Safe and sustainable: mitigating the environmental impact of fire safety systems in waste management applications
Spokesperson: Alden Spencer, Global Product Manager for ANSUL® Vehicle Systems at Johnson Controls
As the global population continues to expand, demand for waste storage and processing is also on the rise. Recently released data predicts that solid waste generation worldwide will increase by a staggering 70% over the next 30 years to reach 3.4 billion metric tons.[1] Such exponential growth is likely to heighten pressure on already busy waste management and recycling facilities and in turn, raise the risks posed by fire incidents.
With large shredders and other waste handling equipment operating close to combustible dust, flammable fluids and unstable waste materials, fast-acting vehicle fire safety systems are essential for protecting personnel and property. But as awareness grows of the impact fire suppression agents containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) can have on the planet, companies must consider evolving environmental regulations as well as performance when selecting a fire suppression system.
Focus on fire hazards
Like all heavy industries, waste management brings with it a host of unique safety challenges. Shredders and mobile plant vehicles pose a risk of ignition in themselves though superheated engine parts, high-performance turbo chargers and flammable hydraulic fluid or vehicle fuel.[2] Add to this the threats presented by Class A material build-up (wood, paper or textiles), and it becomes apparent why waste management sites require effective, fully regulation compliant suppression systems to keep them safe.[3] The incentive to install these vital safety measures is clear. But as facility operators look to source the best solution, the environmental credentials of some fire suppression agents – plus the stricter guidelines governing their use – must now factor into their decision-making process.
Changing PFAS perspectives
A common ingredient of wet chemical, foam or dual agent fire suppression systems, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are valued for their thermal stability and flame blanketing properties.[4] Recently however, governments and regulatory bodies around the world have begun to introduce tighter restrictions on the use of these chemicals. Because they are largely non-biodegradable and have a low Predicted No Effect Concentration (PNEC) score, even trace amounts of these chemicals in soil, ground or surface water can lead to serious environmental damage.[5] With this in mind, waste management contractors must seek fire suppression solutions that can assure the safety of their teams, costly specialised equipment and the planet.
Solutions for a safer, greener future
Typically, when a vehicle suppression system is deployed at the waste site it is not possible to stop the suppression agent from spilling out into the surrounding environment. In the light of growing environmental concerns surrounding PFAS, this lack of containment is now a key consideration site operators should factor into their choice of suppression agent, along with ensuring the area can be cooled quickly to below flash point (450⁰C) to reduce the risk of re-ignition.
In response to these evolving requirements, next generation of fluorine-free suppression agents like the ANSUL® LVS Non-Fluorinated Liquid Suppression Agent are emerging onto the market. This innovative suppression agent offers fast flame extinguishment and rapid surface cooling for reduced equipment downtime and improved suppression performance – all without PFAS. Simple and easy to fit into existing suppression systems, solutions like these give waste management professionals a reliable option for protecting their operations and profits, sustainably.
[1] Statista, Global waste generation - statistics & facts, August 2021, https://www.statista.com/topics/4983/waste-generation-worldwide/
[2] Waste Industry Safety and Health Forum, Reducing Fire Risk at Waste
Management Sites, March 2020, https://www.wishforum.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/WASTE-28.pdf
[3] Ibid, Reducing Fire Risk at Waste Management Sites, March 2020
[4] "Firefighters' exposure to perfluoroalkyl acids and 2-butoxyethanol present in firefighting foams", Laitinen JA, Koponen J, Koikkalainen J, Kiviranta H, Toxicology Letters, December 2014, 231 (2): 227–32. doi:10.1016/j.toxlet 2014.09.007.PMID25447453.
[5] The use of PFAS and fluorine-free alternatives in fire-fighting foams, Wood Environment and Infrastructure solutions, Report for European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), June 2020, https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/28801697/pfas_flourine-free_alternatives_fire_fighting_en.pdf/d5b24e2a-d027-0168-cdd8-f723c675fa98, p4.