Talk:Refrigerant

message: There are a number of natural refrigerants that are growing in popularity and cause little or no harm to the climate – including CO2, ammonia, propane and water. 
Helpful here might be the German-language Wikipedia, which lists them all:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%A4ltemittel#Nat%C3%BCrliche_K%C3%A4ltemittel
There is also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_refrigerant
-- Fph GmbH (talk) 15:52, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Natural refrigerants

message: I would like to know if refrigeration systems using the new refrigerants are more efficient or less efficient than systems that use traditional refrigerants (R-12 / R-22).  In other words, do the more environmentally-friendly refrigerants come at a price of reduced efficiency?  Or is it a win/win situation?  71.219.245.174 (talk) 17:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Relative performance/efficiency of the new refrigerants

message: article R-744 says: 
R744 operates more efficiently than systems using R-134a. Its environmental advantages (GWP of 1, non-ozone depleting, non-toxic, non-flammable)
 
but this article "did say": (appears to be resolved)
One of the most promising alternatives is the natural refrigerant CO2 (R-744). Carbon dioxide is non-flammable, non-ozone depleting, has a global warming potential of 1, but is toxic and potentially lethal in concentrations above 5% by volume.
please resolve that issue, cos those quotes contradict itself --Elthe (talk) 19:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Carbon dioxide is most certainly non toxic.  It is after all the gas that gives beer (and other fizzy drinks) its fiz.  Whoever put that in the article may be geting confused with carbon dioxide being an asphyxiant.  In such a scenario it is not the presence of carbon dioxide that kills but the absence of oxygen which it will readily displace.  Propane is generally non toxic in relatively low concentrations, but if deliberately inhaled in quantity, it will act like many other 'recreational drugs' and can cause death due to overdose.  It should also be borne in mind that large concentrations also diminish the amount of oxygen being inhaled.  As it has been tagged as {cn}, I have deleted the claim.  DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 14:16, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toxic or not 

message: Shouldn't we have an article or a mention of refrigerant recovery?  What about recovery machines?  I'd do it myself, but I don't know enough about either to really make a good entry.  What do you guys think? PantherFoxie 16:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you; I'd think a mention in this article would be sufficient. Unfortunately I'm not really qualified to write it either.  - Geekosaurus(talk) 00:36, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refrigerant Recovery 

message: Argon and Krypton are refrigerants, but are not compounds. GWatson • TALK 07:41, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe any gas can be used as a refigerant, no matter what its boiling point, whether elemental, compound, or mixtures (I suggest gaseous substance, or gas). Air, a mixture, is of interest in general applications. Liquids, solids, magnetic fields, and coherent light can also be used (and are used) as refrigerants in specialized applications. David Spector (talk) 23:41, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change the wording from compound to chemical 

message: As R-22 is a refrigerant, please show a graph relevant to its refrigeration properties.  A Pressure - Enthalpy (P-h) and/or Temperature - Entropy (T-s) diagram would be very informative.  These can be obtained from any of several sources, perhaps the best being ASHRAE. 69.178.161.114 (talk) 18:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs More Information 

message: If a refrigerant is described as "Carb. Anhydr.", what is the chemical involved? Mjroots (talk) 07:48, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Carbon dioxide Synonyms: Carbonic anhydride aka R-744; CO2 without water content 84.197.184.6 (talk) 21:27, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: What is this?

message: What would it take to make this a Good Article?  Step back and think about what the coverage should be.  what sort of organization is best and about how long should each section be?    I think this approach will drive more to article improvement than improving little bits of what is here or adding little bits.
*I guess some coverage of new or obscure or sexy refrigerants is OK.  But it's kind of a side light to just explaining the basics.
*We really should have a summary lead also instead of the current one (which is really "purpose" or "application", i.e. is one of the sections.)
*The bulleted list of refrigerants could use some work too.  Maybe a sortable wikitable.  And some thought on what goes in and what stays out (e.g. make sure sure cover those with most pounds of usage).  
The page gets very high hits (20,000 per month, which is about 20 times the median of recent FAs, about 30 times the median of recent GAs).  It is obviously a core topic for mechanical engineers and of interest to chemists.  So the work to sit down and really sketch out and build up meaty sections would be worthwhile.
::In this professional chemist's opinion, the article is in unpresentable shape, and should be largely redacted—full contents moved to talk, and short, accurate, fully referenced stub article set to appear in its place, until the content that was in place can be fully reviewed by a WP and subject matter expert. The article as it currently stands is a subject matter and ethical embarrassment (for its content quality, see third point in Section entitled "Misinformation?" above, and the plagiarism it contains throughout), and no one with any chemical knowledge or understanding of academic honesty (see ) should tolerate its continued presence. LeProf.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.179.92.36 (talk) 12:01, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I would add to your list that there should probably be more material on ozone depletion and esp. global warming, and efforts to develop low GWP refrigerants.  A list of common refrigerants should include GWPs.LaTeeDa (talk) 13:22, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think some kind of coordinated approach to the article is needed 

