UP20
D A0 1
TE
UNEP
Protecting the
Ozone Layer
V o l u m e
5
Aerosols, sterilants,
carbon tetrachloride
and miscellaneous uses
This booklet is one of a series of reports prepared by the OzonAction Programme of the United Nations Environment
Programme Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (UNEP DTIE). UNEP DTIE would like to give special thanks
to the following organizations and individuals for their work in contributing to this project:
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Ms. Jacqueline Aloisi de Larderel, Director, UNEP DTIE
Mr. Rajendra M. Shende, Chief, UNEP DTIE Energy and OzonAction Unit
Ms. Cecilia Mercado, Information Officer, UNEP DTIE OzonAction Programme
Mr. Andrew Robinson, Programme Assistant, UNEP DTIE OzonAction Programme
Editor: Geoffrey Bird
Design and layout: ampersand graphic design, inc.
© 2001 UNEP
This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational and non-profit purposes without
special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. UNEP would appreciate
receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source.
No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior
permission in writing from UNEP.
The technical papers in this publication have not been peer-reviewed and are the sole opinion of the authors. The
designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication therefore do not imply the expression of
any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Environment Programme concerning the legal status of any
country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Moreover, the
views expressed do not necessarily represent the decision or the stated policy of the United Nations Environment
Programme, nor does citing of trade names or commercial processes constitute endorsement.
ISBN: 92-807-2162-3
UP20
D A0 1
TE
UNEP
Protecting the
Ozone Layer
V o l u m e
5
Aerosols, sterilants,
carbon tetrachloride
and miscellaneous uses
Contents
Foreword
3
Acknowledgements
4
Executive summary
5
Ozone depletion: an overview
6
Requirements of the Montreal Protocol
8
CFC use in aerosol products
12
CFC use in sterilants
15
Carbon tetrachloride
16
Miscellaneous uses
18
Prospects for action:
20
•
•
Aerosol products
20
Sterilants
26
Resources:
29
•
•
•
•
the implementing agencies
29
contact points
30
further reading
32
glossary
33
About the UNEP DTIE OzonAction Programme
34
About the UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics
36
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Foreword
When the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer came into force, in 1989, it
had been ratified by 29 countries and the EEC, and set limits on the production of eight man-made
chemicals identified as ozone depleting substances (ODS). By July 2001 there were more than 170
Parties (i.e. signatories) to the Protocol, both developed and developing countries, and production
and consumption of over 90 substances were controlled.
Linking these two sets of figures, which attest to the success of the Montreal Protocol, is a process of
elimination of ODS in which ratification of the Protocol was only a first step. It was recognized from
the start that the Protocol must be a flexible instrument and that it should be revised and extended to
keep pace with scientific progress. It was also recognized that developing countries would face
special problems with phase out and would need assistance if their development was not to be
hindered. To level the playing field, the developing countries were given extra time to adjust
economically and to equip. A Multilateral Fund (MLF) was also set up early in the process to provide
financial and technical support for their phase out efforts.
Exchanges of information and mutual support among the Parties to the Montreal Protocol – via the
mechanisms of the MLF – have been crucial to the Protocol’s success so far. They will continue to be
so in the future. Even though many industries and manufacturers have successfully replaced ODS
with substances that are less damaging to the ozone layer or with ODS-free technology, lack of upto-date, accurate information on issues surrounding ODS substitutes continues to be a major
obstacle for many Parties, especially developing country Parties.
To help stimulate and support the process of ODS phase out, UNEP DTIE’s OzonAction Programme
provides information exchange and training, and acts as a clearinghouse for ozone related
information. One of the most important jobs of the OzonAction programme is to ensure that all those
who need to understand the issues surrounding replacement of ODS can obtain the information and
assistance they require. Hence this series of plain language reports – based on the reports of UNEP’s
Technical Options Committees (TOC) – summarizing the major ODS replacement issues for decision
makers in government and industry. The reports, first published in 1992, have now been updated to
keep abreast of technological progress and to better reflect the present situation in the sectors they
cover: refrigerants; solvents, coatings and adhesives; fire extinguishing substances; foams; aerosols,
sterilants, carbon tetrachloride and miscellaneous uses; and methyl bromide. Updating is based on
the 1998 reports from the TOCs and includes further information from the TOCs until 2000.
Updating of the reports at this point is particularly timely. The ‘grace period’ granted to developing
countries under the Montreal Protocol before their introduction of a freeze on CFCs came to an end in
July 1999. As developing countries now move to meet their Protocol commitments, accurate and upto-date information on available and appropriate technologies will be more important than ever if the
final goal of effective global protection of the ozone layer is to be achieved.
The publications in this series summarize the current uses of ODS in each sector, the availability of
substitutes and the technological and economic implications of converting to ODS-free technology.
Readers requiring more detailed information should refer to the original reports of the UNEP Technical
Options Committees (see Further Reading) on which the series is based.
3
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Acknowledgements
This report was written by Dr. Helen Tope (EPA Victoria, Australia) and Dr. Stephen O. Andersen (US
EPA), based on the work of TEAP and its ATOC. The report was peer reviewed by Mr. Jose Pons,
Prof. Ashley Woodcock, and members of the ATOC. Thanks are due to those members of the ATOC
who gave freely of their time to ensure that this publication, while written in plain language, reflects the
more detailed information available in the original report as accurately as possible.
MEMBERS OF THE 2001 UNEP AEROSOL PRODUCTS, STERILANTS, MISCELLANEOUS
USES AND CARBON TETRACHLORIDE TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE
4
Co-chairs
Affiliation
Country
Jose Pons
Spray Quimica
Venezuela
Helen Tope
Environment Protection Authority, Victoria
Australia
Ashley Woodcock
University Hospital of South Manchester
UK
Members
Affiliation
Country
D. D. Arora
Tata Energy Research Institute
India
Paul Atkins
Glaxo Wellcome
USA
Olga Blinova
Russian Scientific Centre "Applied Chemistry"
Russia
Nick Campbell
Elf-Atochem SA
France
Hisbello Campos
Ministry of Health
Brazil
Christer Carling
Astra Zeneca
Sweden
Francis M. Cuss
Schering Plough Research Institute
USA
Chandra Effendy
p.t. Candi Swadaya Sentosa
Indonesia
Charles Hancock
Charles O. Hancock Associates
USA
Eamonn Hoxey
Johnson & Johnson
UK
Javaid Khan
The Aga Khan University
Pakistan
P. Kumarasamy
Aerosol Manufacturing Sdn Bhd
Malaysia
Robert Layet
Ensign Laboratories
Australia
Robert Meyer
Food and Drug Administration
USA
Hideo Mori
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Company
Japan
Robert F. Morrissey
Johnson & Johnson
USA
Geno Nardini
Instituto Internacional del Aerosol
Mexico
Dick Nusbaum
Penna Engineering
USA
Tunde Otulana
Aradigm Corporation
USA
Martyn Partridge
Whipps Cross Hospital
UK
Fernando Peregrin
AMSCO/FINN-AQUA
Spain
Jacek Rozmiarek
Glaxo Wellcome SA
Poland
Abe Rubinfeld
Royal Melbourne Hospital
Australia
Albert L. Sheffer
Brigham and Women’s Hospital
USA
Greg Simpson
CSIRO, Molecular Science
Australia
Roland Stechert
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma KG
Germany
Robert Suber
RJR-Nabisco
USA
Ian Tansey
Expert
UK
Adam Wanner
University of Miami
USA
You Yizhong
Journal of Aerosol Communication
China
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Executive summary
The use of ozone-depleting substances in industry increased significantly until about 1990. The result
has been serious depletion of the ozone layer. The hole in the Antarctic ozone layer is now larger than
ever before and similar depletion frequently occurs over the Arctic.
The Montreal Protocol, drafted under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP), will phase out the production and consumption of the man-made substances that deplete
stratospheric ozone. This action will prevent further damage to the ozone layer, and should eventually
allow the ozone layer to repair itself.
This report considers CFC uses in aerosol products, as sterilants, and in a range of miscellaneous
applications including food freezing, tobacco expansion, fumigation and cancer therapy. It also covers
the use of carbon tetrachloride.
Aerosol products were, at one time, the source of 60 per cent of global CFC uses and emissions, as
much as 300,000 tonnes in 1986.
Substitutes for CFC aerosol products are readily available except for a few specialized medical and
industrial applications. CFC use in aerosol products will be reduced to insignificant amounts by 2005.
Currently about 1500 tonnes of CFCs are used in the sterilization of equipment. The most widely used
sterilant is ethylene oxide, a substance that is toxic, mutagenic, a suspected carcinogen, flammable
and explosive. To reduce these risks, ethylene oxide can be used in a mixture that contains 88 per
cent CFC-12 by weight. The alternatives to CFCs include the use of undiluted ethylene oxide, steam,
formaldehyde, a mixture of ethylene oxide and carbon dioxide, and mixtures of ethylene oxide with
HCFCs. These techniques enabled CFC phase out in developed countries by 1995.
Carbon tetrachloride is used as a feedstock in the production of CFC-11 and CFC-12, in the
production of key pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemicals, and as a catalyst promoter. Its use in
the CFC industry will be progressively reduced as CFCs themselves are phased out. The Montreal
Protocol allows the use of carbon tetrachloride as a feedstock wherever carbon tetrachloride is
destroyed in the production process, or where it is used as a process agent. (for more information
see TEAP, 2001 at http://www.teap.org).
