1

Uni

ted

Nati

ons

Envi

ronm

ent P

rogr

amm

e PROMOTING LOW-GWP REFRIGERANTS FOR

AIR-CONDITIONING SECTORS IN HIGH

AMBIENT COUNTRIES (PRAHA)

Uni

ted

Nati

ons

Indu

stria

l Dev

elop

men

t Org

aniz

ation

UNEP-UNIDO Project of promoting low-GWP alternatives for the A/C industry in high-ambient countries (PRAHA)

Project Components

Building and testing prototypes

(8 regional mfg + 6 Technology Providers will build and test

prototypes )

Study on Long-Term Feasible Technologies (Two pilot studies under preparation in

Kuwait and Qatar)

Coordinating phase-out

requirements with MEPS programs

2

1. Assess available technologies• Building, testing, and comparing prototypes with alternatives• Examining the technical feasibility of available options

2. Assess relevant Energy Efficiency (EE) standards and codes• Link assessing future alternatives with local MEPS

3. Economic comparison of alternative technologies• Assess cost implications of suggested alternatives at different

levels i.e. manufacturing, final product, service, etc.

4. Promoting Technology transfer• Examine and the issues related to transferring the technology and

facilitate such technology transfer through the HPMP and MLF as feasible

3

Key Project Elements

4

Prototype Testingof Low-GWP alternatives vs. current HCFC & HFC systems

5

What PRAHA is and is not!

• PRAHA is testing the performance of prototypes working with alternative refrigerants but not the characteristics of the alternatives;

• PRAHA compares low-GWP alternatives but will not recommend one alternative;

• PRAHA tests custom-built prototypes designed for the new alternatives and not as soft-optimized drop-in.

PRAHA is not a decision making process but is a tool to assist in the decision making

Regi

onal

M

anuf

actu

rers

Alessa (KSA)AWAL Gulf (Bahrain)Coolex RIC (Kuwait)GAMI (UAE)Petra (KSA)SKM (UAE)Zamil (KSA)

Tech

nolo

gy

Prov

ider

s

DuPontHoneywellDaikinEmersonGMCCHighly

6

PRAHA Partners

7

Alternative refrigerant selection

Pressure

GWP

Flammability

R-22 or R-410A Eq.

0 to 677

A1 to A3

8

Application selection

• Installed bank• Market trend• 50 Hz or 60 Hz• Manufactured by several stakeholders• Testing facility match

Categories and Prototypes

9

60 Hz 50 Hz

Window (18 MBH)

Decorative (24 MBH)

Ducted (36 MBH)

Packaged (90 MBH)

R32

HFO1

HFO2

HC

R22

HFC base

Number of Tests

10

Number of tests Window Decorative Ducted Packaged

Prototype per

category*Total

prototypes

Number of tests

conditions per

prototype**

Total Number of

testsBase R22 R22 R22 R22 1* 4 2 8HFC base R407 R410 R410 R407/R410 1 4 2 8R32 No Yes Yes No 2 4 3 12HFO1 Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 8 3 24HFO2 Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 8 3 24HC No Yes No No 2 2 3 6

Total 30 82* One prototype per category for base units, two prototypes for alternative refrigerants** Base units test only at high ambient

11

Findings sharing matrixOutput Tech

ProviderOEM

ManufacturerNOU -

CountryOther

Stakeholders

Complete test result/prototype Yes* Yes* No No

Refrigerant parameters Yes Yes Yes No

Comparison of results Yes Yes Yes Yes

* Test results will only be provided after the final report has been issued.

12

Project Timeline

Prototype Building

• To be finalized 4Q2014

• Several already available

Prototype Testing

• Projected 1Q2015

• Logistics being worked out

Findings Report

• Draft by 2Q2015

• Final by 3Q2015

Future Refrigerant

Performance

Prosperity & development

Environment

Safety

Cost & Economics

Sustainability

13

The Future We Want

14

The Research We Want!

1. Developing products for local applications:• Based on market research for the most installed

2. Developing products for local conditions:• Based on local design temperatures

3. Developing products for local standards:• Based on prevailing MEPS in the region

4. Developing products for local practices:• For proper installation, operation, and service

15

Cooperation with AREP Project

• Setting the criteria and the conditions for testing; • Identifying and assisting in setting the parameters to

be reported. • AHRI provided it’s Low-GWP AREP Participants

Handbook. Sharing the list of independent reliable labs known to AHRI;

• Sharing the results and the outputs for possible comparison.

Selection of alternatives should be sustainable i.e. leapfrogging high/higher GWP alternatives to avoid double phase-out that may arise

Selection of alternatives needs to be linked to national initiatives on equipment MEPS as well as any related Energy Efficiency codes

Future Refrigerants likely to have flammability characteristics, hence relevant norms/standards need to be in place (such work requires long-term efforts)

Think outside the box i.e. promoting non-conventional technologies (Absorption, Geo-Thermal, DC solutions, etc.)

PRAHA Key Messages

16

17

Lessons learned & conclusions to-date

• Wide acceptability of the project at all levels;• Commitment of local manufacturers to the project

in spite of the rush to meet the changing MEPS conditions;

• Commitment of international technology providers to the project;

• Availability of components for T3 conditions;• Shipping challenges of new flammable, or mildly

flammable, refrigerants to the region;• Patents?

18

Thank you