message: What about lithium bromide (use in aborption chillers)?  Is that considered a refrigerant or is the term reserved for gases?TCO (talk) 00:50, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  salt systems? 

message: I am relaying this information, but did not create this tag or its explanatory content.
The POV tag contains an original reason (visible when editing), and that reason does not appear in the tag in the article (and so is invisible when reading). It also does not seem to appear anywhere here in Talk.  
Here is the original explanation hidden in the tag, so that it is easily read somewhere:
POV|
article not written in a purely scientific manner, describing how refrigerants/refrigeration works, instead, reading as if written with an environmentalist agenda|
date=February 2013
Per WP, the tag needs to remain until this reason is addressed (see tag).  LeProf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.179.92.36 (talk) 13:16, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly is poor. Yes, the concentration on how evil these chemicals are, is prominent among the defects. Presumably this comes from a conservative POV that chemicals in general are evil. By way of correction, my preference would be for a more engineering than scientific slant. What surprises me, however, is the paucity of editorial activity compared to the plenitude of griping here in the gripe page. Jim.henderson (talk) 03:09, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Tag removed. Vsmith (talk) 18:16, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation of POV tag 

message: Why spell them "hydroflurocarbons" in the article? Not bothering to take the time to make sure words are spelled correctly is part of the reason this projecct is not regarded seriously, or properly encyclopedic, by many people. 173.89.236.187 (talk) 04:01, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: "hydroflurocarbons"

message: The section on history gives little history. There should be a timeline, and discussion of the earliest forms of refrigeration.Royalcourtier (talk) 04:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: this section needs a serious clean up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.159.7 (talk) 06:38, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Water as a refrigerant 

message: The article says: Emissions from automobile air conditioning are a growing concern because of their impact on climate change along with a .   Since an automobile might run 100,000 miles or more, and emit maybe 100,000 pounds of CO2 during that time, and hopefully the refrigerant is recovered, it seems to me that it is a relatively (compared to CO2 emission) small contributor to climate change.  As well as I know, Europe is considering this, though, so maybe  is right. It should be known, though, if the replacements make more or less efficient air conditioners. Gah4 (talk) 05:22, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Emissions from automobile air conditioning are a growing concern because of their impact on climate change.'' 

message: I have removed this text from the examples section of climate justice because it doesn't fit well there. It's not really about climate justice. I imagine it could be moved to another article - perhaps this one? Here is the text:
=== Environmental dumping of harmful appliances ===
The growing use of cooling appliances like air conditioners and refrigerators is projected to be one of the top drivers of global electricity demand growth in the coming years. As demand for cooling appliances has grown, environmental dumping of energy inefficient electronic products into developing countries has increased. These inefficient cooling appliances include used and near end-of-life appliances that use refrigerants with either high global warming potential (GWP) or super polluting greenhouse gases like hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) which are ozone-depleting substances (ODS). An end to environmental dumping of such products is critical in mitigating climate change and ensuring climate justice for communities that are being dumped upon.
EMsmile (talk) 00:15, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A useful text block about environmental dumping of harmful appliances? 

message: The growing use of cooling appliances like air conditioners and refrigerators is projected to be one of the top drivers of global electricity demand growth in the coming years. As demand for cooling appliances has grown, environmental dumping of energy inefficient electronic products into developing countries has increased. These inefficient cooling appliances include used and near end-of-life appliances that use refrigerants with either high global warming potential (GWP) or super polluting greenhouse gases like hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) which are ozone-depleting substances (ODS). An end to environmental dumping of such products is critical in mitigating climate change and ensuring climate justice for communities that are being dumped upon.
EMsmile (talk) 00:15, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Environmental dumping of harmful appliances