The miscellaneous uses of CFCs cover a wide variety of fields but use only small amounts of CFCs.
They are therefore not covered in detail in this publication.
5
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Ozone depletion: an overview
Most of the oxygen in the Earth’s atmosphere is in the form of molecules containing two oxygen
atoms, known by the familiar chemical symbol O2. In certain circumstances, three atoms of oxygen
can bond together to form ozone, a gas with the chemical symbol O3. Ozone occurs naturally in the
Earth’s atmosphere where its concentration varies with altitude. Concentration peaks in the
stratosphere at around 25–30 kilometres from the Earth’s surface and this region of concentration of
the gas is known as the ozone layer.
The ozone layer is important because it absorbs certain wavelengths of ultraviolet (UV) radiation from
the Sun, reducing their intensity at the Earth’s surface. High doses of UV radiation at these
wavelengths can damage eyes and cause skin cancer, reduce the efficiency of the body’s immune
system, reduce plant growth rates, upset the balance of terrestrial and marine ecosystems, and
accelerate degradation of some plastics and other materials.
A number of man-made chemicals are known to be harmful to the ozone layer. They all have two
common properties: they are stable in the lower atmosphere and they contain chlorine or bromine.
Their stability allows them to diffuse gradually up to the stratosphere where they can be broken down
Effects of CFCs on stratoshperic ozone
UV radiation
series of reactions
CFCl3
chlorine
monoxide
free
chlorine
radical
When gases containing chlorine,
such as CFCs, are broken down
in the atmosphere, each chlorine
+
chlorine
radical
atom sets off a reaction that may
destroy hundreds of thousands
ozone
(O3)
CFCl2
of ozone molecules.
oxygen
molecule
(O2)
by solar radiation. This releases chlorine and bromine radicals that can set off destructive chain
reactions breaking down other gases, including ozone, and thus reducing the atmospheric
concentration of ozone. This is what is meant by ozone depletion. The chlorine or bromine radical is
left intact after this reaction and may take part in as many as 100,000 similar reactions before
eventually being washed out of the stratosphere into the troposphere.
6
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
How CFC Nomenclature Works
F
F
CFC numbers provide the information
needed to deduce the chemical structure
of the compound. The digit far right
Cl
C
C
CFC 114
Cl
provides information on the number of
fluorine atoms, the digit second from the
right provides information on hydrogen
atoms, and the digit on the left provides
F
F
number of carbon atoms minus one (omitted if 0)
number of hydrogen atoms, plus one
number of flourine atoms in one molecule
information on carbon atoms. Vacant
valencies are filled with chlorine atoms.
Adding 90 to the number reveals the
numbers of C, H and F atoms more
Note: 1. All spare valencies filled by chlorine atoms
2. Different isomers are indicated by a suffic of lower case letters
3. Bromine atoms are indicated by a suffic B plus number of atoms
4. Hundreds number = 4 or 5 for blends (e.g. R-502)
directly.
Another important environmental impact of a gas is its contribution to global warming. Global
Warming Potential (GWP) is an estimate of the warming of the atmosphere resulting from release of a
unit mass of gas in relation to the warming that would be caused by release of the same amount of
carbon dioxide. Some ODS and some of the chemicals being developed to replace them are known
to have significant GWPs. For example, CFCs have high GWPs and the non-ozone-depleting
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) developed to replace CFCs also contribute to global warming. GWP is an
increasingly important parameter when considering substances as candidates to replace ODS.
During past decades, sufficient quantities of ODS have been released into the atmosphere to damage
the ozone layer significantly. The largest losses of stratospheric ozone occur regularly over the
Antarctic every spring, resulting in substantial increases in UV levels over Antarctica. A similar though
weaker effect has been observed over the Arctic.
At present, scientists predict that, provided the Montreal Protocol is implemented in full, ozone
depletion will reach its peak during the next few years and will then gradually decline until the ozone
layer returns to normal around 2050.
7
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
The Montreal Protocol
The Montreal Protocol, developed under the management of the United Nations Environment
Programme in 1987, came into force on 1 January 1989. The Protocol defines measures that
Parties must introduce to limit production and consumption of substances that deplete the ozone
layer. The Montreal Protocol and the Vienna Convention – the framework agreement from which the
Protocol was born – were the first global agreements to protect the Earth’s atmosphere.
The Protocol originally introduced phase out schedules for five CFCs and three halons. However, it
was designed so that it could be revised on the basis of periodic scientific and technical
assessments. The first revisions were made at a meeting of the Parties in London, in 1990, when
controls were extended to additional CFCs and halons as well as to carbon tetrachloride and methyl
chloroform. At the Copenhagen meeting, in 1992, the Protocol was amended to include methyl
bromide and to control HBFCs and HCFCs. A schedule for phase out of methyl bromide was
adopted at the Vienna meeting in 1995, and this was later revised in 1997, in Montreal. In 1999, the
Parties met in Beijing, where they extended control to bromochloromethane (CBM). By July 2001,
there were 177 Parties to the Montreal Protocol and more than 90 chemicals are now controlled.
Ozone-depleting substances (ODS) covered by the Montreal Protocol
and their ozone-depletion potential (ODP)*
Ozone-depleting
substance (ODS)
Major uses
Ozone-depletion
potential (ODP)
Chlorofluorocarbons
Refrigerants; propellants for spray cans, inhalers, etc.;
0.6–1
(CFC)
solvents, blowing agents for foam manufacture
Halons
Used in fire extinguishers
3–10
Carbon tetrachloride
Feedstock for CFCs, pharmaceutical and agricultural
1.1
chemicals, solvent
1,1,1-trichlorethane
Solvent
0.1
Developed as ‘transitional’ replacement for CFCs.
0.01–0.52
(HCFCs)
Developed as ‘transitional’ replacement for CFCs.
0.02–7.5
Methyl bromide
Fumigant, widely used for pest control
0.6
Bromochloromethane (CBM)
Solvent
0.12
(methyl chloroform)
Hydrobromofluorocarbons
(HBFCs)
Hydrochlorofluorocarbons
* Where ranges of ODP are given, readers requiring the exact ODP for a given CFC, halon, HBFC or HCFC
should refer to the Handbook for the International Treaties for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, published by the
UNEP Ozone Secretariat, or other accredited sources.
8
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
How regulation works
All ODS do not inflict equal amounts of damage on the ozone layer. Substances that contain only
carbon, fluorine, chlorine, and/or bromine – referred to as fully halogenated – have the highest
potential for damage. They include CFCs and halons. Other substances, including the
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), developed as replacements for CFCs, also contain hydrogen. This
reduces their persistence in the atmosphere and makes them less damaging for the ozone layer. For
the purposes of control under the Montreal Protocol, ODS are assigned an ozone-depletion potential
(ODP).
Each controlled chemical is assigned an ODP in relation to CFC-11 which is given an ODP of 1.
These values are used to calculate an indicator of the damage being inflicted on the ozone layer by
each country’s production and consumption of controlled substances. Consumption is defined as
total production plus imports less exports, and therefore excludes recycled substances. The relative
ozone-depleting effect of production of a controlled ODS is calculated by multiplying its annual
production by its ODP, results are given in ODP tonnes, a unit used in this series of publications and
elsewhere. The ODS currently covered by the Montreal Protocol are shown, with their ODPs, in the
table opposite.
Developing countries and the Montreal Protocol
From the outset, the Parties to the Montreal Protocol recognized that developing countries could face
special difficulties with phase out and that additional time and financial and technical support would
be needed by what came to be known as ‘Article 5’ countries. Article 5 countries are developing
countries that consume less than 0.3 kg per capita per year of controlled substances in a certain
base year. They are so called because their status is defined in Article 5 of the Protocol1.
Financial and technical assistance was provided under the 1990 London Amendment which set up
the Multilateral Fund (MLF). Activities and projects under the MLF are implemented by four
implementing agencies: UNDP, UNEP, UNIDO and the World Bank.
Article 5 countries were also granted a ‘grace period’ of 10 years to prepare for phase out. 1999
marked the end of that period for production and consumption of CFCs. Article 5 countries have,
since 1999, entered the ‘compliance’ period in which they will have to achieve specific reduction
targets.
The requirements of the Montreal Protocol as of December 2000 for both developed and Article 5
countries are shown in the table on page 10.
1
This is often written Article 5(1), indicating that status is defined in paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Protocol.
‘Article 5 Parties’ is also used.
