Date:         Mon, 17 Apr 2006 02:09:52 -0400
Reply-To:     Kim Brennan <kimbrennan@MAC.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Kim Brennan <kimbrennan@MAC.COM>
Subject:      Re: AC convert
In-Reply-To:  <02c801c661dd$14579a70$647ba8c0@MAIN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed

Good information no doubt. FWIW, in both of my Vanagons with AC, they  

were fully converted to HFC-134a. Used them that way for a summer.  
 >THEN< I converted them to Duracool. So in my case this wasn't a  
"sham" conversion. It definitely falls into the category of not  
regulated.

With that said, I live in Virginia. Virginia does not allow shops to  
use Duracool or other hydrocarbon based refrigerants. Nor to sell  
them. But mail order works fine. And the safety inspections here do  
not check what refrigerant you use.

This reminds me of the passenger tire thread that comes up  
periodically. Some will use passenger car tires on their Vanagons  
sucessfully. But I won't. I won't because I carry heavy loads in my  
Vanagons, and I'd be afraid of the tires blowing out. I am not afraid  

of hydrocarbon refrigerants (for many of the reasons that John Bange  
mentioned). It can also be noted that these types of refrigerants are  

used (legally) in many other countries.

It also used to be illegal (in the US) to use non-DOT approved  
headlights, no matter the fact that the DOT approved ones might not  
be able to illuminate the road sufficiently for the driver, it was  
the law. And Virginia inspectors were religious about verifying that.  

PITA. Now, its been modified to be DOT approved or headlights that  
are customized specifically for the vehicle. Phew. That means I can  
use Eurospec headlights in my Vanagons and on my Corrado. Legally. I  
did anyway, before the rules change. Just as I do with the foglights  
that don't conform to Virginia official safety inspection rules.

We're getting close to the cooling season (some of you in Texas may  
already be in it). For those of you unconvinced, remember this thread  

as you travel with your Westy's and lament about it's "bad AC"  
system. I'll be cool and dry in mine.


On Apr 17, 2006, at 1:09 AM, Robert Fisher wrote:

>> You can legally use Duracool in R12 setups only after R134a  
>> conversion.
>> Why?
>> Because the EPA knows that "shops" don't do Duracool conversions  
>> and they
>> know anyone who buys Duracool is venting the R12 into the  
>> atmosphere and
>> not
>> recycling the R12. Therefor they don't mind after a R134a  
>> conversion as
>> they
>> assume you had the R12 reclaimed via the a/c shop.
>
> a.. What is a second-generation substitute? Does the SNAP program  
> regulate
> second-generation substitutes? Why can hydrocarbon refrigerants  
> such as
> HC-12aŽ and DURACOOL 12aŽ be used to replace HFC-134a in cars -- is  
> using a
> hydrocarbon replacement in an HFC-134a system safer than using it in a
> CFC-12 system?
> Under the SNAP rule, EPA regulates substitutes for ozone-depleting
> substances. CFC-12 depletes the ozone layer, so EPA reviews  
> substitutes for
> CFC-12; acceptable alternative refrigerants used to directly replace
> ozone-depleting substances such as CFC-12 are called "first- 
> generation"
> substitutes. Certain first-generation substitutes, such as  
> HFC-134a, do not
> threaten the ozone layer, and EPA was not directed by Congress to  
> review
> substitutes for these refrigerants. Substitutes for non-ozone- 
> depleting
> first-generation substitutes (such as substitutes for HFC-134a) are  

> called
> "second-generation" substitutes.
> However, the fact that EPA does not regulate the use of second- 
> generation
> substitutes does not necessarily mean that such use is either legal  

> or safe.
> For example, EPA is aware that many states prohibit the use of  
> flammable
> refrigerants in automobiles. In addition, local fire codes may  
> restrict the
> use of hydrocarbon refrigerants.
>
> Finally, the safety of using hydrocarbon refrigerants such as  
> HC-12aŽ and
> DURACOOL 12aŽ in a system designed for HFC-134a is not likely to be  

