The Fire Protection Podcast : Episode 48 – With new regulations, where do Foam, HFCs, and 3M™ Novec™ 1230 go from here??

Speaker 2 – Todd Stevens:

I’m doing wonderful today. How are you?

Speaker 1:

We are not at the golf course that we recorded this at last time, so

Speaker 2:

Couple years back. Yeah, we did that in a country club at a golf course. Why did we not plan that this time?

Speaker 1:

In the dining room, which they were cleaning up. It was kind of fun. When was that? That was 2019, so that was almost four years ago. Which is crazy.

Speaker 2:

Right.

Speaker 1:

And the topic we talked about last time was some similar; obviously you’re in a different role now. Want to learn about that a little bit, but it kind of went down the. I think we’ve talked about foam, right? And some of the foam proportioning

Speaker 2:

Testing. Yep, exactly. We spent a lot of time talking about foam and foam proportioning, and Yep, that’s correct.

Speaker 1:

Cool. Well, if anybody hasn’t listened to that one, please listen to that one. But Todd Stevens from SEVO  IFP, or Industrial Fire Protection. I guess let everybody know who you are, and obviously a lot of people listen to the podcast know who you’re already, but Sure yeah.

Speaker 2:

Shoot. Yeah, IFP. And, as you mentioned, industrial fire protection. We are a complete turnkey design, installation, maintenance fire suppression contractor. So we do the whole package. We are based out of just outside of Kansas City in Lenexa, Kansas, but a lot of our team is kind of remote all over the US, and we follow our customers wherever those needs are. So we really do work all across the US market and all fire suppression, whether it’s clean agents, water mist, foam and then, of course the big elements of the detection and control side as well. And getting involved in that side of it. We see a lot of different neat things, and it’s really just providing the support to our customers for special hazard needs.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, nice. Yeah, I knew, so you guys are kind of a attached or an arm of SEVO, which I have known for years and years. So it’s not just that you guys are branching off doing every kind of special hazards out there, right?

Speaker 2:

Yeah, we are. And that’s a good point. It, so what makes IFP unique is that we do have a direct link to that manufacturing side. SEVO Systems as a lot of is a manufacturer of clean agent systems where the installer side we are a separate company altogether, but we do have that link to SEVO. So we are able to get more involved in some direct design of different systems, if you will, that IFP is kind of creating and developing with SEVO as a partner. But yes, you’re absolutely correct. We’re not just focused on clean agent; we are a typical contractor. We’re a distributor of a lot of different products out there that you guys all know in the water mist industry and, like I said, in the detection and control side of it. So yeah.

Speaker 1:

What’s your favorite special hazard?

Speaker 2:

Oh boy.

Speaker 1:

To work on and then just in general, I, my favorites have kind of evolved over the years too. So

Speaker 2:

Yeah, I think a big part of what we do is the clean agent side of things, and that’s something that’s been near and dear to my heart over the years. So that’s probably one of my biggest joys is doing layouts and designs of clean agent systems. But the, what’s really changed in the industry, the detection and control side is really unique. And I’m not talking about just basic fire alarm. I’m talking about really cool flame detection and hydrogen detection and all sorts of unique aspects that really help me think outside of the box of, hey, it’s not just about discharging and clean agent system. What are those things prior to that that we can use to help perform a better special hazard system? Yeah,

Speaker 1:

I went to Penn Station or Moynihan Station recently, and I had worked on a project at Moynihan Station way back when I was at Viking. And there were, these are cycling delo systems essentially in the terminal where it was huge class ceilings. And if you’ve been to Moynihan, it is beautiful, but they took the Viking the long throw, 638, I think they popped the head out, and they did Viking. We did special testing for this at the time with the daily systems. But those, the daily systems were great, but it was all the detection that was the coolest part. It was like a flame detector of something happening on the train floor that would set this whole system off, and then they would, if there’s a false activation or whatever, it was obviously a remote shutoff switch. So it was this whole approval process kind of beyond code, which was cool to work with the FDNY, with the engineers and obviously the manufacturer and the fire alarm detection. So it was a kind of cool project, but the TE detection was, I think, the brains of it.