9
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Requirements of the Montreal Protocol including amendments
and adjustments to the end of 1999**
Controlled Substance
Reduction in consumption
and production for
developed countries
Reduction in consumption
and production for developing
(Article 5) countries
CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC- 113,
Base level: 1986
Base level: Average of 1995–1997
CFC-114, CFC-115
1989: Freeze
1999: Freeze
1994: 75 per cent
2005: 50 per cent
1996: 100 per cent
2007: 85 per cent
2010: 100 per cent
Halon 1211, halon 1301, halon
Base level: 1986
Base level: Average of 1995–1997
2402
1992: 20 per cent
2002: Freeze
1994: 100 per cent
2005: 50 per cent
2010: 100 per cent
Base level: 1989
Base level: Average of 1998–2000
1993: 20 per cent
2003: 20 per cent
1994: 75 per cent
2007: 85 per cent
1996: 100 per cent
2010: 100 per cent
Base level: 1989
Base level: Average of 1998–2000
1995: 85 per cent
2005: 85 per cent
1996: 100 per cent
2010: 100 per cent
1,1,1-trichloroethane
Base level: 1989
Base level: Average of 1998–2000
(methyl chloroform)
1993: Freeze
2003: Freeze
1994: 50 per cent
2005: 30 per cent
1996: 100 per cent
2010: 70 per cent
Other fully halogenated CFCs
Carbon tetrachloride
2015: 100 per cent
HCFCs
Consumption
Consumption
Base level: 1989 HCFC consumption +
Base level: 2015
2.8 per cent of 1989 CFC consumption
2016: Freeze
1996: Freeze
2040: 100 per cent
2004: 35 per cent
Production
2010: 65 per cent
Base level: 2015
2015: 90 per cent
2001: Freeze
2020: 99.5 per cent
2030: 100 per cent
Production
Base level: 1989 HCFC consumption +
2.8 per cent of 1989 CFC consumption
2004: Freeze
10
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Requirements of the Montreal Protocol including amendments
and adjustments to the end of 1999**
Controlled Substance
Reduction in consumption
and production for
developed countries
Reduction in consumption
and production for developing
(Article 5) countries
HBFCs
1996: 100 per cent
1996: 100 per cent
Bromochloromethane
2002: 100 per cent
2002: 100 per cent
Methyl bromide
Base level: 1991
Base level: Average of 1995-1998
1995: Freeze
2002: Freeze
1999: 25 per cent
2005: 20 per cent
2001: 50 per cent
2003: review of reduction schedule
2003: 70 per cent
2015: 100 per cent
2005: 100 per cent
** The Protocol allows some exemptions, e.g. for "essential uses." Readers requiring full details of phase out for a given substance
should refer to the Handbook for the International Treaties for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, published by the UNEP Ozone
Secretariat, or other accredited sources.
Progress in the ratification of the Montreal Protocol and its amendments
200
150
No. of Countries
Ratifying 100
50
0
Vienna
Convention
Montreal
Protocol
London
Copenhagen
Amendment Amendment
Montreal
Beijing
Amendment Amendment
Agreement
Source: Caleb Management Services, UK
11
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
CFC use in aerosol products
Compressed gas propellants
were first used in 1923 as a
foams
means of dispersing
Aerosol product uses
others
7%
insecticides. An aerosol
propellant must evaporate
quickly and disperse the active
currently account for about
27 percent of all CFC
usage but reductions are
aerosols 27%
solvents 16%
being rapidly introduced in
most countries.
ingredient effectively.
Compressed gas is of limited
use as a propellant since the
refrigeration 25%
gas pressure in the container
falls as the container empties.
CFC-12 was introduced, during World War II, because it maintains constant pressure until all of the
product is dispensed. CFCs are also not explosive, flammable or toxic, can be produced in very pure
form and are good solvents. These properties made them the preferred propellant in an industry that
expanded rapidly after World War II. By 1987, more than 8000 million aerosol cans were being
produced annually – the equivalent of 15,000 per minute.
CFCs have been used to dispense a wide variety of sprays, including lacquers and paints,
deodorants, shaving foam, perfume, insecticides, window cleaners, oven cleaners, pharmaceutical
and veterinary products, glues and lubricating oils. CFC-12 was the most widely used propellant but
CFC-114 was also used to disperse products containing alcohol. CFC-11 is not a propellant, but was
added to some formulations as a solvent and carrier.
The fact that CFCs were both good propellants and good solvents accounted for many of their uses
in aerosol products. In some formulations, CFCs had the added advantage of suppressing the
flammability of other ingredients.
CFCs are also used in aerosol products designed to produce a chilling effect that occurs when
compressed gases are sprayed. Aerosol chilling products include local anaesthetic and sprain
treatment, freezing of liquids in leaking pipes to cut off flow while repairs are made, freezing of
chewing gum so that it can be removed from fabrics, and identification of electronic circuit faults by
cooling solder joints so that the electrical circuit is interrupted. CFCs can also be used to remove dust
from photographs, disks and tapes because they evaporate quickly and leave no residues. And,
finally, the sudden escape of CFCs from a small orifice is used to create noise in fog and sports
horns, and alarm equipment.
In the mid-1970s, aerosol products accounted for 60 per cent of all the CFC-11 and CFC-12 used
worldwide. By the end of the decade, however, countries were beginning to ban or restrict the use of
12
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
CFCs in aerosol products and, after the introduction of the Montreal Protocol in 1987, CFC use in
aerosol products began to decline rapidly. Overall consumption was about 300,000 tonnes in 1986
but was reduced to some 180,000 tonnes in 1989. Progress since then has been rapid. There are
now no technical barriers to global transition to alternatives. In 1991 about 115,000 tonnes of CFCs
were used in aerosol products. By 1999 this had fallen to about 9000 tonnes (excluding MDIs –
metered-dose inhalers). The table below summarizes regional consumption in 1999.
Regional use of CFCs in aerosol products (excluding MDIs)
CFC Used (tonnes) 1999
ASEAN countries
900
China
2300
Indian subcontinent countries*
1000
Latin America
500
Middle East and Africa
400
Russian Federation
3500
Ukraine
500
Other CEIT, including CIS**
100
Total
9200
* India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan
** Other countries with economies in transition, including the Commonwealth of Independent States
How countries reduced CFC use in aerosol products
There have been four distinct stages in phasing out CFCs from convenience and cosmetic aerosol
products:
Stage 1:
Stage 2:
Stage 3:
Stage 4:
Before 1987
1987 to 1990
1990 to 1992
1992 to 2001
Canada, Sweden,
Australia, Austria,
Brazil, Egypt, Finland,
All countries except
and the United States
Denmark, Germany,
Hungary, Norway,
some developing
Mexico, New Zealand,
Switzerland, and
countries and some
United Kingdom, and
Trinidad and Tobago
CEITs
Venezuela
13
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
CFC use in metered dose inhalers
CFC-containing metered dose inhalers (MDIs) provide reliable and effective therapy for respiratory
diseases such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). MDIs generally use
CFC-12 as a propellant. To suspend or dissolve medication, most use CFC-11 and CFC-114, either
alone or in a mixture. Approximately 500 million MDIs were used annually worldwide in 1998, using
approximately 10,000 tonnes of CFCs.
The prevalence of asthma and COPD is increasing worldwide. In 1998 there were estimated to be
300 million patients with asthma and COPD throughout the world. Evidence confirms that asthma
prevalence is increasing as urbanization of developing countries continues. There is international
consensus that primary treatment of these diseases should be by the inhaled route. Inhalation permits
fast and efficient delivery of treatment to the airways with minimal risk of adverse reactions. Therapy
requires regular treatment, often with more than one drug. MDIs remain the dominant inhaled delivery
system in most countries and for all categories of drugs.
Overall, use of inhaled medication is increasing because of increased prevalence of disease. World
Health Organization/US National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (WHO/NHLBI-GINA) guidelines on
asthma management also encourage the inhaled route as the preferred method of administering
medicine. Therapy administered by the inhaled route is likely to remain the mainstay of therapy for
asthma/COPD.
An MDI is a complex system designed to provide a fine mist of medicament for inhalation directly to
the lungs to treat respiratory diseases such as asthma and COPD. The active ingredient may be
dissolved in the propellant but is more often present as a suspension of particles, the majority of
which are less than 5 micrometers in diameter. A surface-active agent may be included to ensure that
the drug is well suspended and to help lubricate the metering valve. When a patient uses an MDI, the
drug/propellant mixture in the metering chamber of the valve is expelled by the vapour pressure of the
propellant through the exit orifice in the actuator. As droplets of drug in propellant leave the spray
nozzle the propellant gases expand, with very rapid evaporation, resulting in a fine aerosol cloud of
drug particles.
Alternatives to CFC-based MDIs are primarily hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) based MDIs, dry powder
inhalers (DPIs) (single or multi-dose), nebulizers (hand held or stationary), orally administered drugs
(tablets, capsules or oral liquids) and injectable drugs. It is likely that a wide range of reformulated
products will be available in many developed countries and transition to these products away from
CFCs will be making good progress by the year 2005.
14
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
CFC use in sterilants
A mixture of ethylene oxide and CFC-12 is used to sterilize medical equipment. The CFC is used to
KEY FACTS
reduce the flammability and explosive risk of ethylene oxide. The most common mixture contains 88
per cent CFC-12 by weight, and is commonly known as 12/88. Use of CFC-12 in sterilization has
been successfully phased out in most developed countries and in some countries with economies in
transition; it is still used in developing countries. Worldwide, use of CFC-12 for this purpose was
estimated to be less than 1500 tonnes in 1998 (compared with approximately 25,000 tonnes in 1989).
Ethylene oxide penetrates packaging materials, destroys microorganisms and diffuses away from the
package leaving almost no residues. It is used to sterilize medical and surgical equipment and
devices such as catheters and fibre optic medical equipment that are sensitive to heat and moisture.
