フロン対策の将来課題と国際協調

JICOP セミナー

新規フッ素系温室効果ガスの種類と特性、評価
Environmentally Accepted Fluorinated Gases

産業技術総合研究所
関屋 章

AIST, Akira Sekiya
2008年11月26日、ホテル機山館
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

The steps for acceptance of new technologies

Select Useful Alternative Technologies

What is Target

Technology Level

How to evaluate environment
What is benefit:
・Environment
・Resources

Sustainability
Efficiency

What is contribution to society

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Environment analyses
Evaluated by GWP×ｔ

Mole fraction (ppt) of GHGs by IPCC 2007

National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Reportof Japan 2006 ver.2

Figure 2.6

GWP ・Easy to look trend of GHGs emissions.
・Random ITH value
・Difficult to image future environment.
・Selection of Technologies
Successful to chose better technology
Weak relation to atmosphere
Which do you chose by LCCP analysis?
Tech. 1: 1000(GWP,Short LT) × 1kg = 10000
Tech. 2: 1(GWP, Long LT) × 1000kg = 10000
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

IPCC 2001

Reduction schedule ofGHGs is consideredwith ppm analyses

UNFCC:
Target is stabilize
GHGs atmosphericconcentrations

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Analysis Methods of Global Warming
Current analyses: GWP(LCCP, LCA, LCCO2, Carbon Offset, CDM, Carbon Footprint,
Ecological Footprint, Carbon Neutral, Carbon Positive, Eco-point, ------)

Analyses by time
TWPG (kg, ppm)
kg,ppmCx (y)

0time

TWPG (Wm-2)

RFRx (y) ×Cx (y)

Wm-2

0time

CWP

AGWP
(CO2,100y)=1

Integrated value ofTWPG(Wm-2)

0time

TWPG: Total Warming Prediction Graph
CWP: Composite Warming EffectCalculated on the assumption that the same atmosphere is kept in the future.
(According to “Sustainable Development” Concept)

A.Sekiya, Journal of Fluorine Chemistry 128 (2007) 1137–1142
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Scenarios of CO2 emissions by TWPG and CWP
Simulation in IPCC 2001
CO2 emissions [Pg C/y]161000ppm
750ppm
650ppm550ppm450ppm141210
8
6
4
20
2000

CO2 emissions（ISAM model ）

2050

2100

2150

2200

2250

2300

year
CO2 emissions（simulation of ISAM model - average of the upper and lower limits）

TWPG
8070

2RF [W/m ]60
50

1000ppm
750ppm
650ppm550ppm450ppm4030
20102000（y）

Ref. IPCC 2001

2300

02000

Similar to IPCC

2050

2100

2150

2200

2250

2300

year

Our MethodJICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

CO2 Emissions (original scenarios)

TWPG and CWP Analyses
Scenarios of CO2 Emissions

TWPG1) Scenario of IPCC 20012) 450 ppm scenario before 2050 + the same emissions after 2050

After 2050, the same emissions
70

16

10
8
6
4

40

1000ppm
750ppm
650ppm550ppm450ppm450+settled

30
20

20
2000

50
2CO 2 emissions [Pg C/y]1260

RF [W/m ]1000ppm
750ppm
650ppm550ppm450ppm450+settled

14

10

2050

2100

2150

year

2200

2250

2300

02000

2050

2100

2150

2200

2250

2300

year

Continuous reduction of CO2 emission is necessary1) The energy related to carbon emissions must be phased
out in the near future.
2) New non-carbon energy has to be developed urgently.

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Setting Technology level is Important
Level of technologies
1) Continuous reduction of CO2emission is necessary

CO2 emissions [Pg C/y]161000ppm
750ppm
650ppm550ppm450ppm141210Level C
Level B
Level A

864
20
2000

2050

2100

2150

year

2200

2250

2300

Level set is necessary2) Technologies have to chose byhigh level setting

Level C： 6%(Japan) reduction, but no effect for more reductions
Level B： 50% (World) reduction, but no effect for more reductions
Level A： Sustainable technologies