Speaker 2:

A hundred percent. We’re seeing that a lot. One of the things that IFP gets very much involved in market wise is clean energy, the ESS market battery storage, and talk about with that. Yeah, that’s really interesting. With off gas detection and just recently getting involved in projects where they had smoke, they had heat, they had off gas, and they had hydrogen, they had all four of those types of detection in one container. All doing unique things and trying to wrap our head around when is that detection actually going to activate in a fire or an event and what should we do with it with that information. So yeah, it’s. I think the different technologies offer some unique aspects to that. And the ESS market’s a big one for,

Speaker 1:

So the ESS energy storage systems, is that what it’s, is there any other solution now? You know, see the crazy videos on YouTube or whatever of somebody throwing a lithium ion battery and in Novec 1230 fluid or, I mean, you see all these lithium, I saw one the other day, it was like a wife and her a kids and must have been a toy that caught fire, and she’s trying to put the thing out. No, just get out of the house or toss the battery outside if you can with a shovel. I don’t know I, I guess, what solutions that are out there to suppress, and it seems like there isn’t, from my perspective, and it’s probably the detection that’s going to obviously be the first piece, right?

Speaker 2:

Yeah, I think it’s it, it’s important to understand that, like you just said, the detection is number one in reference to again, and you have to really dive into a battery fire and not to get too into the weeds, but when you start talking about off-gassing and thermal runaway and that sort of thing, understanding those stages of a battery fire and then within those stages how to react as far as new technologies out there, I mean there’s a lot of different options and avenues, and there is some suppression agencies, again, there’s clean agent options, there’s water mist options. But the question I always ask, and I’ve always learned to ask, is what are we protecting? Is it a class A fire? Is it a class C fire, or are we trying to protect thermal runaway? And those are the questions you need to understand and got to. I think a lot of people mislead their customers in the sense of saying, oh yeah, we’re going to put this system in.

It’s going to stop thermal runaway. Well, is that really what you’re doing? And wrapping their head around what technology does what. So, and to answer your question more directly too, a lot of it has to do with the battery manufacturer and how those racks are built and how the batteries are built. All these batteries are unique in how that cell is designed and how can we attack it if there is a fire, if it’s completely enclosed, if it’s open, you know, have to go through that risk assessment and that analysis based on the battery manufacturer. And you’re seeing more battery manufacturers get more involved in that side of it to help protect their batteries and developing different ways that they think is going to work best from a fire suppression standpoint or a detection standpoint. So

Speaker 1:

Yeah,  Tesla with obviously they’re probably one of the largest on the large battery scale, where they’ve hired some pretty high powered fire protection engineers on their team, and they keep growing that out. And I think that’s internally, but also externally where they’ve got to figure out on their own systems and old batteries that they’re selling, whether it’s the power walls or some of the industrial and batteries that they sell and how just, at least for the next few years, since that’s being bigger, the federal government is funding, and there’s a lot of emphasis on it. But that’s a few negative sides to lithium ion batteries. And one of ’em is fire.

Speaker 2:

Mean. We’ve been talking about lithium ion batteries for a long time, I mean for years. And we almost in our industry got sick of the next webinar that came up about lithium ion batteries. It was like, oh, another one. But I think we’ve learned a lot over the last three or four years. And again, I don’t know. We asked the question, is it a fire problem, or is it a battery problem? Right. Whose issue really is it to handle? And of course we want to do everything we can from a fire standpoint to help that scenario, but the battery does pose a lot of challenges and just, and that’s what we have to work with and develop some new ways and new ideas.

Speaker 1:

Well, there’s a ripe opportunity in the market right now because since the emphasis on moving to more electric. I mean, the car manufacturers are going electric, and personally I would love to get a power wall in our new house, but I don’t know. I’m also skeptical; I’m not skeptical of it. It’s just like being in the fire industry. You see all the negative sides of it. So like and I have got some buddies at work at the Giger factory out in Nevada, so it’s pretty cool to see what they’re doing, but obviously, we got to solve that problem. And again, there’s enough money being poured into that side of the industry that we could solve that.

Speaker 2:

And I’ve always told people I, I’m impressed with electric cars. I would buy one tomorrow, but I probably would not park it in my garage. It, it scares me because we’ve seen it too often, and I know it’s a unique case, and all the parameters have to be just right for a fire in that type of scenario. But they do exist, and yeah, it

Speaker 1:

Makes me so no power wall in your house either?

Speaker 2:

No power wall not even any solar panels. I . Yeah. But I love that idea, that concept of, hey, let’s throw solar powers on the roof and let’s store that energy in a firewall in my garage and let me plug my electric car. I just, it’s really cool. Jetson, right? I think it’s awesome, but it’s just not something I’m going to jump into tomorrow and to do because of that fire hazard.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, I think there could be a software solution if you’re monitoring those battery and the energy systems. If you’re monitoring at least that, that’s your detection system from a software point of view. If they’re detecting a different gases or even just detecting temperature remotely, send something to your phone saying, Hey, you’ve got an issue. So I think there’s some software aspects of that that could help. Not only is the detection side, but the software side of those batteries.

