teap-progress-report-may2012

MONTREAL PROTOCOL ON SUBSTANCES THAT DEPLETE THE OZONE LAYER UNEP REPORT OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT PANEL MAY 2012 VOLUME PROGRESS REPORT UNEP MAY 2012 REPORT OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT PANEL VOLUME PROGRESS REPORT Montreal Protocol On Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer Report of the UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel May 2012 VOLUME PROGRESS REPORT The text of this report is composed in Times New Roman Co-ordination: Technology and Economic Assessment Panel Composition of the report: Lambert Kuijpers and Meg Seki (UNEP) Layout and formatting: Ozone Secretariat (UNEP) Lambert Kuijpers (UNEP TEAP) Date: May 2012 Under certain conditions, printed copies of this report are available from: UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME Ozone Secretariat, P.O Box 30552, Nairobi, Kenya This document is also available in portable document format from the UNEP Ozone Secretariat's website: http://ozone.unep.org/new_site/en/assessment_panels_main.php No copyright involved This publication may be freely copied, abstracted and cited, with acknowledgement of the source of the material ISBN: 978-9966-20-008-2 iv May 2012 TEAP Progress Report Disclaimer The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) Co-chairs and members, the Technical Options Committees Co-chairs and members, the TEAP Task Forces Co-chairs and members, and the companies and organisations that employ them not endorse the performance, worker safety, or environmental acceptability of any of the technical options discussed Every industrial operation requires consideration of worker safety and proper disposal of contaminants and waste products Moreover, as work continues - including additional toxicity evaluation - more information on health, environmental and safety effects of alternatives and replacements will become available for use in selecting among the options discussed in this document UNEP, the TEAP Co-chairs and members, the Technical Options Committees Co-chairs and members, and the TEAP Task Forces Co-chairs and members, in furnishing or distributing this information, not make any warranty or representation, either express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or utility; nor they assume any liability of any kind whatsoever resulting from the use or reliance upon any information, material, or procedure contained herein, including but not limited to any claims regarding health, safety, environmental effect or fate, efficacy, or performance, made by the source of information Mention of any company, association, or product in this document is for information purposes only and does not constitute a recommendation of any such company, association, or product, either express or implied by UNEP, the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel Co-chairs or members, the Technical and Economic Options Committee Co-chairs or members, the TEAP Task Forces Co-chairs or members or the companies or organisations that employ them Acknowledgements The Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, its Technical Options Committees and the Task Forces Co-chairs and members acknowledges with thanks the outstanding contributions from all of the individuals and organisations that provided support to Panel, Committees and Task Forces Co-chairs and members The opinions expressed are those of the Panel, the Committees and Task Forces and not necessarily reflect the reviews of any sponsoring or supporting organisation The TEAP thanks the Bundesminiterium fuer Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit in Berlin, Germany, for hosting the TEAP meeting, 26-30 March 2012, where this report was first discussed and reviewed May 2012 TEAP Progress Report v Foreword The TEAP 2012 Progress Report The May 2012 TEAP Progress Report consists of three volumes: Volume 1: TOC Progress Reports, EUN, CUN and QPS Reports This report is the Volume report This May 2012 TEAP Progress Report contains an evaluation of the Essential Use Nominations followed by the Medical Technical Options Committee Progress Report These are followed by the Chemicals, Foams, Halons, Refrigeration and Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee Progress Reports The latter is followed by the CUN evaluation report by the same Technical Options Committee After the Refrigeration report the response to decision XXIII/11 on the use of refrigeration on ships follows In the last part of the Progress