given in the
justification) for a large automated refrigerator treatment plant achieving at least 75%
refrigerant recovery.
The conversion cost from HFCs to hydrocarbons quoted in the justification is one of a range of
cost estimates that have been reported, and assumes that 80% of the refrigerant charge is
emitted at end-of-life. At the same time, however, the justification correctly highlights the
increasing rates of refrigerant recovery resulting from the implementation of the WEEE
Directive – this means that the conversion cost referred to in the justification is at least four
times too low in the context of 75% refrigerant recovery. Similarly, the cost estimate given in
the AEAT report (2004) for the UK’s Defra is significantly higher, standing at about 13 €/tonne
CO2 equivalent (about four times that given in the justification). However, for many of the
product types that would be affected by the amendment, particularly high specification
refrigerators and specialist equipment, there are significant additional costs per unit (for
example to change components) to allow hydrocarbons to be used. With the WEEE Directive
in place and resulting in 75% refrigerant recovery at end-of-life, these are in the range of €55
to €565 per tonne of CO2 eliminated. Indeed, the March Report for the Commission quoted
similar conversion costs in the range of 190 to 400 €/tonne CO2.
Overall, the costs of conversion for many of the products affected far exceed the cost of HFC
recovery, and the basis for the amendment set out in the justification is not valid.
Furthermore, regardless of how the WEEE Directive ends up being interpreted, the practical
reality is that, in countries like Belgium and Germany, hydrocarbons are being recovered at
disposal for operational reasons (in order to recover the lubricating oil and to avoid VOC’s),
meaning that the costs of recovery also are imposed on hydrocarbon products.
4.
THE SCOPE OF THE PROPOSED BAN IS TOO WIDE.
The ban would apply to a variety of domestic and commercial products such as
dehumidifiers, water fountains, ice-makers, vaccine coolers, blood and organ storage cabinets,
and vending machines if they have charges less than 150g. Many of these products are
produced by small and medium-sized enterprises, which would be greatly burdened by such a
ban and would not be able to convert economically to hydrocarbons.
5.
THE PROPOSED PRODUCT BAN IS A DISPROPORTIONATE, NON-TARRIF
TRADE BARRIER.
A ban on HFC-containing domestic refrigerators directly bars a small volume of high
specification, niche Mexican and US imports. These products meet all of the containment
measures in the EU’s legislation. It may be impossible, however, for reasons of worker safety,
plant air pollution and the small volume (no more than a few hundred thousand) of these
exports, for particular factories to convert part of their production lines to HC’s. Considering
the extremely low emissions, the containment measures already in place and the energy
efficiency advantages for these products, a ban would be a disproportionate, discriminatory
trade barrier measure.
For these reasons, EPEE opposes Amendment 17.
***
9
EPEE HILL & KNOWLTON – COMMISSION August 26 MEETINGS OVERVIEW
Laurence Graff, Acting Head of Unit. Industrial Emissions Unit
1. Confirmed Commission's support for the Common Position. The Commission is anxious to
avoid conciliation on this dossier and hopes for the adoption of the final legislation by end 2005
- however she is aware such progress depends on what will come out from the Parliament's
'open' Second Reading;
2. The Commission is in agreement with the 'split legal base' agreed in the Common Position. She
did mention the fact that no concrete case of existing legislation with a similar legal base makes
this harder to convince those against this approach;
3. The Commission is against extending the Annex II without cost benefit analysis of real effect
of extension of ban list;
4. On the issue of push for technological innovation and what is 'good for the environment' (which
Mrs Doyle links only to f-gases alternatives) Mrs Graff argues the idea of technological
innovation is hard to argue against but care would need to be taken to ensure such provisions
did not discriminate against F-gases;
5. The discussion covered the EP legal service legal opinion on the F-gases Regulation legal base
- Mrs Graff stated she had read and studied the document, but was surprised by its quality
'green slant'.
Wolfgang Hehn/Steve Hollins, DG Enterprise
1. MM. Hehn & Hollins had heard that due to National court ruling in Austria that the national Fgases banning legislation might be reversed and removed from the statue books. This would
mean the Commission would close the infringement procedures against Austria.
2. DG Enterprise confirmed that the Danes had sent further information defending their national
ordinance (this was also a delaying tactic in the roll out of the infringement procedure). They
also informed that the Danish Minister, as well as meeting MEPs of the F-gases regulation had
also met with several Commissioners on this issue to push the Danish position;
3. Confirmed the Commission had received notification of a Council working group meeting on 8
September - no confirmation of agenda item but feeling was it would look at the Doyle draft
Recommendation and the Commission Communication;
4. Specifically in Amendment 17 - ban on refrigeration systems using less than 150 grams - DG
Enterprise requested to have an EPEE assessment on what this means for industry - cost, trade
and business implications;
5. The various amendments pushing technological innovation (via promotional incentives and
bans) combine with the single 175 legal base and the push to specifically mention Member
States' right to act individually represent dangerous precedent in the Doyle report in DG
Enterprise opinion. These proposals go against the internal market and harmonising intention of
legislation across the EU.
***
------------------------MEP proposes greening draft EU f-gas regulation
Environment Daily 1931, 29/08/05
------------------------The European Parliament's environment committee will next month be asked to approve