Since ethylene oxide is toxic, mutagenic, a suspected carcinogen, flammable and explosive, its use
requires stringent safety precautions and is strictly regulated in some countries. This has led to widely
differing sterilization practices in different countries. Great efforts have been made to replace ethylene
oxide as a sterilant, particularly in hospitals, owing to concerns about exposure of personnel. The fact
that ethylene oxide is still widely used as a sterilant is evidence that, in numerous applications, the
benefits of its use outweigh these disadvantages.
Consumption patterns vary globally so that while no use of 12/88 is reported for China, its use has
been reported in more than 40 other developing countries. There are also indications of increasing
use of CFC-12 in sterilization in some developing countries. Some manufacturers of surgical
equipment may even be shipping products from developed to developing countries for sterilization
with 12/88.
A range of sterilization methods is available. Some use ethylene oxide, others do not. Ethylene oxide
can be used as a sterilant either alone or diluted with other gases such as CFC-12, HCFCs or carbon
Ethylene oxide can be
used to sterilize medical
equipment, either alone
or diluted with other
gases such as CFC-12,
HCFCs or carbon
dioxide (CO2). Mixtures
of CFC-12 and ethylene
oxide are used in some
developing countries.
Mixtures of HCFCs and
ethylene oxide are used
in some developed
countries. Methods that
do not rely on ethylene
oxide include steam
sterilization, dry heat,
formaldehyde, radiation
and ionized gas plasma.
Health and safety
regulations on ethylene
oxide in some countries
have led to the use of
processes such as
steam, formaldehyde
and radiation.
dioxide (CO2). Methods that do not rely on ethylene oxide include steam sterilization, dry heat,
formaldehyde, radiation and ionized gas plasma.
HCFC replacement mixtures for 12/88 are used mostly in the United States and in some European
countries. The European Union has legislation restricting the use of HCFCs in emissive applications
such as sterilization. Mixtures of HCFCs and ethylene oxide are virtual drop-in replacements for
12/88. HCFCs have been found to be important as transitional products in sterilization in those
countries that previously employed 12/88 extensively. The use of HCFC replacement mixtures was
estimated to be less than 3000 metric tonnes in 1998 (some 90 ODP tonnes).
15
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Carbon tetrachloride
Carbon tetrachloride (CCl4) – a controlled substance under the Montreal Protocol – is used as a
KEY FACTS
Carbon tetrachloride is a
controlled substance
under the Montreal
Protocol.
feedstock for the production of other chemicals, as a process agent, and for other uses.
As a feedstock, carbon tetrachloride is the basic chemical building block in the production of other
CFCs, notably CFC-11 and CFC-12. The carbon tetrachloride undergoes transformation in the
process and is converted from its original composition. Only insignificant trace emissions, allowed
Its main use is as a
feedstock for the
production of CFCs – a
use that will disappear
along with CFCs.
under the Montreal Protocol, remain.
Other uses are as a
process agent in the
chemical industry, as a
solvent and for grain
insecticide fumigation.
The Montreal Protocol
allows the use of carbon
tetrachloride as a
feedstock and specific
uses as a process
agent.
of ibuprofen (a basic drug used for analgesic formulations in painkillers). Some products can be
When used as a process agent, carbon tetrachloride’s unique chemical or physical properties
facilitate an intended chemical reaction and/or inhibit an unintended one. Carbon tetrachloride is used
as a process agent in a variety of applications including the chlorination of rubber and the production
produced without the use of carbon tetrachloride, for others, carbon tetrachloride cannot be replaced
for reasons of health, safety, environment, quality, yield, cost effectiveness, technical and economic
feasibility. The Montreal Protocol allows specific uses of carbon tetrachloride as a process agent (for
elaboration see TEAP, 2001 at http://www.teap.org).
The use of carbon tetrachloride as a solvent includes simple solvent extraction, such as caffeine
extraction and palm oil extraction, and cleaning applications such as metal degreasing and textile
spotting. Substitutes are commercially available and economic. These uses should therefore be
discontinued to protect the ozone layer and safeguard the health and safety of people using carbon
tetrachloride. Carbon tetrachloride can also be used in miscellaneous applications such as fire
extinguishers, grain insecticide fumigation, and as an anti-helminthic agent (especially for the
treatment of liver fluke in sheep).
In 1996, estimated atmospheric emissions of carbon tetrachloride were 41,000 tonnes. The primary
source of atmospheric emissions of carbon tetrachloride is its use as a feedstock in the production of
CFCs. Emissions have been estimated at around 28,000 tonnes for 1996, about 70 per cent of total
emissions. The majority of feedstock use emissions originate from CFC production in developing
countries and countries with economies in transition. As production of CFCs is phased out under the
Montreal Protocol, carbon tetrachloride emissions will continue to decline. Atmospheric levels of
carbon tetrachloride have already reduced as a result of the phasing out of CFC consumption in
developed countries.
16
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
There are a number of measures that can lead to reductions in carbon tetrachloride emissions to the
environment:
• closure of CFC manufacturing facilities;
• conversion of facilities using carbon tetrachloride as process agents to alternatives;
• further use of improved emission control technology in carbon tetrachloride and CFC
manufacturing facilities;
• further use of improved containment and emission control technology in manufacturing facilities
using carbon tetrachloride as process agents.
As the bulk of carbon tetrachloride production is for use as a feedstock for CFC production this use
will be eliminated along with CFCs. Carbon tetrachloride is not dealt with further in this publication (for
more information see TEAP, 2001 at http://www.teap.org).
17
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Miscellaneous uses
CFCs have been used in small amounts in many different ways in many different industries. The minor
KEY FACTS
There are many
miscellaneous uses of
CFCs in industry but
none use substantial
amounts.
The two remaining
consumers are the
expansion of cured
tobacco to provide low
tar cigarettes, and
laboratory and analytical
uses.
uses described below now consume insignificant amounts of CFC. In 1998, tobacco expansion was
thought to be the largest of these small uses. Laboratory and analytical uses of CFCs are perhaps the
most widespread of these uses globally.
• CFC-11 has been used to expand dried tobacco to its original size to provide low tar cigarettes.
Worldwide use is difficult to estimate. About 4050 tonnes was used in China in 1996. Carbon dioxide
is an alternative expansion agent used in many countries. Others used less commonly are nitrogen,
propane, and iso-pentane. The principal difficulty for developing countries is the high capital cost of
conversion to alternative technologies. Most are converting to carbon dioxide expansion technologies.
• Laboratory and analytical uses of ozone depleting substances such as CFC-113 and carbon
tetrachloride include: equipment calibration; extraction solvents, diluents, or carriers for specific
chemical analyses; inducing chemical-specific health effects for biochemical research; as a carrier
Substitute chemicals
and processes are
available for all
miscellaneous uses.
for laboratory chemicals; and other critical purposes in research and development where
With the phase out of
CFCs in developing
countries, these
substitutes will be used
or the processes
abandoned.
conditions (see Decisions VI/9)2. International and national organizations are working to eliminate
substitutes are not readily available or where standards set by national and international agencies
require specific use of the controlled substances. The Montreal Protocol allows a global exemption
for laboratory and analytical uses for developed countries until the end of 1995 under strict
the use of ozone depleting substances in many laboratory and analytical uses. Decision XI/193
eliminates three major uses from the global exemption from 1 January 2002: testing of oil, grease
and total petroleum hydrocarbons in water; testing of tar in road paving materials; and forensic
finger-printing.
• Food can be frozen through contact with liquid CFC-12, which boils at -30 °C at normal pressure.
CFC consumption has been totally eliminated from this application using available alternative
freezing methods.
2
Decision VI/9 adopted by the 6th Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. For details, see the Handbook
for the International Treaties for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (UNEP Ozone Secretariat).
3
Decision XI/19 adopted by the 11th Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. For details, see the
Handbook for the International Treaties for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (UNEP Ozone Secretariat).
Food freezing
Tobacco expansion
Fumigation
123005700150004
IER
GLAC
FROZE
N SHR
IMPS
alternatives:
liquid nitrogen and air blast freezing
Metal purification
alternatives: HCFC-123, propane, steam, liquid N2 and CO2
Thermostats/thermometers
20
70
80
0
25
-10
fah
-20
-5
160
10
70
30°
145
10°
40
100
130
25°
5°
30
85
60
40
10
55
Radiation therapy
5
11
20°
Double glazing
50
15°
alternatives: conventional fumigation
l
ce
siu
s
little used: abandon technique?
18
re
nh
eit
new formulations being developed
temporary exception
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
• Fumigation with CFC/ethylene oxide mixtures can be used to treat an assortment of objects,
including spices, rare books and manuscripts, and beehives. Consumption of CFCs for this
application in developed countries has been eliminated. Consumption would be minimal, if any, in
developing countries.
• CFC-12 and a halide detector can be used to detect leaks in pressure vessels. A combination of
HCFC-22 and nitrogen is one alternative, another is the use of helium with helium detectors.
• Wind tunnels are sometimes filled with CFCs because the velocity of sound is much lower in CFC
than in the air. This means that supersonic conditions can be reached with much lower circulation
rates. Possible alternatives are sulphur hexafluoride and HFC-134a.
• In the United Kingdom, graphite rods for nuclear reactors used to be purified by heating them in a
furnace filled with CFC-12. The process is no longer used. A similar process has been used in the
Middle East to refine aluminium.