・Backcasting (Level A)
1) What technology will be accepted in Level A technologies ?
2) Develop Level A technologies urgently.
・Forecasting (Level C, B, A)
1)New technologies which could reduce GHG emissions are under development.
2) Even if reduction amount of GHGs is small, quite high cost must be paid.
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Current Alternative Technologies
TWPG(W)

9.0E-128.0E-12

R134a-Enhanced

7.0E-12

R744-Enhanced

6.0E-12RF (Wm-2)

ExampleRefrigerant
Foam Blowing AgentSolvent

5.0E-124.0E-123.0E-122.0E-12

Semiconductor ?
・PFCs

1.0E-12
0.0E+00

0200400600

Year・NF3
Short Lifetime
Low GWP ?

High Performance

LCCP analysis
LCCP analysis shows total warming but doesn’t shows the difference of twoGases
Energy

HFO↓, HFC,PFC↑, SF6↑,NF3↑CO2↑
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Semiconductor
TWPG (RF) of predicted emissions of PFCs
TWPG on the assumption that the same amountof 2001-2006 is emitted continuously until 3000.
1.2E+00
CF4C2F6 * 8.82
C3F8 * 8.82
c-C4F8 * 8.82
HFC-23 * 8.82
SF6 * 8.82
Total of HFCs, PFCs, SF6 * 8.82
CO2, Fossil-Fuel Burning

1.0E+00

RF [W/m2 ]8.0E-01
6.0E-01

Emissions and predicted emissionsof PFCs from semiconductor
manufacture in US

4.0E-01
2.0E-01
0.0E+00
1751

2251

year

2751

3251

The graph shows the comparison between RF of PFCs’ continuous use and of CO2
emissions until 2004.

Continuous emissions of PFCs bring the large RF in the future.
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Environmental Impacts of Semiconductor
Gases1kg analysis based on IPCC 2007

Sustainable

Unsustainable

Comp.

Lifetime

CWP

GWP[year]

100 y

500 y

1000 y1500y

CF450,0007,390

36,802

73,239109,313

7,390

C2F6

10,00012,20059,798116,680

170,787

12,200

C3F8

2,600

8,830

40,94174,721

102,591

8,830

SF6

3,200

22,800107,197

198,888

277,316

22,800

NF374017,20066,837100,797

118,149

17,200

C4F6

0.016

6.5

8.9

11.2

70.3

0.027

c-C5F8

0.98

91

9396

152

90

COF2～00.7

2.1

3.6

40.0

0000000F2

100 y・CWP includes the decomposed products and CO2.
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

・Tier 3・Remote
TWPG analyses of Semiconductor
・SiN
Cleaning system・Abate. on/off(Incineration, City Gas)
TWPG
TWPG
Warming effects at the time
Warming effects at the time
4.5E-138.0E-14
Remote, SiN, C2F6 + O2, Abat.:onRemote, SiN, C3F8 + O2, Abat.:on

7.0E-14

Remote, SiN, NF3 + Ar (1), Abat.:on

5.0E-14NF3

4.0E-14

C2F6

3.0E-14

Remote, SiN, NF3 + Ar (1), Abat.:on

3.5E-13

Remote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:onRemote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:offRemote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:onRemote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:off

3.0E-13
RF [W/m 2 ]RF [W/m 2 ]6.0E-14

Remote, SiN, C2F6 + O2, Abat.:onRemote, SiN, C3F8 + O2, Abat.:on

4.0E-13

2.5E-13

C2F6

2.0E-13
1.5E-132.0E-14

C3F8

1.0E-14

C3F8

1.0E-13
5.0E-14COF2

0.0E+00

COF2

0.0E+00
0NF3500

1000year

1500

0500

Production Leakage Rate: 3.5%

1000

1500year

Destruction Efficiency Parameters for Abatement (Equipment Specific)
0PFCs, NF3 = 0.99
7.6×10 -14

3.9×10 -13 TWPG(RF) becomes 5.2 times larger(5.2 times larger)
CWP increases similarly.
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

・Tier 3
TWPG analyses of Semiconductor
・Remote・SiN
Cleaning system・Abate. on/off(Incineration, City Gas)
TWPG
TWPG
Warming effects at the time
Warming effects at the time
8.0E-14