environmental protection as the single legal base for an EU regulation on limiting emissions
and uses of fluorinated greenhouse gases (f-gases). The change would make it easier for EU
countries to ban certain f-gas uses unilaterally even if this fragments Europe's single market.
10
The proposal is contained in rapporteur Avril Doyle's report to the environment committee. It is
the latest development in a long-running argument over the best legal basis for EU f-gas
legislation, which as proposed by the European Commission would have had an internal market
base.
Environment ministers last October agreed to split the proposal into a directive on mobile air
conditioning systems, based on internal market, and a regulation on f-gases in other
applications, split between internal market and environment.
Ms Doyle's report proposes adopting the directive entirely as already agreed by ministers, but
fears that splitting the regulation between two legal bases could herald a "worrying" trend. In
an enlarged EU, says her report, care must be taken to avoid "cobbling together sloppy
compromises at the council negotiating table".
Ms Doyle's office said she had therefore considered legal opinions from several quarters,
including parliament's own legal service, and concluded that a single environment base was
"the most logical" for legislation aimed at tackling climate change.
The report also calls for a ban on the use of f-gases in small fridges. And it says the
Commission should come forward with further legislation covering HFCs in stationary air
conditioning by the end of 2008 - something which the council has agreed only as an option.
Though expecting "fierce lobbying" from some industry and national interests, Ms Doyle's
office said she was confident of winning backing from the environment committee for a
changed legal base.
However, Friedrich Busch, director general of refrigeration industry group Epee, said the
change was likely to make agreement with council impossible and land the dossier in
conciliation: "An inter-institutional political battle is unlikely to improve the final legislation,"
he told Environment Daily.
Mr Busch also said the report's call for a ban on the use of f-gases in small fridges was
"disproportionate".
Other Doyle report amendments are relatively minor. A proposal to label products using f-gases
with their global warming potential is reinstated from the first reading.
The report is unusual in that it proposes several changes - including the shift in legal base - that
were not tabled at first reading. The departure from normal procedure is in this case possible
because council's decision to split the f-gas proposal in two, together with the election of a new
parliament last summer, mean the situation is radically different from parliament's March 2004
reading.
And
Coverage ENDS IEEP (Greenpeace) Report on banning small fridge/freezers including EPEE
Comments :
11
ISSUE 1939 - Tuesday 13 September 2005
NGO backs call for HFC phase-out in fridges
The European parliament should back an MEP's call to ban HFC use in small domestic fridges
as part of a proposed regulation on limiting emissions and uses of fluorinated greenhouse gases
(f-gases), according to a review commissioned by Greenpeace.
Avril Doyle, the MEP with lead responsibility for the f-gas proposal at its second reading in the
European Parliament, took industry and NGOs by surprise last month when she recommended
adding small fridges to a list of products for which HFCs should be phased out under the
proposal.
The Greenpeace review - carried out by the London-based Institute for European environmental
policy (IEEP) - concludes that it is cheaper to switch to hydrocarbon coolants than to contain
HFCs in small fridges.
It says that explosion-proof hydrocarbon systems are now safer than previously thought. The
"overwhelming majority" of fridges and freezers awarded the highest grade for efficiency under
the EU's labelling directive use hydrocarbons, it adds.
Friedrich Busch of refrigeration industry group Epee questioned the conclusions. As examples,
he said, the economic estimate ignored the recovery cost for hydrocarbons at the product's end
of life, and that the estimate of emissions saved by hydrocarbon use was "considerably
overstated".
Mr Busch concluded that a blanket ban on f-gases for small fridges would be "disproportionate,
unwarranted and justified on incorrect facts and analysis... The environmental benefit ...would
be tiny."
***
EC 2037/2000
It appears that DG Environment will agree on keeping the deadline of 2015 for the final
phasing out. It is in accordance with the AREA statement forwarded at the end of the last
General Assembly on April 30.
Education & vocational training
Leonardo da Vinci
The Refrigeration Craftsman project
AREA/Leonardo Project EUR/02/C/F/NT- 84604
Agreement N° 2002-4549/001-001LE2X
12
Dissemination and valorisation work!
Information received from Mr. Attila Zoltan, our Hungarian Partner :
„An EU delegation of DG Environment (Tom Batchelor, Marcus Wandinger, Kalina
Lewanska) has been in Budapest. They have spoken (supported by PowerPoint slides) about the
need for harmonized training and certification (person and company, both in F-Gas and
2037/2000) and said that it was indispensable to take into consideration the results of the
AREA Leonardo Craftsmen results. And I've disseminated them in Hungary (Skills
competition, new thematic and training system, the Hóbagoly School), it is something you/we
have to be proud of.”
***
Seven teams will participate in the second AREA European Skills Competition at IKK 2005
(hall 13 – stand 726) : DE, ES, FR, HU, NL, SE and UK.
Here is the first information for the teams to arrive in Hanover on November 1 for the
instruction session.
The tasks for the AREA Skills competition will be :
Task A:
Fault finding
is one of the tasks that the teams will carry on, in turn, during the three day competition
(November 2-3-4).
This task will involve an ice rink installation.
Before 15 October, relevant technical information will be forwarded by the Project Coordinator
to the competing teams : drawings, item list and documentation about the main components.
Task of the day 1
10.00 am – 5:00 pm
Time:
Task B:
Split AC System Installation

