06.06.2014 Views

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Everything R744

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Everything R744

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Everything R744

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

STRENGtHS & WEAKNESSES <strong>OF</strong> NATURAL REFRIGERANTS<br />

… average values, “NR group”<br />

… average values, “non-NR group”<br />

Environmental<br />

impact<br />

Refrigerants costs<br />

Efficiency,<br />

performance<br />

CSR, image, competitive<br />

advantage<br />

Return on<br />

Investment<br />

Compliance with<br />

legislation<br />

Reliability,<br />

compactness, weight<br />

Safety<br />

Availability of<br />

technology<br />

Capital cost<br />

Demand &<br />

composition<br />

Financial support<br />

Uniform standards<br />

Information,<br />

awareness<br />

Skilled personnel<br />

3.15<br />

3.10<br />

2.89<br />

2.85<br />

2.67<br />

2.57<br />

2.47<br />

2.35<br />

2.26<br />

2.19<br />

2.16<br />

2.11<br />

2.04<br />

2.02<br />

1.90<br />

Environmental<br />

impact<br />

Refrigerants costs<br />

Efficiency,<br />

performance<br />

CSR, image, competitive<br />

advantage<br />

Return on<br />

Investment<br />

Compliance with<br />

legislation<br />

Reliability,<br />

compactness, weight<br />

Safety<br />

Availability of<br />

technology<br />

Capital cost<br />

Demand &<br />

composition<br />

Financial support<br />

Uniform standards<br />

Information,<br />

awareness<br />

Skilled personnel<br />

2.59<br />

2.36<br />

2.32<br />

2.26<br />

2.24<br />

2.23<br />

2.05<br />

2.01<br />

1.86<br />

1.80<br />

1.79<br />

1.78<br />

1.70<br />

2.91<br />

2.83<br />

101<br />

NR GROUP<br />

0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5<br />

Total responses: 245<br />

As it could be expected, for the group of respondents<br />

that already had or used products or services for<br />

natural refrigerants, the evaluation of strengths and<br />

weaknesses of natural working fluids, compared to<br />

conventional refrigerants, was more positive than for the<br />

average respondent. For all values, except for the lack of<br />

skilled personnel, the “NR group” thought that natural<br />

refrigerants were at least as competitive as conventional<br />

fluids in all areas. Again, a reduced environmental impact<br />

and low refrigerant costs were noted as clear advantages.<br />

NON-NR GROUP<br />

0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0<br />

Total responses: 111<br />

Unsurprisingly, the average ranking of natural<br />

refrigerants versus conventional fluids was consistently<br />

lower than for the "NR group." However, the order<br />

of strengths and weaknesses remained the same for<br />

both groups. Respondents not yet using or offering<br />

natural refrigerant products / services estimated that<br />

conventional refrigerants would still be more competitive<br />

in five areas: the availability of trained technicians, the<br />

general awareness and availability of information, the<br />

compatibility of standards, the existing market demand<br />

and competition levels, as well as the availability of<br />

financial support.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!