Speaker 2:

Sounds like a offshoot of inspect point. Yeah,

Speaker 1:

Yeah. New startup idea. Right. Well, cool. Anything, I guess is what, what’s in IFP kind of working on any cool projects you can tell us about? Any cool things you’re working on that you want to get out to the market?

Speaker 2:

Yeah, I think we spent some time talking about ESS. That’s a big part of what we do. And, like I said, clean energy and different aspects of that. We’re very involved in the government sector, and government projects, obviously data centers, which is common to our industry and a lot of folks are involved in. But another key element to what we do is the aviation market. In the aviation market, meaning everything from a small data closet in the terminal to protection of the control tower to protection of the aircraft hangers within those F facilities or even wield extinguisher units. So there’s a lot within the aviation market. We’ve kind of got a little bit of a niche going with that. There’s a lot of conversation about foam and concerns with foam and the changes and regulations to foam products out there. And we’re involved with alternatives to that within aircraft hangers. And we’ve done some testing, we’ve moved forward with some projects, and we’ve successfully moved forward with the idea of utilizing clean agent in aircraft hangers. I know water mist is out there as well. You’re seeing some of that pop up and some opportunities. So again, I think what makes us innovative is thinking again, outside of the box. We have issues with regulations today. What can we do to combat that and to come up with new ideas for our industry that we can utilize. So

Speaker 1:

Yeah, the whole foam thing is, it’s a bit of a mess from all the, obviously safety and not environmental, I guess it’s a little bit environmental, but it’s a safety thing and taking essentially every foam, even in the firefighting side out of the market and putting in new, and I think you can do that from the firefighting aspect on their trucks and everything pretty easily, but And does it fight the fire the same? I know there’s a debate, debate on that, but I think the fixed systems foam side is a lot bigger. I feel like every five to 10 years; there’s a transformation of these foam systems from, what was it, the animal, the animal based product? I forgot

Speaker 2:

What you, yeah yes, I know you

Speaker 1:

Made of Crushed Bone, and yeah,

Speaker 1:

No, that’s my old days.

Speaker 2:

Then C8 and then the C6 and then, and I went through that when we worked together at Viking and just those changes. And it was interesting because we, it was such a, and I give foam manufacturers a lot of credit cause they dealt with a lot going from C8 to C6, and it was this whole big change and understanding the capabilities of the new C6 foam and how that relates to the systems that are already installed. Can you just swap it out? Is it compatible? Is it non-compatible? And then all of a sudden, it seemed like not even a year later, it was like, yeah, no, we don’t fix foam either, and we’re got to go to fluorine free. And, like I said, I give those guys a lot of credit. It kind of stinks for them that they went through that process and then got hit again with that. But yeah, it’s been a challenge, but there’s a lot of great fluorine free options out there. I think that the important thing for installers like myself and is to understand what does that mean? If somebody says to me, well, I want a fluorine free foam, and I have currently have an existing AFF system, can I just swap it out? And 9 times out of 10, the answer is no. It’s replacing a lot, whether it’s discharge devices, the bladder tanks, the proportioner.

Speaker 1:

Even the pipe, probably, right? Because if you have to run, redo the hydraulic calc and then the heads aren’t listed with that foam, it’s just like, it’s just a mess.

Speaker 2:

And even the thought that if a system actually activated it any time, you have potentially have that a fluorine foam that was in that piping. So that pipe in itself is now contaminated.

Speaker 1:

Oh gosh,

Speaker 2:

It, it’s got PFAS, it’s it’s bad. And can we flush that piping and clean it out, or do we just pull it all down and replace it like you had said. So there, there’s a lot more to it from that aspect. So

Speaker 1:

That’s crazy. So how does the clean agent hangar protection work? You guys come from the ceiling, and I know it it’s heavier than air. Is that how it comes down from the ceiling, or is it from the floor or from the wall?

