{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026692708333333332, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008463541666666666, 'mean_word_length': 5.457983193277311, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Life-Cycle Comparison of Several Auxiliary Blowing Agents Used for the Manufacture of Rigid Polyurethane Foam

Abstract In a commitment to zero ozone depletion, the United Nations and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have called for the phase-out of the manufacture and import of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), used as auxiliary blowing agents (ABAs) in the manufacture of polyurethane foams. As a result, more environmentally benign alternative ABAs are being sought by the foam-blowing industry. This study examined the life cycle of HCFC-22, hydrofluorocarbon-134a (HFC-134a), and cyclopentane, which are currently used or considered as potential alternative ABAs in the manufacture of rigid polyurethane foams that serve as insulation in a model North American refrigerator. The raw material extraction/refining, manufacturing, use, and disposal stages of the life cycle of each ABA were considered, and their resulting relative impacts on ozone depletion and global warming were compared. The manufacturing, use, and disposal stages were determined to affect ozone depletion and global warming to the largest extent, emphasizing the need for a greater focus on pollution prevention opportunities in these stages. The HFC-134a life cycle yields no impact on ozone depletion and a significantly decreased global warming impact compared with its predecessor, HCFC-22, and a tradeoff of slightly higher global warming impact and fewer added safety concerns compared with its more flammable counterpart, cyclopentane.