• Refrigerator and central heating thermostats and thermometers have made use of the rate at
which CFCs expand as temperature rises to operate on/off switches and turn dials on rotary
thermometers. Other fluorinated chemicals are alternatives for this application.
• Double glazing sometimes uses a gas mixture that includes CFC-12 to lower thermal conductivity
and increase transparency. Other insulating gases such as argon are used as alternatives.
European insulating window manufacturers sometimes use sulphur hexafluoride – one of the most
potent greenhouse gases known – but this use may be environmentally counterproductive and
could be banned under new regulations to protect the climate.
• Linear accelerators used for radiation therapy have used CFC-12 as a dielectric medium in the
transmission of energy at radio frequencies. Sulphur hexafluoride is used as an alternative.
• Solar tracking systems have made use of CFC expansion to tilt solar panels towards the sun. HCFC22 is a substitute and mechanically driven systems are also available. The latter, however, are more
prone to wind damage and are less energy efficient since they use tracking motors.
Other minor uses of CFCs may exist. However, with phase out of CFCs, most have either been
abandoned or replaced by alternative substances and processes. A few very minor uses, such as
laboratory and analytical uses have required temporary exemption in developed countries since 1996.
As these minor uses of CFCs are relatively insignificant, they are not considered further in this
publication.
Laboratory analysis
Leak testing
Wind tunnels
6
19.2
temporary exeption
Ice plugs in piping
alternatives: HCFC-22 and HCFC-152
temporary exemption
Drug manufacturing
substitutes by the year 2000
little used: abandon technique?
Solar tracking systems
HCFC-22 and mechanical systems
19
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Aerosol products
CFCs are used in aerosol products as propellants, as solvents, as a means of reducing the
KEY FACTS
The aerosol products
industry can eliminate
CFC usage by
converting to alternative
propellants, including:
flammability of the active ingredient and as the active ingredient itself in aerosol products designed to
chill and to produce noise. Substitutes for CFCs are chosen with these properties in mind. Many
different substitutes have been adopted and proposed to replace CFCs.
One approach involves finding a substitute for the aerosol concept itself – such as the use of solid
sticks for deodorants. The range of possibilities is shown in the table below.
• hydrocarbons;
• dimethyl ether;
Substitutes for propellants
• compressed air, CO2
or nitrous oxide; and
Hydrocarbons and dimethyl ether
• HFCs and HCFCs.
propellants. They are cheap and efficient, but highly flammable. Operators can minimize risks by
HFC-134a, which is
non-flammable and has
an ODP of zero, also
has a high GWP. Its use
will therefore be limited.
installing fire detection and extinguishing systems, reinforcing buildings to reduce explosion damage,
Some products can be
redesigned to eliminate
the use of propellant
aerosols.
The hydrocarbons, propane, normal butane and isobutane are the most common substitutes for CFC
and providing safety training. The average cost of converting a filling plant to hydrocarbons varies
according to the location and size of the facility. Hydrocarbons generally cost between one-third and
one-fifth as much as CFCs, and the savings obtained soon pay back the conversion costs. However,
if the hydrocarbons need to be purified, operating costs may increase considerably.
Dimethyl ether is used extensively as a propellant, particularly in Europe. It has excellent solvency and
compatibility with water. Although it is flammable it can be used in aerosol filling plants if the usual
safety procedures for flammable propellants are followed.
Hydrocarbons and dimethyl ether share the same disadvantage: they are volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) that take part in chemical reactions in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight resulting in
the production of toxic ground-level ozone. However, dimethyl ether has been used to produce low
VOC formulations with a high water content, which replaces organic solvents.
Aerosol products: currently available alternatives
alternative propellants
alternative solvents
alternative delivery systems
• hydrocarbons (propane, butane)
• water
• finger and trigger pumps
• dimethyl ether
• alcohols (ethanol, iso-
• mechanical pressure dispensers
• compressed gases
(CO2, N2, N2O, air)
• HFC-152a
• HFC-134a
• HFC-227ea
• HCFC-22
and n-propanol)
• chlorinated solvents
perspirants, insect repellents)
(methylene chloride,
• rollers, brushes and cloths
trichloroethylene,
• bag-in-can and piston-in-can
perchloroethylene)
• pentane, hexane, white spirits,
acetone, methyl ethyl ketone
• HCFC-141b, HFC-43-10mee,
volatile silicones
20
• sticks (for deodorants, anti-
systems
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Compressed gas
If a coarse spray is acceptable, air, nitrogen, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide can be used instead of
CFC propellants. The main limitation with these compressed gases is that the pressure inside the
container falls as it empties reducing the delivery rate, spray quality and even the quantity of spray
dispensed. Careful quality control is needed to avoid propellant leaks. Carbon dioxide can produce
corrosion in the can if the formula and can specifications are not carefully chosen. The percentage of
aerosol products using compressed gases is currently 7–9 per cent of all products.
HFCs and HCFCs
HFC-134a and HFC-227ea are new replacements for CFCs. Both of these are non-flammable and
both have an ODP of zero. HFC-134a is the principal replacement of CFC-12 in pharmaceutical
inhalants, HCFC-22 for certain industrial products. HFC-227ea is also being used for pharmaceutical
inhalants. These substances have a high global warming potential. Their use will be limited.
Use of HCFC-22 is not permitted in either the United States or the European Union. HCFC-22 has
been used in place of CFCs for some industrial and technical uses where non-flammable propellants
are essential. HCFC-22 has also been used in some personal products, such as hair sprays and
aerosol fragrances, although use in this category is minimal. HCFC-22 has a higher pressure than
CFC-12.
Substitutes for solvents
Methyl chloroform, CFC-113 and carbon tetrachloride have all been used as solvents in aerosol
formulations and they are still used in some developing countries and countries with economies in
transition. These substances are all non-flammable, have large evaporation rates, high density, low
viscosity and surface tension, and are reasonably low cost where they are still available. Their
solvency power varies from very high (carbon tetrachloride and methyl chloroform) to very low (CFC113). CFC-113 has generally been considered safe for most uses. However methyl chloroform has
much lower exposure levels and should be used only in well-ventilated places. Carbon tetrachloride is
a well-known carcinogen; for that reason alone it should not be used in aerosols. It is possible to
replace these solvents with non-ODS alternatives. However, in developed countries, particularly in
some parts of the United States, VOC regulations have made replacement more difficult by limiting
the amount of VOCs that could be used in each product category.
The two properties that are most difficult to duplicate simultaneously are high evaporation rate and
non-flammability. Where VOC regulations do not limit available options, formulators can usually use
mixtures of chlorinated solvents, such as non-ozone-depleting methylene chloride and
perchloroethylene, with alcohols, ketones, and aliphatic and/or aromatic hydrocarbons. In other cases
it may be possible to replace the ozone-depleting solvent with a mixture of dimethyl ether and water.
The multiplicity of aerosol products requires that each formulation has to be carefully analysed in each
case to determine which characteristics are more desirable.
21
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Alternative non-aerosol methods
Improvements in the design of finger pumps and trigger pumps have allowed these mechanical
dispensing devices to increase their market share. Modern pumps are capable of dispensing fine
mists of low viscosity products at any angle of operation. The disadvantages of pump sprays are that
they produce larger droplets, and the spray penetrates less than that produced by aerosol products.
Aerosol products still offer some unique advantages over these mechanical devices, such as total
enclosure that prevents tampering with the product or oxidation due to air intake (in pumps, air is
admitted to replace the liquid that is dispensed). Total investment will be lower than for an aerosol
facility with similar throughput. The cost of the package for pumps is highly dependent on the style of
the bottle and pump, degree of construction, order quantity, local supply and economics. However, in
most cases pumps will be at least as expensive as aerosol products or even more so. On the other
hand, pump dispensers can be refilled many times, thus saving cost and reducing waste.
The solid stick dispenser is a non-spray dispenser for deodorant or antiperspirant. Pack costs for
solid sticks vary with the degree of package sophistication and will, in some cases, exceed the price
of an aerosol can and valve. However, the finished product will last longer than an aerosol product,
with substantial savings to the customer. Capital costs for filling and assembling of roll-on dispensers
are lower than those for an aerosol line of similar capacity (typically half the investment cost).
Alternatives to propellant aerosol products.
suction
created
by trigger
action
product
drawn up
dip tube
product
in bag
product
product
piston
propellant
propellant
in bag
propellant
In two compartment aerosol (or “pressurized”) products the concentrate and propellant inside the
aerosol package are separated, either by use of a piston, an inner bag containing the product, or an
expanding bag containing propellant. A number of systems are available, some of which have been
commercialized for a long time. Designed originally for dispensing of viscous products (gels, pastes,
cheese spreads, etc.) they can be used with liquids to provide a propellant free spray. A two
compartment pressurized can costs about twice as much as a normal aerosol product. Special filling
machines that are more expensive than normal aerosol fillers are needed for these systems.
22
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Potential problems
Specialized aerosol product uses
CFCs are difficult to replace for some specialized uses of aerosol products. Propellants in medical
aerosol products must be neither toxic nor flammable. Propellants and solvents in aerosol products
used for many industrial purposes must be non-flammable and inert.