Speaker 2:

Yeah, the design of it is really based on the actual hangar size and the dimensions of the hangar and that sort of thing. Some of the initial testing that we did, we actually did sidewall nozzles kind of shooting down low and from the wall standpoint. But more recent testing is at the deck and testing at 40, 45, 50 feet and shooting the agent straight down to attack the fire. Yep, yep. Interesting. It’s generally it, it’s a similar balanced, clean agent system that people are familiar with and at that ceiling level using flame
detection for activation as you would a foam system. And yeah, it’s pretty simple and straightforward. It’s unique. Now, it’s not a total flood. I know that comes up a lot is we’re not doing a complete total flood within the hangar. It’s more of what we call a local flood, if you will or really a right by area kind of using that same concept of local app with CO2 and that sort of thing. So so, it is a little bit of a different design, a little bit more unique. But yeah, it’s it.

Speaker 1:

You got to do a door fan test on the hangar.

Speaker 2:

You do not, no. And again, cause it’s not a total flood, we’re not worried about stealing the environment. We’re not really even concerned so much about whole time we’re putting out that fire that quickly.

Speaker 1:

Oh wow. So you could have the aircraft door open, Potentially,

Speaker 2:

Whenever we design a system, we require or request it to be closed during discharge. And we’ve learned a lot over the years as far as some hangers like, oh yeah, the door’s always closed, and some people see another, they’re always open. And if they are open more or we can’t automatically close it, there’s just some changes that we need to make in the design to make sure to create better coverage at that door if it is open, but

Speaker 1:

Interesting. Yeah. So how does the app, is it if approval through, I guess maybe this is just me being out of the clean agent world for a little bit. Is it a, is UL listing, or is it an FM approval for, is there that for regular clean agent in enclosed spaces? And I guess how does the approval translate to the new hangar protection?

Speaker 2:

Yeah great question. Mean yes, the equipment that we’re utilizing is UL listed and FM approved, right? Gotcha. So we’re the tanks and the agent and all the components and so forth are all listed. It would be in a data center application. What we’ve done kind of goes back to aircraft hangers as NFPA 409, and they’ve really opened the door up recently where they know that foam is a little bit more of a concern environmentally. So the 2022 edition has opened up the opportunity to say, Hey, listen, and if you’re familiar with 409, they kind of have a list of ways to properly protect your hangar. And it depends on the size hangar and all that sort of thing. But without getting into a lot of the details, you have that selection of options. And then at the end, it says, or if none of these options you’re using, you can use a new technology and create by creating a risk assessment.

So kind of goes back to all NFPA standards. The very beginning chapter one always has a paragraph that says that they’re not going to, and I’m paraphrasing that they don’t judge new technologies. It’s it you can use new technologies that are not specifically discussed in the standard as long as you are not lessening the safety as intended by the standard. Right? Gotcha. So 409 talks about foam. It doesn’t say that you have to use foam. It does technically say, well, you can use tech new technologies, and that’s an all NFPA standards, even 13 and that sort of thing. But what 409 has done is they’ve taken a step further and say, we’re going to keep that statement in there, but now we’re going to give more criteria. So now it’s actually more strict because it says, well, how do I know this new technology is acceptable and not providing less safety factor?

So you have to go through a process of creating that risk assessment. And that risk assessment is in chapter four, the standard and talks a lot about response time by the local fire department, what type of vehicles they have to respond to talks about what type of hangar it is. Is it a maintenance hangar, is it a storage hangar? And you go through that whole process if there’s a spill, what type of spill mitigation is involved. So that’s all part of that risk assessment. So all the projects that we have moving forward, we’ve created a risk assessment and submitted that for approval by the local authorities and whoever’s in charge of that process.

Speaker 1:

So who’s, I guess, the AHJ because the AHJ is sometimes a fire marshal, sometimes it’s the owner, sometimes it’s the insurer. I on the projects you’ve been working on with this. Obviously you said the federal government, but are the insurers, probably the owners are involved because they’ve got aircrafts, right? But is the fire officials evolved as much, or is it more on the, so

Speaker 2:

What you see and what we’ve noticed within the aviation market is if you’re not familiar with the firefighters that are specific to aviation, but it’s the ARFF working group, the Air Fire Fighters Rescue or Air Rescue Firefighters and their guys that are trained and specific to airports and that they’re firefighters on an airport basically. And those guys have a big say in what happens to any of those facilities that are within that airport structure, within those boundaries. So they’re a big part of it. But also, I mean, we’ve run into scenarios where a state fire marshal’s involved, or of course the insurance companies and so forth are always somebody that we want to get in front of if necessary. But our members seem to be the key people to discuss the details with so that they understand what’s in the building and how to handle it if the trucks roll up to an event.