Install a split air conditioner on a base frame. The specific information about the several
units will also be sent by e-mail before 15 October. On Tuesday 1 November, during the
instruction session, the selection about which team will receive which unit will be made at
random.

Bring the split AC unit into operation

Write a report with all the necessary technical data and settings
Task of the day 2
13
10:00 am – 3:00 pm
Time:
Task C:
Component & Wiring Fabrication

Fabricate a copper coil according a detailed drawing and install some electrical
components and wiring

The drawing of the coil will not be disclosed beforehand and will be handed over to the
competitors during the instruction session on Tuesday 1 November

Make a pressure test to test the tightness and the function of the wiring with the
electrical components
Task of the day 3
Time:
8:30 am – 12:00 pm
Task D:
Recover refrigerant from Split AC Unit

Switch the AC split unit from cooling to heat pump system

Write a report with all the necessary technical data and settings

Take out the refrigerant of the AC split system

Write a report on the recovery operation
3.00 pm
Prize ceremony : Morten Arnvig Award
Technical matters
THE MINIREF PROJECT
14
Mr. Joop Hoogkamer and Secretary R. Berckmans participated, on behalf of AREA, in the
MINIREF project’s kick off meeting, in the offices of TNO, in Apeldoorn (NL), on September
12-13.
It was the first Steering Committee Meeting. This Committee is the highest project authority;
all Partners are represented.
Another committee is the Technical Committee with all the Work Package (“WP”) Leaders
(see more information below) : this committee is responsible for the timely and correct
execution of the tasks to be performed in the several WP.
Were present :

The Project Coordinator TNO, Nederlandse Organisatie voor Toegepast
Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NL)

