Fluorine-Free Firefighting Foam: Is the Industry Ready for a Major Change?

Fluorine-Free Firefighting Foam: Is the Industry Ready for a Major Change?

There was a time when the only safeguards against a fire (no matter how vicious) were buckets of water. All of that changed as the firefighting industry evolved in the early 20th century. Around 1902, the first-ever firefighting foam was developed by a Russian chemist and scientist, Aleksandr Loran. 

Today, different classes of firefighting foams exist for suppressing various kinds of fires. For instance – Class A foam is used for fires that catch on wood, paper, or garments. In this article, we will specifically focus on Class B firefighting foam used to extinguish liquid-fuel fires. 

Also known as Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF), this firefighting foam is said to be effective but hazardous. The firefighting industry is preparing to shift from the toxic AFFF to non-toxic variants. 

The million-dollar question is whether or not the industry is ready for such a massive change. Keep reading as this article explores that in detail. 

AFFF: Its Popularity and Downfall 

To understand the origin of AFFF, we must get to its main ingredients – per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances or PFAS. A group of complex 12,000+ chemicals, PFAS were discovered in the 1930s. However, they were commercialized only in the 1940s, with 3M as the main manufacturer. 

At the time, PFAS were primarily used in producing non-stick cookware and stain-resistant garments or upholstery. Their use in AFFF did not start until the second half of the 1960s. This firefighting foam was first patented in 1966. 

By the 1970s, all military installations began using AFFF to put out liquid-fuel fires. This means that firefighters have been using AFFF for decades. Gradually, concerns were raised about the toxic nature of PFAS used to manufacture AFFF. According to TruLaw, firefighters developed life-threatening conditions like kidney and testicle cancer due to prolonged AFFF exposure. 

ALSO, READ The Best Ways To Advocate For AFFF Exposure Awareness

In 2017, hundreds of injured firefighters sued PFAS manufacturers. By 2018, the AFFF lawsuit had turned into a multi-district litigation or MDL (having thousands of cases). Besides personal injury lawsuits, municipalities filed water contamination cases. 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agreed to the adverse nature of PFAS. It was indispensable to ban these chemicals’ production. 

The Transition to Synthetic Fluorine-Free Foam 

In the firefighting foam lawsuit, the first-ever Bellwether trials were held last year. The chosen case was that of the City of Stuart vs. 3M Co. et al. The outcome was in the plaintiffs’ favor as 3M privately negotiated to pay $10.3 billion in settlements. 

This money will be used over 13 years for PFAS detection and elimination. As of now, the personal injury cases are awaiting their trial proceedings for individual payouts. In light of the dangers associated with PFAS, 3M promised to stop all production by the year ending 2025. 

Countries worldwide have taken the initiative to ban PFAS by the said period. This means that the firefighting industry must transition to non-toxic fluorine-free firefighting foam soon. Companies like BIOEX are working on producing synthetic fluorine-free foams that do not contain any PFAS. The company’s firefighting foam is biodegradable and non-toxic. 

Challenges Involved in Adoption and Future Scope 

The main question is whether SFFFs will be able to match AFFF as far as fire-suppression performance is concerned. Compared to legacy AFFF, it is true that certain challenges will be involved. Let’s look at the three main differences that won’t go unnoticed with the SFFF transition. 

Application Rate Changes 

When it comes to SFFF agents, the foam application rate may have to be increased. This means that a higher amount may be required to experience similar fire-suppressing capabilities. For instance – If regular AFFF could perform at 0.15 GPM (gallons per minute), synthetic fluorine-free foaming agents may require over 0.20 GPM. 

Proportioning Differences 

With the new SFFF agents, other firefighting equipment may also require changes. This is due to the differences in chemical properties and viscosity of the two foams. For instance – the SFFF agent may not be compatible with the existing foam proportioning device. This largely depends upon different brands and their SFFF concentrate. 

Differences in the Application of Finished Foam 

The main way in which the SFFF agent suppresses fire is by creating a foam blanket. This acts as the barrier between the atmosphere and the fuel. AFFF agents not only provided this barrier but they also created an invisible aqueous film that raced ahead of the aforementioned foam blanket. 

This means the quality of the foam blanket is of utmost importance with SFFF, without which it would become challenging to extinguish fast-spreading fires. 

The Department of Defense (DoD) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have researched non-toxic fluorine-free foam since 2023. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has even released workshop dates to educate the industry on a smooth transition. 

This is the need of the hour because the day is drawing near when the anticipated change will become a living reality.