Market	Characterization	of	the	Motor	Vehicle	Air	

Conditioning	Industry	

P REPARED FOR :

       Stratospheric	Protection	Division		

Office	of	Air	and	Radiation		

U.S.	Environmental	Protection	Agency		

Washington,	D.C.	20460		

P REPARED B Y :

ICF	International		

1725	Eye	Street,	NW		

Washington,	DC	20006		

M A Y 2014
Market	Characterization	of	the	Motor	Vehicle	Air	

Conditioning	Industry	

Table of Contents

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1

2 Market Characterization ................................................................................................................ 1

2.1 Overview of Light‐Duty Vehicles and Trucks................................................................................. 1

2.2 Vehicle Manufacturers.................................................................................................................. 2

2.2.1 Vehicle Production......................................................................................................... 3

2.2.2 Imports and Exports Market.......................................................................................... 3

2.2.3 Vehicle Sales................................................................................................................... 4

3 Sector Background......................................................................................................................... 4

3.1 Refrigerant Use in Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning ...................................................................... 5

4 Climate‐Friendly Alternatives......................................................................................................... 6

4.1 HFC‐152a....................................................................................................................................... 7

4.2 HFO‐1234yf ................................................................................................................................... 7

4.3 Carbon Dioxide.............................................................................................................................. 8

4.4 Other Alternatives (Not Currently Listed by SNAP) ...................................................................... 8

5 References................................................................................................................................... 10
1

1 Introduction  

Motor vehicle air conditioners (MVACs) cool the passenger compartment of light‐duty vehicles

(passenger cars), light‐duty trucks, heavy‐duty vehicles, off‐road vehicles, buses, and passenger rail

vehicles. The MVAC sector historically relied on chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)‐12 refrigerant, and to a more

limited extent, hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)‐22 in passenger rail and buses, both of which are ozone‐

depleting substances (ODS). In advance of the 1996 phaseout of CFC‐12 and the continued phaseout of

HCFCs, the U.S. MVAC industry largely transitioned away from ODS by 1994, relying most heavily on a

high‐global warming potential (GWP) refrigerant, HFC‐134a. However, today low‐GWP alternatives are

entering the U.S. market, facilitated by approval by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s)

Significant New Alternative Policy (SNAP) Program and the availability of air conditioning credits to meet

greenhouse gas (GHG) standards for light‐duty vehicles and trucks.  

The purpose of this paper is to characterize the U.S. MVAC sector in terms of market size, key market

players, historical and current refrigerant use, the availability of alternative refrigerants, and barriers to

transitioning to alternative refrigerants. This report focuses on MVACs in light‐duty vehicles and trucks,

which are the most numerous of the vehicle types.  

2 Market Characterization for Light‐Duty Vehicles

This section presents available market data on automobile and MVAC manufacturers. The majority of

vehicle manufacturers assemble and install their own MVAC systems, while others purchase assembled

MVAC systems. Because almost all cars sold in the U.S. are equipped with an air conditioning system,

vehicle production, import and export, and sales data are used to characterize the light‐duty vehicle

MVAC market in the United States.

2.1 Overview of Light‐Duty Vehicles and Trucks

Definitions and fleet estimates of light‐duty vehicles and trucks are provided below. Similar information

found in this report can be found in Appendix A for heavy‐duty vehicles, buses, trains, and off‐road

vehicles.

 Light‐duty vehicles include standard and large passenger cars, which meet the criteria outlined

in 40 CFR 86.1803‐01, which defines light‐duty vehicles as a passenger car or passenger car

derivative capable of seating 12 passengers or less, and are categorized as Class 1 vehicles with

gross vehicle weight rating less than 6,000 lbs (EPA 2010a). Typical light‐duty vehicles include

passenger cars, minivans, sports utility vehicles (SUVs), pick‐up trucks, and utility vans (EPA

2011). These vehicles represent the largest use of MVACs.  

 Light‐duty trucks are defined as vehicles with gross vehicle weight rating less than 8,500 lbs, or

between 8,500 and 10,000 lbs that meet the criteria outlined in 40 CFR 86.1803‐01, which

defines a light‐duty truck as any motor vehicle rated at 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight rating

(GVWR) or less which has a vehicle curb weight of 6,000 pounds or less and which has a basic

vehicle frontal area of 45 square feet or less, which is: (1) Designed primarily for purposes of

transportation of property or is a derivation of such a vehicle, (2) Designed primarily for

transportation of persons and has a capacity of more than 12 persons, or (3) Available with

special features enabling off‐street or off‐highway operation and use. Vehicles in this category

are categorized as Class 2A vehicles and include truck‐based station wagons, minivans, full size
2

pick‐up trucks, and full‐size SUVs (EPA 2011; DOT 2013a).

Fleet estimates (i.e., the number of vehicles in use) within the United States are summarized in Table 1

below, based on readily available literature.  