FKW Forschungszentrum für Kältetechnik und Wärmepumpe (DE)

EST Enerji Sistem Teknolojileri Sanayi, Ic ve Dis Ticaret (Turkey)

Apparatenfabriek HELPMAN (NL)

LODAM Electronics (DK)

Ingenieurs en Handelsburo WIJBENGA (NL)

Th. WITT Kältemaschinenfabrik (DE)

AHE Alu Heat Exchangers (DK)

The contractor Bort DE GRAAF (NL)

NEKOVRI Vereniging van Nederlandse Koel- en Vrieshuizen (NL)

NVKL Nederlandse Vereniging van Ondernemingen op het Gebied van Koudetechniek
en Luchtbehandeling (NL)

ECSLA European Cold Storage and Logistics Association

And AREA.
(apologies from Spanish, Italian and Polish partners)
Key points :
Reminding the overall objectives :
1. charge minimization up to 95% and energy reduction up to 30%
2. getting involvement and commitment as soon as possible
3. implementation and training (specially of EU SME).
Reminding the scientific / technological objectives :
1. building prototype to prove the concept
2. searching performance limits and looking for innovative ways to pass the limits
3. striving for an optimal “system” (indeed optimal components alone do not guarantee
optimum system performance)
4. integrating energy savings options within the concept
5. searching for retrofit possibility for current installations too new to be replaced.
Basic thoughts are :
1. eliminating buffers (in HP/LP receivers, evaporators, condensers) through control actions
to cope with load variations and new design (high heat transfer, low charge)
2. increasing utilization of refrigerant through increase of heat transfer, compressor
frequencies, refrigerant velocities.
The objectives are high, maybe slightly too high, but justified by the ambition and the
momentum of the project.
15
At the beginning, the project was conceived taking into account the compliance with the
obligations of the Kyoto Protocol : it means studying HFC systems.
But a consensus was reached around the table to say that HFC are no more a long term solution
and so-called Natural refrigerants (NH³, CO²) will be included in the project.
The Work Package Leaders are :
1. WP 1 – coordination and project management : TNO
2. WP 2 – program of demands : NEKOVRI
3. WP 2 – system concept : TNO
4. WP 4 – heat exchangers : AHE
5. WP 5 – compressors : FKW
6. WP 6 – piping and expansion : TNO
7. WP 7 – controls : LODAM
8. WP 8 – full scale prototype : TNO
9. WP 9 – users group m: NEKOVRI
10. WP 10 – training : NVKL
11. WP 11 – dissemination* : AREA.
*
(Expected dissemination actions are :

