by Kenneth V. Blanchard, Global Marketing Segment Manager, DuPont Fire Extinguishants

 

What are the important environmental regulations affecting the fire suppression industry today?

A number of voluntary and regulatory initiatives exist today that are designed to protect the environment from ozone depletion and climate change. These include the Montreal Protocol, which focuses on the elimination of ozone depleting substances (ODS), and the Kyoto Protocol and the related European Union (EU) F-Gas Regulation, which are designed to address climate change. Although the U.S. has not yet ratified the Kyoto Protocol, some states have passed similar legislation. For example, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has assumed responsibility for identifying opportunities and recommending actions to reduce climate change in California.

Not surprisingly, there is a great deal of confusion about these initiatives and what they require, which can lead to misinterpretations, misunderstandings, and unfounded and exaggerated concerns. These misrepresentations are occasionally evident in connection with the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) as clean agent fire suppression materials. As will be discussed below, none of these key regulatory initiatives place restrictions on the use of HFCs in fire protection, due in large part to voluntary codes of practice within the industry that have significantly minimized HFC emissions.

 

 

What is the Montreal Protocol and how is it affecting the fire suppression industry?

The Montreal Protocol, enacted 20 years ago, is an agreement targeting substances that deplete the ozone layer. Specifically, it focuses on reducing, and ultimately eliminating global production, consumption and emissions of ozone-depleting substances, including chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and halons. Initially, the Montreal Protocol focused on phasing out CFCs and halons in developed countries. These substances were subsequently replaced by HCFCs and HFCs.

Although the Montreal Protocol has been a significant driver in the conversion away from halon extinguishants in the fire protection industry, it does not control the use of HFC fire extinguishants. Halons have extremely high ozone depletion potential (ODP) – three to ten times higher than any other agents. By comparison, HFCs, when used as clean agent fire extinguishants in both total flooding systems and portable extinguishers, have zero ODP. This is a key reason why HFCs have become the preferred fire suppression alternative to halons.

 

 

How is the Kyoto Protocol impacting the fire suppression industry?

The 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which was ratified in February 2005, is an agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that requires developed countries that are signatories to the Protocol to meet a target net emission of a “basket” of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) over the period 2008-2012. That “basket” of GHGs includes carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride and HFCs.

Countries committed to meeting the targets in the Kyoto Protocol must develop specific programs to meet emissions reductions objectives. One of these tactical programs in the European Union is the F-Gas Regulation. The objective of the F-Gas Regulation is to prevent and reduce emissions of fluorinated gases (HFCs, PFCs and sulfur hexafluoride) covered by the Kyoto Protocol. Within the fire suppression industry, HFC emissions are currently at very low levels, due to voluntary actions taken by industry. Fire suppression is considered a non-emissive source. As a result, no restrictions are imposed for HFCs in fire suppression as part of the F-Gas Regulation. In a recent summary of the F-Gas Regulation for the fire protection industry, the British Fire Protection Systems Association (BFPSA) announced no restrictions on the production, sale, or use of HFCs.

The United Sates has not yet ratified the Kyoto Protocol; however, some states are taking or considering action to reduce GHG emissions. In California, CARB is responsible for identifying opportunities to cut F-Gas emissions.

Similar to the EU F-Gas Regulation, CARB has not included HFCs used in fire suppression applications on its “Group 1” early action items list, which details the substances that CARB believes will have the greatest early reduction potential for GHG emissions in California. This is likely due to the effective actions taken by the industry to minimize emissions of HFCs in fire suppression applications to date. A recent CARB publication also underscores the minimal impact that regulating HFCs for fire protection would have in reducing GHG emissions. HFCs are, however, included on CARB’s “Group 2” list, called “Additional GHG Reduction Strategies.” In response to CARB’s request for public feedback on the Group 2 list, DuPont highlighted the industry’s voluntary actions to minimize HFC emissions in fire suppression applications to date.

