The events of the past few weeks in the cooling industries of the U.S. and Europe have made for some interesting comparisons.

I have written extensively about how the European Commission has not managed to bring Daimler to book for its flouting of the MAC Directive. Therefore, those of us in the European cooling sector have been looking somewhat jealously at the way U.S. authorities wield the big stick when someone transgresses on cooling matters.

For example, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency published a $2 million program of remedial actions it had agreed upon with Costco last month to address the retail giant's poor record on refrigerant leakage. This resulted in more than a few sharp intakes of breath on this side of the Atlantic.

Simply put, "making an example" of companies that fail to comply with refrigerant laws — especially big ones — is not something the Europeans seem very good at. We could say that the wheels of justice grind slowly when it comes to European laws.

To begin with, there is the MAC Directive saga, which has seen Daimler able to effectively ignore one the European Union's key environmental laws for a total of 20 months and counting.

Carmakers are supposed to have replaced R134a with a lower-GWP refrigerant in new models since January 2013 (and even that was an extension on the initial deadline), but only now is the Commission arriving at court proceedings for Daimler or the German authorities who allowed it. The extent of the enforcement so far appears to be confined to a lot of exchanges of letters.

But added to the high-profile MAC Directive shortcomings is the failure to enforce the initial F-Gas Regulation, brought in to control emissions of HFCs, which to the best our combined industry knowledge, has not seen any prosecutions of transgressors in its six years of implementation. There are many in the cooling industry who are clamoring for more teeth to be applied to the new iteration of the F-Gas laws, some of the clauses of which start taking force in January 2015.

The fact that these clauses relate to leak detection only serve to emphasize the contrast between the U.S. and Europe when it comes to refrigerant laws, since the EPA's censure of Costco was related to its inability to detect and prevent refrigerant leaks.

Yes, the Costco ruling was related to systemic leaks of R22, and so was effectively related to ozone depletion. And, yes, the F-Gas rules are all about preventing global warming. But in my mind, it comes down to the same thing: protecting the atmosphere.

At the moment, it looks like the U.S. authorities are working proactively to stop companies from harming the environment, whereas the European authorities are not. And whether that harm is because of ignorance or negligence, it doesn't matter: those who transgress should be appropriately punished.

In the U.K., government departments are keen on using the phrase "light touch" to excuse the fact that no company has been pursued over matters such as not having appropriately trained F-Gas personnel or not having appropriate leak detection in place. But this overlooks a key element — the powerful effect that "making an example" can have on those who are inclined to cut corners.

I am sure that when the Costco decision was published by the EPA, there were plenty of smaller supermarkets who were instantly prompted to check their own policies on refrigerant management. So we must applaud the EPA for naming and shaming such a big retailer and sending out a clear message that systemic refrigerant leakage and poor management of cooling systems will not be tolerated.

But I also think that the difference between attitudes across the Atlantic shows a difference in how seriously our policymakers are taking cooling and its potential impact on the environment. The historical perception of the U.S. always playing catch-up on green cooling matters is now outdated, because the U.S. is now leading the way on motivation.

Not only is there the "strong stick" on past transgressions, but there is also the proposal to act quickly on phasing down HFCs where it is feasible — shockingly quickly, if you are used to seeing things from a European perspective.

The new EC F-Gas regulations envisage phasing out the high-GWP refrigerant R404A and its ilk by 2020. U.S. authorities are intent on just two years. Now whether this proves practical to implement remains to be seen, but certainly there is no mistaking the direction of travel.

But perhaps most impressive to us in Europe is the way the moves toward greener cooling, better energy efficiency and increased responsibility have been led from the top.

We can all argue as to how much President Barack Obama is involved personally with the moves toward lower-GWP alternatives, but the involvement of the administration clearly has an impact. The recent low-GWP event at the White House was certainly well reported by many beyond the cooling industry and many beyond the U.S., too. And that goes for the $5 billion headline investment from AHRI members, too.

I simply cannot conceive of an occasion when U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron would put his name to a program for investment in the cooling industry. And, unfortunately, I cannot imagine a European industrywide investment of such magnitude either. So from this side of the pond, credit where it is due.

But ladies and gentlemen, I have a dream — a U.S. vs. Europe quest for low-GWP innovation in cooling. It could be the new Space Race.