FEDS TURNING UP HEAT ON MOTORISTS
By ERIC PETERS
It used to help keep us cool in the scorching summer months. It was cheap, safe, easy to handle. It was universally hailed as environmentally friendly. The product was freon, now effectively banned by Federal law thanks to a coalition of green activists and corporate moguls backed by a nutty media campaign. It is illegal to manufacture freon in the U.S. Heavy taxes are applied to existing stocks which are available only to "qualified" air-condition mechanics. Do-it-yourselfers can no longer get small cans for routine top-offs at auto parts stores. You can get it through the underground but you and the suppliers are taking a risk. Those who attempt to circumvent the ban face criminal prosecution by a Justice Department task force, as a Miami company, Refrigeration U.S.A., recently discovered. Federal agents issued a 164-count indictment against them for importing contraband from South America and failing to pay $22 million in excise taxes. If found guilty, the individuals face lengthy jail terms and loss of their business. Government officials have stated they will "zealously pursue" anyone who attempts to obtain illicit freon with the same fervor directed at cocaine smugglers. Local shops are being monitored by EPA. Any shop that obtains or uses freon produced without paying the exorbitant tax can expect huge fines and possible seizure of their facilities. In a "zero-tolerance campaign" the Customs Service stops smugglers at the border. As smugglers get more clever Customs has to use increasingly aggressive tactics and more thorough searches. The freon bait-and-switch ranks among the most adroitly engi- neered con jobs ever perpetrated. It will cost millions and inconvenience millions of motorists whose pre-1992 cars and trucks use the compound in the AC. It's all courtesy of a specious environmental campaign waged by green dullards and secretly backed by chemical giant E.I. DuPont de Nemours. DuPont once owned the patents to freon, the only refrigerant used by the auto industry since AC systems were installed in the 1950s. With the patents running out in 1992, DuPont faced the prospects of losing millions as competitors entered the market. We began to hear hysterical shrieks about an "ozone hole" and the dangers of man-made chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) like freon. The argument held that leakage of freon from auto AC and other sources was allowing chlorine molecules to escape into the upper atmosphere where they deplete the ozone layer, creating a "hole." The hole allowed ultra-violet light to reach earth unfiltered causing skin cancer. To the dismay of reputable chemists, atmos-pheric scientists and lay people with any knowledge of CFCs, the theory was accepted uncritically by the media which peddled it in alarming tones. Reports of blinded Patagonian sheep and other horrors became the stuff of nightly news segments. Shortly thereafter a U.N. treaty (the Montreal Protocol) was signed that called for the gradual phase-out of CFC-based refrigerants. It was follow-ed in the Bush administration by an accelerated phase out to cheers by the radical environmentalists and quiet nods of approval by corporate America. Lost in the din were the voices of critics who tried to point out that CFC leakage from auto ACs was inconsequential. Chlorine is heavier than air. When released it sinks to ground level. Chlorine molecules from CFC refrigerants cannot harm the ozone because they can't get there. This was ignored by the scientifically illiterate media. Also ig- nored was the fact that man-made sources of chlorine are minuscule compared with the natural level. Mt. Pinatubo hurled more chlorine into the atmosphere than if all the freon in every auto AC ever built was vented into the air. As a result of the ban, minor service that cost less than $50 a few years ago can now cost several hundred dollars. In the event of a system failure, owners of pre-1992 cars face repair bills that may exceed the value of the car. The replacement refrigerant (HFC-134A) is incompatible with old systems. This has forced repair shops to acquire two sets of recharging equipment at tremendous cost. The icing on the cake? The new refrigerant is less environmentally friendly than the old one. HFC-134a is a less efficient refrigerant. It takes a larger compressor to create the same cooling effect. This means higher fuel consumption and greater quantities of carbon dioxide, a "greenhouse" gas. HCF- 134a also presents health risks to technicians not present with freon. DuPont isn't worried about all that. The company owns exclusive rights to HFC-134a, the only refrigerant authorized for use in new car AC systems. Eric Peters is an automotive writer for the Washington Time. this article is excerpted from Free Market, newsletter of the Von Mises Institute.