Hallon alternativ
Broader fire protection engineering considerations and fire prevention began to take precedence over the basic fire-extinguishing perspective. The EPA and the Air Force helped to organize the Halon Alternatives Research Corporation HARC to aid in identifying the most promising research opportunities, and they worked to prepare markets to accept alternatives and substitutes as they developed. Increases in UV-B radiation are likely to have substantial adverse effects on human health, including increases in the incidence of, and morbidity from, skin cancer, eye diseases, and infectious diseases.
In Australia, the State of Victoria implemented strong controls on halon use, and plumbers' unions refused to install or service halon systems unless it was deemed essential bygd a committee of public and private experts. Elsewhere, authorities of jurisdiction were helping to eliminate requirements for discharge testing and training with halon. When stratospheric ozone is depleted by halons and other ozone-depleting substances, increased amounts of harmful ultraviolet radiation reach Earth's surface.
By late , the U. The National Fire Protection Association NFPA planned to mandate full discharge testing of all new halon CF 3 Br systems in beställning to verify that the controls and hardware functioned properly and that the concentration of halon gas was high enough and remained long enough in an enclosure to extinguish a test fire. Property owners began to use a broader range of strategies to protect property. Not a MyNAP member yet?
Insurance companies agreed to offer their most favorable rates to insure property with fire protection other than halon. The Air Force sent a representative to Montreal to help make the case that halon should be included in the protocol. It was agreed that EPA and the fire protection community jointly should investigate halon controls, with the goal being to act only by broad consensus. For example, military aircraft designers reevaluated whether space and weight might be better allocated to threat avoidance or weapons rather than fire protection.
Thus, much work remains to complete the phaseout of halon use. In , few substitutes had been identified for any of the ozone-depleting fire extinguishing substances, and it was widely believed that halon uses were all essential. Computer manufacturers confirmed that, contrary to advertising claims for halon, most equipment could be protected with water sprinklers. Because halons were not part of any regulatory plan and because fire protection involved human life and property, EPA officials met with the chair of the NFPA halon committee to discuss collaborative efforts to investigate halon use.
Looking for other ways to read this?
In early , EPA initiated projects with the U. Department of Defense and U. Air Force. EPA was concerned that property owners, insurance companies, and fire authorities might also conclude that older systems should be discharge tested or that all systems should be periodically discharge tested. In that document, halons are mentioned only briefly in an annex on monitoring of data, because earlier analysis had concluded that halon was rarely released and had predicted that halon use would decline as computer systems became smaller.
These efforts stimulated other important paradigm shifts. The Marine Corps, Navy, and Air Force cooperated to develop the first practical halon recycling equipment and were the first organizations in the world to deploy this equipment. Diplomats reasoned that if the military could reduce its use, so could the civilian sector. EPA's goal is to ensure that industry and consumers have ample choices for the diversity of applications in which CFCs and halons are currently used.
It was estimated that very little halon was used to actually kamp fires but that emissions from testing, training, and accidental discharge were far higher than analysts had thought. Telecommunications companies reduced the need for halon by using cable materials that would not bum. This committee of international experts became the catalyst for global efforts.
A plan was proposed to involve global experts in problem solving and to use market incentives to change the way that engineers and property owners protected against fire risk. Slowly fundamental change began to occur. EPA began to develop control strategies based primarily on measures of ozone depletion potential ODP. Title VI of the U. Clean Air Act of enacts the U. Section of Title VI directs EPA to set up the Significant New Alternatives Policy SNAP program, to evaluate any halon substitutes or alternative fire protection technologies to ensure that they reduce the overall risk to human health and the environment and to promote these substitutes to achieve rapid market acceptance.
Such testing alone would have substantially increased the threat to the ozone layer. The phaseout of halon production took effect January 1, , with little disruption because the fire protection community had established global information networks and coordinated halon banks. In , a small group of countries signed the Vienna Convention on Ozone Layer Protection, the framework for negotiating the Montreal Protocol. Chemical substitutes for halon for the remaining important uses are a part of the ultimate solution.
Halon Alternatives
Without this endorsement, halon production might not have been included in the Montreal Protocol. It was hoped that chlorofluorocarbon CFC restrictions alone would adequately protect the ozone layer. lista for a free account to start sparande and receiving special member only perks. The military began to design weapons systems that did not depend on halon. This language gave EPA broad latitude, but it did not give clear guidance.