Table 1. Light‐duty Vehicle and Truck Fleet Size Estimates

Year Number of Light-duty Vehicles and Trucks 

Sources 

2010 239,812,000a Ward’s (2011) 

2010 237,129,000 ICCT (2012) 

2011 233,841,000b DOT (2013a) a Includes 118,946,744 cars and 120,865,240 commercial vehicles. 

b Includes light duty vehicles (192,513,278 short wheel base and 41,328,144 long wheel base). 

2.2 Vehicle Manufacturers

Available 2011 U.S. Census data on the U.S. vehicle manufacturing industry is provided in Table 2,

including information on total shipment values, number of employees, number of establishments, and

number of companies/firms.  

Table 2. 2007 Census Data on the Vehicle Manufacturing Industry

Industry NAICS code 

Total Value of 

Shipments* 

($1,000) 

Number of 

Employees 

Number of 

Establishments 

Number of 

Companies/Firms

Automobile and Light Duty 

Motor Vehicle Manufacturing 336111 84,727,558 65,436 188 174 

Light Truck and Utility Vehicle

Manufacturing 336112 154,035,538 84,806 90 66 

*Value of shipments is defined as received or receivable net selling values, free on board plant (exclusive of freight and 

taxes), of all products shipped as well as all miscellaneous receipts, such as receipts for contract work performed for 

others, installation and repair, sales of scrap, and sales of products bought and sold without further processing. 

Known light‐duty vehicle and truck manufacturers within the United States are listed below, based on

Lowe et al. (2010), Nielsen et al. (2010), and EPA (2011). A more extensive list that includes companies

that manufacture heavy‐duty vehicles, bus, passenger rail, and off‐road vehicles can be found in

Appendix A. The companies listed were identified during literature review while developing this report,

and do not necessarily represent an inclusive list of all manufacturing companies within the United

States. However, these companies, in alphabetical order, represent the larger automobile

manufacturers. 

 BMW  Honda  Mitsubishi

 Chrysler  Hyundai  Nissan

 Daimler  Isuzu  Subaru

 Ford  Kia  Toyota

 General Motors  Mazda  Volvo

From the list above, the 13 major companies manufacturing light‐duty passenger vehicles in the United

States are BMW, Chrysler, Daimler, Ford, General Motors (GM), Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Mazda, Mitsubishi,

Nissan, Subaru, and Toyota. Three of the companies, GM, Ford, and  Chrysler—also known as the

“Detroit Three”—are headquartered in the Detroit, Michigan area, with the majority of their U.S. plants
3

located in the Great Lakes region, and the remainder primarily located in southern states (International

Trade Administration 2010). The largest light‐duty truck manufacturers in the United States are GM,

Ford, and Chrysler.  Isuzu, Daimler, Mitsubishi, and Nissan also sell vehicles in this market segment (EPA

2012a).  

2.2.1 Vehicle Production  

Production estimates for the vehicle manufacturing industry by vehicle type are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Estimated Number of Light‐duty Vehicles and Trucks Produced Annually in the United States

Year 

Production 

Light-duty Vehicles Light-duty Trucks Total 

2005 4,284,391 7,249,964 11,534,355 

2006 4,340,673 6,525,355 10,866,028 

2007 3,895,684 6,583,451 10,479,134 

2008 3,755,039 4,701,500 8,456,539 

2009 2,229,656 3,333,408 5,563,064 

2010 2,781,947 4,776,365 7,558,312 

2011 3,019,848 5,388,169 8,408,017 

2012 4,106,991 5,937,229 10,044,220 

2013 4,357,929 6,446,965 10,804,894 

Sources: OICA (2014), BEA (2014), Automotive News (2008, 2009, 2011, 2012), DOT (2014) 

2.2.2 Imports and Exports Market

The U.S. import and export markets for light‐duty vehicles and trucks are significant. Foreign markets

accounted for nearly 70% of Ford vehicles sold in 2007 and 64% of GM’s total sales in 2008. Canada was

the top export destination, with exports of $17 billion, followed by Germany ($3.6 billion), Saudi Arabia

($2.95 billion), China ($2.91 billion), and Mexico ($2.8 billion) (International Trade Administration 2011).  

The United States imports more vehicles by volume and value than any other country. In 2010, Mexico,

Canada, Germany, Japan, and Korea accounted for 93% of all U.S. light‐duty vehicle imports; Mexico and

Canada alone accounted for 48% of U.S. light‐duty vehicle imports (International Trade Administration

2011).  

Vehicle import and export estimates for the U.S. industry by vehicle type are presented in Table 4. The

International Trade Administration (2014) provided both import and export data of light‐duty vehicles

and trucks; however, the values represent combined light‐duty vehicles and trucks. To disaggregate the

data into light‐duty vehicles and trucks, the annual ratio of light‐duty vehicles to trucks that are

produced based on the production data (Table 3) was applied to the total, which is roughly 40 percent

light‐duty vehicles and 60 percent light‐duty trucks each year.   
4

Table 4. Estimated Number of Vehicles Imported and Exported for the U.S.