1.0E-13

RF [W/m 2 ]6.0E-14
5.0E-14

9.0E-14

Remote, SiN, C2F6 + O2, Abat.:onRemote, SiN, C3F8 + O2, Abat.:onRemote, SiN, NF3 + Ar (1), Abat.:on

8.0E-14

Remote, SiN, NF3 + Ar (1), Abat.:onRemote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:onRemote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:off

7.0E-14

Remote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:onRemote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:off

RF [W/m 2 ]7.0E-14

Remote, SiN, C2F6 + O2, Abat.:onRemote, SiN, C3F8 + O2, Abat.:on

NF3

4.0E-14

C2F6

3.0E-14

6.0E-14NF3

5.0E-14

C2F6

4.0E-14
3.0E-142.0E-14C3F8

1.0E-14

C3F8

2.0E-14
1.0E-14COF2

0.0E+00

COF20.0E+00
0500

1000year

15000500

Production Leakage Rate: 3.5%1000

1500year

Destruction Efficiency Parameters for Abatement (Equipment Specific)
0.95
PFCs, NF3 = 0.99
7.6×10 -14(17% larger)

8.9×10 -14

TWPG(RF) becomes 17% larger
CWP also becomes 17% larger
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

・Tier 3・Remote
TWPG and CWP analyses of・SiN
Semiconductor Cleaning system・Abate. on/off(Incineration, City Gas)
TWPG(W) Warming effects at the timeCWP Integrated warming effects
6.0E+028.0E-14
Remote, SiN, C2F6 + O2, Abat.:onRemote, SiN, C3F8 + O2, Abat.:onRemote, SiN, NF3 + Ar (1), Abat.:on

RF [W/m 2 ]6.0E-14

Remote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:onRemote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:off

5.0E-14NF3

4.0E-14

C2F6

3.0E-142.0E-14

C3F8

1.0E-14

Remote, SiN, C3F8 + O2, Abat.:onRemote, SiN, NF3 + Ar (1), Abat.:on

5.0E+02
CWP, CO 2 (1kg, 100y) = 1

7.0E-14

Remote, SiN, C2F6 + O2, Abat.:onRemote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:onRemote, SiN, COF2 + O2 (1), Abat.:off

4.0E+02

NF3

3.0E+02

C2F6

2.0E+02

C3F8

1.0E+02

COF2

COF2

0.0E+00

0.0E+00
0500

1000

1500

0500

year

1000

1500year

Production Leakage Rate: 3.5%
Destruction Efficiency Parameters for Abatement (Equipment Specific)
PFCs, NF3 = 0.99

Integrated warming effect ・・・ COF2 vs. NF3 = 1 : 62 (100y)
COF2(1.14) vs. NF3(71.05) = 1 : 62.3

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Comparison of NF3 and COF2 as semiconductor cleaning gases
Remote system, SiN

Reduction (W)→NF3

COF262→

1Level A

Destruction ratio （No abatement system）

0.99

5.2→

1Level B

Destruction ratio
0.95→ 0.99

1.2→

1

Level C0→

Alternative technologies is the best choice.
It is much better than abatement system
Scientific analyses guide the high level technologies

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

About GTP
Keith P. Shine, Jan S. Fuglestvedt, Kinfe Hailemariam, Nicola Stuber, Climatic Change, 68, pp.281-302, 2005.
"Alternatives to the Global Warming Potential for Comparing Climate Impacts of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases"

Abstract (part)
The Global Warming Potential (GWP) is used within the Kyoto Protocol to theUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as a metric forweighting the climatic impact of emissions of different greenhouse gases. The
GWP has been subjected to many criticisms because of its formulation, butnevertheless it has retained some favor because of the simplicity of its design
and application, and its transparency compared to proposed alternatives. Here,
two new metrics are proposed, which are based on a simple analytical climate
model. The first metric is called the Global Temperature Change Potential andrepresents the temperature change at a given time due to a pulse emission of agas (GTPP); the second is similar but represents the effect of a sustainedemission change (hence GTPS). Both GTPP and GTPS are presented as relative
to the temperature change due to a similar emission change of a reference gas,
here taken to be carbon dioxide.

