Please invest in Our Daily Planet today, by making a one time or monthly contribution.
We do not charge our readers a subscription fee for our content. We want to continue to grow our readership, particularly among millennials and public servants. Voluntary contributions from readers will help us employ interns and freelance journalists, expand our content, and reach a larger audience.
If you make a contribution of $150 or more, you will become an official “Friend of the Planet” and receive a Friend of the Planet T-shirt or water bottle.
HFCs or hydrofluorocarbons, are super greenhouse gases, manufactured for use in refrigeration, air conditioning, foam blowing, aerosols, fire protection, and solvents. However, unlike most other greenhouse gases, HFCs are not waste products but are intentionally produced. That’s why the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol was a crucial step by the global community to expand […]
Continue Reading 437 words
In 2017, in a case about a regulation banning the use of hydrofluorocarbons or HFCs issued by the Obama Administration, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. struck down one part of the rule saying it went beyond their what was permissible under the Clean Air Act.
Why This Matters: HFCs are a very potent greenhouse gas – as we have written recently, they have a global warming potential of 1000 to 3000 times that of carbon dioxide, and their use has increased exponentially since they were introduced in 1990.
Continue Reading 505 words
An energy bill with bipartisan support was zipping through the Senate, but it ran into a roadblock when President Trump and conservative Republicans blocked an amendment that would have phased out greenhouse gas trapping chemicals called hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) because the Democrats refused to ban states’ right to pass stricter standards on them.
Why This Matters: The White House argues that any such phase-out should be governed by a uniform federal law to provide certainty and consistency across the country, but Congressional Dems claim that this “federal pre-emption” provision is not needed because if the federal law is stringent enough states won’t need to pass tougher laws.
Continue Reading 454 wordsSubscribe to the email that top lawmakers, renowned scientists, and thousands of concerned citizens turn to each morning for the latest environmental news and analysis.
