Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Using propane for your home A/C unit (was: home A/C and R-22 - cost per lb)
2,322 views
Skip to first unread message
HVAC Guy
Apr 27, 2013, 9:29:07 AM4/27/13
to
tdfei...@gmail.com wrote:
> As of April 26, 2013, R22 has drastically increased in price for
> the industry, if you you're lucky, you can work with your A/C tech
> and he'll sell it to you wholesale if there's labor work involved
> in the sale. It's still going to run you $80/lb and even a small
> system is gonna set you back $500.
About the price increase, see here:
http://www.acbyj.com/r-22priceincrease/
===================
February 15th, 2013
R-22 refrigerant (freon) price Increases in 2013
The price of R-22 refrigerant has skyrocketed in the last 6 months. Due
to government regulations to �phase out� the production of �ozone
depleting� chemicals like Freon, production has continued to decrease
and has costs to skyrocket. R-22 refrigerant is 4 times more expensive
than it was just 6 months ago and is expected to continue to climb.
Due to this, contractors have bought it at an alarming rate and supplies
are greatly reduced. �Panic Buying� have forced some vendors across the
country to limit the amount of R-22 contractors can purchase in a month.
As the cost of R-22 rises, the cost of the new replacement Freon, R410a
continues to drop. It is a simple case of supply and demand.
Federal regulations call for a 90% reduction of production of R-22 by
2015 and to be completely obsolete by 2020. What this means to consumers
is outrages Freon related repair costs and eventually no choice but to
replace their HVAC equipment.
Most air conditioners manufactured before 2010 us the old R-22
refrigerant.
While a R-410a unit can just as easily develop a leak as an R-22 unit
can, from vibration, rust, stress cracks our sub-par welds etc., without
warning, the cost to replace R-410a is a fraction of R-22.
==================
Jon Edwards wrote:
> Continuing to operate an old R-22 air conditioner is fiscally
> foolish when you realize that the new 18 SEER units use half
> the energy.
I thought that R-22 was more efficient than R134 or R410 (less of a load
on the compressor to achieve the same heat-transfer effect).
In any case, it's looking more and more that home owners are going the
DIY route by recharging their leaking home R22 units with propane (and I
know that you so-called pro's in alt.hvac will just love it when that
happens).
And I don't see why not, given that the auto-ignition temp. of these
refrigeration-grade propane mixes is higher than R134 and R410, and from
an electrical energy usage standpoint, using propane seems to cut that
down by 40%.
What I don't really understand is the safety hazzard issue of using
propane.
If you have a small leak (the sort of leak that is typical in an HVAC
system) it's going to take days or weeks for the system to de-pressurize
to ambient pressure, and the relatively small amount of propane in the
system is going to dissapate in the typical home during that time (if
the leak is inside the house).
If you have a furnace malfunction (blower-motor burn-out, fan-belt
breaks, over-heat cut-off malfunction) then again would you ever have a
condition where a run-away plenum temperature would bake the evap coil
to the point of combustion?
Could you get combustion happening *inside* the compressor due to some
sort of mechanical compressor malfunction?
Some sort of accidental dammage to AC lines (either inside or outside
the house) could release all of the propane within minutes or seconds -
is this the combustion hazzard that the HVAC industry / gov't is worried
about? Is this the only practical safety issue with using propane for
home A/C recharging?
> As of April 26, 2013, R22 has drastically increased in price for
> the industry, if you you're lucky, you can work with your A/C tech
> and he'll sell it to you wholesale if there's labor work involved
> in the sale. It's still going to run you $80/lb and even a small
> system is gonna set you back $500.
About the price increase, see here:
http://www.acbyj.com/r-22priceincrease/
===================
February 15th, 2013
R-22 refrigerant (freon) price Increases in 2013
The price of R-22 refrigerant has skyrocketed in the last 6 months. Due
to government regulations to �phase out� the production of �ozone
depleting� chemicals like Freon, production has continued to decrease
and has costs to skyrocket. R-22 refrigerant is 4 times more expensive
than it was just 6 months ago and is expected to continue to climb.
Due to this, contractors have bought it at an alarming rate and supplies
are greatly reduced. �Panic Buying� have forced some vendors across the
country to limit the amount of R-22 contractors can purchase in a month.
As the cost of R-22 rises, the cost of the new replacement Freon, R410a
continues to drop. It is a simple case of supply and demand.
Federal regulations call for a 90% reduction of production of R-22 by
2015 and to be completely obsolete by 2020. What this means to consumers
is outrages Freon related repair costs and eventually no choice but to
replace their HVAC equipment.
Most air conditioners manufactured before 2010 us the old R-22
refrigerant.
While a R-410a unit can just as easily develop a leak as an R-22 unit
can, from vibration, rust, stress cracks our sub-par welds etc., without
warning, the cost to replace R-410a is a fraction of R-22.
==================
Jon Edwards wrote:
> Continuing to operate an old R-22 air conditioner is fiscally
> foolish when you realize that the new 18 SEER units use half
> the energy.
I thought that R-22 was more efficient than R134 or R410 (less of a load
on the compressor to achieve the same heat-transfer effect).
In any case, it's looking more and more that home owners are going the
DIY route by recharging their leaking home R22 units with propane (and I
know that you so-called pro's in alt.hvac will just love it when that
happens).
And I don't see why not, given that the auto-ignition temp. of these
refrigeration-grade propane mixes is higher than R134 and R410, and from
an electrical energy usage standpoint, using propane seems to cut that
down by 40%.
What I don't really understand is the safety hazzard issue of using
propane.
If you have a small leak (the sort of leak that is typical in an HVAC
system) it's going to take days or weeks for the system to de-pressurize
to ambient pressure, and the relatively small amount of propane in the
system is going to dissapate in the typical home during that time (if
the leak is inside the house).
If you have a furnace malfunction (blower-motor burn-out, fan-belt
breaks, over-heat cut-off malfunction) then again would you ever have a
condition where a run-away plenum temperature would bake the evap coil
to the point of combustion?
Could you get combustion happening *inside* the compressor due to some
sort of mechanical compressor malfunction?
Some sort of accidental dammage to AC lines (either inside or outside
the house) could release all of the propane within minutes or seconds -
is this the combustion hazzard that the HVAC industry / gov't is worried
about? Is this the only practical safety issue with using propane for
home A/C recharging?
Stormin Mormon
Apr 27, 2013, 9:55:39 AM4/27/13
to
If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
.
"HVAC Guy" <HV...@Guy.com> wrote in message news:517BD2A3...@Guy.com...
Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
.
"HVAC Guy" <HV...@Guy.com> wrote in message news:517BD2A3...@Guy.com...
Nate Nagel
Apr 27, 2013, 10:21:06 AM4/27/13
to
On 04/27/2013 09:55 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
> If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be
> dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable
> refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home
> owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
>
> Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
I would think that it would be possible for a leak to not only let
> If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be
> dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable
> refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home
> owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
>
> Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
propane out but let air in if it's on the low side, making that a not
unlikely scenario. It should be perfectly safe IF THERE ARE NO LEAKS
but do you want to bet that that is never going to happen on your system?
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
Stormin Mormon
Apr 27, 2013, 11:55:57 AM4/27/13
to
I don't have any verifiable proof, or examples to point to. But, I'm not going to volunteer to have my AC system exploded for science.
"Nate Nagel" <njn...@roosters.net> wrote in message news:klgms...@news3.newsguy.com...
"Nate Nagel" <njn...@roosters.net> wrote in message news:klgms...@news3.newsguy.com...
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Apr 27, 2013, 12:35:41 PM4/27/13
to
On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 09:55:39 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61**NOJUNK**@hotmail.com> wrote:
>If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
>
>Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
>.
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
>.
But if there is air in the system the owner has other problems. That's
<cayoung61**NOJUNK**@hotmail.com> wrote:
>If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
>
>Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
>.
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
>.
why a system is "evacuated" before recharging - with ANY refrigerant.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Apr 27, 2013, 12:39:40 PM4/27/13
to
On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:21:06 -0400, Nate Nagel <njn...@roosters.net>
wrote:
>On 04/27/2013 09:55 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
>> If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be
>> dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable
>> refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home
>> owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
>>
>> Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
>
>I would think that it would be possible for a leak to not only let
>propane out but let air in if it's on the low side, making that a not
>unlikely scenario. It should be perfectly safe IF THERE ARE NO LEAKS
>but do you want to bet that that is never going to happen on your system?
>
>nate
How low does the low side of a refrigeration unit go???? Are they
not supposed to run somewhere between 40 and 85 PSI???
Not much change of getting ANY air into a system that has enough gas
in it to function at all. In fact virtually impossible to get air into
anything but an OPEN system (one with a severe leak or one with a slow
leak that has existed for a long time - system totally non-functional)
wrote:
>On 04/27/2013 09:55 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
>> If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be
>> dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable
>> refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home
>> owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
>>
>> Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
>
>I would think that it would be possible for a leak to not only let
>propane out but let air in if it's on the low side, making that a not
>unlikely scenario. It should be perfectly safe IF THERE ARE NO LEAKS
>but do you want to bet that that is never going to happen on your system?
>
>nate
not supposed to run somewhere between 40 and 85 PSI???
Not much change of getting ANY air into a system that has enough gas
in it to function at all. In fact virtually impossible to get air into
anything but an OPEN system (one with a severe leak or one with a slow
leak that has existed for a long time - system totally non-functional)
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Apr 27, 2013, 12:49:15 PM4/27/13
to
On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 11:55:57 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61**NOJUNK**@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I don't have any verifiable proof, or examples to point to. But, I'm not going to volunteer to have my AC system exploded for science.
>
>
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
>.
>.
>"Nate Nagel" <njn...@roosters.net> wrote in message news:klgms...@news3.newsguy.com...
>
>I would think that it would be possible for a leak to not only let
>propane out but let air in if it's on the low side, making that a not
>unlikely scenario. It should be perfectly safe IF THERE ARE NO LEAKS
>but do you want to bet that that is never going to happen on your system?
>
>nate
LOTS of so-called "drop in replacement" refrigerants are mostly
<cayoung61**NOJUNK**@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I don't have any verifiable proof, or examples to point to. But, I'm not going to volunteer to have my AC system exploded for science.
>
>
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
>.
>.
>"Nate Nagel" <njn...@roosters.net> wrote in message news:klgms...@news3.newsguy.com...
>
>I would think that it would be possible for a leak to not only let
>propane out but let air in if it's on the low side, making that a not
>unlikely scenario. It should be perfectly safe IF THERE ARE NO LEAKS
>but do you want to bet that that is never going to happen on your system?
>
>nate
propane. Not that I would recommend using ANY of them on a
refrigeration/ac system.
