FEIPUR 2012 Opportunities and Challenges to Replace HCFC141b in Rigid Foams

November 2012 Paulo Altoe’ - Dow Brasil

HCFC141b Consumption in PU Foams – Brazil 2009

2

32,63 6,54

3,03

0,71

2,05

0,82

7,13

8,17

9,97

6,70

2,08

20,17

1.Domestic Refrigeration

2.Panels -Continuous

3.Water Heaters

4.Thermoware

5.Pipe in Pipe

6.Packaging

7.Panels- other

8.Block

9.Commercial Refrigeration

10.Transportation

11.Spray

12.Flexible + Integral Skin

HCFC141b Consumption in PU Foams - Brazil 2009 Distribution Percentage per Application - Total PDO = 617 t

Estimated HCFC141b Consumption in PU Rigid Foams – Brazil 2011

3

6,92 11,10

6,42

1,49 4,35

1,73

15,12 17,32

16,94

14,20 4,41

1.Domestic Refrigeration

2.Panels -Continuous

3.Water Heaters

4.Thermoware

5.Pipe in Pipe

6.Packaging

7.Panels- other

8.Block

9.Commercial Refrigeration

10.Transportation

11.Spray

Estimated Consumption of HCFC141b in PU Rigid Foams - Brazil 2011 Distribution Percentage per Application - Total PDO ~ 330 t

Opportunities for non validated technologies represent ~68% of HCFC141b consumption

HCFC141b Phase Out – Alternative Blowing Agents

4

HCFC141b Phase Out – Alternative Blowing Agents

Page 5

Zero ODP - Low GWP

H2O HCs Methyl

Formate Ecomate®

Methylal HFOs

Zero ODP

HFCs

Moderate to High GWP

HCFC 141b

HFO

c-Pentane

CO2TDCEMethylal

Methyl

Formate

-5

-3

-1

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

9 11 13 15 17

k-factor (mW/mK)

GWP

Page 6

HCFC 141b Phase Out – Comparison of Selected Blowing Agent Alternatives

• GWP and k-factor of Zero ODP BAs vs. 141b • Red = Flammable • Blue = moderate to high GWP • Green = Low to zero GWP

Sources:

API 2003, Utech 2006, Rapra 2007 , CPI 2009

GWP < ~30 “very low-GWP” (“ultra-low”1) GWP < ~100 “very low-GWP” GWP < ~300 “low-GWP” GWP < ~1000 “moderate-GWP” GWP < ~3,000 “high-GWP” GWP < ~10,000 “very high GWP” GWP > ~10,000 “ultra-high GWP” Source: UNEP

Very Low GWP

Blowing Agents wih Zero ODP

HFC 245fa

HFC 227ea

HCFC 141b

HFC 134a

HFC 365mfc

365/227 93/7 365/227 87/13

C-Pentane CO2

Methylal

Met Formate

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

k-factor (mW/mK)

GWP

HFOs

HCFC141b Phase Out

7

What must be considered for its Application ? • Environment & Sustainability • Foam Cost • Applied Density • Processing • Machinery Investment • Mold Investment • Temperature Controls • Energy Efficiency • Flammability • …

