World Ozone Day: Protecting the Atmosphere Starts with Responsible Refrigerant Management

A global commitment with a local maintenance task

A cooling system can run quietly for years while its environmental risks receive little attention. Then a recurring leak becomes a routine top-up, a refrigerant cylinder loses its identity, or old equipment leaves the facility without a recovery record. Each decision belongs in environmental assurance.

The International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer is observed on 16 September. It commemorates the signing of the Montreal Protocol in 1987. For workplaces, the occasion is an opportunity to connect an international achievement with everyday purchasing and maintenance decisions.

Ozone protection and climate protection need different checks

The ozone layer helps shield life from harmful ultraviolet radiation. CFCs and HCFCs are examples of ozone-depleting substances controlled under the Montreal Protocol. HFCs were introduced as alternatives that do not deplete the ozone layer, but many have a high global-warming potential; the Kigali Amendment addresses their phasedown.

A refrigerant described as ozone-friendly therefore still needs a climate and safety assessment. UNEP promotes lifecycle management, including sound servicing, recovery and end-of-life handling. The practical actions in this article are Worksite Safety Hub recommendations to help teams review their own arrangements.

Start with an inventory you can trust

Identify the cooling systems that support your workplace: offices, accommodation, control rooms, food storage and specialist equipment. Record the refrigerant identity from reliable equipment and supplier information, rather than assumptions based on age or appearance.

Assign ownership between facilities, maintenance, procurement and environmental management. Where records are incomplete, obtain competent technical advice. A missing label is a gap to resolve before servicing or disposal.

• Maintain equipment identity, refrigerant type and relevant service history.
• Reconcile purchases and additions with maintenance records to identify recurring losses.
• Check that contractor competence covers the specific refrigerants and equipment involved.
• Confirm the approved destination for recovered refrigerants and retired units.

A repeated top-up should trigger investigation

Consider a fictional example: an accommodation unit needs refrigerant several times between planned services. The room cools again after every visit, so the job is repeatedly closed as successful. The unresolved leak continues to consume material and may damage performance.

Treat the repeat demand as a maintenance defect with an owner and completion date. Investigate the cause, repair through an authorised process and verify the outcome. Do not let restored cooling become the only measure of success.

Choose alternatives through engineering review

Lower environmental impact must be achieved with suitable equipment and safe servicing. Some alternatives introduce flammability, toxicity or different pressure requirements. UNEP has warned about unsafe substitution in equipment not designed for the replacement refrigerant.

Any change should pass through the organisation’s engineering and management-of-change arrangements. Assess compatibility, ventilation, detection, electrical protection, emergency response and technician competence as applicable. This article is not a servicing instruction or permission to retrofit a system.

End of life is part of the job

Equipment disposal can move a hidden liability outside the fence. Before releasing a unit, establish who will recover its refrigerant, what records will accompany it and how the approved waste or recovery route will be verified. Follow applicable local requirements and site procedures.

Offshore operations also need to coordinate storage, marine transport and shore reception. A transport booking is only one step; the responsible team should be able to demonstrate the final handling route.

Mark the day with one completed improvement

Use 16 September for a focused review of one cooling system with recurring defects or incomplete records. Bring the technician, equipment owner and environmental representative together. Agree a corrective action, then follow it through to evidence of completion.

Discussion starter: Which cooling-system loss have we accepted as normal, and what evidence would show that we have stopped it?