The big problem with propane, in my opinion, is it is a "heavier than
air" flammable gas - so if it leaks in your house, and the AC
coil/lines are in a asement, the gas may collect rather than disburse,
and you have a very real explosion/fire hazard.
Used in an automotive AC system, unless it leaks in your below-grade
or basement-connected garage, the hazards are significantly reduced.
If it leaks into the car when you are driving the mercapitan will get
you out of the car before it gets dangerous (before it reaches lean
explosive limit)
bob haller
Apr 27, 2013, 1:26:59 PM4/27/13
to
On Apr 27, 12:49 pm, cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 11:55:57 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
>
>
>
>
>
> <cayoung61**NOJUN...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >I don't have any verifiable proof, or examples to point to. But, I'm not going to volunteer to have my AC system exploded for science.
>
> >Christopher A. Young
> >Learn more about Jesus
> > www.lds.org
> >.
> >.
> >"Nate Nagel" <njna...@roosters.net> wrote in messagenews:klgms...@news3.newsguy.com...
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 11:55:57 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
>
>
>
>
>
> <cayoung61**NOJUN...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >I don't have any verifiable proof, or examples to point to. But, I'm not going to volunteer to have my AC system exploded for science.
>
> >Christopher A. Young
> >Learn more about Jesus
> > www.lds.org
> >.
> >.
>
> >I would think that it would be possible for a leak to not only let
> >propane out but let air in if it's on the low side, making that a not
> >unlikely scenario. It should be perfectly safe IF THERE ARE NO LEAKS
> >but do you want to bet that that is never going to happen on your system?
>
> >nate
>
> LOTS of so-called "drop in replacement" refrigerants are mostly
> propane. Not that I would recommend using ANY of them on a
> refrigeration/ac system.
>
> The big problem with propane, in my opinion, is it is a "heavier than
> air" flammable gas - so if it leaks in your house, and the AC
> coil/lines are in a asement, the gas may collect rather than disburse,
> and you have a very real explosion/fire hazard.
>
> Used in an automotive AC system, unless it leaks in your below-grade
> or basement-connected garage, the hazards are significantly reduced.
>
> If it leaks into the car when you are driving the mercapitan will get
> you out of the car before it gets dangerous (before it reaches lean
> explosive limit)
Imagine trying to explain a AC fire in your hme from a DIY propane gas
> >I would think that it would be possible for a leak to not only let
> >propane out but let air in if it's on the low side, making that a not
> >unlikely scenario. It should be perfectly safe IF THERE ARE NO LEAKS
> >but do you want to bet that that is never going to happen on your system?
>
> >nate
>
> LOTS of so-called "drop in replacement" refrigerants are mostly
> propane. Not that I would recommend using ANY of them on a
> refrigeration/ac system.
>
> The big problem with propane, in my opinion, is it is a "heavier than
> air" flammable gas - so if it leaks in your house, and the AC
> coil/lines are in a asement, the gas may collect rather than disburse,
> and you have a very real explosion/fire hazard.
>
> Used in an automotive AC system, unless it leaks in your below-grade
> or basement-connected garage, the hazards are significantly reduced.
>
> If it leaks into the car when you are driving the mercapitan will get
> you out of the car before it gets dangerous (before it reaches lean
> explosive limit)
in AC. Your insurance company will be interested:(
k...@attt.bizz
Apr 27, 2013, 5:58:13 PM4/27/13
to
On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:26:59 -0700 (PDT), bob haller <hal...@aol.com>
wrote:
Here we go again, Haller's insurance insanity.
wrote:
k...@attt.bizz
Apr 27, 2013, 5:59:28 PM4/27/13
to
The Daring Dufas
Apr 27, 2013, 7:42:02 PM4/27/13
to
mixture? It doesn't have to be that close but you do need enough O2 and
fuel to make a BOOM! The military and terrorists have used fuel/air
bombs with great effectiveness. If you pump O2 from your welding tank
into your AC filled with propane and overload the compressor until the
overload breaker in the compressor windings gets hot enough to trip, you
might be a Redneck. You should have two cameras setup, one close and one
far away. After it's all over have a surviving Redneck upload the video
to Y'all Tube. ^_^
TDD
tra...@optonline.net
Apr 27, 2013, 7:54:48 PM4/27/13
to
On Apr 27, 12:39 pm, cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:21:06 -0400, Nate Nagel <njna...@roosters.net>
pressure, so if there is a leak, it's going to leak out. When it gets
down to atmospheric pressure, then air could start to get inside.
But with a typical pinhole leak, I see refrigerant under pressure
getting out. Air getting in is going to be a lot more difficult.
A bigger worst case scenario would be that someone or something
slams into one of the lines inside near the furnace, severs it and a
pilot light
from the furnace, water heater, etc ignites the propane. But you kind
of have that potential with dryer gas lines, stove lines, etc too.
I wonder if any codes say anthing about it?
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:21:06 -0400, Nate Nagel <njna...@roosters.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On 04/27/2013 09:55 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
> >> If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be
> >> dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable
> >> refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home
> >> owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
>
> >> Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
>
> >I would think that it would be possible for a leak to not only let
> >propane out but let air in if it's on the low side, making that a not
> >unlikely scenario. It should be perfectly safe IF THERE ARE NO LEAKS
> >but do you want to bet that that is never going to happen on your system?
>
> >nate
>
> How low does the low side of a refrigeration unit go???? Are they
> not supposed to run somewhere between 40 and 85 PSI???
That's right, it's the low side, but it's still way above atmospheric
>
> >On 04/27/2013 09:55 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
> >> If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be
> >> dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable
> >> refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home
> >> owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
>
> >> Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
>
> >I would think that it would be possible for a leak to not only let
> >propane out but let air in if it's on the low side, making that a not
> >unlikely scenario. It should be perfectly safe IF THERE ARE NO LEAKS
> >but do you want to bet that that is never going to happen on your system?
>
> >nate
>
> How low does the low side of a refrigeration unit go???? Are they
> not supposed to run somewhere between 40 and 85 PSI???
pressure, so if there is a leak, it's going to leak out. When it gets
down to atmospheric pressure, then air could start to get inside.
But with a typical pinhole leak, I see refrigerant under pressure
getting out. Air getting in is going to be a lot more difficult.
A bigger worst case scenario would be that someone or something
slams into one of the lines inside near the furnace, severs it and a
pilot light
from the furnace, water heater, etc ignites the propane. But you kind
of have that potential with dryer gas lines, stove lines, etc too.
I wonder if any codes say anthing about it?
Stormin Mormon
Apr 27, 2013, 9:12:42 PM4/27/13
to
Can go as low as about 20 inches of mercury, maybe 25. And the situation you describe (for your opinion of the only possible way) does happen.
<cl...@snyder.on.ca> wrote in message news:bjvnn8trlq5f8eke9...@4ax.com...
<cl...@snyder.on.ca> wrote in message news:bjvnn8trlq5f8eke9...@4ax.com...
Stormin Mormon
Apr 27, 2013, 9:15:23 PM4/27/13
to
What is "mercapitan" and is it used in propane
for heating and cooking and such? Never seen that
word, and online dictionary doesn't have it.
<cl...@snyder.on.ca> wrote in message news:1rvnn81lkmbbpovqh...@4ax.com...
for heating and cooking and such? Never seen that
word, and online dictionary doesn't have it.
<cl...@snyder.on.ca> wrote in message news:1rvnn81lkmbbpovqh...@4ax.com...
Stormin Mormon
Apr 27, 2013, 9:16:36 PM4/27/13
to
Bubba says "Doan no nuttin bout no EPA, but cooter said hit werkd ril gud in hiz sistim."
"bob haller" <hal...@aol.com> wrote in message news:55dc8758-4d93-4161-a3ac-
"bob haller" <hal...@aol.com> wrote in message news:55dc8758-4d93-4161-a3ac-
Stormin Mormon
Apr 27, 2013, 9:18:14 PM4/27/13
to
At that moment, Billy Bob stops by with his propane cylinder, and adds seven pounds of propane.
<k...@attt.bizz> wrote in message news:egion8lkdhjj5n9i2...@4ax.com...
<k...@attt.bizz> wrote in message news:egion8lkdhjj5n9i2...@4ax.com...
Stormin Mormon
Apr 27, 2013, 9:25:37 PM4/27/13
to
Please explain to me again, that the toothless home
owner with the ten big dogs tied out front, using
propane for his AC system. That sleeveless, truck
driving wonder who calls his wife by blowing the
horn on the truck "musical rendition of Dixie" will
evacuate to 400 microns, using two stage vacuum
pump, digital micron gage, and full flow ports with
valve core remover? Is that before he farts a few
bars of "anchors aweigh" or after?
owner with the ten big dogs tied out front, using
propane for his AC system. That sleeveless, truck
driving wonder who calls his wife by blowing the
horn on the truck "musical rendition of Dixie" will
evacuate to 400 microns, using two stage vacuum
pump, digital micron gage, and full flow ports with
valve core remover? Is that before he farts a few
bars of "anchors aweigh" or after?
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Apr 27, 2013, 11:01:17 PM4/27/13
to
to 10.1% by volume at 20C and atmospheric pressure.
Gasoline is 1.4 to 7.6 BY VOLUME - Stoich is about 14:1 BY WEIGHT.
Bob F
Apr 27, 2013, 11:01:43 PM4/27/13
to
Ever try typing a word you don't know into geegle?
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Apr 27, 2013, 11:05:08 PM4/27/13
to
On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 21:12:42 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61**NOJUNK**@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Can go as low as about 20 inches of mercury, maybe 25. And the situation you describe (for your opinion of the only possible way) does happen.
>.
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
>.
Not on a functioning system - most will shut down before that happens
<cayoung61**NOJUNK**@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Can go as low as about 20 inches of mercury, maybe 25. And the situation you describe (for your opinion of the only possible way) does happen.
>.
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
>.
because that means a very low charge. Perhaps some home units may get
that low - I don't have much to do with them - but I've never seen an
automotive system get anywhere NEAR that low.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Apr 27, 2013, 11:07:21 PM4/27/13
to
On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 21:15:23 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61**NOJUNK**@hotmail.com> wrote:
>What is "mercapitan" and is it used in propane
>for heating and cooking and such? Never seen that
>word, and online dictionary doesn't have it.
>.
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
>.
>.
Ethyl Mercaptan - the odorant in propane and natural gas
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Apr 27, 2013, 11:09:49 PM4/27/13
to
repairing it deserves to have his double-wide join the international
space station in orbit. Propane or not.
Good start for the Darwin awards.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Apr 27, 2013, 11:12:04 PM4/27/13
to
refrigeration system without a licence - which requires training.
Used to have mine for automotive AC but let it lapse many tears ago.