Year 

Imports Exports 

Light-duty 

Vehicles 

Light-duty 

Trucks Total Light-duty Vehicles 

Light-duty 

Trucks Total 

2005 2,453,820 4,143,277 6,597,097 471,291 795,774 1,267,065 

2006 2,940,203 4,409,859 7,350,062 578,822 868,144 1,446,966 

2007 2,656,448 4,478,232 7,134,680 614,905 1,036,606 1,651,511 

2008 2,883,764 3,603,015 6,486,779 703,188 878,572 1,581,760 

2009 1,746,438 2,598,200 4,344,638 405,610 603,432 1,009,042 

2010 2,142,100 3,656,289 5,798,389 513,368 876,254 1,389,622 

2011 2,165,210 3,845,539 6,010,749 571,669 1,015,316 1,586,985 

2012 2,838,986 4,105,171 6,944,157 738,183 1,067,412 1,805,595 

2013 2,879,909 4,271,187 7,151,096 781,700 1,159,338 1,941,038 

Source: International Trade Administration (2014) 

2.2.3 Vehicle Sales

Estimates of U.S. light‐duty vehicle and light‐duty truck sales are presented in Table 5. In 2010, sales by

foreign manufacturers accounted for approximately 54% of the U.S. market of light‐duty vehicle sales;

Japanese manufacturers decreased their market share to 38.8% in 2010, from 40.5% in 2009 while

German manufacturers increased their market share from 7.3% to 7.6% and Korean manufacturers’

market share grew from 7.1% to 7.7% (International Trade Administration 2011).  

Table 5. U.S. Sales of Light‐duty Vehicles and Trucks

Year 

Sales 

Light-duty Vehicles Light-duty Trucks Total 

2005 7,667,066 9,288,400 16,955,466 

2006 7,820,854 8,766,721 16,587,575 

2007 7,618,413 8,399,807 16,018,220 

2008 6,813,369 6,345,806 13,159,175 

2009 5,400,890 4,940,454 10,341,344 

2010 5,635,433 5,829,948 11,465,381 

2011 6,089,422 6,603,650 12,693,072 

2012 7,241,900 7,166,834 14,408,734 

2013 7,585,800 7,946,200 15,532,000 

Source: Ward’s Automotive Group (2011 & 2013), BEA (2014) 

3 Sector Background  

MVACs have been in widespread production in the United States since the 1960s. As of 2012, more than

98% of passenger vehicles sold in the United States are estimated to contain MVACs (ICCT 2012). This

section provides an overview of MVACs used in light‐duty vehicles and trucks, including a description of

the vehicle types and fleet estimates, and their historical refrigerant use. MVACs are defined under the

Section 609 regulations at 40 CFR 82.32.
5

3.1 Refrigerant Use in Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning

Historically, the light‐duty MVAC sector relied on CFC‐12 refrigerant, a substance that destroys the

stratospheric ozone layer that shields the Earth from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet radiation. Automobile

manufacturers transitioned to the non‐ozone depleting alternative HFC‐134a in the mid‐1990s. HFC‐

134a, like its predecessor, is a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change. Cars today

predominantly use HFC‐134a, which has a GWP of 1,430 (Forster et al. 2007). HFC‐134a occupies the

majority of the light‐duty MVAC refrigerant market, as illustrated in Figure 1.  

Figure 1. U.S. Light‐Duty Vehicle and Truck MVAC Refrigerant Use Over Time*

* “Other” includes <1% of the market consisting of a variety of blends. 

Source: U.S. EPA Vintaging Model. VM IO file_V4.4_3.23.14.xls. 

The overall decrease in consumption shown in Figure 1 is driven by a couple of factors: EPA’s Vintaging

Model is based on actual stock and sales of car/trucks through 2013, and there was a fairly significant

drop in sales around 2008‐2009 due to the recession. That coupled with modeled improvements (i.e.,

decreases) in the 134a MVAC LDV charge size in 2002 and again in 2007 (charge size drops also occur for

LDTs in 2003 and 2006) and contribute to the decreases in refrigerant use seen in the figure. Estimates

of conventional (ODS or HFC) MVACs charge size and lifetime (in use today) are shown in Table 6.

Table 6. Average Light‐duty Vehicle and Truck MVAC Refrigerant Charge Sizes and Lifetimes for

Conventional (ODS/HFC) Systems  

Refrigerant Charge Size (kg) Lifetime (years) Sources 

0.6 - 0.8 13.1 ICCT (2012) 

0.4 - 1.2 Not provided RTOC (2010) 

0.4 – 0.8 Not provided EIA (2012) 

0.77- 0.95 16 EPA (2011) 

Under the SNAP program, EPA has found acceptable, subject to use conditions, three MVAC refrigerants

with low GWP: HFC‐152a, hydrofluoroolefin (HFO)‐1234yf, and carbon dioxide (CO2). None of these

alternatives deplete the ozone layer and all have significantly lower GWPs than CFC‐12 or HFC‐134a.

