Day 011 - 12 Jul 94 - Page 45
1 the way the numbers went did have some relationship to
where the chlorine atoms were attached in the chemical
2 framework, so it was not a completely random numbering
choice.
3
Q. No. I was going to move on to that. For example, CFC-11,
4 as we call it, should in reality really be called CFC-011?
A. Yes.
5
Q. That is right?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. The first digit is one less than the number of carbon
atoms in the molecule?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. The second digit is one more than the number of hydrogen
atoms?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. The third digit is the number of fluorine atoms?
A. Yes.
12
Q. That all the other atoms in the molecule are chlorine?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Generally, if there was only one carbon atom in the
molecule, this means the first digit is a zero and so it
15 is frequently omitted?
A. Yes.
16
Q. That is where you get CFC-11 rather than 011?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Would it be fair to say that CFCs are basically
hydrocarbons where some or all of the hydrogen atoms have
19 been replaced by fluorine and/or chlorine?
A. I think it would be fairest to say that CFCs, as now
20 understood, are hydrocarbons where all the hydrogen atoms
have been replaced by either chlorine, by one of the
21 halogens and, in fact, normally would be chlorine or
fluorine.
22
Q. Could you just say that last part again?
23 A. Yes, as in the current usage of the term CFC, it is a
hydrocarbon where all of the hydrogen atoms have been
24 replaced by either fluorine or chlorine which means, for
example, that carbon tetrachloride would not be classed as
25 a CFC because it contains no fluorine.
26 Q. What about the previous naming system? Would that have
come under the umbrella of CFCs previously?
27 A. Yes, it would.
28 Q. Would it be fair to say that, basically, the three digit
numbering system takes into consideration the number of
29 hydrogen atoms remaining?
A. Yes.
30
Q. I.e. the second digit relates to hydrogen, so there is a