The Daring Dufas
Apr 27, 2013, 11:15:32 PM4/27/13
to
for. ^_^
TDD
Stormin Mormon
Apr 28, 2013, 6:40:52 AM4/28/13
to
Stormin Mormon
Apr 28, 2013, 6:42:02 AM4/28/13
to
Home Guy
Apr 28, 2013, 9:57:28 AM4/28/13
to
Stormin Mormon wrote:
> What is "mercapitan" and is it used in propane for heating and
> cooking and such?
Are you just clowning around, or have you really never heard of
> What is "mercapitan" and is it used in propane for heating and
> cooking and such?
mercaptan?
It's what they add to natural gas to make it smell like rotten cabbage
so you can smell gas-line leaks.
They apparently also add it to refrigerant-grade propane.
And by the way, propane is apparently approved for use in commercial
refrigeration plants.
The way things are going with the drive to increase energy efficency in
consumer devices and appliances, it's really only a matter of time when
residential AC units are going to start using propane. I mean jesus
christ - natural gas is already being pumped into and combusted in
millions of homes, in furnaces, water heaters, stoves, dryers. It's not
like we don't know how to handle flamable gases in residential
appliances.
The amount of gas circulating in a residential AC system is a pittance
anyways, and anything short of a burst pipe is not going to be a
hazzard.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Apr 28, 2013, 4:22:42 PM4/28/13
to
either too high or too low.
grumpy
Apr 30, 2013, 9:26:50 PM4/30/13
to
"Stormin Mormon" <cayoung61**NOJUNK**@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:R27ft.180645$P%5.16...@fed16.iad...
you need to to NYC bronx section.
grumpy
Apr 30, 2013, 9:51:39 PM4/30/13
to
"grumpy" <t.s...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:klpqql$b5f$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> "Stormin Mormon" <cayoung61**NOJUNK**@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:R27ft.180645$P%5.16...@fed16.iad...
> G, doan no.
> .
> Christopher A. Young
> Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
> .
> .
> "Bob F" <bobn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:kli38p$hab$1...@dont-email.me...
> Ever try typing a word you don't know into geegle?
>
>
> Stormin Mormon wrote:
>> What is "mercapitan" and is it used in propane
>
> Comon Chris the word is like few other it's cool man, do you digit man
> "Stormin Mormon" <cayoung61**NOJUNK**@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:R27ft.180645$P%5.16...@fed16.iad...
> G, doan no.
> .
> Christopher A. Young
> Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
> .
> .
> "Bob F" <bobn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:kli38p$hab$1...@dont-email.me...
> Ever try typing a word you don't know into geegle?
>
>
> Stormin Mormon wrote:
>> What is "mercapitan" and is it used in propane
>
> you need to go to NYC bronx section.
>
> shit I am eating every second word
>
grumpy
May 7, 2013, 8:58:04 PM5/7/13
to
"HVAC Guy" <HV...@Guy.com> wrote in message news:517BD2A3...@Guy.com...
> tdfei...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> As of April 26, 2013, R22 has drastically increased in price for
>> the industry, if you you're lucky, you can work with your A/C tech
>> and he'll sell it to you wholesale if there's labor work involved
>> in the sale. It's still going to run you $80/lb and even a small
>> system is gonna set you back $500.
>
> About the price increase, see here:
>
> http://www.acbyj.com/r-22priceincrease/
>
> ===================
> February 15th, 2013
> R-22 refrigerant (freon) price Increases in 2013
>
> The price of R-22 refrigerant has skyrocketed in the last 6 months. Due
> to government regulations to "phase out" the production of "ozone
> depleting" chemicals like Freon, production has continued to decrease
> and has costs to skyrocket. R-22 refrigerant is 4 times more expensive
> than it was just 6 months ago and is expected to continue to climb.
>
> Due to this, contractors have bought it at an alarming rate and supplies
> are greatly reduced. "Panic Buying" have forced some vendors across the
> country to limit the amount of R-22 contractors can purchase in a month.
>
> As the cost of R-22 rises, the cost of the new replacement Freon, R410a
> continues to drop. It is a simple case of supply and demand.
>
> Federal regulations call for a 90% reduction of production of R-22 by
> 2015 and to be completely obsolete by 2020. What this means to consumers
> is outrages Freon related repair costs and eventually no choice but to
> replace their HVAC equipment.
>
> Most air conditioners manufactured before 2010 us the old R-22
> refrigerant.
>
> While a R-410a unit can just as easily develop a leak as an R-22 unit
> can, from vibration, rust, stress cracks our sub-par welds etc., without
> warning, the cost to replace R-410a is a fraction of R-22.
> ==================
>
> Jon Edwards wrote:
>
>> Continuing to operate an old R-22 air conditioner is fiscally
>> foolish when you realize that the new 18 SEER units use half
>> the energy.
>
> I thought that R-22 was more efficient than R134 or R410 (less of a load
> on the compressor to achieve the same heat-transfer effect).
You could not be more wrong
>
> In any case, it's looking more and more that home owners are going the
> DIY route by recharging their leaking home R22 units with propane (and I
> know that you so-called pro's in alt.hvac will just love it when that
> happens).
>
> And I don't see why not, given that the auto-ignition temp. of these
> refrigeration-grade propane mixes is higher than R134 and R410, and from
> an electrical energy usage standpoint, using propane seems to cut that
> down by 40%.
Yes some of replacement Refrigerants use some mixture of propane/beuteen etc
whatever, the Refrigerants are approved by OSH that is all one needs to
know! And yes are whole lot more efficient then old 22,12,and 502, and
specially over 134 and 410, 410 is efficient on high pressure but very lousy
on low pressure/temperatures....
>
> What I don't really understand is the safety hazzard issue of using
> propane.
>
> If you have a small leak (the sort of leak that is typical in an HVAC
> system) it's going to take days or weeks for the system to de-pressurize
> to ambient pressure, and the relatively small amount of propane in the
> system is going to dissapate in the typical home during that time (if
> the leak is inside the house).
>
> If you have a furnace malfunction (blower-motor burn-out, fan-belt
> breaks, over-heat cut-off malfunction) then again would you ever have a
> condition where a run-away plenum temperature would bake the evap coil
> to the point of combustion?
>
> Could you get combustion happening *inside* the compressor due to some
> sort of mechanical compressor malfunction?
>
> Some sort of accidental dammage to AC lines (either inside or outside
> the house) could release all of the propane within minutes or seconds -
> is this the combustion hazzard that the HVAC industry / gov't is worried
> about? Is this the only practical safety issue with using propane for
> home A/C recharging?
Home Guy
May 7, 2013, 11:04:54 PM5/7/13
to
grumpy used improper usenet message composition style by unnecessarily
full-quoting:
> > Jon Edwards wrote:
> >
> >> Continuing to operate an old R-22 air conditioner is fiscally
> >> foolish when you realize that the new 18 SEER units use half
> >> the energy.
> >
> > I thought that R-22 was more efficient than R134 or R410 (less of a
> > load on the compressor to achieve the same heat-transfer effect).
>
> You could not be more wrong
Oh really?
===============
Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering
Dec 2010, Volume 4, No.12
A Comparative Study on the Performance and Environmental Characteristics
of Alternatives to R22 in Residential Air Conditioners for Tunisian
Market
Abstract: This paper presents the simulation results of a 9000 BTU/h
air conditioner with some selected fluids that have been assessed for
their suitability as alternatives to R22 for air conditioners. Only
those refigerants with zero Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) are
considered.
Ther performance of 11 refigerants were comparatively studied using the
simulation software NIST Cycle_D. R134a, R290, R600, R404A, R407B,
R407C, 407D, R410A, R410B, and R417A are considered in this study.
The thermal performance obtained with R134A and R290 (propane) are very
close to those of R22. The power consumption of the units operating
with R404A, R407C, and R410A are higher in the range of 22-31% with
respect to R22. For units operating with 407A, R407B, R407D, R407E, and
R410B, the electric consumption is higher in the range 10-23%. For
R600, the power consumption was in the range 6-8%.
For all the fluids, the COP (Coefficient of Performance) is lower by
7-24% compared to R22 except for R600 for which the COP is higher by
7-9% and R134A and R290 which exhibit the same COP as R22. When
considering the thermal and environmental parameters, R290 (propane) is
identified as the best candidate for R22, provided safety aspects of
using R290 are addressed.
==================
I was wrong about R22 having better efficiency than R134a (it has the
same efficiency / COP) but R410 (A or B) is a big loser in terms of
electrical efficiency and COP compared to R22. R410a is what you will
get when you install a new A/C system these days.
But clearly, propane (R290) is the way of the future for residential air
conditioning, as a drop-in replacement for R22 and R12.
> > In any case, it's looking more and more that home owners are going
> > the DIY route by recharging their leaking home R22 units with
> > propane (and I know that you so-called pro's in alt.hvac will just
> > love it when that happens).
>
equivalent to R134. Not sure how it compares to R12. R12 probably has
a higher COP than R22, but it's a major ozone killer compared to R22.
See also:
=============
http://www.hychill.com.au/pdf/cpohcr.pdf
Conclusion: Hydrocarbon refrigerants have environmental advantages and
are safe in small quantities. R290 (propane) can replace R22 and HC
mixtures can replace R12 and R134a in applications using
positive-displacement compressors.
HC refrigerants are completely soluble in and compatible with
hydrocarbon lubricants. HC liquid absorbs only trace amounts of water,
like R12, so HC refrigerants are completely compatible with R12 driers.
HC refigerants with appropriate vapor pressures are drop-in replacements
for CFCs on equipment using thermostatic expansion valves.
==============
full-quoting:
> > Jon Edwards wrote:
> >
> >> Continuing to operate an old R-22 air conditioner is fiscally
> >> foolish when you realize that the new 18 SEER units use half
> >> the energy.
> >
> > I thought that R-22 was more efficient than R134 or R410 (less of a
> > load on the compressor to achieve the same heat-transfer effect).
>
> You could not be more wrong
===============
Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering
Dec 2010, Volume 4, No.12
A Comparative Study on the Performance and Environmental Characteristics
of Alternatives to R22 in Residential Air Conditioners for Tunisian
Market
Abstract: This paper presents the simulation results of a 9000 BTU/h
air conditioner with some selected fluids that have been assessed for
their suitability as alternatives to R22 for air conditioners. Only
those refigerants with zero Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) are
considered.
Ther performance of 11 refigerants were comparatively studied using the
simulation software NIST Cycle_D. R134a, R290, R600, R404A, R407B,
R407C, 407D, R410A, R410B, and R417A are considered in this study.
