fluorocarbons

I don't think the problem is only with smoke particles; I think gaseous fluorocarbons produced are sufficiently toxic to birds.

No, fluorocarbons in general are very inert, with the astonishing result that they're generally less toxic than water.

The only thing that comes to my mind that actually improved situation was the global ban on fluorocarbons.

This article from Teflon.com is not clickbait, they’re just massively underselling the risk of fluorocarbons to birds.

They have had a beneficial effect on atmospheric pollutants like sulfur dioxide, fluorocarbons and many others.

It's the crazy persistent halo/fluorocarbons that will be banned, things like pentane will be ok...

Are you talking about comparing CO2 to N2O to CH4 to fluorocarbons, for example?

I think the production of fluorocarbons needs to continue, and just shoving it somewhere else is not a good solution.

Should we treat certain fluorocarbons as human because they can work a bit like blood?

We correctly banned fluorocarbons as refrigerants in systems where they would not be properly recycled, such as domestic refrigerators, air-conditioning systems incuding those in vehicles, and like.

I think my friend said the edibles tested positive for aluminum and fluorocarbons?

Much more common is chemical duster (hold the can upside-down and the boiling fluorocarbons will rapidly cool anything), or even nothing at all if you do it quickly.

We "naturally" made fluorocarbons, and then realized it was a bad idea and stopped.

Fluorocarbons have a low London dispersion (induced dipole) force due to the high polarization of the C-F bond.

Fluorocarbons have huge GHG potential so any leak is most definitely an issue.

Fluorocarbons would take about 10^8 tons, so that might be vaguely plausible.