 ‐

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

1985 1995 2005 2015

Refrigerant Use (MT)

CFC‐12 HFC‐134a HFO‐1234yf Other
6

Table 7 shows the relative GWPs of these MVAC refrigerants and whether or not they are ozone

depleting. Today, there are cars on the road that use CFC‐12, HFC‐134a, and HFO‐1234yf.

Table 7. Environmental impacts of MVAC refrigerants

MVAC refrigerant GWPa Ozone depleting? 

CFC-12 10,900 Yes 

HFC-134a 1,430 No 

HFC-152a 124 No 

HFO-1234yf 4 No 

CO2 (R-744) 1 No 

a Forster et al. 2007

Transition away from HFC‐134a to these climate‐friendly alternatives is likely to be enhanced by the

joint regulations promulgated by the EPA and Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), which established GHG and fuel economy standards for light‐duty

vehicles and trucks. Under EPA’s Final Rulemaking for 2017‐2025 Light‐Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas

Emission Standards, vehicle manufacturers may earn credits toward meeting the GHG standards by

improving air conditioning systems and using an approved climate‐friendly alternative refrigerant.1 Over

time, transition to climate‐friendly alternatives is expected to increase in the U.S. based on these credits,

as well the changing marketplace in the European Union (EU), prompted by the European Commission

(EC) MAC Directive (2007/46/EC). The EC Directive requires that, as of January 1, 2013,2 all new model

vehicles must be sold with an MVAC refrigerant with a GWP of no greater than 150, and in all new

vehicles beginning January 1, 2017. An analysis by EPA (2012a) estimates that starting in 2017, 20% of

the U.S. market will adopt alternative MVAC refrigerants, and then increase an additional 20% each

subsequent year until 2021, when use of low‐GWP alternatives is predicted to reach 100%.

4 Climate‐Friendly Alternatives   This section summarizes information on refrigerant alternatives for MVACs that have been approved

under U.S. EPA’s SNAP program, which are summarized in Table 9, as well as other alternatives under

development in 2014.  

Table 2. Overview of Climate‐Friendly Alternatives Approved by SNAP

Alternative SNAP Listing Status Global Use Status 

HFC-152a  Acceptable subject to use conditions in 2008  Prototype vehicles have been tested 

 No known use 

                                                            

1 The United States is moving to reduce emissions from HFC-134a MVAC systems, by making available credits toward the fleetwide average CO2 standards to auto manufacturers for improving air conditioning systems (EPA 2010b). GHG credits can be earned 

directly by reducing emissions through improved leak control and/or use of a low-GWP refrigerant in the A/C system. GHG and fuel 

economy credits can be indirectly earned through improvements to technologies that result in decreased consumption of fuel to 

provide mechanical power to the A/C system. The regulations allows vehicle manufacturers to generate AC leakage credits of up to 

13.8 and 17.2 g/mi CO2eq and AC efficiency credits of up to 5.0 and 7.2 g/mi CO2eq for cars and trucks, respectively, in complying 

with the industry fleet-wide average standard projected to be 163 g/mi CO2eq in model year 2025 (EPA and NHTSA 2012). 2

 Originally, the EC Directive requiring all MVACs in new model vehicles to be sold with a GWP no greater than 150 was to be 

effective in 2011; however, this date was postponed to January 1, 2013. 
7

Alternative SNAP Listing Status Global Use Status 

HFO-1234yf  Acceptable subject to use conditions in 2011 

 Used in several light-duty vehicle models in the U. S., 

Canada and Europe 

 Gaining market share in the U. S. 

CO2  Acceptable subject to use conditions in 2012 

 Used outside the U. S. in buses 

 No known use in light-duty vehicles; under evaluation by 

several European car manufacturers 

4.1 HFC‐152a

While prototype vehicles have been tested with HFC‐152a, and there was on‐going development as of

2010, no automobile manufacturers have adopted this refrigerant to date. According to ICCT (2012),

however, at least one manufacturer reported that good engineering design could address technical

barriers, though cost and efficiency would still present challenges to bring it to market. According to the

same report, other sources have indicated that HFC‐152a exhibits good cooling performance and cost,

especially when incorporating the latest technological advancements; still, the system would require

significant space in the engine compartment which would pose a challenge in many vehicle models

today.  

HFC‐152a exhibits moderate flammability and is characterized as an A2 refrigerant by ASHRAE. Under

the 2008 SNAP listing, EPA established the following conditions for use: (1) Engineering strategies and/or

devices shall be incorporated into the system such that foreseeable leaks into the passenger

compartment do not result in R‐152a concentrations of 3.7% v/v or above in any part of the free space

inside the passenger compartment for more than 15 seconds when the car ignition is on, and (2)

Manufacturers must adhere to all the safety requirements listed in the  Society of Automotive Engineers

(SAE) Standard J639, including unique fittings and a flammable refrigerant warning label as well as SAE

Standard J2773, “Refrigerant Guidelines for Safety and Risk Analysis for Use in Mobile Air Conditioning

Systems.”

