3M Novec 1230 Fire Protection Fluid

Myriam Lavoie <myriamlavoie [at] gmail__com> writes

>Amy McKune <amckune [at] eiteljorg__com> writes
>
>>We are considering replacing our Halon system with a Novec 1230 fire
>>suppression system.  All the trade data suggests it is a much
>>greener product than Halon, leaving traces in the environment for a
>>fraction of the time that Halon does.  I understand that it is
>>distributed with the same force as Halon continuing the need to move
>>away from storing objects on open shelving.  Does anyone have advice
>on whether this is an appropriate solution for collections storage?
>
>One of the museums in Quebec city was asked to phase out its Halon
>fire extinguishers in favour of a 'greener and healthier' product.
>Halotron was suggested as a replacement; like Novec 1230 it is
>marketed as a greener product that leaves no traces behind, and
>seems to be geared towards the electronics market (for instance in
>server rooms,etc.).

There is an inherent misconception in the sentence that says:

"One of the museums in Quebec city was asked to phase out its Halon
fire extinguishers in favour of a 'greener and healthier' product."

The new fire suppressing gases are "greener" meaning they are less
damaging to the environment because they cause less stratospheric
ozone destruction than the old halons. And in fact, the halon-like
gases allowed today will be phased out eventually and replaced by
even less ozone-damaging compounds. But the diminished effect
chemicals have on ozone has nothing whatever to do with being
"healthier" for you.

The old Halon's were less toxic to breathe than the new ones.
Further, most "greener," "biodegradable," and "low VOC" products are
more toxic to people than the ones they replaced.  For example, the
biodegradable solvents such as turpentine, pinene, and citrus oil
(d-limonene) are more toxic to people than common petroleum
distillates.  And some of the nonylphenol ethoxylate replacements
for the low toxicity phosphate detergents banned for fertilizing our
waterways are now banned in the EU and known to cause feminizing
estrogenic activity in aquatic animals and probably in humans.

Another unreliable term is "low VOC" which only means there are low
amounts of *regulated* solvents in the product--solvents that react
with sunlight to create smog.  Solvents that don't do this are not
regulated and can be in the product at any level without labeling as
a VOC.  So a can of 100% acetone or ethyl acetate could be labeled
correctly as containing "no VOCs."  If that weren't enough, EPA
mucks about with the definition. For example, they call
2-butoxyethanol a VOC in industrial products and not a VOC in
consumer products.  Go figure.

*Never* assume any label term means the product is safer for you.
And that includes the term "nontoxic" which can be applied to
chemicals with low acute hazards but for which there is absolutely
no chronic data such as cancer or reproductive data.  And this is
common even when the chemical is in a class in which all members are
suspected to cause cancer but the particular class member in your
product has not been tested.

All we can do now is wait for the UN's GHS version of Safety Data
Sheets which are adopted in the EU (in effect for pure substances
since 2010, for mixtures by 2015) and proposed for adoption in
Canada and the US. Then we will see what manufacturers must actually
reveal.  The UN version of the SDS requires manufacturers to either
list the data for cancer, reproductive and other basic chronic tests
or say "no data available."  So these GHS SDSs inform users about
both what is known and what is *not* known.  The US version proposed
by OSHA waters this toxicology section down to bovine poo.  OSHA
doesn't require missing data to be mentioned and still allows
manufacturers to say "not listed as a carcinogen by IARC, NTP or
OSHA" which actually means there is no data.  But people
misinterpret this statement. So once again, the US workers will be
provided less informative SDSs than are required in the rest of the
world. Ah, me.

Well thanks, guys.  I feel better getting this all off my chest
again anyway.

Monona Rossol
ACTS
181 Thompson St., #23
New York NY 10012


                                  ***
                  Conservation DistList Instance 26:7
                   Distributed: Monday, July 9, 2012
                        Message Id: cdl-26-7-007
                                  ***