> very
> different from the safety of using it in a system designed for  
> CFC-12. Since
> no valid risk assessment addressing the safety of hydrocarbon  
> refrigerants
> in either type of system has yet been submitted under the SNAP  
> program, EPA
> does not believe that hydrocarbon refrigerants have been proven to  
> be a safe
> substitute for either CFC-12 or HFC-134a in motor vehicle air  
> conditioning
> systems.
>
>
>> Otherwise it is a fine alternative as is HOTSHOT if you can get  
>> it. No
>> neither is anymore combustible then R134a.
>
> a.. Since the autoignition temperature of HFC-134a is lower than  
> that of
> hydrocarbon refrigerants such as HC-12aŽ and DURACOOL 12aŽ, doesn't  
> that
> mean that HFC-134a is more flammable than these hydrocarbons?
> According to both Underwriters Laboratories and the American  
> Society of
> Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE),  
> the main
> standard-setting body for refrigerants in the U.S., hydrocarbons are
> flammable materials. Flammability, as defined by the American  
> Society for
> Testing Materials (ASTM) E-681 standard test procedure for  
> refrigerants,
> means that a substance will ignite at atmospheric pressure when  
> mixed in
> some concentration in air at normal temperature and pressure. The  
> minimum
> and maximum concentrations at which ignition will occur are called  
> the lower
> and upper flammability limits in air. Hydrocarbons, like the  
> components of
> HC-12aŽ and DURACOOL 12aŽ, become flammable at concentrations as  

> low as 2%
> by volume. These values are well-established in published literature.
> Autoignition temperature is a distinct measure from flammability  
> limits in
> air. Specifically, this test measures the temperature at which a  
> substance
> will spontaneously ignite, without any external ignition source  
> like a match
> or lighter.
>
> Certain documents claim that because the autoignition temperature of
> HFC-134a is below 750 degrees Celsius (1382 degrees Fahrenheit), it is
> flammable, and because the autoignition temperature of hydrocarbon
> refrigerant blends such as HC-12aŽ is above 750 degrees Celsius, it is
> nonflammable. However, this statement misrepresents the procedure  
> used by
> Underwriters Laboratories to classify refrigerants.
>
> UL first examines whether a refrigerant burns in air at some  
> concentration
> and normal pressure and temperature. If it does ignite under these
> conditions, it is classified as flammable. Hydrocarbons, like the  
> components
> of HC-12aŽ and DURACOOL 12aŽ, are classified as flammable. (Note that
> hydrocarbon refrigerant manufacturers recognize that their products  

> are
> flammable, and label containers for those products with the word
> "flammable.")
>
> If a refrigerant is not classified as flammable as a result of this  

> test
> procedure, UL then uses the autoignition temperature to distinguish  

> between
> practically nonflammable refrigerants (meaning the autoignition  
> temperature
> is below 750 degrees Celsius) and nonflammable refrigerants  
> (meaning the
> autoignition temperature is above 750 degrees Celsius). HFC-134a  
> does not
> ignite, regardless of concentration, at atmospheric temperatures and
> pressures. This means that at atmospheric pressures and  
> temperatures, if a
> can of HFC-134a is opened and a lit match is placed in front of the  

> can, the
> HFC-134a will extinguish the match. HFC-134a is classified by UL as
> practically nonflammable because its autoignition temperature is  
> below 750
> Celsius. Note that UL lists most alternative refrigerants as  
> practically
> nonflammable. HCFC-22, the refrigerant used in most home air- 
> conditioning,
> is also classified as practically non-flammable.
>
>
>
>> OK all you haters let the tread begin!
>
> Y'all can believe what you want to believe... no skin off me. You  
> can put
> these compounds in your car if you choose to... not gonna affect me  