The thermal performance obtained with R134A and R290 (propane) are very
close to those of R22. The power consumption of the units operating
with R404A, R407C, and R410A are higher in the range of 22-31% with
respect to R22. For units operating with 407A, R407B, R407D, R407E, and
R410B, the electric consumption is higher in the range 10-23%. For
R600, the power consumption was in the range 6-8%.
For all the fluids, the COP (Coefficient of Performance) is lower by
7-24% compared to R22 except for R600 for which the COP is higher by
7-9% and R134A and R290 which exhibit the same COP as R22. When
considering the thermal and environmental parameters, R290 (propane) is
identified as the best candidate for R22, provided safety aspects of
using R290 are addressed.
==================
I was wrong about R22 having better efficiency than R134a (it has the
same efficiency / COP) but R410 (A or B) is a big loser in terms of
electrical efficiency and COP compared to R22. R410a is what you will
get when you install a new A/C system these days.
But clearly, propane (R290) is the way of the future for residential air
conditioning, as a drop-in replacement for R22 and R12.
> > In any case, it's looking more and more that home owners are going
> > the DIY route by recharging their leaking home R22 units with
> > propane (and I know that you so-called pro's in alt.hvac will just
> > love it when that happens).
>
> Yes some of replacement Refrigerants use some mixture of propane /
> beuteen (butane) etc whatever, the Refrigerants are approved by
> OSH that is all one needs to know!
>
> And yes are whole lot more efficient then old 22,12,and 502, and
> specially over 134 and 410, 410 is efficient on high pressure
> but very lousy on low pressure/temperatures....
Again, R22 is (was) one of the most efficient working fluids -
>
> And yes are whole lot more efficient then old 22,12,and 502, and
> specially over 134 and 410, 410 is efficient on high pressure
> but very lousy on low pressure/temperatures....
equivalent to R134. Not sure how it compares to R12. R12 probably has
a higher COP than R22, but it's a major ozone killer compared to R22.
See also:
=============
http://www.hychill.com.au/pdf/cpohcr.pdf
Conclusion: Hydrocarbon refrigerants have environmental advantages and
are safe in small quantities. R290 (propane) can replace R22 and HC
mixtures can replace R12 and R134a in applications using
positive-displacement compressors.
HC refrigerants are completely soluble in and compatible with
hydrocarbon lubricants. HC liquid absorbs only trace amounts of water,
like R12, so HC refrigerants are completely compatible with R12 driers.
HC refigerants with appropriate vapor pressures are drop-in replacements
for CFCs on equipment using thermostatic expansion valves.
==============
tra...@optonline.net
May 8, 2013, 9:04:57 AM5/8/13
to
OLD R22 based systems, don't you? It's being used in systems that
were never designed for it. It says nothing at all about the
efficiency when used in new systems that are designed for R410.
If the efficiency is so lousy, how is it that we had 10 SEER R22
systems
that are being replaced by new 14 to 18 SEER R410 systems?
>
Home Guy
May 8, 2013, 9:58:18 AM5/8/13
to
"tra...@optonline.net" wrote:
> You do realize that your source is a study of using R134A and R410
> in OLD R22 based systems, don't you? It's being used in systems
> that were never designed for it. It says nothing at all about the
> efficiency when used in new systems that are designed for R410.
>
> If the efficiency is so lousy, how is it that we had 10 SEER R22
> systems that are being replaced by new 14 to 18 SEER R410 systems?
Assuming 40 degrees evaporating temperature and 105 degrees condensing
> You do realize that your source is a study of using R134A and R410
> in OLD R22 based systems, don't you? It's being used in systems
> that were never designed for it. It says nothing at all about the
> efficiency when used in new systems that are designed for R410.
>
> If the efficiency is so lousy, how is it that we had 10 SEER R22
> systems that are being replaced by new 14 to 18 SEER R410 systems?
temperature.
R410A gauge pressures will be 344 head and 119 suction
R22 gauge pressures will be 211 head and 68 suction
R410A compression ratio calculation:
344 + 15 (14.7 psi atmospheric rounded up) = 359 psia
119 + 15 = 134 psia
359/134 = 2.67:1 compression ratio, R410A
R22 compression ratio calculation:
211 + 15 = 226 psia
68 + 15 = 83 psia
226/83 = 2.72:1 compression ratio, R22
Practically a tie. So in terms of compressor work-load, it's pretty
equal. The higher pressures in the R410a system require a thicker
compressor shell, and the long-term durability / cost-of-ownership of
the entire system has yet to prove itself. The lubricating oil used in
R410a absorbs more water than the mineral oil used in R22, so that's
another factor.
R410a will also be phased out (or phased down) so who knows if owners
who have switched from R22 to R410 will again face the cost of switching
in 10 years (to R600?).
The compressor is one of two components responsible for maintaining a
pressure difference in the refrigeration circuit. The other component is
the metering device at the inlet to the evaporator. For residential air
conditioning, a target indoor evaporating temperature is around 40
degrees F. What OEMs have been doing for some time now when playing the
SEER game is to lower the condensing temperature, which would
concurrently lower the head/discharge pressure. With evaporating
temperatures/pressures fairly constant, a lower condensing pressure
lowers the compression ratio of the compressor, which in turns reduces
energy required to run the pump.
Until R410 came along, OEMs kept making larger and larger condensing
units for the same nominal tonnage ratings to reduce head pressure for
R22 systems. Not only was that the goal, but the larger coils made for
better subcooling of the condensed liquid so there would be a
corresponding gain in net refrigeration effect in the evaporator (how
much actual refrigeration occurs after the refrigerant is cooled
immediately downstream of the metering device).
One thing to consider is the difference between ECM and PSC motors and
their effect on SEER ratings, which have nothing to do with what the
working fluid in the AC system is.
I could replace the HVAC blower and condenser fans on an R22 system with
ECM motors and raise the SEER of the system.
Are any compressor motors ECM these days?
tra...@optonline.net
May 8, 2013, 10:33:11 AM5/8/13
to
On May 8, 9:58 am, Home Guy <H...@Guy.com> wrote:
Does all of the above mean that you agree that the R410 systems
that are being sold are in fact as efficient or substantially more
efficient
than the R22 systems they replace and that using R410 is not a
significant issue from an efficiency standpoint?
that are being sold are in fact as efficient or substantially more
efficient
than the R22 systems they replace and that using R410 is not a
significant issue from an efficiency standpoint?
grumpy
May 16, 2013, 9:17:53 PM5/16/13
to
I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if current
410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be yes
but not as is giving to people by industries. The reason that is more
efficient is because condensers are made more efficient so that heat can be
removed much quicker, any system depend on transfer of heat. Maintenance
R410 will never be able to compete with R22 of cost and easiness for
service.
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:05f3e699-ab7b-4ce6...@s9g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be yes
but not as is giving to people by industries. The reason that is more
efficient is because condensers are made more efficient so that heat can be
removed much quicker, any system depend on transfer of heat. Maintenance
R410 will never be able to compete with R22 of cost and easiness for
service.
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:05f3e699-ab7b-4ce6...@s9g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
tra...@optonline.net
May 17, 2013, 8:50:06 AM5/17/13
to
On May 16, 9:17 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
> I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if current
> 410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be yes
> but not as is giving to people by industries.
What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
> I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if current
> 410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be yes
> but not as is giving to people by industries.
Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are
safe for the environment because of the R410 and that the
systems are a lot more energy efficient than the typical
older systems they replace.
>The reason that is more
> efficient is because condensers are made more efficient so that heat can be
> removed much quicker, any system depend on transfer of heat.
major components too. Larger evaporators, ie N coil instead of A,
scroll compressors, etc.
>Maintenance
> R410 will never be able to compete with R22 of cost and easiness for
> service.
what R410 costs and what R22 used to cost prior to the
phase out? Allowing for inflation over the last decade,
I don't see it as being a huge difference. R410 is
probably a little more expensive. But in the overall cost
of a repair bill when you need to add enough to matter,
it shouldn't make a big difference. Not sure what
the issue is that you're referring to with ease of service.
Home Guy
May 17, 2013, 9:49:32 AM5/17/13
to
"tra...@optonline.net" wrote:
> What do you think the cost differential is between what R410 costs
> and what R22 used to cost prior to the phase out? Allowing for
> inflation over the last decade, I don't see it as being a huge
> difference. R410 is probably a little more expensive. But in the
> overall cost of a repair bill when you need to add enough to matter,
> it shouldn't make a big difference. Not sure what the issue is
> that you're referring to with ease of service.
All the parts of a 410 system must be built to handle the higher working
> What do you think the cost differential is between what R410 costs
> and what R22 used to cost prior to the phase out? Allowing for
> inflation over the last decade, I don't see it as being a huge
> difference. R410 is probably a little more expensive. But in the
> overall cost of a repair bill when you need to add enough to matter,
> it shouldn't make a big difference. Not sure what the issue is
> that you're referring to with ease of service.
pressures. That makes it more expensive. Leaks that happen because of
higher working pressure will reduce system efficiency over time.
Comparing the heat exchanger size and design of 410 vs 22 is
disengenuous - you could have just as easily (and more cheaply) built
more capable heat-exchangers for r22 systems.
I'd like to see a comparison (real dollars spent by real home owners,
real dollars saved over time, etc) if someone takes a 15 to 25 year-old
R22 system that needs a recharge and instead of replacing it with a new
r410 system, charge it with R290 (propane).
> Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
> for the environment because of the R410
not that good. R410 will be phased down in 10 or 15 years, probably
will be replaced with r600.
> and that the systems are a lot more energy efficient than the
> typical older systems they replace.
pressures and compression ratio analysis, there is no difference between
the two systems. If you replace a small A-frame r22 with a larger
N-frame R410, you can't say that your increase in system efficiency has
anything to do with the r410 circulating in the lines.
And again I ask -> does the use of ECM motors (plenum fan, condenser
fan) get factored into SEER ratings?
tra...@optonline.net
May 17, 2013, 11:18:35 AM5/17/13
to
On May 17, 9:49 am, Home Guy <H...@Guy.com> wrote:
systems today are about the same cost as the ones that
they replace, adjusted for inflation. That is if you take an
entry level system from 20 years ago, which was 10 SEER
and compare it to a 14 SEER system today. Factor in utility rebates,
govt rebates, and lower operating costs and they are less
expensive than the old ones they replaced.
> Leaks that happen because of
> higher working pressure will reduce system efficiency over time.
Nonsense. If a pipe or component is going to fail, it's
typically from corrosion, a bad braze joint, etc. And I'd say
the probability of that isn't dependent on the system pressure.
And if you get a leak, it's not really an efficiency issue, because
before very long with a typical leak, it's not going to run anymore.
>
> Comparing the heat exchanger size and design of 410 vs 22 is
> disengenuous - you could have just as easily (and more cheaply) built
> more capable heat-exchangers for r22 systems.