develop and produce dissemination materials

organize workshops

presentations in conferences and exhibitions

scientific / technical publications

press releases and advertising

website

…
Another specific task of AREA is the management and the protection of intellectual property
rights “IPR”)
The AREA WP Leader is Mr. Joop Hoogkamer.
The official starting date of the project was 1/8/2005, so it will end on 31/7/2008.
Essential dates are :
 standard installation (i.e. state-of-the-art of today) and test rig by : 31/5/2006
 miniref prototype (15-100 KW) by 31/7/2007.
A long discussion took place about the available budget and the willingness to work on F- and
Natural refrigerants which means two systems instead of one.
The decision was taken to have in priority, one reference installation using HFC but to test and
work on 2 Miniref systems : HFC and Natural refrigerants.
TNO was asked to check the financial feasibility.
The attendance discussed about the reference installation and agreed on the following :
Freezing system
Capacity : 50-100 KW (market reference to be scaled down for testing)
To : -25°C
Tc : 35°C
T room : -20°C
Open type reciprocating compressor (C.o.p +/- 2; C.o.p. system +/- 1,2)
16
Standardisation
Available at the secretariat the last version (dated 9/2005) of
prEN 12693
Refrigerating systems and heat pumps – Safety and environmental requirements – Positive
displacement refrigerant compressors
(pdf, 64 pages)
Member States
Differences in holidays for workers in EU
Agreed annual leave and public holidays vary hugely across the EU- from 44 days in Sweden
to 28 days in Estonia, Lithuania, Poland and Slovenia – a difference of over 50% or more than
3 working weeks.
Denmark, Germany, Italy, Malta and the Netherlands also have a high numbers of leave days
per year, while other notably low leave countries include Belgium, Hungary, Ireland and
Latvia. The average figure for the EU15 and Norway is 36 days, while that for the new Eastern
Member States is 30,8.
***
GERMANY
------------------------Further f-gas controls "could slash emissions"
Environment Daily 1931, 29/08/05
------------------------Germany could cut substantially emissions of fluorinated greenhouse gases (f-gases) by
introducing controls beyond those in draft EU f-gas legislation currently under debate in
Brussels, according to a study from the country's environment agency.
Most of the additional controls would involve phasing out f-gas uses to be permitted under the
EU rules. The agency has previously published research showing that f-gases could be widely
substituted in applications where the draft EU rules instead require better containment to stop
emissions.
The study calculates that, without further measures German emissions of the three "Kyoto" fgases (HFCs, PFCs and SF6) would rise by about 50% over their 1995 level by 2020. By
implementing the EU controls as currently drafted they will instead be virtually stabilised at 4%
above 1995 levels by 2020.
Only by going beyond the EU framework, could emissions be cut. The study calculates that
levels could be reduced, falling by 15% from the 1995 baseline by 2010 and 29% in total by
2020.
17
The planned EU laws will avoid increasing HFC emissions, largely by cutting use of HFC-134a
in vehicle air conditioning, requiring better maintenance of refrigeration systems and banning
HFCs in production of certain foams. But they will make little difference to German PFC or
SF6 emissions compared with existing national legislation up to 2003, the study reports.
By going beyond the EU rules, emissions of all three types of f-gas can be cut, it concludes. Its
assumptions include that non-HFC coolants would take half the refrigeration market, and that
HFCs are entirely phased out in automotive air conditioning, both by 2020.
News from our Members
SNEFCCA
After Rennes, Montpellier and Amiens, SNEFCCA will hold its 4th and 5th Regional RAC Fairs
in the 2004-2005 season :
Bordeaux : on October 15, 2005
Strasbourg : on November 9, 2005
Each previous exhibitions welcomed more than 2,000 visitors, including about 600 young
technicians interested in joining the RAC sector.
***
VDKF
Bonn, 02.09.2005
New composition of the IKK Exhibitors’ Advisory Board – International Trade
Fair Refrigeration, Air Conditioning, Ventilation
Open Letter on the general situation regarding the composition of the IKK Exhibitors’ Advisory Board –
Committee
Dear Sir,
Dear Madam,
Since 1992 the IKK Exhibitors’ Advisory Board has supported the organizer of the IKK in an advisory capacity, in
consultation with the company staging this international trade fair, NürnbergMesse GmbH. In recent years this
Advisory Board has made a considerable contribution to the consistent success of today’s IKK. In determining the
composition of this Committee both product sectors as well as the various sizes of the exhibitors’ companies are
taken into account. The members of the Exhibitors’ Advisory Board were initially appointed for three events
subject to the provision that a reappointment is possible. In addition, this Committee reflects the broad spectrum of
the exhibitors and entire clientele from the refrigeration, air-conditioning, ventilation sector.
On 11.08.2005 the promoter of the IKK expressed its gratitude to all serving members to date for their
constructive cooperation in recent years. We informed them about a changed trade fair situation within our sector
and in that connection about a repositioning and new composition according to individual market segments on this
Committee. On the basis of the constituent meeting of 10th October 1992, the tasks of the Exhibitors’ Advisory
Board have been revised. Against this background both the tasks set as well as the current internationality of the
IKK will be taken into account.
18
In keeping with the wish of the promoter, the future Advisory Board will comprise - along with the companies
who traditionally support the annual cycle of the IKK – members reflecting newly added segments, the
internationality and the national and international associations which belong to this sector.
We are conducting intensive canvassing among interested IKK exhibitors to secure their involvement in this
Committee, in order to represent their entire product segment and be actively involved in the development and
positioning of the IKK which is held annually at the locations of Hanover and Nuremberg. Constructive
contributions aimed at the further extension and development of the IKK as the leading fair for the refrigeration,
air-conditioning and ventilation sector in the national and international trade fair spectrum is the wish of all those
involved.
When we took our leave of certain members on the previous Exhibitors’ Advisory Board on 11.08.05 expressing
the gratitude due to them and these members declare they are stepping down on 23.08.05, it is apparent here that
several of the organizer’s purposefully expressed statements have in the past been misunderstood. We are also
inviting these companies to continue their involvement with this Committee through their annual participation at
the IKK in Hanover and in Nuremberg.
I would like to take this opportunity to once again express my gratitude to the previous members for their longstanding service on the IKK Exhibitors’ Advisory Board.
With friendly recommendation to all national and international exhibitors at the IKK.
VDKF Wirtschafts- und Informationsdienste GmbH
Christian Scholz
Chairman of the Supervisory Board
Dipl.-Volkswirt Rudolf Pütz
Executive Director
Sister Associations
European Heat Pump Association EHPA
Secretary R.Berckmans attended the last EHPA General Meeting held in Brussels on
September 16.
Needless to mention the potential of the HP market (you will find statistics at the end of this
EHPA section).
The association is still closer to the heating applications than to the cooling operations. The
companies that are members of EHPA are quite interested in R&D : solar energy, biomass,
solar cooling, adsorption HP, …
EHPA has been invited to come to the AREA Brussels GA on November 22 to make a short
presentation and answer questions of our Members.
Current projects where EHPA is a Partner :
EU Cert. HP
European training and certification for HP installers (Austria, Czech Republic, France,
Ireland, Italy, Slovenia, Sweden, UK; observers : Germany, Slovakia, maybe the Netherlands)
19
The preliminary version of the courses / manual (in EN) will be ready in October 2005. Pilot
courses will be organized end 2005 – beginning 2006. AREA will receive the information and
will be able to give some feedback.
The project also covers a European certification : the requirements are presently under study; a
certification program will be proposed and the Member States will decide how to set up the
certification scheme. The project leader, Arsenal Research (AT), will be involved in Austria as
an accredited certifying body.
SHERPA
Development of components for systems using CO², NH³, HC – system optimisation
EARTH
Training targets / programs concerning solar water heating, ground source HP and biomass as
heat & energy sources
GROUND REACH
Development of the use of ground sources for heating
ThERRA
Development of the use of renewable heat (Leader is SenterNovem NL)
EU target is 12% in 2010
Harmonisation of definitions, standards, calculation methods, monitoring of results
Statistics about the HP market
FIZ Karlsruhe
18.07.05
General remarks