CFCs are still being used as propellants in some developing countries, for medical aerosol products
containing substances such as anaesthetics and antiseptics. Medical aerosol products that are not
inhaled can be converted to alternative propellants, dispensed by mechanical pump sprays, or
produced as powders. The CFC-free products will need to be approved by local health authorities.
This can be a lengthy process.
CFCs are also used as propellants and solvents in aerosol products for lubricating, cleaning and faultchecking of electrical equipment. Most of these products have been converted to use HFC-134a as
propellant. HCFC-141b can be used in developing countries as a partial replacement for CFC-113,
but its use for this purpose is not allowed in developed countries.
Developing countries’ perspective
Use of CFC in aerosols in developing countries is declining slowly. A faster decline will not occur
unless the specific problems of reformulation of medical aerosols and industrial and technical aerosols
are solved. Where lack of availability of hydrocarbons is stopping conversion of non-metered dose
inhaler medical aerosols, availability problems need to be solved. Final phase out of the use of CFCs
will also require conversion of small users, overcoming any potential public safety issues for small
aerosol fillers operating in congested areas.
Final phase out
As most aerosol products have been converted to non-ODS propellants and solvents, an accelerated
phase out of CFCs would be relatively simple. In 2000, it was estimated that less than 10,000 tonnes
of ozone-depleting substances were used worldwide in the manufacture of aerosols (excluding MDIs).
Most of this amount was used for the manufacture of non-MDI medical aerosols in developing
countries and countries with economies in transition.
23
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Metered dose inhalers
Currently available alternatives to CFC-based metered dose inhalers (MDIs) are, primarily:
• CFC-free MDIs;
• dry powder inhalers (DPIs) (single or multi-dose);
• nebulizers (hand held or stationary);
• orally administered drugs (tablets, capsules or oral liquids);
• and injectable drugs.
All the CFC-free MDIs under development contain the same components as the CFC products, but
the very different physical properties of the HFC propellants have meant that significant changes have
had to be made. CFC-free MDIs will contain the new propellants HFC-134a or HFC-227ea, and some
products may contain both. The HFCs have very different properties to the CFCs. This has resulted in
new formulations being developed. The CFC-free MDI may superficially look the same as the CFC
MDI, but it will have a different taste and mouth feel that will be obvious to the user.
In the future, alternatives are likely to include non-CFC MDIs, new DPIs, new nebulizers, novel noninhaled treatments, and new propellant-free inhalation devices. Some of these are already on the
market, and many others are in the late stage of development or under regulatory evaluation. They
will reach the market place in the next few years.
DPIs can now be used successfully for most anti-asthma drugs. These inhalers are an immediately
available alternative for a large proportion of patients, although they may not represent a satisfactory
alternative to the pressurized MDIs for all patients or for all drugs. Currently available DPIs are
lightweight and portable like MDIs; they require less coordination to use than most MDIs; they have
the potential to use pure drugs without additives; they are difficult for patients with very low inspiratory
flow, e.g. small children and the elderly; they may require special packaging for use in humid climates;
some require special handling during use; the cost compared with MDIs varies between products and
countries; patient acceptability is not uniform. In some countries, over 85 per cent of inhalers used
are DPIs.
There is an increasing use of the multi-dose dry powder inhaler and this is likely to accelerate as new
multiple dose devices are produced, particularly as they may be more suitable for young children,
provided their inspiratory flow is sufficient. DPI usage globally, as a percentage of all inhaled
medication, is estimated to be around 17 per cent. This figure varies considerably from country to
country. For example, it is currently 85 per cent in Sweden, less than 2 per cent in the USA, and no
DPIs are available yet in Japan. It seems unlikely that uptake of DPIs in most countries will be at the
levels seen in Scandinavian countries.
Nebulizers are devices that are filled with a drug that is dissolved or suspended in aqueous solution
and that is converted to inhalable droplets using compressed air or ultrasonic waves. Nebulizers are
generally not considered to be alternatives to MDIs. They are mainly restricted to the treatment of
infants and severely ill patients where patient cooperation is minimal, or to situations when larger
doses of drug and/or prolonged administration times are desired.
Oral medications include tablets, capsules, and oral liquids and have been the standard form of
therapy for most diseases for many years. For existing products such as steroids and
24
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
bronchodilators, tablet therapies involve higher doses and greater risk of side effects. Regulatory
authorities in some countries have approved novel oral compounds (e.g. leukotriene modifiers) for the
treatment of asthma. These may be of value to certain asthma sufferers, but it is unlikely that they will
be a full substitute for the current inhaled preventive therapy.
Some drugs used for the treatment of asthma and COPD are also available in injection form.
However, injection is not practical for general use in ambulatory patients. It is therefore reserved for
the treatment of hospitalized patients.
Continued provision of MDIs in developing countries will depend either on import of products or local
production. Local production of CFC MDIs is likely to continue for some time after cessation of their
use in developed countries and will overlap with the importation and local production of CFC-free
MDIs by multinational and national companies. Local production of CFC-free MDIs by a local
producer, a multinational company, or by a local producer in collaboration with a multinational
company will require the transfer of new technologies and may require new licensing arrangements
and transfer of intellectual property. The costs of local production of CFC-free inhalers will include
capital costs and licensing arrangements. Multinational companies operating in Article 5 countries
should be encouraged to make the technology transfer as soon as possible. One company is already
committing resources to set up manufacturing capacity for HFC MDIs in Latin America (Brazil) and
Eastern Europe (Poland). The manufacturing plants will be operational in the next couple of years and
will serve local and regional market needs.
25
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Sterilants
Ethylene oxide mixed with CFC-12 (a mixture known as 12/88) is used to sterilize medical equipment.
KEY FACTS
Hospitals, medical equipment manufacturers and commercial sterilizing facilities also use a range of
Commercial sterilization
plants can reduce CFC12 use by converting
from 12/88 to
techniques based on
100 per cent ethylene
oxide, HCFC and
ethylene oxide mixtures,
10/90 and radiation.
other sterilizing substances and processes for particular products.
For smaller units, such
as those used in
hospitals, 12/88 use
can be reduced or
eliminated by a
combination of steam,
formaldehyde, ethylene
oxide or HCFC/ethylene
oxide mixtures.
deficiencies in the level of sterility. Not every process or sterilant will be compatible with all products.
Methods for sterilization of medical and surgical equipment and devices have developed differently in
each country, influenced by country-specific codes and regulations for fire protection, occupational
safety, validation of results, liability considerations, availability of sterilization equipment and materials,
and medical practices.
Quality health care is dependent on ensuring the sterility of medical devices. Validation of processes
for an intended application is important to avoid problems of incompatibility with certain materials or
However, once a technology is validated for a specific application it becomes a viable alternative for
that application.
Alternative sterilization processes
The alternative processes listed below can be used to reduce or replace the use of ozone-depleting
substances in sterilization.
Techniques for reducing
or eliminating 12/88 use
in hospitals
Steam sterilization
• sterilizing heatresistant equipment
with steam;
used for equipment that can withstand high humidity and temperatures of at least 113 °C. Steam
Steam sterilization is the least expensive of all sterilization methods and is widely used by medical
equipment manufacturers and hospitals. This process is non-toxic, economical and safe. It can be
sterilization cannot be used to sterilize certain heat and moisture-sensitive medical equipment, e.g.
the equipment used for operations such as organ transplants.
• sterilizing heatsensitive equipment
with formaldehyde;
Hospital practice can minimize the use of mixtures of ozone-depleting substances with ethylene
oxide by separating the majority of equipment that can be sterilized with steam (and/or formaldehyde)
• using 100 per cent
ethylene oxide
sterilizers in units
where this is safe and
practical;
from the heat- and moisture-sensitive equipment sterilized with the ethylene oxide mixture.
Formaldehyde
Formaldehyde has been used as a sterilant for many years. However, as it is toxic and a suspected
carcinogen, its use is restricted in some countries. The most common formaldehyde sterilization
process can be used on equipment that can withstand temperatures of 80–85 °C, with some
• using HCFC/ethylene
oxide mixtures;
operating temperatures as low as 60–65 °C.
• recovering and
recycling 12/88.
It is cheaper to sterilize with steam than formaldehyde. However, the formaldehyde process is
cheaper than 12/88 and, where regulations allow, it is a viable alternative for the sterilization of
equipment that can withstand the required operating temperatures.
Ethylene oxide
Medical equipment manufacturers and hospitals use undiluted ethylene oxide to sterilize heatsensitive materials and equipment. This flammable gas can be used where safety requirements can
be met. Sterilization is usually carried out at atmospheric pressure, or below, to reduce the risk of fire
and explosion. Equipment varies from large industrial units to small hospital units that use canisters
26
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
containing less than 200 g of ethylene oxide. Safety precautions are necessary for the storage and
handling of ethylene oxide.
In hospitals, steam and formaldehyde are used to sterilize most equipment. Ethylene oxide is used
only for heat-sensitive equipment that cannot withstand sterilization by other methods. Ethylene
oxide, used in conjunction with other sterilization processes, is a possible alternative to use of 12/88
in hospitals.
