Contaminant comparison between traditional firefighting and fire gas cooling / PPE before entering
Thank you for choosing Automatic Translation. Currently we are offering translations from English into French and German, with more translation languages to be added in the near future. Please be aware that these translations are generated by a third party AI software service. While we have found that the translations are mostly correct, they may not be perfect in every case. To ensure the information you read is correct, please refer to the original article in English. If you find an error in a translation which you would like to bring to our attention, it would help us greatly if you let us know. We can correct any text or section, once we are aware of it. Please do not hesitate to contact our webmaster to let us know of any translation errors.
Firefighters operate in hazardous environments where exposure to toxic and carcinogenic substances in fire gases poses significant health risks, including increased incidences of cancer and cardiovascular diseases.
This work has been produced by CTIF's Associate member Cold Cut Systems.
The attached report studies the effectiveness of the SAVE (Scan, Attack, Ventilate, Enter) tactic, deploying ultra-high-pressure water mist and controlled ventilation before entering and retaking the fire compartment, in reducing toxic exposure compared to traditional breathing apparatus (BA) internal attacks.
It is meant to be seen as an indicative study demonstrating the effectiveness of the SAVE method (Scan, Attack, Ventilate, Enter) and how it helps to minimize toxic exposure compared to traditional firefighting. The study showed that using SAVE significantly reduced the levels of contaminants inside the fire room; both air quality and visibility improved, and the temperature decreased, contributing to a safer working environment for firefighters. The study's results highlight the potential of the SAVE tactic to enhance firefighter safety by reducing exposure to hazardous substances.
Cold Cut Systems conducted comparative tests at the Guttasjön Fire Fighting Training Facility in Sweden, using a 40-foot container as the fire compartment. The tests evaluated two firefighting methods: the conventional standard operation BA-attack and the SAVE tactic, which involves cooling fire gases externally with water mist and ventilating the fire compartment before firefighter entry. Firefighters' exposure to contaminants was measured using samples from their protective equipment and analysed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS).
Results from the initial tests in July showed inconclusive differences due to procedural deviations. However, subsequent tests in December, where proper SAVE procedure were followed, showed a clear reduction in contaminant levels, particularly polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) such as phenanthrene and fluoranthene. The SAVE tactic significantly reduced the magnitude of contaminants and improved air quality, visibility within the fire compartment and temperature, suggesting a safer working environment for firefighters.
This study highlights the potential of SAVE tactics to improve firefighter safety by reducing exposure to toxic substances. Future research should include validation of the results and for instance comparative studies of physical absorption of substances between standard BA-attack and the SAVE tactic to highlight effects of a change in work-methods. The results underline the importance of tactical measures to minimise health risks and improve operational efficiency and safety in firefighting.