4.2 HFO‐1234yf

The number of cars using HFO‐1234yf globally is expected to exceed 2 million by the end of 2014

(Automotive World 2014). Several light‐duty vehicle models in the U. S. and Europe are manufactured

with this refrigerant. In the U. S., a number of vehicle models are sold with HFO‐1234yf MVACs,

including General Motor’s Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Spark EV, Chrysler 300, Dodge Challenger, Dodge

Charger, Honda Fit EV, Jeep Cherokee, Range Rover, and Range Rover Sport (Nelson 2013). In 2014,

Honeywell announced its supply agreement with Asahi Glass Company Ltd. to increase production of

HFO‐1234yf in mid‐2015, and plans to construct a new production plant in Geismar, Louisiana

(Automotive World 2014). In 2013, Arkema announced its construction of a new HFO‐1234yf production

plant, which is anticipated to begin production in 2016 (Arkema 2013).  

HFO‐1234yf is considered to have cooling performance and fuel use comparable to HFC‐134a and, due

to chemical similarities, use of this refrigerant is expected to require minimal system modifications (ICCT

2012). HFO‐1234yf is mildly flammable, classified by ASHRAE as an A2L refrigerant. Under the 2011

SNAP decision and a March 2012 subsequent rule, EPA established two required use conditions for HFO‐

1234yf used in a new MVAC system for passenger cars and light‐duty trucks. First, HFO‐1234yf MVAC

systems must adhere to all of the safety requirements of SAE J639 (adopted 2011), including

requirements for a flammable refrigerant warning label, high‐pressure compressor cutoff switch and

pressure relief devices, and unique fittings.  For connections with refrigerant containers for use in
8

professional servicing, use fittings must be consistent with SAE J2844 (revised October 2011).  Second,

manufacturers must conduct Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) as provided in SAE J1739

(adopted 2009).  Manufacturers must keep the FMEA on file for at least three years from the date of

creation. Under its Cooperative Research Program (CRP), SAE International found the risk of fire to be

“very small compared to the risks of a vehicle fire from all causes and well below risks that are

commonly viewed as acceptable by the general public.”

4.3 Carbon Dioxide

In March 2013, several German car manufacturers announced plans to develop MVACs using CO2 (R‐

744) refrigerant, though light‐duty vehicles using CO2 are not in production today (AMN 2013). The use

of CO2 as a refrigerant in MVAC systems poses challenges due to its high operating pressure. The peak

pressure of CO2 operating systems is approximately 2,000 psi compared to 450 psi in HFC‐134a systems

(EPA & NHTSA 2012). The refrigerant’s energy performance has been questioned, with some studies

claiming performance to be similar if not better than HFC‐134a, and others reporting poorer

performance at high ambient temperatures (EIA 2012, CARB 2011, ICCT 2012).

When EPA listed CO2 acceptable for use in 2012, the SNAP program established the following conditions

of use:  (1) Engineering strategies and/or mitigation devices shall be incorporated such that in the event

of refrigerant leaks the resulting CO2 concentrations do not exceed the STEL of 30,000 ppm averaged

over 15 minutes in the passenger free space and the ceiling limit of 40,000 ppm in the passenger

breathing zone; (2) OEMs must keep records of the tests performed for a minimum period of three years

demonstrating that CO2 refrigerant levels do not exceed the STEL of 30,000 ppm averaged over 15

minutes in the passenger free space, and the ceiling limit of 40,000 ppm in the breathing zone; and (3)

the use of CO2 in MVAC systems must adhere to the standard conditions identified in SAE Standard J639

(EPA 2012b).

4.4 Other Alternatives (Not Currently Listed by SNAP)

Additional alternatives are under development and/or in use outside of the U. S. However, these

alternatives have not been listed as acceptable by the SNAP program. As of 2014, the SNAP program

prohibits the use of flammable refrigerants in MVACs unless a particular refrigerant is specifically listed

as acceptable subject to use conditions, as EPA has done for HFC‐152a and HFO‐1234yf (Appendix B to

subpart G of 40 CFR part 82).  

A range of unsaturated fluorocarbon blends have recently emerged as potential alternatives for

refrigerants used in MVAC systems. While the majority of these are still under development,

unsaturated fluorocarbons have exhibited promising results thus far, with the use of blending offering

flexibility in overcoming technical and financial barriers associated with use in MVACs. Two blends in

particular, AC5 and AC6 (also referred to as R‐444A and R‐445A, respectively) are under development.

AC5 is a blend of 12% HFC‐32, 5% HFC‐152a, and 83% HFO‐1234ze (by weight); AC6 is a blend of 6% CO2,

9% HFC‐134a and 85% HFO‐1234ze. The GWPs of AC5 and AC6 are 92 and 130, respectively (SAE

undated).  

