为了应对因使用具有高全球变暖潜能（GWP）的制冷剂而引起的环境问题，空调、供暖和制冷研究所（AHRI）启动了一项全行业合作研究计划，称为低GWP替代制冷剂评估计划（AREP），确定和评估主要产品类别中有前途的替代制冷剂。在2013年12月成功完成该项目的第一阶段后，AHRI于2014年启动了低GWP AREP的第二阶段，以继续研究之前未涉及的领域，包括高环境条件下的制冷剂、第一阶段未测试的应用中的制冷剂，以及自该项目开始测试以来确定的新制冷剂。 尽管R-410A的臭氧消耗潜能为零，但由于其高GWP，这种制冷剂正在接受审查。一些候选替代制冷剂已经证明全球变暖的可能性很低。正在评估这些低GWP替代制冷剂在空调和热泵应用中的性能，以确保可接受的系统容量和效率。本文报告了在AREP第二阶段进行的一系列压缩机热量计测试的结果，以评估空调系统用往复式压缩机中R-410A替代制冷剂的性能。 它比较了替代制冷剂ARM-71A、L41-1、DR-5A、D2Y-60和R-32与R-410A在各种工作条件下的性能。试验表明，总体而言，制冷能力略低（R-32除外），但替代制冷剂的能效比（EER）与R-410A相当。引用:2016年年度会议，密苏里州圣路易斯，会议论文

In response to environmental concerns raised by the use of refrigerants with high Global Warming Potential (GWP), the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) has launched an industry-wide cooperative research program, referred to as the Low-GWP Alternative Refrigerants Evaluation Program (AREP), to identify and evaluate promising alternative refrigerants for major product categories. After successfully completing the first phase of the program in December 2013, AHRI launched a second phase of the Low-GWP AREP in 2014 to continue research in areas that were not previously addressed, including refrigerants in high ambient conditions, refrigerants in applications not tested in the first phase, and new refrigerants identified since testing for the program began. Although the Ozone Depletion Potential of R-410A is zero, this refrigerant is under scrutiny due to its high GWP. Several candidate alternative refrigerants have already demonstrated low global warming potential. Performance of these low-GWP alternative refrigerants is being evaluated for Air conditioning and heat pump applications to ensure acceptable system capacity and efficiency. This paper reports the results of a series of compressor calorimeter tests conducted for the second phase of the AREP to evaluate the performance of R-410A alternative refrigerants in a reciprocating compressor designed for air conditioning systems. It compares performance of alternative refrigerants ARM-71A, L41-1, DR-5A, D2Y-60, and R-32 to that of R-410A over a wide range of operating conditions. The tests showed that, in general, cooling capacities were slightly lower (except for the R-32), but energy efficiency ratios (EER) of the alternative refrigerants were comparable to that of R-410A.