Talk:R-410A: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:51, 26 September 2021

Chemistry B‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

R-410A Use Outside of the USA

Expansion cooling in Europe and Asia also primarily uses R-22 and R-410A, I don't feel this article is USA-Centric enough to warrant the tag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.40.5.69 (talk) 18:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it mainly refers to the "availability" section; I've moved it. -- Mikeblas (talk) 19:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

automotive uses

ok now, why dont they use this in automobiles, we all know that they eventually leak down, get vented etc., so why not use a freon that doesnt damage the atmosphere?.....of course, nothin will work as well as R-12 when it comes to cooling efficiency and running lower pressures, but thats been banned. R-134a rapidly looses effectiveness as it leaks down, is being banned in the EU, and is just inefficient.

also, systems that are redesigned(over engineered) to run higher pressures will leak less often, and experience fewer failures.... this can be proven by comparing diesel engines to gasoline engines —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.23.43.135 (talk) 04:37, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article additions

I've never done this before, so please forgive any errors, but this article needs two additions:

First of all, the Carrier trademark for R410a (Puron) requires citation. The citation can be found at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (http://tess2.uspto.gov/) by searching for "Puron" or the Serial Number 77215886.

Secondly, R410a refrigerant is only partially accepted in Europe at this time, as Europe converted early from R22 to R407C, a "gap" refrigerant. Many manufacturers (like my employer, whom I do not have permission to represent)do not yet offer 410A equipment that meets EU standards. This information can be confirmed in many placces, like here: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ozone/pdf/mcquay_hfc_scroll_chillers_paper.pdf at the top of page three, and here: http://www.achrnews.com/CDA/Archives/258c7cf93d85a010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0____ as well as others. Even if R410a will eventually be the leader in Europe, R407C should be mentioned in this article.

Michialekirksey@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.218.191.34 (talk) 20:16, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I moved your comments to a new section, I titled it "Article additions", but I welcome you to change it. You can get a new section on a talk page by clicking the tab next to "edit" and labelled "New Section". The citations and additional information would be welcome to this article, please add them!Best of editing! Scientific29 (talk) 21:58, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up sentence fragment

This sentence fragment needs clarified at the beginning of "Availability": Although the United States Environmental Protection Agency has mandated that R-22 along with other hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) be phased-out in the United States. Ernest S. B. Boston (talk) 16:30, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Efficieny of R410A versus R-22

I would like this article include information about the relative efficiency of R-410A versus R-22 as a refrigerant. Thanks. 143.112.144.129 (talk) 00:06, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

R-410A VS. R-22

To clarify. R-410A's efficiency is lower than R-22 but leaks are less harmful to ozone depletion? And even though it has a high global warming potential, leaks are less common as the system is under much more pressure, typically leaks are less likely. As the newer refrigerants are less efficient they use more energy. I wonder if the good outweighs the bad? --174.240.192.151 (talk) 18:13, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Type of oil

Would be useful if indicated which type of oil can be used in R410A systems. And that's about the same for every other refrigerant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.219.131.2 (talk) 13:46, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete reference for Global Warming Potential

According to List of refrigerants R-410a is 50% CH₂F₂ and 50% C₂HF₅. While CH₂F₂ appears in Table 2.14 on page 212 of the cited IPCC Assessment Report 4 (AR4) 2007, C₂HF₅ does not. The reason is that the latter is not in a canonical form in List of refrigerants. I have repaired the formula for HFC-125 there. Also it is not clear what th global warming potential of R-410A is at all, since it is a 50% mixture of HFC-32 and HFC-125^[1]. Accordingly the claim that "R410A has a high global warming potential (GWP) of 2088, higher than that of R-22 (GWP=1760), and an atmospheric lifetime spanning decades.^[2]" remains unsubstantiated. A reference needs to be provided which justifies the 2088 number. It may well be correct, but the chain of reference doesn't show it. I am changing the text to explain that complication, providing the additional reference.

References

I think the section on environmental effects is very well done now. EcoQuant (talk) 18:51, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on R-410A. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:37, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Velders, Guus JM, David W. Fahey, John S. Daniel, Mack McFarland, and Stephen O. Andersen. "The large contribution of projected HFC emissions to future climate forcing." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106, no. 27 (2009): 10949-10954, supplement Table S2, page 8 of 8.

[2] IPCC Assessment Report 4 (AR4) 2007

[1]

[2]

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 {{reflist-talk}}
+I think the section on environmental effects is very well done now.
+[[User:Empirical bayesian|EcoQuant]] ([[User talk:Empirical bayesian|talk]]) 18:51, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 == External links modified ==