Speaker 1:

Yeah. Well it’s crazy. The last, I mean, timing’s almost with this technology, and this solution’s pretty spot on because, obviously, you have all the PFOS and the PFOA with issues. But then, I mean, it seems like over the last two years there’s been, and maybe they weren’t getting publicized, but the false activations of some of the aircraft hangar and the phone system’s going off, it seems to have picked up at least in the last few, and maybe that’s just me, and again, I don’t track it, but you see him over the news, and then you had that one tragedy with the one person, I think it was in California or whatever, which is awful that they went in or they couldn’t get out. So obviously, you have a vet, but also the owners of those planes. I mean, you might have to scrap the plane afterward or really, really throw it through or to get it back up and running.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, I think that’s the key thing. I think you’re referring to the discharge in Ohio or the gentleman perished. It was a high expansion foam system, and I think there’s still some questions on whether what happened exactly there, but it unfortunate, and it is a safety factor, but whether it’s high expansion, whether it’s a Triple F, there’s cleanup, right? You need to properly contain that foam. You need to properly dispose of it. You can’t just dump that stuff down the drain. And there’s a lot involved with that process, and there’s a lot of expense involved with that process. And to your point you could very much damage that aircraft. So the question we like to ask is, what are we trying to do here? Are we trying to protect the aircraft hangar, or are we trying to protect the life safety and the aircrafts themselves right now?

So an owner, obviously, there’s more money in some of these planes than there is in the actual hangar itself. The hangar is four walls, and the plane itself is worth a heck of a lot more money. So foam systems activate properly, put the fire out, do their job, but how much damage does it do to the actual aircraft where a clean agent system activates, puts the fire out and does not damage the aircraft? There’s no residue. There’s no cleanup, there’s no need for containment. And that’s a big aspect of what, what’s really catching the eye of owners and contractors and stuff in the market right now as an option.

Speaker 1:
So speaking of ARFF and and 409 Aaron Johnson at all, of

Speaker 2:

Course, yep. Yeah,

Speaker 1:

Of course. What’s his opinion on this clean agent technology? I know he’s presented a lot in the past, and I’m sure he’s been kind of in the know of it, but I guess what’s his opinion on it?

Speaker 2:

Aaron’s supportive. He’s super knowledgeable and knowledgeable in that market and that industry. And he got a lot of friends in that industry, like you said, in ARFF and that sort of thing. Yeah, I think he’s excited to just see new technologies out there to provide more opportunities and more options for that environment. It’s funny because he got me a little bit more involved in the whole the electric vertical takeoff.

Speaker 1:

Yeah,

Speaker 2:

Yeah. Aspect. So we’re sitting here talking about aircrafts and fuel fires, but now we’re talking about electrical fires and aircrafts a whole different than now you’re tying in the whole ESS market. I think the whole EV is going to be pretty interesting. But he’s been pretty involved in that market as well. And wrapping his head around some of the opportunities moving forward with that. So

Speaker 1:

It’s funny, he presented at NAFED last year, and I was presenting, I think, after him or whatever the day after, and a heavy topic where, oh, I knew about electric cars, but electric helicopters and they’re going to Uber me or Blade whatever the new one is going to take it across the Long Island sound to New York City. I’m, I blew some people’s minds in the presentation of, and

Speaker 2:

It’s

Speaker 1:

Happening. What’s going out there.

Speaker 2:

Yeah. And it’s happening. It’s not like it’s just a dream. I, you know, talk about some of these companies like Jobby and Liam, and there’s so many others that are building these. I’ve read an article not too long ago that NetJets placed an owner for 150 of them.

Speaker 1:

No way.

Speaker 2:

And so that production’s moving forward, the FAA has done a ton to prepare for it. I still don’t know if we’re really ready for it, but is it’s really, really cool. That’s something I might want to purchase, maybe in an electric car, but I won’t buy an electric plane.

Speaker 1:

Yeah.

Speaker 2:

But yeah, no, and it goes back to technology like that opens doors for our industry. There’s so many people in our industry that are somewhat close minded, and they’re still stuck. We’re just going to
put Halon in a data center type thing. But when I hear evol, I get excited because I think it will list so many different opportunities for us as fire suppression contractors to get involved in that, the heliports,

the charging stations and all that sort of thing. So as that technology continues to grow, it helps provide us with new opportunities.

