Day 011 - 12 Jul 94 - Page 64


     
     1        that the one of the major uses of CFCs and HCFCs is in
              refrigeration equipment.  If the refrigeration equipment
     2        could not be immediately adapted to use other
              refrigeration -- would you actually like all the
     3        refrigerators in London to be switched off while you
              looked for an alternative source of something you can use
     4        in standard refrigerators? Because that is actually the
              main use of the HCFCs.  It is not as a blowing agent.
     5
         MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Are you an expert on whether it was
     6        practical to move to something else?
              A.  No, I am not, my Lord, only in the sense that I know
     7        that the reason that HCFCs were considered for
              refrigerators is they have somewhat similar properties to
     8        the existing CFCs and, therefore, could be used in
              existing refrigeration without causing damage.
     9
         Q.   I was not particularly thinking of refrigeration.  What it
    10        is suggested is it was irresponsible to use HCFCs as
              blowing agents.  I do not know, maybe in Mr. Morris's mind
    11        the question of practicability is neither here nor there,
              because you should just stop and that is the end of it.
    12        But if other people in the world think that practicability
              has to be given some weight, are you then an expert on
    13        whether there were practicable alternatives?
              A.  No, my Lord.
    14
         MR. MORRIS:  But as far as the food packaging industry is
    15        concerned, you would not know if there were practical
              alternatives?
    16        A.  No, my expertise is not in the technology -----
 
    17   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I am not cutting your point off.  I am just
              wondering whether this is the witness to ask the question.
    18
         MR. MORRIS:  No, it is just that you did say you felt that
    19        McDonald's had moved as quickly as practicable to remove
              their CFC usage.  I am just trying to identify that is not
    20        maybe the case?
              A.  No, I would say that given the documentation which
    21        I read, as you could have read it, the conclusion I drew
              from that is that within the limitations explained by the
    22        technical engineers who actually wrote the assessment,
              that in my view they had made a reasonable assessment of
    23        the practicality of what they were doing.
 
    24        I would, however, have to say that if you wished to
              actually get an independent assessment of that, you would
    25        actually have to call somebody who was an expert on the
              use of blowing agents in the packaging industry, which 
    26        I am not. 
  
    27   Q.   But, with the benefit of hindsight, in fact, the
              environmentalists who were calling for a total ban have
    28        turned out to be right -- they have foreseen this whole
              situation, is that not correct?
    29        A.  I think what I would say is that all the people who
              have been studying the problem which involves the
    30        environmentalists had foreseen there was a problem, and
              that if one reads the reports which have been alluded to

Prev Next Index