Report the Report on QPS is presented A short chapter on TEAP and TOC organisation complete this report As a last piece of information, the TEAP and TOC Membership lists are given as an Annex, status May 2012 Volume 2: The separate Volume of the TEAP Progress Report contains the report of the Task Force responding to Decision XXIII/9 on alternatives to ODS In subsequent chapters information is found on RAC, foams, fire protection and solvents Volume 3: The separate Volume of the TEAP Progress Report contains the report of the Task Force responding to Decision XXIII/10 The UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel: Stephen O Andersen, co-chair Lambert Kuijpers, co-chair Marta Pizano, co-chair Paul Ashford Mohamed Besri David Catchpole Biao Jiang Sergey Kopylov Alistair McGlone Bella Maranion Michelle Marcotte USA NL COL UK MOR UK PRC RF UK USA CDN Keiichi Ohnishi Roberto Peixoto Marta Pizano Ian Porter Miguel Quintero Ian Rae Helen Tope Dan Verdonik Ashley Woodcock Masaaki Yamabe Shiqiu Zhang J BRA COL AUS COL AUS AUS USA UK J PRC UNEP MAY 2012 REPORT OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT PANEL VOLUME PROGRESS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE FOREWORD VII ESSENTIAL USES 1.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF ESSENTIAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METERED DOSE INHALERS 1.2 ESSENTIAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METERED DOSE INHALERS 1.2.1 Criteria for Review of Essential Use Nominations for MDIs 1.2.2 Review of Nominations 1.2.3 Observations 1.2.4 Stockpiles 1.2.5 China 1.2.6 Russian Federation 1.3 REPORTING ACCOUNTING FRAMEWORKS FOR ESSENTIAL USE EXEMPTIONS 1.3.1 Argentina 1.3.2 Bangladesh 1.3.3 Egypt 1.3.4 European Union 1.3.5 India 1.3.6 Iran 1.3.7 Pakistan 1.3.8 Syria 1.3.9 United States 2012 MEDICAL TOC (MTOC) PROGRESS REPORT .15 2.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2.2 GLOBAL USE OF CFCS FOR MDIS 2.3 CFC STOCKPILES 2.4 MANUFACTURE OF CFC MDI VALVES USING CFCS 2.5 CFC PRODUCTION 2.6 TRANSITION AWAY FROM THE USE OF CFC MDIS 2.7 TRANSITION STRATEGIES 2.7.1 Progress reports on transition strategies under Decision XII/2 2.8 GLOBAL DATABASE IN RESPONSE TO DECISION XIV/5 2.9 EXPORT MANUFACTURING TRANSITION PLANS IN RESPONSE TO DECISION XVIII/16 2012 CHEMICALS TOC (CTOC) PROGRESS REPORT 23 3.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3.2 INTRODUCTION 3.3 PROCESS AGENTS 3.3.1 Introduction 3.3.2 Response to Decision XXIII/7(6) 3.4 FEEDSTOCKS 3.4.1 Introduction 3.4.2 Montreal Protocol definitions 3.4.3 How the ODS are used as feedstocks 3.4.4 Estimated emissions of ODS 3.5 N-PROPYL BROMIDE UPDATE 3.6 CTC INVOLVEMENT IN PRODUCTION OF VINYL CHLORIDE MONOMER (VCM) 3.6.1 Introduction 3.6.2 Chemistry of the process 3.6.3 Conclusion 3.7 ESSENTIAL USE NOMINATION OF CFC-113 FOR AEROSPACE INDUSTRIES BY THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION 3.7.1 Introduction 3.7.2 CTOC Comments on EUE of CFC-113 in 2013 by the Russian Federation 3.7.3 Recommendation 3.8 ALTERNATIVES TO THE USE OF CTC IN ANALYSIS OF OIL, GREASE AND TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS IN WATER, SOIL, OR AIR 3.8.1 Introduction 3.8.2 Alternative solvents 3.8.3 Other analytical methods 3.8.4 Provision of advice 3.8.5 Standard methods of analysis 3.8.6 Green chemistry 3.9 CARBON TETRACHLORIDE 3.9.1 Request for information 3.9.2 Early concern with CTC emissions 3.9.3 TEAP estimates of emissions 3.9.4 MLF estimates 3.9.5 Discussions in 2011 3.9.6 CTC in the air of cities 3.10 PRELIMINARY ADVICE TO PARTIES 3.11 DESTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES 2012 FOAMS TOC PROGRESS REPORT .47 2012 HALONS TOC (HTOC) PROGRESS REPORT 49 5.1 ALTERNATIVE AGENTS 5.2 HALON 1301 USE AS A FEEDSTOCK 5.3 HALON RECOVERY AND RECYCLING IN ARTICLE COUNTRIES 5.4 CONTAMINATED RECYCLED HALONS 5.5 UPDATE ON THE RESPONSE TO DECISION XXI/7 5.6 HTOC MEMBERSHIP 2012 REFRIGERATION, AC AND HEAT PUMPS TOC (RTOC) PROGRESS REPORT .53 6.1 REFRIGERANTS 6.2 DOMESTIC REFRIGERATION 6.3 COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION 6.4 LARGE SYSTEMS 6.5 TRANSPORT REFRIGERATION 6.6 AIR-TO-AIR AIR CONDITIONERS AND HEAT PUMPS 6.7 WATER HEATING HEAT PUMPS 6.8 CHILLERS 6.9 VEHICLE AIR CONDITIONING USE OF REFRIGERANTS ON SHIPS – DECISION XXIII/11 .61 7.1 INTRODUCTION x TEAP May 2012 Progress Report 7.2 OVERVIEW 7.3 REFRIGERANTS USED 7.4 BANKS AND EMISSIONS 7.5 REFERENCES 2012 METHYL BROMIDE TOC (MBTOC) PROGRESS REPORT .65 8.1 TRENDS IN METHYL BROMIDE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION FOR CONTROLLED USES 8.1.1 Production trends 8.1.2 Quarantine and Preshipment (QPS) 8.1.3 Global consumption for controlled uses 8.1.4 Consumption trends in Non-Article countries 8.1.5 Consumption trends in Article countries 8.2 METHYL BROMIDE USES FOR QPS 8.2.1 Recent research on alternatives to MB for QPS uses 8.2.2 Update on the registration status of alternative fumigants for QPS 8.2.3 International Plant Protection Convention 8.2.4 SPM-15 Standard for Wood Packaging Material 8.3 ALTERNATIVES TO MB FOR SOIL FUMIGATION (PRE-PLANT USES) 8.3.1 Chemical alternatives for the remaining critical uses (non Article Parties) 8.3.2 Non-chemical alternatives for soil fumigation 8.3.3 Methyl Bromide phase out in Article countries 8.3.4 Additional key issues 8.3.5 Remaining and emerging Challenges 8.4 STRUCTURES AND COMMODITIES PROGRESS REPORT 8.4.1 Regulatory News 8.4.2 Special report on recapture of MB from fruit storage in California – an on-going response to an incident of human injury from methyl bromide 8.4.3 Special report updating on adoption of controlled atmosphere and modified atmosphere as a pest control treatment for commodities 8.5 REFERENCES 2012 EVALUATIONS OF CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL BROMIDE AND RELATED MATTERS – INTERIM REPORT 97 9.1 SCOPE OF THE REPORT 9.2 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL BROMIDE 9.2.1 Mandate 9.2.2 Fulfilment of Decision IX/6 9.2.3 Reporting of MB Consumption for Critical Use 9.2.4 Trends in Methyl Bromide Use for CUEs since 2005 9.2.5 Disclosure of Interest 9.2.6 Article issues 9.2.7 Revisions to the Handbook on Critical Use Nominations for Methyl Bromide 9.2.8 Consideration of Stocks, Decision Ex.1/4 (9f) 9.3 EVALUATIONS OF CUNS – 2012 ROUND FOR 2014 EXEMPTIONS 9.3.1 Critical Use Nominations Review 9.3.2 Achieving Consensus 9.4 INTERIM EVALUATION OF CUNS: MBTOC-SOILS 9.4.1 Critical Use Nominations submitted 9.4.3 Issues Related to CUN Assessment for Preplant Soil Use 9.4.4 Registration of alternatives for preplant uses - Decision Ex I/4 (9i) and (9j) 9.4.5 Update on rates of adoption of alternatives for preplant uses - Dec.XIX/9 9.4.6 Sustainable alternatives for preplant uses 9.4.7 Standard presumptions used in assessment of nominated quantities 9.4.8 Adjustments for standard dosage rates using MB/Pic formulations 9.4.9 Use/Emission reduction technologies - Low permeability barrier films and dosage reduction TEAP May 2012 Progress Report xi 9.5 INTERIM EVALUATION OF CUNS: STRUCTURES AND COMMODITIES 9.5.1 Standard rate presumptions 9.5.2 Details of evaluations 9.6 REFERENCES: 141 ANNEX TO CHAPTER 9: DECISION IX/6 ANNEX II TO CHAPTER 9: MINORITY REPORT ON THE ASSESSMENT OF THE CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL BROMIDE ANNEX IV TO CHAPTER - PART A: TREND IN MB PREPLANT SOIL NOMINATIONS AND EXEMPTIONS ANNEX V TO CHAPTER – PART B: TRENDS IN MB STRUCTURAL AND COMMODITY NOMINATIONS AND EXEMPTIONS 10 QUARANTINE AND PRE-SHIPMENT USES OF METHYL BROMIDE – RESPONSE TO DECISION XXIII/5 167 10.1 INTRODUCTION 10.1.1 Mandate and scope 10.2 ORIGIN AND INTENT OF THE QPS EXEMPTION 10.2.1 Definitions of Quarantine and Pre-shipment 10.2.2 Organisation of work 10.3 CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION OF MB FOR QPS USES 10.3.1 Mandate 10.3.2 Source of data and analysis 10.3.3 Production of Methyl Bromide for QPS uses 10.3.4 Consumption of Methyl Bromide for QPS uses 175 175 2009 175 2010 175 10.4 PROCEDURES AND METHODS FOR DATA COLLECTION ON MB USE FOR QPS PURPOSES 10.4.1 Mandate 10.4.2 Data collection forms 10.4.3 Policies and measures requiring data collection on the use of methyl bromide for QPS 10.4.4 Suggested form that Parties may wish to consider ANNEX 1: DRAFT METHYL BROMIDE RECORD SHEETS FOR RECORDING QUARANTINE AND/OR PRE-SHIPMENT USES ANNEX 2: UNITED STATES (APHIS) ANNEX 2A: UNITED STATES (EPA) QPS FORM ANNEX 3: AUSTRALIA ANNEX 4: METHYL BROMIDE FUMIGATION LOGBOOKS USED IN THE EUROPEAN UNION UNTIL METHYL BROMIDE WAS BANNED IN 2010 ANNEX 4A: FORM FOR REPORTING ON PROGRESS IN USING ALTERNATIVES FOR QPS ANNEX 5: JAPAN ANNEX 6: MALAYSIA ANNEX 7: INDIA 11 TEAP AND TOC ORGANISATION ISSUES 220 11.1 CURRENT TEAP AND TOC MEMBERSHIP 11.2 FUTURE TEAP MEMBERSHIP 11.3 TOC AND TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP 11.4 FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS AND CHALLENGES 11.5 MINORITY REPORTS xii TEAP May 2012 Progress Report ANNEX I TO CHAPTER 11: TEAP TOC MEMBERSHIP LIST STATUS APRIL 2012 TEAP May 2012 Progress Report xiii