AC5 is expected to have similar performance to R‐134a and similar flammability characteristics to HFO‐

1234yf, whereas AC6 is expected to have a somewhat higher refrigeration capacity than HFC‐134a and

reduced flammability compared to HFO‐1234yf (SAE undated). That said, both AC5 and AC6 have an A2L

flammability rating under ASHRAE 34 (ASHRAE 2013).  SAE standards on AC6 are under development. To

date, research has been conducted on the design and manufacture of prototype charging equipment

using AC6 (PRWeb 2013); however, concerns exist with the servicing and recovery of such zeotropic

refrigerant blends because the blend composition varies with temperature and pressure during the
9

refrigeration cycle (SAE 2013). Additional concerns include selective leakage as the CO2 component of

AC6, the highest pressure component, has the highest potential leak rate. A leakage model from SAE’s

Cooperative Research Program shows there would be just a 5% performance loss if the CO2 level

dropped from 6% to 2% (SAE 2013).  

The potential for use of hydrocarbons in MVAC systems is still being researched, and there is not yet

agreement on its suitability. According to TEAP (2013), due to safety (flammability) concerns, use of

hydrocarbons for MVACs in light‐duty vehicles and trucks is not anticipated to receive support from any

car company and would remain marginal. Hydrocarbons have the highest flammability rating given by

ASHRAE, A3. Some sources reported that certain hydrocarbon refrigerants could have benefits due to

their relatively low charge size (e.g., 200‐300 g), higher cooling performance, and higher coefficient of

performance (COP) than HFC‐134a and HFO‐1234yf (Obrist Engineering 2011; Greenpeace 2012).  

According to Expert Group (2013), a consulting firm in Australia, hydrocarbons are currently used in

about 8% of MVACs in passenger and light commercial vehicles in Australia. To date, the SNAP program

has listed flammable refrigerants as unacceptable for use in MVAC systems and has not yet received

sufficient information on any hydrocarbon refrigerant to find their use acceptable in MVACs.
10

5 References

AMN (aftermarketNews) 2013. German Automakers To Develop CO2 A/C Systems. Available online at:

http://www.aftermarketnews.com/Item/111549/german_automakers_to_develop_co2_ac_syst

ems.aspx. March 25, 2013.

APTA (American Public Transportation Association). 2012. “2012 Public Transportation Fact Book.”

Available online at:

http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/FactBook/APTA_2012_Fact%20Book.pdf

Accessed October 21, 2013.

Arkema. 2013. Arkema is announcing the construction of production capacities for new refrigerant

fluorinated gas 1234yf. Press Release. September 4, 2013. Available online at:

http://www.arkema.com/en/media/news/news‐details/Arkema‐is‐announcing‐the‐

construction‐of‐production‐capacities‐for‐new‐refrigerant‐fluorinated‐gas‐1234yf/?back=true.

Automotive Industries Team. 2011. “The Road Ahead.” U.S. Department of Commerce. Available online

at:  

http://www.trade.gov/mas/manufacturing/oaai/build/groups/public/@tg_oaai/documents/we

bcontent/tg_oaai_003659.pdf. Accessed October 21, 2013.

Automotive News. 2008. 2008 Market Data: North American Production. April 7, 2008. Available online

at: http://www.autonews.com/assets/PDF/CA4289044.PDF.

Automotive News. 2009. 2009 Market Data: North American Production. July 27, 2009. Available online

at: http://europe.autonews.com/assets/PDF/CA66214723.PDF.

Automotive News. 2011. 2011 Market Data: North American Production. July 25, 2011. Available online

at: http://www.autonews.com/assets/PDF/CA74794722.PDF.  

Automotive News. 2012. 2012 Market Data: North American Production. November 2012. Available

online at: http://www.autonews.com/assets/PDF/CA846391218.PDF

Automotive World. 2014. World’s leading authority on climate change confirms that Honeywell’s new

automobile refrigerant has lower global warming potential than carbon dioxide. Available online

at: https://www.automotiveworld.com/news‐releases/worlds‐leading‐authority‐climate‐

change‐confirms‐honeywells‐new‐automobile‐refrigerant‐lower‐global‐warming‐potential‐

carbon‐dioxide/. Accessed March 10, 2014.  

ASHRAE. 2013. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 34‐2013 Designation and Classification of Refrigerants.  

BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis). 2014. Auto and Truck Seasonal Adjustment.  

CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2011. “LEV III Greenhouse Gas Non‐Test Cycle Provisions:

Technical Support Document.”  

CNN (Cable News Network). 2012. Fortune 500: Construction and Farm Machinery. Available online at:
11

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2012/industries/230/.  

Coffin, David. 2013. Passenger Vehicles. Industry and Trade Summary. Publication ITS‐09. Washington,

DC:  

U.S. International Trade Commission, May 2013. Available online at:

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/working_papers/pub_ITS_09_PassengerVehiclesSumma

ry5211.pdf.

DOT (Department of Transportation). 2012. “Table 1‐14 U.S. Automobile and Truck Fleets by Use.”

October 2012.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/national_transportation_st

atistics/index.html.