Speaker 1:

And you’ve had the different markets within fire protection with the warehouses and then obviously the data centers, and now it’s going into the transportation now, which is pretty cool.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, transportation is definitely a big market. So

Speaker 1:

Kind of last topic here, there’s a lot of, I think about a year, a little over a year ago, I had John Demeter on talking about the AIM Act, which is the American investment, or I don’t know,

Speaker 2:

Innovation, American Innovation and Manufacturing Act.

Speaker 1:

So essentially it, it’s tried to, I’m butchering this, but it, it’s taking out a lot of the HFCs within the market. And it was funny, and somebody brought it up to me that wasn’t involved in fire protection the other day and like, oh, what’s the opportunity of looking at HSF, FCS and the Inspect Point platform and stuff like that. And at the overall, IT HFCs are bigger in the HVAC in that market, but fire protection’s gotten looped in and obviously have to curb some of those chemicals. So any update on the AIM Act? And I want to get into the 3M update at some point too.

Speaker 2:

Sure. Yeah. I mean, the AIM Act, I think back again; it’s been a discussion for years, right? About HFCs and the concern, and there was always that, I guess we could say, threat that they would phase down or phase out HFCs. And it’s been a top popular topic in our industry for a long time. I want to say it was close to the end of 2021 that we finally saw some traction, if you will. And the EPA basically said, yeah, HFC227 and 125 and other HFCs are now part of this process that we are going to phase down. But it was interesting because they talked about 85% phase down of the production and consumption of HFCs by 2035. We’re only in 2023 right now. So in my mind, well, hey, we got time and that sort of thing. But the interesting aspect of this was that happened I think officially the end of 2021, and then January of last year, a lot of the OEMs sent out messages and letters to their customers saying, we’re not going to support HFCs anymore. So

Speaker 1:

Shot up the price and everything too. Yeah, right.

Speaker 2:

Absolutely. But it was just with the idea of a phase down is always, you know, try to calm your customer down and say, oh yeah, no, it’s still acceptable. It’s just being phased down over a certain length of time. We’ll work with you. And then all of a sudden, we got cut off, and it was, well, you can’t get HFCs anymore. No new designs. No. And it was really interesting to see that I’m not an expert in it. I know there’s, when you talk about the manufacturing of HFCs, those companies get credits for certain HFCs that they make, and they can only spend so many credits. And now I’m butchering this, but basically it’s understanding of, and there’s refrigerants and that sort of thing. And the companies had to make those decisions on where do we make our biggest profit and maybe fire protection. HFCs really weren’t that big a profit. So even though it is technically a phase down till 2035, excuse me, don’t not going to

see it. I don’t know what OEMs still even allow the use of HFCs or support the use of HFCs with new installations. So I want to be clear too, talking about support for new installations, existing installations

are still fine. I know there’s capabilities of refill and that sort of thing, so that’s not a concern. But the new designs, it’s kind of interesting and just kind of got shut off all of a sudden. So

Speaker 1:

The new installations at the HFCs being phased out and are already phased out. So I mean, you’re going to the fluoroketone, I guess I’m going having to pull some stuff from my brain. I haven’t used in a while

Speaker 2:

Making you work for it today

Speaker 1:

With 3M, but they just put out a notice a few weeks ago that they’re going to start facing that out. So it’s just kind of wild, I guess. What’s the deal with that?

Speaker 2:

Yeah, that announcement came out in December and created quite a stir in our industry. And it’s still a very hot topic and sensitive topic. I think, in general, I can’t speak for 3M from the standpoint of what they’re doing, why they’re doing it. I can make some assumptions. I mean, we know that 3M is constantly in litigation for PFOS and PFOA issues within foam and other products that they manufacture that has PFOS and PFOA. And when we look at 3M as a whole, they’re a very large company, roughly 35 billion business where they’re PFAS manufacturing is maybe about 1.31 point billion. So if they’re getting hit with so many litigations in their minds, it’s a corporate decision, right? Well, we can just stop manufacturing it altogether, and that will get us kind of clear and free of future litigation. So from a business standpoint, I see what they’re doing, or I’m, what I’m surmising what they’re doing. The important thing is education and helping everybody understand that this is not being done due to any regulations at all. Right? Fluoroketone is still perfectly acceptable by the EPA. It’s acceptable by NFPA 2001. And there are other manufacturers of FK512

Speaker 1:

Out there then is the equivalent in Novec 1230 or,

Speaker 2:

Yeah. So Novec 1230 is the 3M branding rating. So in three Novec 1230 is FK512. And that’s what you’ll see in NFPA 2001 as listed as FK 512. So to do a little education, I’m going to go back because about 15 minutes ago, I made a comment, and I was wrong. Cause we were talking about foam, and I said PFAS is bad, and I was incorrect in that. But what made foam bad and the regulations of foam was PFAS and POA PFOS and PFOA. That’s why FOAM is being regulated and removed from the industry. FOAM is a PFAS, but again, PFAS is a very generic term for a lot of products.