Blends of ethylene oxide and CO2
Non-flammable mixtures of ethylene oxide and carbon dioxide (CO2) are sometimes suitable
alternatives to ODS mixtures with ethylene oxide. Common mixtures are 10 percent ethylene oxide
and 90 percent CO2 (known as 10/90), and 8.5 percent ethylene oxide and 91.5 percent CO2. These
mixtures are non-flammable, not explosive or environmentally damaging, and are also currently
available. However, operating pressures are about ten times higher than for 12/88, requiring more
expensive equipment. They also have other disadvantages, such as composition changes during the
progressive use of a single tank or cylinder, increased polymerization problems, and compatibility and
corrosion problems caused by the acidity of CO2. Flammable mixtures of ethylene oxide and CO2 are
also used in some countries, with safety precautions necessary to reduce operating risks.
Blends of ethylene oxide and HCFC-124
Blends of ethylene oxide and HCFC-124 are virtual drop-in replacements for 12/88. HCFCs are good
flame-retardants; have low ODP, GWP and toxicity; are compatible with medical equipment; and
blend with ethylene oxide. With minor control adjustments, these mixtures allow continued use of
expensive 12/88 sterilizing equipment. The gas mixture requires validation for the particular
application before use. Product and packaging compatibility needs to be established.
Radiation
Two radiation processes are used, one based on gamma radiation the other on electron beam
irradiation. Both processes are well established and used in large facilities. Globally, a large proportion
of all single-use medical products is sterilized by irradiation. Product manufacturers usually have their
own on-site equipment for irradiation, whereas hospitals usually send equipment to specialized
facilities for irradiation. Hospitals do not have their own facilities because of construction costs and
the complexities of irradiation. For example, processes using gamma radiation need to dispose of
spent isotopes and are therefore generally not acceptable for hospitals.
Sterilization techniques: alternatives to 12/88
cheaper
than 12/88
steam
•
formaldehyde
•
ethylene oxide
suitable for
heat-sensitive
equipment
nontoxic
nonflammable
•
•
cheapest sterilization method
•
use restricted in some countries
some
•
•
comments
conversion costs; safety procedures
essential
ethylene oxide/
•
•
•
operating problems
•
•
•
safety procedures essential
•
•
sterilized equipment must be
•
virtual drop-in replacement
carbon dioxide
radiation
dry heat
•
used immediately
ethylene oxide/
HCFC 124
•
for 12/88
27
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Radiation is a very reliable sterilization technique. Irradiated equipment can be released as sterile
without holding it under quarantine to conduct sterility tests. However, radiation is not compatible with
all materials. Some products and packaging are irreversibly damaged by radiation.
Dry heat
Metal and other items that can withstand temperatures up to about 190° C can be sterilized by
exposure to dry heat. A wide selection of dry heat equipment is available worldwide, and is cheap to
buy, operate and maintain. Items sterilized by this technique must be used immediately as they are
not protected by a sterilized package. Dry heat sterilization would therefore, for instance, be a suitable
technique for a small dental surgery, but not for a large hospital where equipment is unlikely to be
used immediately after it is sterilized.
Ionized Gas Plasma
Several ionized gas plasma processes have been commercialized. In one process the plasma is
generated in a hydrogen peroxide atmosphere, while in another it is generated in a peracetic acid
environment. Many ionized gas plasma units have been sold worldwide, mostly to hospitals. One of
these processes (using peracetic acid plasma)–and which had not received FDA approval for this
application–was recently associated with patient injuries when ophthalmic surgical instruments
sterilized with this system were used. A global recall of equipment using this particular ionized gas
process was issued.
Developing countries
In 1998, total global use of blends of ethylene oxide and CFC-12 was estimated to be 1500 tonnes,
consumed almost exclusively in developing countries. Most developing countries have some hospitals
using advanced medical techniques and equipment. A few developing countries have at least one
commercial sterilization facility, and many have one or more hospital sterilization units. To reduce CFC
use, commercial sterilization facilities are phasing out 12/88 and converting to other sterilization
methods. However, in some developing countries there have been indications of increased use of
CFC-12, with the possibility that some surgical equipment manufacturers are shipping products from
developed to developing countries for sterilization.
Developing countries can take steps to minimize CFC use. Hospital practice can minimize the use of
mixtures of ethylene oxide with CFC-12 by separating the majority of equipment that can be sterilized
with steam (and/or formaldehyde) from the heat- and moisture-sensitive equipment sterilized with the
ethylene oxide mixture. Units using 12/88 should be identified, and assistance provided to convert to
100 per cent ethylene oxide or HCFC/ethylene oxide mixtures. Developing countries can convert
12/88 equipment to the virtual drop-in replacement HCFC/ethylene oxide mixtures with no changes
to operating procedures and at reasonable cost. Developing countries can also: ensure that no new
commercial facilities using 12/88 are built in the country; provide commercial sterilization facilities and
hospitals with technical information and financial assistance to help them convert from 12/88; train
personnel in commercial facilities and hospitals in alternative techniques; and encourage hospitals to
choose non-CFC technology when purchasing new sterilizers.
Forecast of usage
By 1998, CFC use in sterilization had been successfully eliminated in most developed countries. In
1998, use in developing counries and in some countries with economies in transition was estimated
to be less than 1500 tonnes. In these countries, 12/88 can be eliminated from commercial and
hospital units if financial and technical assistance is available.
28
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Resources
Secretariats and
Implementing Agencies
UNDP
Dr. Suely Carvalho, Deputy Chief
Montreal Protocol Unit, EAP/SEED
Multilateral Fund Secretariat
United Nations Development Programme
Dr. Omar El Arini
(UNDP)
Chief Officer
304 East 45th Street
Secretariat of the Multilateral Fund for
Room FF-9116,New York, NY 10017
the Montreal Protocol
United States of America
27th Floor, Montreal Trust Building
Tel: 1 212 906 6687
1800 McGill College Avenue
Fax: 1 212 906 6947
Montreal, Quebec H3A 6J6
Canada
Email: [email protected]
Web site: www.undp.org/seed/eap/montreal
Tel: 1 514 282 1122
Fax: 1 514 282 0068
E-mail: [email protected]
Web site: www.unmfs.org
UNIDO
Mrs. H. Seniz Yalcindag, Chief
Industrial Sectors and Environment Division
United Nations Industrial Development
UNEP Ozone Secretariat
Mr. Michael Graber
Acting Executive Secretary
UNEP Ozone Secretariat
PO Box 30552
Gigiri, Nairobi
Kenya
Tel: 2542 623-855
Fax: 2542 623-913
Organization (UNIDO)
Vienna International Centre
P.O. Box 300
A-1400 Vienna
Austria
Tel: (43) 1 26026 3782
Fax: (43) 1 26026 6804
E-mail: [email protected]
Web site: www.unido.org
Email: [email protected]
Web site: www.unep.org/ozone
World Bank
Mr. Steve Gorman, Unit Chief
UNEP
Mr. Rajendra M. Shende, Chief
Energy and OzonAction Unit
United Nations Environment Programme
Division of Technology, Industry and Economics
(UNEP DTIE)
39-43 quai Andre Citroen
75739 Paris Cedex 15
Montreal Protocol Operations Unit
World Bank, 1818 H Street NW
Washington DC 20433
United States of America
Tel: 1 202 473 5865
Fax: 1 202 522 3258
Email: [email protected]
Web site: www.esd.worldbank.org/mp/home.cfm
France
Tel: 33 1 44 3714 50
Fax: 33 1 44 3714 74
Email: [email protected]
Web site: www.uneptie.org/ozonaction
29
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Contact points
American Hospital Association
American Chemistry Council
840 North Lakeshore Drive
(Formerly the Chemical Manufacturers Association)
Chicago, IL 60675
703-741-5000 phone
United States
703-741-6000 fax
Tel: 1 312 280 6360
1300 Wilson Blvd.
Fax: 1 312 280 5923
Arlington, VA 22209
http://www.aha.org
http://www.cmahq.com/
Comité Français des Aérosols
Asociación Española de Aerosoles
32 rue de Paradis
Loreta 2-Entresuelo 4°, 08029
F-75484 Paris Cedex 10
Barcelona, Spain
France
Tel: +34 93 410 60 65
Tel: 1 47 70 26 42
Fax: +34 93 419 37 56
Fax: 1 47 70 34 84
[email protected]
http://www.aerosols-info.org/index.html
Associação Portuguesa de Aerossois
European Council of Chemical Manufacturers
Avenida Antonio José d’Almeida Nº 7-2º
Federations
1000 Lisbon, Portugal
Avenue E. Van Nieuwenhuyse, 4
Tel: +351 1 799 1550
B-1160 Brussels
Fax: +351 1 799 1551
Belgium
[email protected]
Tel: 322 676 7211
Fax: 322 676 7300
Association for the Advancement of Medical
http://www.cefic.org/
Instrumentation
3330 Washington Boulevard
Federation of European Aerosol Associations
Suite 400
Square Marie-Louise, 49
Arlington, VA 22201-4598
B-1040 Brussels
United States
Belgium
Tel: 1 703 525 4890
Tel: 322 238 9711
Fax: 1 703 276 0793
Fax: 322 231 1301
http://www.aami.org/
http://www.aerosol.org/
British Aerosol Manufacturers Association
Health Industry Manufacturers Association
King’s Buildings
1200 G Street, NW
16 Smith Square
Washington, DC 20005
London SW1P 3JJ
United States
United Kingdom
Tel: 1 202 783 8700
Tel: 71 828 5111
Fax: 1 202 783 8750
Fax: 71 834 8436
http://www.bama.co.uk/
Hellenic Aerosol Association
(includes directory of global aerosol associations and
Eleftherias & Melpomenis str
government departments)
15th Klm Nat.Rd Athens-Lamia, 14564
Kifissia-Athens, Greece
Suomen Aerosoliyh
Tel: +30 1 80 77 403
(Finnish Aerosol Association)
Fax: +30 1 80 76 084
PO Box 073
E-mail: [email protected]
SF-00131 Helsinki
Finland
International Aerosol Association
Tel/Fax: 358 01 3451400
Waisenhausstrasse, 2
E-mail: [email protected]
CH-8001 Zurich
Switzerland
Tel: 01 211 5255
Fax: 01 221 2940
30
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Further reading
Brandberg et al. Sterilisering med etylenoxid (EO).
