I bet with 80% confidence that there are more unwanted activations in areas protected by 'Dirty Agents' than there are fire saves' by 'Dirty Agent' fire suppression systems.
Probably true of water-based fire suppression too though, right? -Kyle M From: å... .... <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 2:27 AM To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers <[email protected]> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Sprinklerforum] pipes Hydrostatic test in NFPA 2001: Clean Agents vs Dirty Agents Whoever conned or bribed the NFPA and FMGlobal into allowing the name 'clean agent' to be used for fluorinated gas suppression systems got away with murder. And while they are stable, until they are not (i.e. decompose in the fire or after some time short of 'forever'...) Many of these fluorinated organic gases are big greenhouse warmers. They negatively impact the environment with leakage at the production site container storage ops unintended activation of fire protection systems The stupid part of naming them 'clean agent' is we did not declare the basis of time for how long these chemicals are 'clean' These agents are clean for what... a 10-minute hold time? If these fluorinated organics are 'clean' then NFPA 13 should be renamed 'Standard for Installation of Sprinkler Systems Using Immaculate Agent' Water mist & even standard spray sprinklers are far superior options than these 'Dirty Fluorinated Gas Agents' in most electronic equipment rooms I bet with 80% confidence that there are more unwanted activations in areas protected by 'Dirty Agents' than there are fire saves' by 'Dirty Agent' fire suppression systems. And after an unwanted activation, the 'Dirty Agent' industry charges the customer ~ 66% of the original install cost, just to refill the containers with more 'Dirty Agent'... Just say 'no' to most fluorinated gas fire suppression agents, or do our homework and be the stewards of society's safety that safety engineers are paid and expected to be... What is the likelihood of fire loss (per hour of fire protection) vs fire loss in US dollars, for electronic equipment rooms over the last 25 years? The US military and US Coast Guard must have a number for this within 50% of accuracy. How many hermetically sealed hard-drives inside a cowling, have failed from sprinkler water? Why does fire protection so often apply the expensive and unreliable solution, to its wealthy customers? What is more sustainable and environmentally friendly than water? These comments will upset the some people... They are not new comments, I first made them about 17 years ago. Ask ourselves a question, are we making decisions based on loyalty to our status, our paycheck, or are we making decisions based on efficiency with regard to laws of Nature as engineers, efficiency of energy and material usage. Are we being wise (i.e. predicting the future with improved accuracy) Scot Deal Excelsior Fire & Risk Engineering gms: +420 606 872 129 Civilization is a race between education and extinction h.g. wells Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - da vinci
_________________________________________________________ SprinklerForum mailing list: https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
