Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Devil_May_Kare t1_iubmvz5 wrote

I hope they either have a carve-out for inhaler propellants or a safe non-HFC propellant ready to replace HFC-134a.

76

3232330 t1_iucixr2 wrote

You might find this article interesting

This part stood out

> In December, pharmaceutical company Chiesi in Parma, Italy, announced a €350-million (US$385-million) effort to bring an MDI with a climate-friendly propellant to market by 2025. Pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca announced in January that it plans to have a similar device ready by 2025.

20

Nonegoose t1_iuctg0o wrote

My concern is that here in the US inhalers can get pricey- about five years ago the out-of-pocket was $70 for a 200-count MDI, and there was no generic available because of the propellant change since that was still under patent. They're a bit cheaper now that generics are available (some are even available over the counter), but another propellant change without a price cap or free use of the patent for inhalers is going to cause significant distress- and take rescue MDIs off the non-script shelves again.

What's fun is that worsening air pollution tends to cause asthma, so we could find ourselves in a worse situation than we did a year into Covid: a boost to the population seeking treatment for breathing issues, with an added twist of a sudden drop in available and reasonably priced inhalers.

7

NotObviouslyARobot t1_iuc0nwm wrote

The Drug companies don't want you to use HFC propellants so they can sell you more expensive inhalers.

19

jeffbailey t1_iuc8u6w wrote

The more expensive ones have lactose, which is an allergen.

8

fuzzygondola t1_iud38js wrote

The lactose can't be a requirement for another propellant to work, right?

2

jeffbailey t1_iudz7ej wrote

Not my field :). When I asked a friend why they used lactose, he said that it increases absorption.

2

RoboticGreg t1_iuaqwv1 wrote

Anyone else read "High Frequency Cholesterol" or an I the only stupid one?

60

Erlian t1_iuc43co wrote

For anyone wondering - hydrofluorocarbons.

10

BlueBelleNOLA t1_iucy79p wrote

I thought everyone knew that but I guess it hasn't been in the news as much since the hole in the ozone layer thing.

4

ScottClam42 t1_iucz3t3 wrote

I read Joe Rogan instead of Biden. I need coffee

2

Silver_gobo t1_iubtqy9 wrote

Looks like we’re going to be tackling climate change with no air conditioning

14

Raider411 t1_iubyo3z wrote

That was my biggest concern immediately after seeing this headline.

The current refrigerant fluids, that replaced the "bad refrigerant(s)" for air conditioners, are already bad in comparison to the previous.

I knew I was going to see this world burn, but thought "at least I'll have AC"

19

SignorJC t1_iucg2al wrote

The western world (at least USA) is seriously addicted to air conditioning. There is a lot that can be done to control temperature in buildings, but many many many homes and businesses are cooled below 70F...it's ridiculous. We shouldn't be wearing sweaters to our offices in the summer.

8

Frosted-Crocus t1_iuci0zd wrote

Meanwhile I’m fighting with work to get them to shut the gd heat off. It’s a factory; it literally heats itself between all the ovens and machinery, but nope, gotta keep it 95+ because a select few can’t grasp the concept of a sweater.

14

Lurking_was_Boring t1_iubzb60 wrote

CO2 refrigerant systems have come a long way in recent years.

18

its8up t1_iuc6dhg wrote

The equipment is costly compared to the current stuff. Would be much simpler and cheaper to risk turning your home into a bomb by using hc refrigerants. I have a 1987 RV that cools nicely with isobutane and propane going through an r12 evaporator core. Sure the first test run turned my classic camper into a bomb, as the original evaporator core blew a leak, but nothing detonated and everyone still has their fingers and toes.

1

vasya349 t1_iuch53i wrote

At least part of that cost is because it didn’t have the economies of scale or investment HFCs do. 2/3rds of congress wouldn’t pass a law on a subject this contentious if they had any points to score.

5

flashmedallion t1_iuc371o wrote

Aircon isn't exactly a solution though, it's a painkiller until we can turn things around

1

Silver_gobo t1_iuc3otn wrote

You know most of the southwest is what it is today because of air conditioning, right? Without it, people would’ve never built there in mass.

“Southern California and parts of the American Southwest exist as they do today — populous and prosperous — principally because AC made them OK”

Point being, there was already places in North America that we didn’t want to live in without aircon. Just wait till climate change worsens and having aircon in your house is only for the rich

3

flashmedallion t1_iuc48i9 wrote

What does that have to do with anything? Most places are what they are because of fossil fuels too. Keeping the AC running isn't a goal, it's a side benefit of getting things right to the point where we can buffer our comforts sustainably.

3

lowgreentent t1_iucnqkr wrote

Southwest has no water either. People need to live somewhere else.

1

Brucester62 t1_iue4dac wrote

Very amazing story and kudos to Biden and his team. Still have to wonder why so many GOP did NOT support it? Makes no sense to me and should be a wake up call to many.

6

Kikutwo t1_iucn30y wrote

For a second there I thought he banned KFC.

3

AutoModerator t1_iuad4ck wrote

Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here.

All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1