But who cares? It's that the new R410 systems are a lot
more efficient that's the bottom line. Exactly how they got
there doesn't matter to the consumer.
>
> I'd like to see a comparison (real dollars spent by real home owners,
> real dollars saved over time, etc) if someone takes a 15 to 25 year-old
> R22 system that needs a recharge and instead of replacing it with a new
> r410 system, charge it with R290 (propane).
You could try it and tell us. If it works you could have a new
business. Of course the problem is that a 20 year
old system that needs recharging, probably has a serious problem
that caused it to need recharging.
>
> > Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
> > for the environment because of the R410
>
> R410 effect on ozone is nil (that is true) but as a greenhouse gas, it's
> not that good.
Who cares? It's not like a car or power plant that's BURNING
fuels that release CO2. Any release of R410 is going to be so
small, it's irrelevant, except maybe to an environmental nut.
R410 will be phased down in 10 or 15 years, probably
> will be replaced with r600.
>
> > and that the systems are a lot more energy efficient than the
> > typical older systems they replace.
>
> Again, from a carnot-cycle point of view, and from real-world working
> pressures and compression ratio analysis, there is no difference between
> the two systems. If you replace a small A-frame r22 with a larger
> N-frame R410, you can't say that your increase in system efficiency has
> anything to do with the r410 circulating in the lines.
I never claimed that it did. Nor do I recall seeing manufacturers
make that claim. What I see them usually saying is that R410 is
environmentally friendly, R22 is phased out, and that the new systems
using R22 are a lot more efficient than the old systems.
>
> And again I ask -> does the use of ECM motors (plenum fan, condenser
> fan) get factored into SEER ratings?
I guess you could address that to the folks that do the
ratings. AFAIK, the only ECM motors used would be for
the blower motor in the furnace, if it has one.
> "trad...@optonline.net" wrote:
> > What do you think the cost differential is between what R410 costs
> > and what R22 used to cost prior to the phase out? Allowing for
> > inflation over the last decade, I don't see it as being a huge
> > difference. R410 is probably a little more expensive. But in the
> > overall cost of a repair bill when you need to add enough to matter,
> > it shouldn't make a big difference. Not sure what the issue is
> > that you're referring to with ease of service.
>
> All the parts of a 410 system must be built to handle the higher working
> pressures. That makes it more expensive.
I don't see that in the installed cost of a new system. The
> > What do you think the cost differential is between what R410 costs
> > and what R22 used to cost prior to the phase out? Allowing for
> > inflation over the last decade, I don't see it as being a huge
> > difference. R410 is probably a little more expensive. But in the
> > overall cost of a repair bill when you need to add enough to matter,
> > it shouldn't make a big difference. Not sure what the issue is
> > that you're referring to with ease of service.
>
> All the parts of a 410 system must be built to handle the higher working
> pressures. That makes it more expensive.
systems today are about the same cost as the ones that
they replace, adjusted for inflation. That is if you take an
entry level system from 20 years ago, which was 10 SEER
and compare it to a 14 SEER system today. Factor in utility rebates,
govt rebates, and lower operating costs and they are less
expensive than the old ones they replaced.
> Leaks that happen because of
> higher working pressure will reduce system efficiency over time.
typically from corrosion, a bad braze joint, etc. And I'd say
the probability of that isn't dependent on the system pressure.
And if you get a leak, it's not really an efficiency issue, because
before very long with a typical leak, it's not going to run anymore.
>
> Comparing the heat exchanger size and design of 410 vs 22 is
> disengenuous - you could have just as easily (and more cheaply) built
> more capable heat-exchangers for r22 systems.
more efficient that's the bottom line. Exactly how they got
there doesn't matter to the consumer.
>
> I'd like to see a comparison (real dollars spent by real home owners,
> real dollars saved over time, etc) if someone takes a 15 to 25 year-old
> R22 system that needs a recharge and instead of replacing it with a new
> r410 system, charge it with R290 (propane).
business. Of course the problem is that a 20 year
old system that needs recharging, probably has a serious problem
that caused it to need recharging.
>
> > Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
> > for the environment because of the R410
>
> R410 effect on ozone is nil (that is true) but as a greenhouse gas, it's
> not that good.
fuels that release CO2. Any release of R410 is going to be so
small, it's irrelevant, except maybe to an environmental nut.
R410 will be phased down in 10 or 15 years, probably
> will be replaced with r600.
>
> > and that the systems are a lot more energy efficient than the
> > typical older systems they replace.
>
> Again, from a carnot-cycle point of view, and from real-world working
> pressures and compression ratio analysis, there is no difference between
> the two systems. If you replace a small A-frame r22 with a larger
> N-frame R410, you can't say that your increase in system efficiency has
> anything to do with the r410 circulating in the lines.
make that claim. What I see them usually saying is that R410 is
environmentally friendly, R22 is phased out, and that the new systems
using R22 are a lot more efficient than the old systems.
>
> And again I ask -> does the use of ECM motors (plenum fan, condenser
> fan) get factored into SEER ratings?
ratings. AFAIK, the only ECM motors used would be for
the blower motor in the furnace, if it has one.
Home Guy
May 18, 2013, 8:08:27 AM5/18/13
to
heat...@gmail.com wrote:
> Wholesale is about $500 per 30lb Cylinder now. It continues to grow
> every 3 months or so.
Any american who hasn't yet built a reinforced fence or bunker around
their ground or roof-mounted AC unit, residential or commercial (or
church!), monitored 24/7 with video -> now is the time.
The next wave of "american urban mining" is starting now, and it's being
done by out-of-work hvac techs, prowling around in the middle of the
night with empty propane tanks - harvesting the R-22 out of your
soon-to-be non-working hvac systems...
> Wholesale is about $500 per 30lb Cylinder now. It continues to grow
> every 3 months or so.
Any american who hasn't yet built a reinforced fence or bunker around
their ground or roof-mounted AC unit, residential or commercial (or
church!), monitored 24/7 with video -> now is the time.
The next wave of "american urban mining" is starting now, and it's being
done by out-of-work hvac techs, prowling around in the middle of the
night with empty propane tanks - harvesting the R-22 out of your
soon-to-be non-working hvac systems...
grumpy
May 18, 2013, 7:00:32 PM5/18/13
to
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:0c4aadfb-c6ff-4592...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...
On May 16, 9:17 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
> I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if
> current
> 410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be
> yes
> but not as is giving to people by industries.
What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
****************************************************
> I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if
> current
> 410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be
> yes
> but not as is giving to people by industries.
What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
Yes R410 is safer as to what defiantly not regarding pressures,
yes it is safer as to Propane R290 and it is Environment friendly
because it does not have chemicals in it, that effects the atmosphere,
as to other studies we will have to wait for few years before truth comes
out.
The efficiency does not come from Refrigerant regardless of type it comes
from design at hole package. Note; from experience I got compressors
on R134 and R410 do not hold up as good as on 12or 22. I have replace
few on the brand new equipment that came directly from OEM so the sales
pitch from suppliers don't work with me.
Ratting is big mish mash there is no NBS anymore so the manufacture
doing they own rattings just like cars, have any one ever got gas milege
according to manufacture addvertisment, do I need to say more!!!
tra...@optonline.net
May 18, 2013, 7:50:43 PM5/18/13
to
On May 18, 7:00 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
> <trad...@optonline.net> wrote in message
"What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are
safe for the environment because of the R410 "
> The efficiency does not come from Refrigerant regardless of type it comes
> from design at hole package.
No shit Sherlock. I've been saying that from the start.
The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
doesn't matter.
>Note; from experience I got compressors
> on R134 and R410 do not hold up as good as on 12or 22. I have replace
> few on the brand new equipment that came directly from OEM so the sales
> pitch from suppliers don't work with me.
If you have more than a rare failure on brand new compressors,
either you're using crap eqpt or you're doing something wrong.
> Ratting is big mish mash there is no NBS anymore so the manufacture
> doing they own rattings just like cars, have any one ever got gas milege
> according to manufacture addvertisment, do I need to say more!!!
You don't need to get the exact MPG the manufacturer claims to
believe that cars that get 25 highway get significantly better mpg
than those that are rated 18 mpg.
> <trad...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> news:0c4aadfb-c6ff-4592...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...
> On May 16, 9:17 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if
> > current
> > 410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be
> > yes
> > but not as is giving to people by industries.
>
> What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
> Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
> ****************************************************
> Yes R410 is safer as to what defiantly not regarding pressures,
> yes it is safer as to Propane R290 and it is Environment friendly
> because it does not have chemicals in it, that effects the atmosphere,
> as to other studies we will have to wait for few years before truth comes
> out.
Nice edit, completely changing the context of what I said.
> news:0c4aadfb-c6ff-4592...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...
> On May 16, 9:17 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if
> > current
> > 410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be
> > yes
> > but not as is giving to people by industries.
>
> What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
> Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
> ****************************************************
> Yes R410 is safer as to what defiantly not regarding pressures,
> yes it is safer as to Propane R290 and it is Environment friendly
> because it does not have chemicals in it, that effects the atmosphere,
> as to other studies we will have to wait for few years before truth comes
> out.
"What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are
> The efficiency does not come from Refrigerant regardless of type it comes
> from design at hole package.
The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
doesn't matter.
>Note; from experience I got compressors
> on R134 and R410 do not hold up as good as on 12or 22. I have replace
> few on the brand new equipment that came directly from OEM so the sales
> pitch from suppliers don't work with me.
either you're using crap eqpt or you're doing something wrong.
> Ratting is big mish mash there is no NBS anymore so the manufacture
> doing they own rattings just like cars, have any one ever got gas milege
> according to manufacture addvertisment, do I need to say more!!!
believe that cars that get 25 highway get significantly better mpg
than those that are rated 18 mpg.
Mark
May 18, 2013, 8:49:17 PM5/18/13
to
>
> No shit Sherlock. I've been saying that from the start.
> The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
> is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
> and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
> In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
> doesn't matter.
>
>
decent price and that would in many cases be the most economical
choice if you have an existing R22 system that needs repair.
the only reason switching to a new system is more economical is
because of the artificially high cost of the R22.
the point is that there is no INHERENT economic advantage between
R22 and R410A but yet we are forced to update
Which brings me to my question...
If you top off an R22 system with R290, do you have to remove all the
R22 and replace it with R290 or can they be mixed?
Mark
tra...@optonline.net
May 18, 2013, 9:19:59 PM5/18/13
to
On May 18, 8:49 pm, Mark <makol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > No shit Sherlock. I've been saying that from the start.
> > The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
> > is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
> > and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
> > In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
> > doesn't matter.
