the NEWS
HVACR Directory | Extra Edition | Learning Center | Editorial Blogs | Product Gallery
  Home
  About the NEWS
  Subscription Info
  e-Newsletter
  Contact Us
  Resources
  Archived Editorial
  Blogs
  Career Center - Employers
  Career Center - Job Seekers
  Columns
  Distributor Corner
  Calendar of Events
  HVACR Directory
  Industry Links
  Learning Center
  Letters
  Manufacturer Reports
  Regional Reports
  Newsline
  Reprints
  Survey Says
  Training Track
  Webinars
  AEC Store
  Market Research
  Extra Edition
  Business Management
  Service & Maintenance
  Technical
  Advertising
  Ad Index
  Media Kit
  Submit Press Release
  Services
  eProduct Info
  Classifieds
  Digital Edition
  List Rental
  Post Cards
spacer
Search in: EditorialProductsCompanies
Powell’s Ponderings: What Rocket Crash Doesn’t Mean
by Peter Powell
March 16, 2009

ARTICLE TOOLS
EmailEmailPrintPrintReprintsReprintsshareShare



“A rocket carrying a NASA satellite crashed near Antarctica after a failed launch, ending a $280 million mission to track global warming from space,” according to an Associated Press story published Feb. 24.

The story went on to say, “The 986-pound satellite was supposed to be placed into a polar orbit some 400 miles high to track carbon dioxide emissions. Scientists currently depend on 282 land-based stations — and scattered instrumented aircraft flights — to monitor carbon dioxide at low altitudes. Measurements collected from the (satellite) mission were expected to improve climate models and help researchers determine where the greenhouse gas originates and how much is being absorbed by forests and oceans.”

The fact that there was a need to launch a rocket to really make sure information about the negatives of CO2 emissions was really correct is yet another instance of “how factual are the facts” concerning climate change upon which the HVACR is assigned part of the blame for using so-called global warming gases and letting them leak into the atmosphere.

But while it is interesting to report of such matters, it doesn’t change the fact that keeping systems leaktight and energy efficient is the best policy for the industry to be on the ‘correct’ side of the environmental debate, and for contractors and technicians to, in the long run, remain profitable and perceived as providing the best comfort cooling or food preservation options to customers.


Peter Powell
Refrigeration Editor. E-mail him at peterpowell@achrnews.com.

|PrintEmail
  Comments (2)Post a Comment
Title: Climate Change - The Opposing Science


To hear an opposing view on the entire climate change issue and whether or nor CO2 emmisions are a major threat to our world, I highly reccomend reading a recent article that appeared in the Wall Street Journal. The author, Will Happer provides a much different view of climate change than the hysteria being driven by the media and other special intersts. You can view the article online at www.capmag.com/article.asp?id=5441.
It is a long article but well worth the time.


Title: Leak Tight Systems & Energy Efficiency


I think the question is: Are leak tight systems(assuming such a creation exists with refrigerants under pressure) and energy efficiency, ample strategies for affording special status to HFC's and other powerful greenhouse gases in the carbon emissions legislation debate?
I think it bears mentioning not many months ago 'the News' was telling us that no more than five percent of All refrigerants were being returned for reclaim.
Several years ago when supermarkets were among the lead groups beginning the process of detailing their carbon footprints guess what was their largest carbon footprint sector. Well it wasn't transportation, it was refrigeration.
On the question of energy efficiencies, whose to say at this point whether HFOs might be at least as efficient as HFCs in similar applications.


 



 



Please enter the verification code as it appears in the box above.
 

Did you enjoy this article? Click here to subscribe to the magazine.








© 2009 BNP Media. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy
Your Feedback