・There are uncertainties between the GWP metric and the environment change.
・The global warming is figured out using the metric based on the surface
temperature change.
GTP is also described in IPCC 2007 and UN.

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Characteristics of GTP, GWP and TWPGGWP：time-integrated radiative forcing after a pulse emission
over normally a 100-year time horizon (CO2 = 1)
The contribution of the past RF remains over 100 years. A 100-year makes little sence.

TWPG (AGWP)： radiative forcing (W) after a pulse emission
A time-based value. After disappear from atmosphere, the radiative forcing is not counted.
The value does not employ CO2 as a reference.

AGTPP：global mean surface temperature change after a pulse
emission
A time-based value. A gradual recovery of the heat from the sea is counted.
The value does not employ CO2 as a reference.

GTPS：global mean surface temperature change due tosustained emission change
A sustained emission change is similar into the integrated value and is not a practicalcase. This value employs CO2 as a reference.
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Comparison among GTP, GWP and TWPG
metrics
GWP

atmospherevalueunit

reference

Integrated RFdimensionless(ratio)CO2

Wattstand-aloneof pulse emission

TWPG(AGWP)

atmosphere

RF changeof pulse emission

analytical-GTPP

atmosphere& sea

Temp. changeof pulse emission

dimensionless(ratio)CO2analytical-AGTPP

atmosphere& sea

Temp. changeof pulse emission

K(temperature)

stand-alone

GTPS

atmosphere& sea

Temp. changeof sustained emission
changeK year(temperature)

CO2

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

The results of GTPP evaluation
Radiative forcing after 1 kg release
・The same as TWPG
・The time-integrated this value
is equal to AGWP.

CF4CH4CO2

HFC152a
HFC152a

CF4CF4CH4 CH4
HFC152aAnalytical
EBM
CO2CO2The temperature change
corresponding to RF in figure (a)・thin lines：Analytical AGTPP・thick lines：AGTPP based on EBM・During the first a few years, EBM ishigher.
・ Analytical AGTPP both overestimates
the peak response and underestimates
the recovery from the pulse.

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

p.79
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

AGTP-EBM and TWPGAGTPP – EBM due to 1kg pulse emission]
K[egnahCerut
arep
meT

TWPG(W) due to 1kg pulse emission

2]
m/W
[FR

0.0E+00

0.0E+00

0100200year

300

400500AGTPP – EBM due to emissions based on themodel cases

0100200year

300

400

500

TWPG(W) due to emissions based on the model cases
3.0E-132.0E-13][K 1.5E-13egnahC
er 1.0E-13ut
arep
me 5.0E-14
T

Model A
Model B
Model C

2.5E-13Model A
Model B
Model C2]

2.0E-13m/
W[ 1.5E-13FR
1.0E-13
5.0E-140.0E+00

0.0E+00
0100200year

300400500

0100200year

300400500

Model A: Every year 1 kg for 500 years
Model B: First year: 1kg, 2-80 years: 1% reduction, 81-: 0.2kg for every year
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京
Model C: First year: 1kg, 2-100 years: 1% reduction, 101-: no emission for every year

TWPGP*
20100500

10

6.2 4.1

1.5 1.47 1.46
29
3.2 2.92300 12.9 0.95350

274 12.46800 11000 16000*) TWPGをCO2基準に変形し、TWPGP*とした。
A.Sekiya

EnergyDec.

VOC

Ozon Layer

Climate Atmos.

SeaProd.

O3

Cooling×◯◯◯×◯××××△×◯◯◯×××◯◯×◯◯◯

GWP
Anal-GTPP
EBM-GTPP
TWPGP*Values

Similar

GWP ≒ GTPs、

TWPG ≒ AGTPP

Needed data for calculations:RF, Lifetime

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Conclusion
Level A Technologies
How to find

How to introduce

All technologies

Reductions by Kyoto

Scientific evaluations
Future estimations

AGTPp
TWPG

Selections of level A technologies（GWP is using now）

GWP

GWP use ?
Replace GWP?

Push Level A Tech.

Factorsetc.

Sustainable Society
JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京

Thank you for the attention

JICOP セミナー、2008.11.26、東京