We’re on the Zoom call right now. Our laptops, our cell phones, our cars, so many products that we have today have PFAS in it. So I think it’s important to get that education out there that not all PFASs are created equal. There is a process to try to rebrand PFAS into different categories. And I think those different categories would be the new terminology of PBT, which is persistent and toxic. So is a PFBAS PBT, or is it non PBT. Okay. Okay. So FK512 is a non PBT PFAS. So it’s persistent, which means it doesn’t stay in the environment. It doesn’t pertain to the groundwater. It evaporates, and it’s gone. It’s not a forever chemical. You hear that terminology that all PFAS are forever chemicals. That’s not a correct statement. It’s non bioaccumulative, which means it doesn’t stay in you. It doesn’t stay with you. And of course,

Speaker 1:

Have you ever been in a room when it’s gone off?

Speaker 2:

I have in testing applications. Yep. Yep.

Speaker 1:

Do you know what it does to your vocal chords?

Speaker 2:

Well, usually I wear a breathing apparatus in that. Yeah. So I’ve never breathed it in and tried talking.

Speaker 1:

And I, I’m going to out or whatever. So I was on; we were doing the Sapp Sapphires Johnson Controls line for sure. And they had us up to Ansul, and they discharged one, and then we got to go in the room, which probably wouldn’t have these days without a breathing apparatus, right? And you start talking, and in helium your voice goes high, but with Novec, your voice goes really low like this. So if I ended up getting something in the next 10 years and where it’s from, I guess

Speaker 2:

Well, it’s funny because we joke about even all the foam testing, and you see, and heck, I went years ago to a manufacturer for training, and they dump a bunch of foam, and everybody’s walking around in it, and they’re like, oh God, this is great. And I’m like, yeah, we not do that today.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, yeah. I don’t do it anymore.

Speaker 2:

But I think again, where IFP is moving forward with the well, SEVO as a manufacturer is continuing to move forward with the manufacturing of FK products and systems. I think a lot of the manufacturers out there have already released statements pretty much saying the same thing, that production is going to continue to move forward. 3M is a big manufacturer of FK 512, but they’re not the only one. So there are options out there. I truly believe it may even open the door for other manufacturers to say, yep, this is a good market I want to be in. Again, it’s a non BVT. There is zero regulations occurring. There is nothing wrong with FK 512. Nothing’s changed from December to today or prior to that other than 3M making a business decision. Yeah, I think that’s the key. It’s frustrating for our industry because it does kind of put a dull light on the use of the clean agents.

But I think it’s important as members of the industry and to educate and to continue to get that information out there. And even some of the other guys like Honeywell, Kamo DuPont they’ve actually announced that they’re continuing to increase their PFAS productions. And they’ve said that publicly because PFAS is in so many different products, we can’t even imagine life without PFAS, to be honest with you. It’s in some of the drugs the pharmaceutical industry, Prozac, Lipitor even the new Covid 19 drug, they all contain PFA S, but they’re non BVT PFAS. Right. So without going on and on, I think the key thing here I want to get across to people is that not all PFASs are created equal. And FK 512 is a non PBT PFAS, and it is not being regulated, and there is no reason why we should be concerned with utilizing it moving.

Speaker 1:

Forward. And the manufacturers will pivot again to that different 5Ks to get it listed. Sure. And whatever else. So

Speaker 2:

Of course,

Speaker 1:

This is great, Todd. So want to wrap it up here. I don’t know if I asked you quick response questions last time, but did I in the last I don’t know if I did or not.

Speaker 2:

Think you may have. Yeah, because we talked about the superhero.

Speaker 1:

Oh, right. So you still sound like you’re from Boston, even though you live in North Carolina now. years I’ve been here. Yeah. You still got it in you. So if you had to pick a lobster roll, would it be cold or hot?

Speaker 2:

Oh, cold.

Speaker 1:

Yeah. Yeah,

Speaker 2:

Yeah. A hundred percent.

