Day 011 - 12 Jul 94 - Page 69
1 declined markedly and what was left was the one which had
the hydrogen atoms attached to it.
2
Q. It just says in your statement "produced using HCFCs";
3 then it gives the figure.
A. What it actually says is at present none of the
4 packaging is produced using HCFCs. I realise this could
be ambiguous, but the point I was trying to make was that
5 in fact there had been a very rapid phase out of the
chlorine containing compounds; and that by the early
6 1990's they were only being used in two outlets.
7 Q. That does not include McDonald's refrigeration usage of
CFCs or anything like that, just purely packaging?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. OK. Do you have any view on the phase out of CFCs on the
-- like you said about fridges, you felt that was
10 something that was absolutely essential, and therefore
took a longer phase out period -- do you have any view
11 about which usage would be expected to be phased out first
or earlier, for example, you know, if it was used in a
12 hospital it would be expected to be phased out more slowly
than if it was used for blowing up children's balloons?
13 A. As I said earlier, I am not an expert on the
refrigeration industry. What I do know, however, is that
14 in the absence of the use of CFCs or HCFCs, or in fact
HFCs, unless you are prepared to shut down a large chunk
15 of the refrigeration capacity, until you have
re-engineered the factories which make refrigerators to
16 use alternative agents, then in fact you would have rather
a large hole in the world in order to keep its food from
17 going rotten.
18 Q. Fridges are pretty important?
A. I would say so, yes.
19
Q. Do you have any view about fastfood packaging ----
20
MR. JUSTICE BELL: Can I just say, this is right in the sphere
21 that -- I will not say "have to decide" -- may have to
decide, whereas I no doubt would be an admirer of
22 Professor Duxbury's scientific knowledge, for better or
worse it is my judgment on orders of precedence, not his.
23
MR. MORRIS: The point I was making is that strict figures on
24 total amounts of usage do not necessarily show anything in
terms of whether a company is using responsibly something
25 which should be phased out, do they? Strict figures
alone, do they prove anything at all?
26 A. No. Let me point something out. If I were to buy,
for example, a refrigerator the supplier of the
27 refrigerator has a different way of giving the information
to me than if I commissioned somebody to provide me with a
28 blowing agent, or to produce it in a certain way. What
you were asking earlier was effectively to confuse two
29 things -- one is effectively the use of plant in a
restaurant, which is in fact no different from, for
30 example, a refrigeration plant in most of the office
buildings in North America, and a specific use of an agent