The quality of statistical data provided from 13 European countries differ considerably.
Only seven countries can provide (more or less) reliable statistics. However, these countries are
representing approximately 80% of the national markets considered.

No official data from Southern Europe available at all.
Results

Total sales of space heating HPs: Around 208.000 units (including heat recovery and
reversible HPs, excluding tap water only HPs). Approximately 3 Mio air-conditioners with heat
pump function predominantly used for cooling purposes in Southern Europe are disregarded. If
you look at the figures of the below mentioned countries since 1992, the growth rate in the last
12 years has been +20% compound per annum!

Increase of sales vs 2003 of the most important markets: more than 30% (see Table). During
the last five years countries like Austria (136%) and Germany (120%) realized a remarkable market
increase.

The market share of HPs on the heating markets differs considerably from country to
country (e.g. for new buildings between around 8% in Germany and 80% in Sweden).

Sweden is clearly the dominating market: Over 100.000 units sold in 2004, 60% of them
heating only HPs (mostly brine/water Hps; including heat recovery HPs) and 40% reversible HPs
20
(air-source systems predominantly used for heating purposes). Exhaust air HPs are installed in more
than 90% of all new single-family houses.

Heating only: Ground source HPs are the dominating systems in most countries.

Reversible HPs (air-source HPs predominantly used for heating purposes) are the dominating
systems in Norway (90%), Finland (63%).