På 4:e året i Göteborgs sjukvård, Sjukhuset, nr 2/1985, årgång 62.
‘CFC Replacement, Are we Ready?’ Deposition, Clearance and Effects in the Lung, Consensus Seminars on Issues
of Aerosol Therapy. Davos, Switzerland, April 1991. Journal of Aerosol Medicine, Vol 4 No 3 1991.
Chest, The Environmental Impact of Chlorofluorocarbon Use in Metered Dose Inhalers. 100, No. 4 October 1991.
CMA reporting companies. Grant Thornton Report 1991. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) 11 and 12 – Cumulative
Production through 1979 and Annual Production and Sales for the years 1980–l989. CMA, Washington D.C., United
States.
Figurama, Metal Box Aerosols, l987.
Independent Committee on Smoking and Health. Developments in Tobacco Products and the Possibility of ‘Lower
Risk’ Cigarettes. Second Report, page 7, 1979.
Midwest Research Institute. Addenda to EPA Regulatory Impact Analysis Document, Miscellaneous Uses, vol III, part 5.
October 1987.
Midwest Research Institute. Addenda to EPA Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis, vol III, part 6, Sterilants. October 1987.
National Swedish Environmental Protection Board. CFCs/Freons – Proposals to Protect the Ozone Layer. Report
3410.
Radian, Essential Aerosols Update.
EPA Contract No. 68-02-4288, January 1989.
UNEP. Report of the Aerosol Products, Sterilants, Miscellaneous Uses and Carbon Tetrachloride Technical Options
Committee, 1992.
UNEP. Report of the Aerosol Products, Sterilants, Miscellaneous Uses and Carbon Tetrachloride Technical Options
Committee, 1994.
UNEP. Report of the Aerosol Products, Sterilants, Miscellaneous Uses and Carbon Tetrachloride Technical Options
Committee, 1998.
UNEP. Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, 2001.
USEPA. Future Concentrations of Stratospheric Chlorine and Bromine. USEPA, 1989.
31
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
Glossary
CFC
32
chlorofluorocarbon
carcinogen
causing cancer in animals and humans
compressed gas
a high pressure propellant that behaves like a gas inside the aerosol
DPI
dry powder inhaler
DME
dimethyl ether
GWP
global warming potential
HCFC
hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HFC
hydrofluorocarbon
hydrocarbon
organic substance made of hydrogen and carbon
MDI
metered dose inhaler
mutagenic
causes mutation
ODP
ozone-depletion potential
OAIC
OzonAction Information Clearinghouse
ozone
gas formed from three oxygen atoms
propellant
a liquid or gas inside an aerosol product that provides pressure to expel the contents
VOC
volatile organic compound – constituents will evaporate at temperature of use, and may react
photochemically with atmospheric oxygen to produce toxic and smog-producing tropospheric
ozone
12/88
a mixture of ethylene oxide and CFC-12 in the proportion 12:88 per cent
10/90
mixture of ethylene oxide and CO2 in the proportion 10:90
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
About the UNEP DTIE OzonAction Programme
Nations around the world are taking concrete actions to reduce and eliminate production and
consumption of CFCs, halons, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, methyl bromide and HCFCs.
When released into the atmosphere these substances damage the stratospheric ozone layer – a
shield that protects life on Earth from the dangerous effects of solar ultraviolet radiation. Nearly every
country in the world has committed itself under the Montreal Protocol to phase out the use and
production of ODS. Recognizing that developing countries require special technical and financial
assistance in order to meet their commitments under the Montreal Protocol, the Parties established
the Multilateral Fund and requested UNEP, along with UNDP, UNIDO and the World Bank, to provide
the necessary support. In addition, UNEP supports ozone protection activities in Countries with
Economies in Transition (CEITs) as an implementing agency of the Global Environment Facility (GEF).
Since 1991, the UNEP DTIE OzonAction Programme has strengthened the capacity of governments
(particularly National Ozone Units or “NOUs”) and industry in developing countries to make informed
decisions about technology choices and to develop the policies required to implement the Montreal
Protocol. By delivering the following services to developing countries, tailored to their individual needs,
the OzonAction Programme has helped promote cost-effective phase out activities at the national and
regional levels:
Information Exchange
Provides information tools and services to encourage and enable decision makers to make informed
decisions on policies and investments required to phase out ODS. Since 1991, the Programme has
developed and disseminated to NOUs over 100 individual publications, videos, and databases that
include public awareness materials, a quarterly newsletter, a web site, sector-specific technical
publications for identifying and selecting alternative technologies and guidelines to help governments
establish policies and regulations.
Training
Builds the capacity of policy makers, customs officials and local industry to implement national ODS
phase out activities. The Programme promotes the involvement of local experts from industry and
academia in training workshops and brings together local stakeholders with experts from the global
ozone protection community. UNEP conducts training at the regional level and also supports national
training activities (including providing training manuals and other materials).
Networking
Provides a regular forum for officers in NOUs to meet to exchange experiences, develop skills, and
share knowledge and ideas with counterparts from both developing and developed countries.
Networking helps ensure that NOUs have the information, skills and contacts required for managing
national ODS phase out activities successfully. UNEP currently operates 8 regional/sub-regional
Networks involving 109 developing and 8 developed countries, which have resulted in member
countries taking early steps to implement the Montreal Protocol.
Refrigerant Management Plans (RMPs)
Provide countries with an integrated, cost-effective strategy for ODS phase out in the refrigeration and
air conditioning sectors. RMPs have to assist developing countries (especially those that consume
33
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
low volumes of ODS) to overcome the numerous obstacles to phase out ODS in the critical
refrigeration sector. UNEP DTIE is currently providing specific expertise, information and guidance to
support the development of RMPs in 60 countries.
Country Programmes and Institutional Strengthening
Support the development and implementation of national ODS phase out strategies especially for
low-volume ODS-consuming countries. The Programme is currently assisting 90 countries to develop
their Country Programmes and 76 countries to implement their Institutional-Strengthening projects.
For more information about these services please contact:
Mr. Rajendra Shende, Chief, Energy and OzonAction Unit
UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics
OzonAction Programme
39-43, quai André Citroën
75739 Paris Cedex 15 France
E-mail: [email protected]
Tel: +33 1 44 37 14 50
Fax: +33 1 44 37 14 74
www.uneptie.org/ozonaction.html
34
UNEP
PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER • TECHNICAL BROCHURE UPDATES • AEROSOLS AND STERILANTS
About the UNEP Division of Technology, Industry
and Economics
The mission of the UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics is to help decision-makers
in government, local authorities, and industry develop and adopt policies and practices that:
• are cleaner and safer;
• make efficient use of natural resources;
• ensure adequate management of chemicals;
• incorporate environmental costs;
• reduce pollution and risks for humans and the environment.
The UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (UNEP DTIE), with its head office in Paris,
is composed of one centre and four units:
• The International Environmental Technology Centre (Osaka), which promotes the adoption and use
of environmentally sound technologies with a focus on the environmental management of cities
and freshwater basins, in developing countries and countries in transition.
• Production and Consumption (Paris), which fosters the development of cleaner and safer
production and consumption patterns that lead to increased efficiency in the use of natural
resources and reductions in pollution.
• Chemicals (Geneva), which promotes sustainable development by catalysing global actions and
building national capacities for the sound management of chemicals and the improvement of
chemical safety world-wide, with a priority on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and Prior
Informed Consent (PIC, jointly with FAO).
• Energy and OzonAction (Paris), which supports the phase out of ozone depleting substances in
developing countries and countries with economies in transition, and promotes good management
practices and use of energy, with a focus on atmospheric impacts. The UNEP/RISØ Collaborating
Centre on Energy and Environment supports the work of the Unit.
• Economics and Trade (Geneva), which promotes the use and application of assessment and
incentive tools for environmental policy and helps improve the understanding of linkages between
trade and environment and the role of financial institutions in promoting sustainable development.
UNEP DTIE activities focus on raising awareness, improving the transfer of information, building
capacity, fostering technology cooperation, partnerships and transfer, improving understanding of
environmental impacts of trade issues, promoting integration of environmental considerations into
economic policies, and catalysing global chemical safety.
35
www.unep.org
United Nations Environment Programme
P.O. Box 30552 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: (254 2) 621234
Fax: (254 2) 623927
E-mail: [email protected]
web: www.unep.org