 

 

What is the main difference between the Montreal Protocol and the Kyoto Protocol?

Chart summarizing the findings of an article in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, showing the climate benefit of the Montreal Protocol treaty is 5 to 6 times larger than the 1st commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.

Beyond targeting seemingly different substances (ODS and greenhouse gases), there are two key distinctions between the Montreal Protocol and the Kyoto Protocol. First, HFCs are not controlled by the Montreal Protocol because they do not deplete the ozone layer; however, they are included in the Kyoto Protocol, as they have some global warming potential (GWP). Second, the Montreal Protocol requires the phase-out of ODS, while the Kyoto Protocol focuses on GHG emissions reductions. Countries committed to meeting the targets set in the Kyoto Protocol must develop specific programs to reach emissions reduction objectives. Unlike the Montreal Protocol, which prescribes a specific process for phasing out ODS, the Kyoto Protocol does not detail how countries should meet the targets. Instead, the Kyoto Protocol sets the goal and leaves the means of achieving those goals to individual countries and the industries committed to the terms of the treaty.

 

 

What voluntary codes of practice has the fire suppression industry established to help reduce emissions?

Voluntary codes of practice within the fire suppression industry, supported by organizations such as the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), clearly outline environmentally responsible methods for installing, maintaining and servicing fire suppression systems. These measures have proven highly effective in reducing HFC emissions in fire suppression applications. The industry has also worked closely with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop a reporting program aimed at tracking emissions. As a result of these voluntary and stringent maintenance and inspections programs, emission rates for HFCs used in fire protection are extremely low – 2.5 percent for total flooding systems and 3.5 percent for portable extinguishers. As detection technology and fire protection hardware continues to improve, and with the ongoing support of the fire protection industry, it is anticipated that emissions from this sector will continue to decline.

 

As the supply of virgin halon decreases, what should fire safety experts understand about halon replacements and restrictions on those replacements?

In 1994, the U.S. banned the production and import of virgin halons 1211, 1301, and 2402 in compliance with the Montreal Protocol. Recycled halons and inventories produced before 1994 are now the only sources of supply.

However, it is legal to continue the use of existing halon systems as well as to purchase recycled halons and halons produced before the phase-out to recharge systems. Users are encouraged to consider replacing current systems with halon alternatives, such as HFCs, and making their halon stock available for users with more critical needs.

It is important for the fire suppression industry to understand that none of the current key global regulatory initiatives place restrictions on the use of HFCs in fire protection due to the low emission levels of this application.

 

 

In addition to supplying non-ozone depleting clean agent fire extinguishants, what kind of advocacy or education does DuPont provide to the industry regarding halons and their phase out?

At DuPont, health, safety and environmental sustainability are core values. As a leader in fire protection we are committed to educating the industry on issues of fire safety and technical solutions that aid global fire protection in an environmentally acceptable manner.

DuPont is committed to helping its customers understand and stay ahead of regulatory changes. DuPont Fire Extinguishants is an active participant at a range of fire safety trade shows worldwide to help better educate the industry on clean agent fire extinguishant technology, and the current regulatory environment.

We also have more information about fire suppression on our Web site: www.cleanagents.dupont.com.

Additional Resources

For more information about the topics discussed in this Expert View, please visit the following Web sites:

White Paper
» HFC Fire Extinguishants: A Clarification of Regulations

National/International Environmental Treaties
» Montreal Protocol

Department of Trade and Industry (UK)
» F-Gas Regulation

California Air Resources Board (CARB)
» Home page
» Download

About the Author

Mr. Blanchard is the global marketing segment manager for DuPont Fire Extinguishants based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Before joining DuPont in March 2003, Ken was the global business account manager at Great Lakes Chemical. Ken is a member of several industry associations and councils. He serves on the board of directors for the Halon Alternatives Research Council (HARC), is a manufacturer’s member of the Fire Suppression Systems Association and a voting member of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). Ken graduated from the University of New Hampshire.