Speaker 1:

Yeah. All right. Yeah. That’s not Connecticut style. The original. Yeah. No,

Speaker 2:

New England style main. I tell the story all the time. When I did this years ago, I was up in Portland, Maine, at this little bar right on the pier and having a drink or two. We’re going to order some lobster, of course, in Maine; that’s what you eat. And this fishing boat comes in, and the guy, I’m watching the guy get off his fish fishing boat, and he literally throws a sack of lobster around his shoulder and walks in the front door of this restaurant. And I joked, and I stopped, and I said to the bartender, I says, I want that lobster right there. And the guy’s like, which one? He’s like this one. And he had him put Sack down, pulled the lobster out, put a colored tag on it, and he is like, all right, this one’s for him. Make sure you go cook it. You can’t get a fresher lobster.

Speaker 1:

Oh, that’s awesome. Yeah. Very funny. Another one round of trade shows this year. What one which ones are you most excited about?

Speaker 2:

Oh wow. Well we talked a little bit about some of the markets that we’re in. There is a ton of clean energy data conferences as well as aviation conferences. There’s so many out there. And it’s exciting because we are fire protection, and a lot of those people don’t see people like us. So we’re kind of bringing a new concept to something for them to think about. So it’s exciting instead of going to the same old conferences all the time. And it’s great to see the people that we know and so forth. But I think we get more value out of some of these other conferences that, like I said, the Aviation and Clean Energy conferences. But I always do enjoy NFPA. Of course, getting to see a lot of great people. And I was asked to speak at NAFED. You mentioned Oh, nice. Today this year which, is the first time I’ve been asked to do that. And I’m excited about that. So those conferences will be a lot of fun.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, NAFED’s a good one. I spoke at it last year, and we’re always active there, and it’s always a good time. You get a good mix across the industry, especially on the suppression side. So that one should be fun this year.

Speaker 2:

Yeah. How about you?

Speaker 1:

What’s,

Speaker 2:

You guys do a lot of conferences and stuff. Do you have a

Speaker 1:

Yeah, we’re trying to mix. Unfortunately, I’m not going to go to as many this year. I want my team to go to them. I can’t be the only person going all the time. I know it is a lot of fun. I get to do the podcast occasionally. I did it did it at FSSA last year. I did it at some of the NAFEDs, and a FSSA, NFSA, NFPA is always a great time because everybody gets together from all sorts of fire protection. So that one’s

Speaker 2:

Really cool. That’s the point, right? I think with NFPA; it’s, it’s not just suppression people. It’s not just fire alarm people, everybody. Yeah. So it’s fun.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, I liked it when it was in Boston last year because just NFPAs in Boston; that was a lot of fun last year, but Vegas always had a good time that Mandalay this year, so. All right. Last question. We got four teams left. Who are you rooting for?

Speaker 2:

Oh, man. I’m going to get shot if I don’t answer this correctly, but since I know, people can’t see that we’re on video, but Drew is there with an Eagles Philadelphia Eagles logo behind him. I am a New England Patriots fan, and I can say that now it’s the end of the podcast. So people are going to start shutting it off now, but because we are based out of the Kansas City market, the people that I work for are Chiefs fans. So I think Mahomes is a special guy. So I think he’s got a long history in front of him. And, of course, me being a Brady fan, I can see a lot of that in Mahomes. So I think I’m going to pull for the cheese through the rest of the year here, so, all.

Speaker 1:

Right. That’s fine. At least you didn’t say the Niners, so I’m probably jinxing them by doing this before the game. Before the game. Yeah. But

Speaker 2:

The Niners, who are the Niners, anyway, come on.

Speaker 1:

Crazy. I’m just glad the Giants. The evils are squashed; the Giants, and the Cowboys lost. So it’s a positive.

Speaker 2:

The evil empires are gone. Yeah.

Speaker 1:

Well, Todd, thanks again for joining. I guess, where can we find where can they find IFP.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, you can reach me at my email address, toddstevens@ifpcom. I know a lot of you out there know me, and I will be, like I mentioned, at a lot of the events coming up this year with NAFED and NFPA and FSSA and that sort of thing. So I’m sure you’ll find me somehow,

Speaker 1:

great.

Speaker 2:

But I appreciate the time, Drew. It’s always a blast to chat with you, and always makes it you always make the conversations fun. So I appreciate that, and thanks for having me.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, it’s getting easier. I just, a lot, it just spitballing, right?

Speaker 2:

Yeah. Great. Great job. It’s all right. Great. Great podcast. Thanks, Todd. All right. Take care.