DOT (Department of Transportation). 2013a. Appendix B – Glossary. Available online at:

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/national_transportation_st

atistics/html/appendix_b.html.

DOT (Department of Transportation). 2013b. “Table 1‐11 Number of U.S. Aircraft, Vehicles, Vessels, and

Other Conveyances.” July 2013.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/national_transportation_st

atistics/index.html.

DOT (Department of Transportation). 2014. “Table 1‐15: Annual U.S. Motor Vehicle Production and

Factory (Wholesale) Sales (Thousands of units).” May 2014. Available online at:

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/national_transportation_st

atistics/html/table_01_15.html_mfd

EIA (Environmental Investigation Agency). 2012. “Availability of low GWP alternatives to HFCs: Feasibility

of an early phase‐out of HFCs by 2020.” Available online at: http://www.eia‐

international.org/availability‐of‐low‐gwp‐alternatives‐to‐hfcs. Accessed October 24, 2013.

ERG (Eastern Research Group). 2010. “Characterizing MAC Refrigerant Emissions from Heavy‐Duty On

and Off‐road Vehicles in California.” September 2010. Available online at:

http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/06‐342.pdf. Accessed October 21, 2013.

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2010a. Final Rulemaking to Establish Light‐Duty Vehicle

Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards

Regulatory Impact Analysis. April 2010. Available online at:

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/regulations/420r10009.pdf.  

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2010b. “EPA and NHTSA Propose First‐Ever Program to Reduce

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Improve Fuel Efficiency of Medium‐ and Heavy‐Duty Vehicles:

Regulatory Announcement”. October 2010. Available online at:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=

http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nhtsa.gov%2Fstaticfiles%2Frulemaking%2Fpdf%2Fcafe%2FCAFE_2014‐

18_Trucks_FactSheet‐v1.pdf&ei=X75qUtm4C8bR2QXjv4DADg&usg=AFQjCNGQhBMXoSj1Il0U6‐

mB8iwFPlVzzQ&sig2=gApP0RUxqZhh‐7mchthviA&bvm=bv.55123115,d.b2I. Accessed October

21, 2013.  
12

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2010c. “Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis: Proposed Rulemaking

to Establish Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium‐ 

and Heavy‐Duty Engines and Vehicles.” October 2010.

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2011. “Regulatory Impact Analysis: Final Rulemaking to

Establish Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium‐ and

Heavy‐Duty Engines and Vehicles.” August 2011. Available online at:  

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/documents/420r11901.pdf.

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2012a. “Regulatory Impact Analysis: Final Rulemaking for 2017‐

2025 Light‐Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel

Economy Standards. August 2012. Available online at:

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/documents/420r12016.pdf. Accessed October 21, 2013.

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2012b. “Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Alternative for the

Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Sector Under the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP)

Program.” Final Rule. 40 CFR Part 82. EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0488; FRL–9668–8. RIN 2060–AM54.

June 6, 2012.

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration).

2012. Joint Technical Support Document: Final Rulemaking for 2017‐2025 Light‐Duty Vehicle

Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. August

2012. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/documents/420r12901.pdf.

Expert Group. 2013. Cold Hard Facts 2 ‐ A study of the refrigeration and air conditioning industry in

Australia. Prepared for the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and

Communities.  July 2013.  

Forster, P., V. Ramaswamy, P. Artaxo, T. Berntsen, R. Betts, D.W. Fahey, J. Haywood, J. Lean, D.C. Lowe,

G. Myhre, J. Nganga, R. Prinn, G. Raga, M. Schulz and R. Van Dorland. (2007). Errata.  In: Climate

Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth

Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M.

Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Available online at:

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment‐report/ar4/wg1/ar4‐wg1‐errata.pdf.

Greenpeace. 2012. Cool Technologies: Working without HFCs. 2012 Edition. Available online at:

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/Global/international/publications/climate/2012/Fgas

es/Cool‐Technologies‐2012.pdf.

International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT). 2011. “U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel

Efficiency Standards for Medium‐ and Heavy‐Duty Engines and Vehicles.” September 23, 2011.

Available online at:

http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCTpolicyupdate14_USHDV_final.pdf.

Accessed October 21, 2013.

International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT). 2012. “Comparative Lifecycle Cost Assessment of

Alternative Mobile Air Conditioning Systems in the Light‐Duty Vehicle Sector.” Final Report. May

2, 2012. Available upon request to Ray Minjares of ICCT.  
13

International Trade Administration. 2010. “Motor Vehicles Industry Assessment FY 2010”. U.S.

Department of Commerce. Available online at:

http://www.trade.gov/mas/manufacturing/oaai/build/groups/public/@tg_oaai/documents/we

bcontent/tg_oaai_003754.pdf. Accessed October 21, 2013.

International Trade Administration. 2011. “The Road Ahead Phase II.” U.S. Department of Commerce.

http://www.trade.gov/mas/manufacturing/oaai/build/groups/public/@tg_oaai/documents/we

bcontent/tg_oaai_003659.pdf. Accessed October 21, 2013.