> any. I
> have two issues here: One, people recommending products and  
> procedures, or
> advocating their use without mentioning that they have considerable  

> baggage
> to go along with them, for instance the possible legalities  
> involved with
> using hydrocarbon refrigerants in your car. I think mentioning the one
> without mentioning the other is irresponsible.
> Two, people come here to get and exchange information from and with  

> the
> supposedly well-informed. I realize that this can be vague by its very
> nature but making statements such as yours above are misleading at  
> best.
>
> Here's the section addressing Kim Brennan's statement on  
> retrofitting the
> retrofit:
>
> a.. What is a "sham retrofit" of a motor vehicle A/C system?
> EPA does not regulate the use of hydrocarbon refrigerants such as  
> HC-12aŽ
> and DURACOOL 12aŽ as substitutes for HFC-134a in motor vehicles.  
> Certain
> materials have circulated claiming that by first converting a  
> system from
> CFC-12 to HFC-134a, the system may then be converted to use a  
> hydrocarbon
> refrigerant without violating the original prohibition against using
> hydrocarbons as substitutes for CFC-12. Thus, the question arises  
> about the
> definition of a legitimate retrofit. This definition hinges on two  
> distinct
> principles: complying with the conditions placed on using HFC-134a  
> under the
> SNAP program, and the intent of the retrofit.
> In accordance with the SNAP rules, a retrofit from CFC-12 to  
> HFC-134a must
> meet certain requirements. The CFC-12 must be completely recovered in
> accordance with regulations issued under section 609 of the Clean  
> Air Act.
> Fittings designed for use with HFC-134a must be permanently  
> attached to the
> system. These fittings mechanically prevent the mixing of HFC-134a  
> with
> CFC-12 and other refrigerants. Finally, the system must be labeled,  

> and the
> label must contain detailed information as described by the SNAP  
> rule. Some
> vehicles also require the installation of a compressor shutoff switch.
> Performing these activities complies with the letter of the SNAP
> regulations.
>
> Even such compliance may not, however, indicate a legitimate  
> retrofit. For
> example, HFC-134a should be used with a different lubricating oil from
> CFC-12; if the lubricant is not changed, the air conditioner will  
> not work.
> Similarly, a vehicle must be charged with the correct amount of  
> HFC-134a in
> order for the air conditioner to work. Failure to take these steps  
> indicates
> that the technician does not truly intend to convert the vehicle's air
> conditioner to work with HFC-134a, and the subsequent installation  
> of a
> hydrocarbon refrigerant such as HC-12aŽ or DURACOOL 12aŽ may  
> violate the
> prohibition against using hydrocarbon refrigerants as CFC-12  
> substitutes.
>
> Other indications of a sham retrofit also exist, including the  
> timing of the
> retrofit. In general, if a car arrives in a repair shop containing  
> CFC-12
> and leaves containing a hydrocarbon refrigerant, it is likely that it
> underwent a sham retrofit, regardless of what actually occurred in  
> the shop.
> Generally, if HFC-134a is charged into a system and then immediately
> removed, such a temporary retrofit to HFC-134a was likely intended  
> solely to
> allow the use of HC-12aŽ, DURACOOL 12aŽ, or other hydrocarbon  
> refrigerant in
> a car designed to use CFC-12. EPA is currently investigating several
> complaints, and believes indications such as those described above  
> support
> finding a Clean Air Act violation.
>
> The whole of it can be read here:
> http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/hc12alng.html
>
> Like I said, it's no nevermind to me if you're gonna use this  
> stuff... the
> likelihood of you blowing yourself to that great Vanagon graveyard  
> in the
> sky (not the one in Pahrump) while next to me in traffic is nil...  
> and I
> seriously doubt the refrigerant police are waiting around to nail  
> you on the
> first hot day of the year, but- I think we should make an effort  
> here to be
> as complete and accurate in our information as we can be, so people  

> can make
> the best informed decision they can.
>
> Cya,
>
> Robert