>
> it matters because if "they" didn't outlaw R22 you could get it at a
> decent price and that would in many cases be the most economical
> choice if you have an existing R22 system that needs repair.
>
Let's consider how it is that an old R22 system comes to
> > No shit Sherlock. I've been saying that from the start.
> > The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
> > is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
> > and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
> > In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
> > doesn't matter.
>
> it matters because if "they" didn't outlaw R22 you could get it at a
> decent price and that would in many cases be the most economical
> choice if you have an existing R22 system that needs repair.
>
need refrigerant. It's typically because a major component,
like the compressor has burned out. Or maybe the
evaporator or condensor has corroded and sprung a leak.
Those repairs aren't cheap and are going to cost a
major portion of what you could get new eqpt for.
You'd have to be nuts to pour money into it regardless
of the price of R22. Compressor shot? $1000 even
with the price of R22 when it was cheap. At today's
prices, it's $1200. In the words of Hillary Clinton
"What difference does it make?"
> the only reason switching to a new system is more economical is
> because of the artificially high cost of the R22.
R22 systems they are replacing have SEERS of 10.
That is a huge difference in efficiency and operating
cost. Now, I'm not
saying everyone should run out and replace their system
today. But if you have an old R22 system that needs
a major repair, the answer is likely yes. And it could
be yes even if the systems is still running fine. It
depends on the climate, AC usage, and electricity cost.
>
> the point is that there is no INHERENT economic advantage between
> R22 and R410A but yet we are forced to update
that there is an economic advantage in what it costs
to operate that new R410 system compared to the
typical 20 year old R22 system that needs a big
infusion of R22 to keep it running.
Stormin Mormon
May 19, 2013, 7:08:18 AM5/19/13
to
It's been a while since I needed to know this, but I remember that it's illegal to mix refrgerants. So, there is the artificially high cost of removing the (artificially expensive) R-22 before adding propane. Needs to be done with a EPA approved machine, done by a certified technician.
"Mark" <mako...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:b771cdf4-5556-43de...@s18g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
"Mark" <mako...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:b771cdf4-5556-43de...@s18g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
gregz
May 20, 2013, 11:07:26 PM5/20/13
to
Greg
Stormin Mormon
May 21, 2013, 6:47:56 AM5/21/13
to
To my knowledge, it's still not legal to mix refrigerants.
"gregz" <ze...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:1163962883390798849.8...@news.eternal-september.org...
"gregz" <ze...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:1163962883390798849.8...@news.eternal-september.org...
PaxPerPoten
May 26, 2013, 10:30:30 PM5/26/13
to
On 5/18/2013 6:50 PM, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
> On May 18, 7:00 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> <trad...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:0c4aadfb-c6ff-4592...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...
>> On May 16, 9:17 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if
>>> current
>>> 410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be
>>> yes
>>> but not as is giving to people by industries.
>>
>> What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
>> Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
>> ****************************************************
>> Yes R410 is safer as to what defiantly not regarding pressures,
>> yes it is safer as to Propane R290 and it is Environment friendly
>> because it does not have chemicals in it, that effects the atmosphere,
>> as to other studies we will have to wait for few years before truth comes
>> out.
>
> Nice edit, completely changing the context of what I said.
what?????
> On May 18, 7:00 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> <trad...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:0c4aadfb-c6ff-4592...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...
>> On May 16, 9:17 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if
>>> current
>>> 410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be
>>> yes
>>> but not as is giving to people by industries.
>>
>> What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
>> Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
>> ****************************************************
>> Yes R410 is safer as to what defiantly not regarding pressures,
>> yes it is safer as to Propane R290 and it is Environment friendly
>> because it does not have chemicals in it, that effects the atmosphere,
>> as to other studies we will have to wait for few years before truth comes
>> out.
>
> Nice edit, completely changing the context of what I said.
>
> "What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
> Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are
> safe for the environment because of the R410 "
>
>> The efficiency does not come from Refrigerant regardless of type it comes
>> from design at hole package.
>
> No shit Sherlock. I've been saying that from the start.
> The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
> is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
> and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
> In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
> doesn't matter.
Kind of a snotty reply to a well meaning response. So go F! yourself...
> "What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
> Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are
> safe for the environment because of the R410 "
>
>> The efficiency does not come from Refrigerant regardless of type it comes
>> from design at hole package.
>
> No shit Sherlock. I've been saying that from the start.
> The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
> is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
> and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
> In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
> doesn't matter.
>
>
>> Note; from experience I got compressors
>> on R134 and R410 do not hold up as good as on 12or 22. I have replace
>> few on the brand new equipment that came directly from OEM so the sales
>> pitch from suppliers don't work with me.
>
> If you have more than a rare failure on brand new compressors,
> either you're using crap eqpt or you're doing something wrong.
Obviously you are either not in the HVAC business or are just another
>
>> Note; from experience I got compressors
>> on R134 and R410 do not hold up as good as on 12or 22. I have replace
>> few on the brand new equipment that came directly from OEM so the sales
>> pitch from suppliers don't work with me.
>
> If you have more than a rare failure on brand new compressors,
> either you're using crap eqpt or you're doing something wrong.
hired gopher.
>
>
>> Ratting is big mish mash there is no NBS anymore so the manufacture
>> doing they own rattings just like cars, have any one ever got gas milege
>> according to manufacture addvertisment, do I need to say more!!!
>
> You don't need to get the exact MPG the manufacturer claims to
> believe that cars that get 25 highway get significantly better mpg
> than those that are rated 18 mpg.
Wow! What aqn intelligent analogy.. ;-p
>
>> Ratting is big mish mash there is no NBS anymore so the manufacture
>> doing they own rattings just like cars, have any one ever got gas milege
>> according to manufacture addvertisment, do I need to say more!!!
>
> You don't need to get the exact MPG the manufacturer claims to
> believe that cars that get 25 highway get significantly better mpg
> than those that are rated 18 mpg.
PaxPerPoten
May 26, 2013, 10:33:28 PM5/26/13
to
with small amount losses. Face it sports fan... Your all knowing
Government has raped the public yet again.
>
>
PaxPerPoten
May 26, 2013, 10:43:40 PM5/26/13
to
On 5/18/2013 8:19 PM, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
> On May 18, 8:49 pm, Mark <makol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> No shit Sherlock. I've been saying that from the start.
>>> The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
>>> is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
>>> and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
>>> In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
>>> doesn't matter.
>>
>> it matters because if "they" didn't outlaw R22 you could get it at a
>> decent price and that would in many cases be the most economical
>> choice if you have an existing R22 system that needs repair.
>>
>
> Let's consider how it is that an old R22 system comes to
> need refrigerant. It's typically because a major component,
> like the compressor has burned out.
Most refrigerant top off's are needed for leaks in the system and not
> On May 18, 8:49 pm, Mark <makol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> No shit Sherlock. I've been saying that from the start.
>>> The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
>>> is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
>>> and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
>>> In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
>>> doesn't matter.
>>
>> it matters because if "they" didn't outlaw R22 you could get it at a
>> decent price and that would in many cases be the most economical
>> choice if you have an existing R22 system that needs repair.
>>
>
> Let's consider how it is that an old R22 system comes to
> need refrigerant. It's typically because a major component,
> like the compressor has burned out.
compressor burnouts. stretching of the A-coil etc is quite common.
causing microscopic leaks.
Or maybe the
> evaporator or condensor has corroded and sprung a leak.
> Those repairs aren't cheap and are going to cost a
> major portion of what you could get new eqpt for.
> You'd have to be nuts to pour money into it regardless
> of the price of R22. Compressor shot? $1000 even
> with the price of R22 when it was cheap. At today's
> prices, it's $1200. In the words of Hillary Clinton
>
> "What difference does it make?"
>
>
>> the only reason switching to a new system is more economical is
>> because of the artificially high cost of the R22.
as long as the R22 system in most cases. But you will get more service
calls for rebalancing the cooling gases.
>
> BS. New systems have SEERS of 14+. The typical
> R22 systems they are replacing have SEERS of 10.
those of you that are not too bright....Check the size of that
equipment. Also note that many furnaces are now only 33 inch tall in
order to facilitate the overlarge Acoil
PaxPerPoten
May 26, 2013, 10:47:23 PM5/26/13
to
locks on the service valves. How much can you huff in a single night?
>
tra...@optonline.net
May 27, 2013, 9:08:46 AM5/27/13
to
On May 26, 10:43 pm, PaxPerPoten <P...@USA.net> wrote:
That statement is spot on? The only reason a new system is more
economical is because of the high cost of R22? The fact that a new
system is typically SEER 14, while the old one it replaces is SEER 10,
doesn't affect the economics? Good grief! It's operating cost will
be substantially less.
>
> > BS. New systems have SEERS of 14+. The typical
> > R22 systems they are replacing have SEERS of 10.
>
> Due ..of course to a much larger Condensing coil and A-coil system. For
> those of you that are not too bright....Check the size of that
> equipment. Also note that many furnaces are now only 33 inch tall in
> order to facilitate the overlarge Acoil
Who cares exactly how it's achieved? The simple fact is that a
cost effective R410A system is available that has a huge efficiency
increase
compared to the old system it replaced. Contrary to your nonsense,
that is a huge economic advantage and the consumer doesn't
care how exactly it's achieved.
economical is because of the high cost of R22? The fact that a new
system is typically SEER 14, while the old one it replaces is SEER 10,
doesn't affect the economics? Good grief! It's operating cost will
be substantially less.
>
> > BS. New systems have SEERS of 14+. The typical
> > R22 systems they are replacing have SEERS of 10.
>
> Due ..of course to a much larger Condensing coil and A-coil system. For
> those of you that are not too bright....Check the size of that
> equipment. Also note that many furnaces are now only 33 inch tall in
> order to facilitate the overlarge Acoil
cost effective R410A system is available that has a huge efficiency
increase
compared to the old system it replaced. Contrary to your nonsense,
that is a huge economic advantage and the consumer doesn't
care how exactly it's achieved.
Home Guy
May 27, 2013, 9:15:32 AM5/27/13
to
PaxPerPoten wrote:
> > The next wave of "american urban mining" is starting now, and
> > it's being done by out-of-work hvac techs, prowling around in
> > the middle of the night with empty propane tanks - harvesting
> > the R-22 out of your soon-to-be non-working hvac systems...
>
> With you wandering our network... I can see why it is Code to
> install locks on the service valves. How much can you huff in
> a single night?
"wandering our network" ?
> > The next wave of "american urban mining" is starting now, and
> > it's being done by out-of-work hvac techs, prowling around in
> > the middle of the night with empty propane tanks - harvesting
> > the R-22 out of your soon-to-be non-working hvac systems...
>
> With you wandering our network... I can see why it is Code to
> install locks on the service valves. How much can you huff in
> a single night?