HCFC141b Phase Out – Comparative Systems - All Zero ODP

8

HCFC141b Phase out - Comparative Systems with medium reactivity

Voracor * Systems Lambda Mold Dens C. Strength C. Strength Gel GWP % Bl. Ag

mW/mK kg/m3 kPa kPa @32 Sec GWP Rel% Mixing Head

100% HCFC 141b 19.96 34.78 141 120 42 100.0 8.56

H20, Gen 1 24.10 43.20 225 145 41 ~ 0.0 NA

H20, Gen 2 23.70 39.28 205 141 37 ~ 0.0 NA

HFC 365/227 Low [ ] 22.96 38.80 182 131 41 59.6 3.04

C-pentane 21.22 35.53 150 125 42 0.9 4.86

Solstice ™ Low [ ] 20.64 36.05 162 132 37 0.5 4.21

Solstice ™ 18.93 35.00 158 131 48 1.1 8.88

Formacel® 1100 Low [ ] 20.31 36.11 173 130 36 0.9 5.52

Formacel® 1100 18.82 34.46 147 127 49 2.0 11.59

HCFC141b Phase Out – Comparative Systems

9

30,00

32,00

34,00

36,00

38,00

40,00

42,00

44,00

46,00

48,00

50,00

50

70

90

110

130

150

170

190

210

230

250kg/m3 kPa kPa @32

CS,

kP

a

Mo

ld D

en

s, k

g/m

3

Alternative Blowing agents for HCFC141b Replacement Molded Density and Compressive Strength

HCFC141b Phase Out – Comparative Systems

10

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Alternative Blowing Agents for HCFC 141b Replacement Lambda @ 24 C, mW/mK

mW

/mK

, @ 2

4 C

Page 11

• Panels (Others)

• Blocks

• Commercial Refrigeration

• Transportation

• Spray

Applications [ Technology not validated yet by UNDP)

Opportunities for HCFC141b Elimination in PU Rigid Foams

S2

B1

S3

Injection Point

S4

S1 Process information

Page 12

2nd Generation of Water Blown Rigid PU Foams

Comparative evaluation between WB G2 and HCFC 141b – Customer test

• HP Machine

• Injection Point = 1

• Injection Time = 4 secs

• Mold Temperature = 45 C

• Volume 0.245 m3

• Molded Density = 37.5 – 38.7 kg/m3

• Demold Time = 8 min

Test S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 B-1 Units Methods

Core Density 36,80 37,80 36,9 38,0 38,2 kg/m3 ASTM D 1622

Creep test 1.22 2.25 1.88 5,00 0.37 % @ 1 Bar

Adhesion 1,39 1,46 1,37 1.31 1,46 KgF/cm2

Friability 4.36 4.17 4.02 4.11 4.06 % ASTM – C 421

Thermal conductivity, 24°C 24,0 24,0 23,8 24,0 23,7 mW/mK ASTM C 518

Dimensional stability –

Linear 48h / -20ºC

-0.13 -0.09 -0.08 -0.53 -0.11 % ASTM D2126

Dimensional stability –

Linear 70h / + 70ºC

-0. 40 0.42 -0.43 -0.57 -0.33 % ASTM D2126

Compressive strength, 10% 203.8 210.3 209.6 196.7 211.3 kPa ASTM D-1621

Overall Molded Density : 38,7 Kg/m3 – 9,50Kg (WB G2)

Page 13

2nd Generation of Water Blown Rigid PU Foams

2nd Generation of Water Blown Rigid PU Foams

14

• VORACORTM – ZERO ODP and zero GWP

• VORACORTM – ZERO flammable blowing Agent

• VORACORTM – Easy handling and storage

• VORACORTM – Excellent physical properties

• VORACORTM – Non-corrosive to equipments and final products

• VORACORTM – Mold temperature range should be from 45oC to 55oC

• VORACORTM – Can be used in existing equipments, low investment is required.

Enviromental and Technical Aspects

2nd Generation of Water Blown Rigid PU Foams

15

• Requires accurate temperature control

• Critical for adhesion

• High lambda that is typical for water based systems

• Aging can be affected if foam is not properly sealed

• Higher density than HCFC141b

Challenges

HAND MIX Unit 141B Based

Low GWB

Cream Time S 8 8

Gel Time s 80 80

FRD kg/m3 21 23

Proc. Condition

Ratio (I/P) 100:130 100:145

Temp °C 25 25

Pressure Bar 150 150

HPM

Cream Time s 6 5

Gel Time s 72 70

MD kg/m3 36 38

Page 16

DCP (Discontinuous Panel)

HAND MIX Unit 141B Based

Low GWP

Cream Time s 2 2

Gel Time s 8 8

FRD kg/m3 29 31

Proc. Condition

Ratio (I/P) 1:1 1:1

Temp °C 25 25

Pressure PSi 1500 1500

HPM

Cream Time s 2 2

Gel Time s 6 6

MD kg/m3 42 42

Spray

Low GWP Foam - Combining HFCs and High Water

Comparative evaluation between HCFC 141b and Low GWP with HFCs (365/227)