International Trade Administration. 2014. U.S. Automotive Trade Data and Data Links. Available online

at: http://trade.gov/mas/manufacturing/oaai/tg_oaai_003649.asp.  

Lowe, M., S. Tokuoka, K. Dubay, G. Gereffi. 2010. “U.S. Manufacture of Rail Vehicles for Intercity

Passenger Rail and Urban Transit.” June 24, 2010.

http://www.cggc.duke.edu/pdfs/U.S._Manufacture_of_Rail_Vehicles_for_Intercity_Passenger_

Rail_and_Urban_Transit.pdf. Accessed October 21, 2013.

Nacer, A. & M. San Roman. 2013. “Low GWP Refrigerant for Buses and Trains Air Conditioning.”

Available online at: http://www.honeywell‐refrigerants.com/europe/wp‐

content/uploads/2013/03/honeywell‐solstice‐hfo1234yf‐lgwp‐buses‐trains‐air‐conditioning‐

paper.pdf. Accessed October 21, 2013.

Nelson, Gabe. 2013. Automakers' switch to new refrigerant will accelerate with EPA credits, European

mandate. Automotive News. Available online at:

http://www.autonews.com/article/20131230/OEM01/312309996/warming‐to‐the‐idea#.

Obrist Engineering. 2011. Are high efficient HC’s if accompanied with a safety system a possible

alternative to R‐134a in MACs. ATMOsphere 2011. Available online at:

http://www.atmo.org/presentations/files/107_Obrist‐New‐safety‐system‐for‐hydrocarbons‐in‐

Mobile‐Air‐Conditioning.pdf.

OICA. 2014. World Motor Vehicle Production by Country and Type 2005 – 2013. International

Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers. Available online at:

http://www.oica.net/category/production‐statistics/.

Oko‐Recherche. 2011. Preparatory study for a review of Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 on certain

fluorinated greenhouse gases. Annexes to the Final Report. Available online at:

http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/f‐gas/docs/2011_study_annex_en.pdf.  

Organisation Internationale des Constructeurs d’Automobiles (OICA). 2014. World Motor Vehicle

Production Statistics (2008 – 2013). Available online at:

http://www.oica.net/category/production‐statistics/.

PRWeb. 2013. “SAE International MRB CRP Announces Significant Progress in Development of Low GWP

Blended Refrigerants.” October 2, 2013. Available online at:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11188830.htm. Accessed October 29, 2013.  
14

Red Dot Corporation. 2011a. “Refrigerants for Heavy‐duty A/C Systems.” Available online at:  

http://www.reddotcorp.com/sites/default/files/WhitePaper‐Refrigerants_for_Heavy‐

duty_AC_Systems.pdf  Accessed October 22, 2013.  

RTOC (Refrigeration, Air Conditioning, and Heat Pumps Technical Options Committee). 2010.

“Refrigeration, Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps Technical Options Committee 2010

Assessment.” Available online at: http://ozone.unep.org/teap/Reports/RTOC/RTOC‐Assessment‐

report‐2010.pdf/ Accessed October 25, 2013.  

SAE International. Undated. “Development and Evaluation of AC5 and AC6 Refrigerants for MAC

Applications. White Paper. Available online at:

http://www.sae.org/standardsdev/tsb/cooperative/mrb‐ac6_white_paper.pdf. Accessed

October 29, 2013.

SAE International. 2013. A/C industry faces challenges from Daimler R‐1234yf issues, explores other

options. Available online at: http://articles.sae.org/11870/. Accessed March 3, 2014.

Seattle Post Globe. 2009. “30 percent chance of getting an air‐conditioned bus.” July 28, 2009. Available

online at: http://seattlepostglobe.org/2009/07/28/30‐percent‐chance‐of‐getting‐an‐air‐

conditioned‐bus/.

TEAP (Technology and Economic Assessment Panel). 2013. “Report of the Technology and Economic

Assessment Panel Volume 2 Decision XXIV/7 Task Force Report Additional Infoirmation to

Alternatives on ODS (Draft Report).” Available online at:

http://ozone.unep.org/Assessment_Panels/TEAP/Reports/TEAP_Reports/TEAP_TaskForce%20X

XIV‐7‐May2013.pdf

U.S. Census Bureau. 2011. “Industry Statistics Portal.” Available online at:

http://www.census.gov/econ/isp/index.php

U.S. Census Bureau. 2012. “Agriculture.” Available online at:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/12statab/agricult.pdf

Ward’s Automotive Group. 2011. “Vehicles in Operation by Country.” Available online at:

https://www.google.com/search?q=ward's+automovtive+data&oq=ward's+automovtive+data&

aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.28291j0j4&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=93&ie=UTF‐8#.

Accessed October 21, 2013.  

Ward’s Automotive Group. 2011. World Vehicle Sales: 2005 through 2011.

Ward’s Automotive Group. 2013. World Vehicle Sales: 2012.