How much can I "huff" in a single night? You think I'm an HVAC tech?
Huff? Is that the lingo you use to describe the covert theft of AC
refrigerant?
I'm a Canadian watching you americans flush yourselves down the toilet
in many ways. Urban mining - stripping copper and wire, street and
highway lights, gutters and siding, plumbing, entire hvac systems (and
R22) from working systems, church rooftops and derelict homes.
tra...@optonline.net
May 27, 2013, 9:30:36 AM5/27/13
to
On May 26, 10:30 pm, PaxPerPoten <P...@USA.net> wrote:
Let's review, shall we?
I posted :
"What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
**************************************************** "
And then gave your response:
"Yes R410 is safer as to what defiantly not regarding pressures,..."
I said manufacturers said R410 is safe for the ENVIRONMENT and
you make it sound like I just said R410 is safe and then start
talking about safety with regard to pressure.
> >> The efficiency does not come from Refrigerant regardless of type it comes
> >> from design at hole package.
>
> > No shit Sherlock. I've been saying that from the start.
> > The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
> > is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
> > and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
> > In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
> > doesn't matter.
>
> Kind of a snotty reply to a well meaning response. So go F! yourself...
>
Same to you pal. You have some kind of bug up your
ass about R22 vs R410A. All I did was point out that the
typical R410A system that you buy today to replace that
old system has a much higher efficiency rating. Contrary
to your nonsense, that is a big economic advantage to the
consumer and the consumer doesn't care how exactly
it's achieved, whether it has R410A, R22 or XYZ.
>
> >> Note; from experience I got compressors
> >> on R134 and R410 do not hold up as good as on 12or 22. I have replace
> >> few on the brand new equipment that came directly from OEM so the sales
> >> pitch from suppliers don't work with me.
>
> > If you have more than a rare failure on brand new compressors,
> > either you're using crap eqpt or you're doing something wrong.
>
> Obviously you are either not in the HVAC business or are just another
> hired gopher.
>
The you should be able to give us some credible industry sources
that support your claim that there is a significant initial failure
rate on
compressors in new HVAC eqpt that has been properly installed.
Links please....
>
> >> Ratting is big mish mash there is no NBS anymore so the manufacture
> >> doing they own rattings just like cars, have any one ever got gas milege
> >> according to manufacture addvertisment, do I need to say more!!!
>
> > You don't need to get the exact MPG the manufacturer claims to
> > believe that cars that get 25 highway get significantly better mpg
> > than those that are rated 18 mpg.
>
> Wow! What aqn intelligent analogy.. ;-p
>
Thank you, because it is. Cars today are available that have
much higher efficiency ratings than they did 20 years ago.
Now you can argue about how those ratings are done, whether
if a car is rated 28 MPG on the highway you actually get that
specific number or not. But that the car uses less gas than
the equivalent car it replaced from 20 years ago is a fact.
Simple question, do you deny that a new 14 SEER system
saves a large amount in electricity that it uses
compared to a 10 SEER system that it replaces? Yes or no?
> On 5/18/2013 6:50 PM, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 18, 7:00 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> <trad...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:0c4aadfb-c6ff-4592...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...
> >> On May 16, 9:17 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >>> I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if
> >>> current
> >>> 410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be
> >>> yes
> >>> but not as is giving to people by industries.
>
> >> What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
> >> Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
> >> ****************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 18, 7:00 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> <trad...@optonline.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:0c4aadfb-c6ff-4592...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...
> >> On May 16, 9:17 pm, "grumpy" <t.se...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >>> I ca not comment on whole but perhaps the answer to you question if
> >>> current
> >>> 410 systems are more efficient ten the old 22 systems my answer would be
> >>> yes
> >>> but not as is giving to people by industries.
>
> >> What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
> >> Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
> >> ****************************************************
>
> > Nice edit, completely changing the context of what I said.
>
> what?????
>
You just did it again. Editing to completely change the context.
>
> what?????
>
Let's review, shall we?
I posted :
"What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are
safe for the environment because of the R410 "
You edited the above to this:
Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are
safe for the environment because of the R410 "
"What answers exactly are "industries" giving that are false?
Pretty much what I've heard is that the R410 systems are safe
**************************************************** "
"Yes R410 is safer as to what defiantly not regarding pressures,..."
I said manufacturers said R410 is safe for the ENVIRONMENT and
you make it sound like I just said R410 is safe and then start
talking about safety with regard to pressure.
> >> The efficiency does not come from Refrigerant regardless of type it comes
> >> from design at hole package.
>
> > No shit Sherlock. I've been saying that from the start.
> > The point is that you can get a system today that uses R410,
> > is a lot more efficient than the typical system it replaces
> > and adjusted for inflation, they cost about the same.
> > In other words, all this bitching about R22 vs R410A
> > doesn't matter.
>
> Kind of a snotty reply to a well meaning response. So go F! yourself...
>
ass about R22 vs R410A. All I did was point out that the
typical R410A system that you buy today to replace that
old system has a much higher efficiency rating. Contrary
to your nonsense, that is a big economic advantage to the
consumer and the consumer doesn't care how exactly
it's achieved, whether it has R410A, R22 or XYZ.
>
> >> Note; from experience I got compressors
> >> on R134 and R410 do not hold up as good as on 12or 22. I have replace
> >> few on the brand new equipment that came directly from OEM so the sales
> >> pitch from suppliers don't work with me.
>
> > If you have more than a rare failure on brand new compressors,
> > either you're using crap eqpt or you're doing something wrong.
>
> Obviously you are either not in the HVAC business or are just another
> hired gopher.
>
that support your claim that there is a significant initial failure
rate on
compressors in new HVAC eqpt that has been properly installed.
Links please....
>
> >> Ratting is big mish mash there is no NBS anymore so the manufacture
> >> doing they own rattings just like cars, have any one ever got gas milege
> >> according to manufacture addvertisment, do I need to say more!!!
>
> > You don't need to get the exact MPG the manufacturer claims to
> > believe that cars that get 25 highway get significantly better mpg
> > than those that are rated 18 mpg.
>
> Wow! What aqn intelligent analogy.. ;-p
>
much higher efficiency ratings than they did 20 years ago.
Now you can argue about how those ratings are done, whether
if a car is rated 28 MPG on the highway you actually get that
specific number or not. But that the car uses less gas than
the equivalent car it replaced from 20 years ago is a fact.
Simple question, do you deny that a new 14 SEER system
saves a large amount in electricity that it uses
compared to a 10 SEER system that it replaces? Yes or no?
Home Guy
May 27, 2013, 9:36:47 AM5/27/13
to
"tra...@optonline.net" used improper usenet message composition style
by unnecessarily full-quoting:
> > >> the only reason switching to a new system is more economical is
> > >> because of the artificially high cost of the R22.
> >
> > Actually, That statement is pretty spot on. The new system will
> > not last as long as the R22 system in most cases. But you will
> > get more service calls for rebalancing the cooling gases.
>
> That statement is spot on? The only reason a new system is more
> economical is because of the high cost of R22?
He also talked about the R410 systems not having as long a service life
as the r22 systems, and also leakage issues.
> The fact that a new system is typically SEER 14, while the old
> one it replaces is SEER 10, doesn't affect the economics?
Someone faced with fixing a leak and re-charging an R22 system would be
paying substantially less for that repair if the cost of R22 wasn't
being made artificially higher due to politics.
The artificially high cost of R22 changes the economics and payback
equation for the home owner and makes the high cost of replacing the
entire system with R410 seem more comparable to fixing the existing R22
system.
No one is disputing the differences in operating costs between the two
systems. You seem to be minimizing the upfront costs for tearing out
the old system and installing a new one. The amortization schedule (or
rate-of-payback) for these sorts of things are never what they claim to
be.
by unnecessarily full-quoting:
> > >> the only reason switching to a new system is more economical is
> > >> because of the artificially high cost of the R22.
> >
> > Actually, That statement is pretty spot on. The new system will
> > not last as long as the R22 system in most cases. But you will
> > get more service calls for rebalancing the cooling gases.
>
> That statement is spot on? The only reason a new system is more
> economical is because of the high cost of R22?
as the r22 systems, and also leakage issues.
> The fact that a new system is typically SEER 14, while the old
> one it replaces is SEER 10, doesn't affect the economics?
paying substantially less for that repair if the cost of R22 wasn't
being made artificially higher due to politics.
The artificially high cost of R22 changes the economics and payback
equation for the home owner and makes the high cost of replacing the
entire system with R410 seem more comparable to fixing the existing R22
system.
No one is disputing the differences in operating costs between the two
systems. You seem to be minimizing the upfront costs for tearing out
the old system and installing a new one. The amortization schedule (or
rate-of-payback) for these sorts of things are never what they claim to
be.
tra...@optonline.net
May 27, 2013, 9:56:40 AM5/27/13
to
On May 27, 9:36 am, Home Guy <H...@Guy.com> wrote:
> "trad...@optonline.net" used improper usenet message composition style
not last as long as systems from 30 years ago, but I don't see that
as being an R410 issue. Most residential eqpt one buys today
doesn't typically last as long as the system from 30 years ago.
A gas furnace, a dishwasher, for example and they don't use
R410.
>
> > The fact that a new system is typically SEER 14, while the old
> > one it replaces is SEER 10, doesn't affect the economics?
>
> Someone faced with fixing a leak and re-charging an R22 system would be
> paying substantially less for that repair if the cost of R22 wasn't
> being made artificially higher due to politics.
Oh please. We've been through that a dozen times. If you need
a pound of R22 to top off a system, it doesn't make much difference
in the cost. The cost of that R22 is $16. Even if it needs a
whole system charge, it's not so high it's the end of the world.
It's just that if a system needs a whole charge, it's probably
because it's had some major failure. And in that case, most
people with good sense, would decide that it's not worth fixing
the 25 year old system and instead replace it with a new system
that uses 40% less energy.
>
> The artificially high cost of R22 changes the economics and payback
> equation for the home owner and makes the high cost of replacing the
> entire system with R410 seem more comparable to fixing the existing R22
> system.
See above.
>
> No one is disputing the differences in operating costs between the two
> systems. You seem to be minimizing the upfront costs for tearing out
> the old system and installing a new one. The amortization schedule (or
> rate-of-payback) for these sorts of things are never what they claim to
> be.
Actually, grumpy, pax, whatever his name is, well he is
disputing it. And I'm not minimizing the costs of a new system.
I just think that typically if a system needs a whole lot of R22,
then it's very likely because it's had a major failure, eg the
compressor
is shot, the coils are shot, etc. In that case, it makes no sense
to me to be bitching about the cost of R22, because even if R22
were 25% of the price it is today, it wouldn't make sense to do
a major repair to that old system. And if it just needs a pound or
two of R22, then it's still not that much and if they want to just
add the R22, nothing stopping them from doing so.