DACH countries and NL: Obviously not yet a remarkable market for reversible HPs
21
Sales Figures Space Heating 1)
2003
2004
units
units
Austria
Bulgaria
Czech Rep.
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Ireland
Netherlands
Norway
Slovenia
Sweden
Switzerland
Total
3.780
15
1.200
510
8.540
13.700
15.838
1.300
1.557
55.081
25
68.100
8.695
5.129
25
2.400
750
12.648
17.300
20.636
1.800
1.800
35.390
35
100.215
9.796
178.341
207.924
reversible HPs predominantly used for
space heating and heat recovery HPs; excluding tap
water only HPs
increase
36%
67%
100%
47%
48%
26%
30%
38%
16%
-36%
40%
47%
13%
17%
1) Including
Diagramms:
 Diagr. 1: Sales figures space heating HPs
 Diagr. 2: Sales figures heating only HPs
22
EHPA Heat Pump Statistics 2004: Sales Figures Space Heating
4.767 362
Austria
Heating only HPs (excluding heat recovery HPs)
25
Bulgaria
Heat recovery HPs
2400
Czech Rep
Reversible HPs
750
Estonia
Rev. HPs (mostly air-source units, predominantly for heating)
1.736
8.000
Finland
2.912
Total
11.700
France
5.600
12.636
Germany
8.000
1800
Ireland
1.800
Netherlands
744
32.012
Norway
2.634
35
Slovenia
45.283
Sweden
9.739
Switzerland
0
14.932
40.000
57
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
70.000
80.000
90.000
100.000
23
EHPA Heat Pump Statistics 2004: Sales Figures Space Heating
4.767 362
Austria
Heating only HPs (excluding heat recovery HPs)
25
Bulgaria
Heat recovery HPs
2400
Czech Rep
Reversible HPs
750
Estonia
Rev. HPs (mostly air-source units, predominantly for heating)
1.736
8.000
Finland
2.912
Total
11.700
France
5.600
12.636
Germany
8.000
1800
Ireland
1.800
Netherlands
744
32.012
Norway
2.634
35
Slovenia
45.283
Sweden
9.739
Switzerland
0
14.932
40.000
57
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
70.000
80.000
90.000
100.000
Eco-label for heat pumps
The Commission is looking at heating systems; they are only considering now extending to
cooling systems (decision not yet taken).
HP are not recognized in the renewable energy category.
HFC, as refrigerant, is proposed to be only used under specific circumstances (definitely
GWP100y to be <2000 CO² eqv)
***
International Institute of Refrigeration IIR
Message received :
Dear Colleagues
We would hereby like to remind you about the invitation to submit abstracts for the "7th IIR
Gustav Lorentzen Conference on Natural Working Fluids".
24
The submission will be web-based.
See our home-page: http://www.energy.sintef.no/arr/GL2006/ for all necessary information.
If possible we would appreciate your assistance to inform other people of interest of this
conference.
We hope to see you in Trondheim next year in May.
Regards,
Trygve M. Eikevik, Prof.
Chairman of Organizing Committee
7th IIR Gustav Lorentzen Conference
***
Federation of European Heating and Air Conditioning Associations REHVA
Air-conditioning and ventilation conference in Prague
REHVA as conference co-sponsor, invites you to participate at the international conference
Air-conditioning and Ventilation Prague 2006, organised by Czech REHVA member
association Society of Environmental Engineering (STP)
on May 17-19, 2006 in Prague, Czech Republic.
The main topic of the conference is ventilation and air-conditioning and associated technology
branches. Papers dealing with building and HVAC systems simulation will be welcome.
More information and registration are available on a conference web page.
Business news
Another giant is born …
JOHNSON CONTROLS INC. has signed a definitive agreement to acquire YORK
INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION.
The group will have more than 500 offices in 125 countries and employ over 150,000 persons.
The transaction is expected to close in December 2005, subject to customary regulatory
approvals and YORK shareholder approval.
Events
“Implications of the new hazardous waste regulations”
Seminar to be held on October 25, 2005 in the Solihull Moat House Hotel
For information call +44 1778 391117
***
25