17

• VORACORTM – ZERO ODP and very low GWP

• VORACORTM – ZERO flammable Blowing Agent

• VORACORTM – Easy handling and storage

• VORACORTM – Excellent physical properties

• VORACORTM – Non-corrosive to equipments and final products

• VORACORTM – Mold Temperature range should be from 35oC to 50oC

• VORACORTM – Can be used in existing equipments, low investment is required.

Enviromental and Technical Aspects - DCP and Spray

Low GWP Foam - Combining Low HFC and High Water

18

• Lambda just slighly better than water based systems

• Incremental foam cost due to HFC addition that is more expensive

• Higher molded density than HCFC141b

Challenges

Low GWP Foam - Combining Low HFC and High Water

HFOs (Hydrofluorolefins ) blown Foam for HCFC141b Replacement

19

High Concentration of Solstice™ LBA and Formacel ® 1100

Validated in Cabinets Remarks • ZERO ODP and ~ zero GWP

• Easy Handling and Storage

• Superior Mechanical Performance

• Similar Molded Density

• Better Lambda and Better Energy Efficiency (2-4% )

• Drop in Solution for HCFC 141b , Technically Possible to all Applications

Trade offs

•Not yet available •Cost versus benefit not applicable to all PU Rigid Applications

HFOs blown Foam for HCFC141b Replacement

20

Low Concentration of Solstice™ LBA and Formacel ® 1100 combined with High Water

Not Validated in the field yet Remarks • ZERO ODP and ~ zero GWP

• Easy handling and storage

• Good mechanical performance

• Cost effective solution to overcome limitations of water blown systems

• Drop in solution for HCFC 141b

• Can be used in existing equipments, low investment is required

HCFC141b Phase out - Timeline and Technical Alternatives

21

2015 2020 2025 2030

HCFC141b

Hydrocarbons (Methylal, Me Formate)

H2O

HFCs

HFOs

Conclusion

22

• Water based systems can be applied in commercial refrigeration.

Due to limited adhesion its implementation in Panels-Other and Spray is most unlikely.

• C-pentane is a well known alternative to replace HCFC141b .

Flammable Requires high investment for plant modification and machinery

Applicable for high consumption of PU Systems. Good balance of foam cost and performance

Not applicable for spray and limited application in Panels-Other and Transportation

• Utilization of HFCs combined with water . Non Flammable

Needs to be considered as interim and feasible alternative while HFOs are not available.

High Spectrum of Application due to good balance of foam cost and properties

• HFOs can be considered as drop-in solution for HCFC141b replacement.

Appropriate concentration of blowing agent can reach good balance of cost versus performance

Applications that require better energy efficiency are most recommended

www.dowpolyurethanes.com

®™* Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company ("Dow") or an affiliated company of Dow

Thank you Paulo Altoe’ paltoe@dow.com

Dow – A Polyurethane Leader Customers Trust

• World’s largest producer of propylene oxide, propylene glycol and polyether polyols – A leading producer of aromatic isocyanates

• True Global Reach: Expansive, global network of world-scale integrated assets with low cost-to-serve positions – 28 global manufacturing facilities

– Approximately 30 systems houses

• Full backward integration to feedstocks – Backed by the strength, scale and resources of global Dow

• More than 60 years’ experience in polyurethane technology – Materials science expertise with technical and customer service

• Ongoing investment in market-focused and customer-centric technologies with an optimized production network

• Well-known brands and technologies such as PAPI™ and VORANATE™ Isocyanates, VORANOL™ Polyols, VORATEC™ Formulations, HPPO Technology and PASCAL™ Technology

24

Global Reach, Local Support

25

Developing Tailor Made Products Throughout 30 Systems Houses

26

www.dowpolyurethanes.com

®™* Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company ("Dow") or an affiliated company of Dow