In other words, I don't buy this nonsense that it's the high cost
of R22 that's forcing people to needlessly convert to new eqpt.
> "trad...@optonline.net" used improper usenet message composition style
> by unnecessarily full-quoting:
>
> > > >> the only reason switching to a new system is more economical is
> > > >> because of the artificially high cost of the R22.
>
> > > Actually, That statement is pretty spot on. The new system will
> > > not last as long as the R22 system in most cases. But you will
> > > get more service calls for rebalancing the cooling gases.
>
> > That statement is spot on? The only reason a new system is more
> > economical is because of the high cost of R22?
>
> He also talked about the R410 systems not having as long a service life
> as the r22 systems, and also leakage issues.
The "leakage issue" is a red herring. The new systems may
>
> > > >> the only reason switching to a new system is more economical is
> > > >> because of the artificially high cost of the R22.
>
> > > Actually, That statement is pretty spot on. The new system will
> > > not last as long as the R22 system in most cases. But you will
> > > get more service calls for rebalancing the cooling gases.
>
> > That statement is spot on? The only reason a new system is more
> > economical is because of the high cost of R22?
>
> He also talked about the R410 systems not having as long a service life
> as the r22 systems, and also leakage issues.
not last as long as systems from 30 years ago, but I don't see that
as being an R410 issue. Most residential eqpt one buys today
doesn't typically last as long as the system from 30 years ago.
A gas furnace, a dishwasher, for example and they don't use
R410.
>
> > The fact that a new system is typically SEER 14, while the old
> > one it replaces is SEER 10, doesn't affect the economics?
>
> Someone faced with fixing a leak and re-charging an R22 system would be
> paying substantially less for that repair if the cost of R22 wasn't
> being made artificially higher due to politics.
a pound of R22 to top off a system, it doesn't make much difference
in the cost. The cost of that R22 is $16. Even if it needs a
whole system charge, it's not so high it's the end of the world.
It's just that if a system needs a whole charge, it's probably
because it's had some major failure. And in that case, most
people with good sense, would decide that it's not worth fixing
the 25 year old system and instead replace it with a new system
that uses 40% less energy.
>
> The artificially high cost of R22 changes the economics and payback
> equation for the home owner and makes the high cost of replacing the
> entire system with R410 seem more comparable to fixing the existing R22
> system.
>
> No one is disputing the differences in operating costs between the two
> systems. You seem to be minimizing the upfront costs for tearing out
> the old system and installing a new one. The amortization schedule (or
> rate-of-payback) for these sorts of things are never what they claim to
> be.
disputing it. And I'm not minimizing the costs of a new system.
I just think that typically if a system needs a whole lot of R22,
then it's very likely because it's had a major failure, eg the
compressor
is shot, the coils are shot, etc. In that case, it makes no sense
to me to be bitching about the cost of R22, because even if R22
were 25% of the price it is today, it wouldn't make sense to do
a major repair to that old system. And if it just needs a pound or
two of R22, then it's still not that much and if they want to just
add the R22, nothing stopping them from doing so.
In other words, I don't buy this nonsense that it's the high cost
of R22 that's forcing people to needlessly convert to new eqpt.
eugenero...@gmail.com
Jun 5, 2016, 6:27:24 PM6/5/16
to
On Saturday, April 27, 2013 at 7:55:39 AM UTC-6, Stormin Mormon wrote:
> If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
>
> Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
> "HVAC Guy" <HV...@Guy.com> wrote in message news:517BD2A3...@Guy.com...
> refrigeration-grade propane mixes is higher than R134 and R410, and from
> an electrical energy usage standpoint, using propane seems to cut that
> down by 40%.
>
> What I don't really understand is the safety hazzard issue of using
> propane.
>
> If you have a small leak (the sort of leak that is typical in an HVAC
> system) it's going to take days or weeks for the system to de-pressurize
> to ambient pressure, and the relatively small amount of propane in the
> system is going to dissapate in the typical home during that time (if
> the leak is inside the house).
>
> If you have a furnace malfunction (blower-motor burn-out, fan-belt
> breaks, over-heat cut-off malfunction) then again would you ever have a
> condition where a run-away plenum temperature would bake the evap coil
> to the point of combustion?
>
> Could you get combustion happening *inside* the compressor due to some
> sort of mechanical compressor malfunction?
>
> Some sort of accidental dammage to AC lines (either inside or outside
> the house) could release all of the propane within minutes or seconds -
> is this the combustion hazzard that the HVAC industry / gov't is worried
> about? Is this the only practical safety issue with using propane for
> home A/C recharging?
In my experience and observation, without resorting to "doom and gloom" and terror tactics, Many, MANY vehicles are equipped with propane AS A FUEL. In other words, there is no more dangerous environment for propane to exist in it's compressed format (in tanks). Yet, as EVERYONE knows who knows anything about chemistry, propane does not burn until and unless it is evaporated and mixed with sufficient oxygen and then brought to the ignition point. Even if there was a minute amount of oxygen in the sealed air conditioner/refrigeration loop, the danger of ignition is virtually nil.
I have personally recharged a number of vehicles and an old freezer using propane, with no ill effects to my knowledge. I even power-factor-corrected the old units to use a fraction of the electricity making replacing them a low-priority issue.
It appears that the law is created by man FOR man, that is to say for industry, for the elite who are in control of industry and commerce. The common "consumers" have no say in the matter which occurs in the capital cities of the world (contrary to what we are led to believe).
What is most interesting is that I learned about Propane being used as a refrigerant by a commercial refrigeration technician charged with the heat-pump systems of a number of skating rinks. He told me that Ammonia was the best refrigerant, but that Ammonia requires very special equipment AND care to use and maintain. Whereas Propane was a good substitute which is not weighted down with the same concerns as Ammonia. :)
Eugene Labossiere
> If propane and air are mixed in the system, the explosion can be dangerous. AC systems are designed for totally non flammable refrigerants. if there is some air in the system, and the happy home owner adds propane, the resulting explosive mix can, well, explode.
>
> Yes, you can get sparking inside the compressor.
> "HVAC Guy" <HV...@Guy.com> wrote in message news:517BD2A3...@Guy.com...
> tdfei...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> In any case, it's looking more and more that home owners are going the
> DIY route by recharging their leaking home R22 units with propane (and I
> know that you so-called pro's in alt.hvac will just love it when that
> happens).
>
> And I don't see why not, given that the auto-ignition temp. of these
>
>
> In any case, it's looking more and more that home owners are going the
> DIY route by recharging their leaking home R22 units with propane (and I
> know that you so-called pro's in alt.hvac will just love it when that
> happens).
>
> refrigeration-grade propane mixes is higher than R134 and R410, and from
> an electrical energy usage standpoint, using propane seems to cut that
> down by 40%.
>
> What I don't really understand is the safety hazzard issue of using
> propane.
>
> If you have a small leak (the sort of leak that is typical in an HVAC
> system) it's going to take days or weeks for the system to de-pressurize
> to ambient pressure, and the relatively small amount of propane in the
> system is going to dissapate in the typical home during that time (if
> the leak is inside the house).
>
> If you have a furnace malfunction (blower-motor burn-out, fan-belt
> breaks, over-heat cut-off malfunction) then again would you ever have a
> condition where a run-away plenum temperature would bake the evap coil
> to the point of combustion?
>
> Could you get combustion happening *inside* the compressor due to some
> sort of mechanical compressor malfunction?
>
> Some sort of accidental dammage to AC lines (either inside or outside
> the house) could release all of the propane within minutes or seconds -
> is this the combustion hazzard that the HVAC industry / gov't is worried
> about? Is this the only practical safety issue with using propane for
> home A/C recharging?
In my experience and observation, without resorting to "doom and gloom" and terror tactics, Many, MANY vehicles are equipped with propane AS A FUEL. In other words, there is no more dangerous environment for propane to exist in it's compressed format (in tanks). Yet, as EVERYONE knows who knows anything about chemistry, propane does not burn until and unless it is evaporated and mixed with sufficient oxygen and then brought to the ignition point. Even if there was a minute amount of oxygen in the sealed air conditioner/refrigeration loop, the danger of ignition is virtually nil.
I have personally recharged a number of vehicles and an old freezer using propane, with no ill effects to my knowledge. I even power-factor-corrected the old units to use a fraction of the electricity making replacing them a low-priority issue.
It appears that the law is created by man FOR man, that is to say for industry, for the elite who are in control of industry and commerce. The common "consumers" have no say in the matter which occurs in the capital cities of the world (contrary to what we are led to believe).
What is most interesting is that I learned about Propane being used as a refrigerant by a commercial refrigeration technician charged with the heat-pump systems of a number of skating rinks. He told me that Ammonia was the best refrigerant, but that Ammonia requires very special equipment AND care to use and maintain. Whereas Propane was a good substitute which is not weighted down with the same concerns as Ammonia. :)
Eugene Labossiere
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Jun 5, 2016, 9:20:58 PM6/5/16
to
On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 15:27:22 -0700 (PDT), eugenero...@gmail.com
wrote:
It is the slow leak into a confined space with an ignition source
that is the problem. In an automotive sytewm a slow leak in the
evaporator can put enough propane into the interior of the car to
ignite from the spark of the dome light switch when the door is
opened. Propane fuel components are NOT allowed inside the passenger
area.
wrote:
that is the problem. In an automotive sytewm a slow leak in the
evaporator can put enough propane into the interior of the car to
ignite from the spark of the dome light switch when the door is
opened. Propane fuel components are NOT allowed inside the passenger
area.
Stormin Mormon
Jun 8, 2016, 10:09:12 AM6/8/16
to
with flammable propane?
How do you get the propane from a POL
threaded tank to a 1/4 flare refrigeration
service valve?
Can you guarantee that kids who get a chemistry
set for Christmas (and know some thing about
chemistry) "ALL" know about the flammable
properties of propane? The kids are included
in EVERYONE who knows some thing about
chemistry.
--
.
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
. www.lds.org
.
.
diese...@gmail.com
Jun 25, 2016, 9:37:20 AM6/25/16
to
PaxPerPoten
Jun 25, 2016, 7:20:53 PM6/25/16
to
Don't get caught!
>
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
PaxPerPoten
Jul 18, 2016, 5:02:55 PM7/18/16
to
On 6/25/2016 8:37 AM, diese...@gmail.com wrote:
you will pay.
--
"...I am committed against every thing which in my judgement, may
weaken, endanger, or destroy [The constitution]...and especially against
all extension of Executive power; and I am committed against any attempt
to rule the free people of this country by the power of the Government
itself... --Daniel Webster
0 new messages