The Salesmen of the Green New Deal

Why was halon not used to stop these fire?
MGM Grand fire - Wikipedia
Dupont Plaza Hotel arson - Wikipedia
First Interstate Tower fire - WikipediaWhy is there no record of a fire department ever using halon on a structure fire?
Why did no fire depts ever have a halon truck. They had tankers and pumpers, but no halon trucks. A vast conspiracy before the ozone conspiracy? Why was it never deployed for any wildfire in US history? 

quote:

---

The toxicity of the Halon gases makes them dangerous to use in confined spaces. If it is to be used in such scenarios, precaution is required to minimize any inhalation of Halon. Avoiding all unnecessary exposure to Halon is considered good practice. This is because exposures to concentrations of 7% for more than 15 minutes can be very dangerous. The risk is minor when exposed to Halon in the 5-7% range as no noticeable effect can occur. However, at levels between 7% to 10%, the likelihood of toxicity increases significantly. That’s why, in places where Halon is still used and needed to be used, it is highly recommended that operators evacuate the space before proceeding

---

quote:

---

There are a number of health risks associated with the use of Halon extinguishing agents. These include the following:

​

• Frostbite: Skin that comes in contact with the liquid of Halon can cause frostbite and chilled skin issues.
• Suffocation: High concentrations of Halon can cause people to suffocate. This is because it can create an oxygen-deficient environment.
• Eye and Skin Irritation: Since Halon is toxic, it can cause damage to skin and eye. Irritation can occur even if there is no direct contact with Halon.
• Cardiac Sensitization: Halon can cause an increased heart rate and irregular heartbeats in response to adrenaline. It can even cause a heart attack in extreme cases.
• Interruption of the Central Nervous System: Inhalation of high concentrations of Halon can interfere with the proper functionality of central nervous system. In such cases, symptoms of tingling sensation and dizziness is expected. A victim can even go unconscious in some cases.

---

3 Ways That Halon Can Be Dangerous | We Buy Halon

Gee less than a minute of research.

quote:

---

Health effects reported in some quarters associated with Halon extinguishers include Asphyxiation, frostbite, burns to the skin, as well as skin and eye irritation. Inhaling halon compounds in high concentrations can cause central nervous system disorders including dizziness, unconsciousness, and tingling in the arms and legs.

​

Exposure to halon compounds may also cause cardiac sensitization resulting in irregular heartbeats and even heart attacks (in severe circumstances). This is because when halon is used on fires, it produces such decomposition byproducts as hydrogen chloride, hydrogen bromide, and traces of free halogens.

---

Halon Fire Extinguisher: How It Works And Its LimitationsSounds like pretty toxic stuff. So let me get this straight Halon is not real bad unless exposed to in high concentrations, but when used to put out a fire very toxic chemicals are released. Hmmm.

Then it should be easy to provide scientific evidence supporting that. Of course it's relevant, because you are STILL FAULSLY IMPLYING THAT IF THE NYFD HAD HALON THEY COULD HAVE PUT THOSE FIRES OUT ON 9-11 BEFORE THE BUILDINGS COLLAPSED!The north tower collapsed 102 minutes after the crash and the south tower collapsed 56 minutes after the crash.There would have been no way to deliver halon to those fires in that amount of time and no way to smother those fires (keep oxygen away long enough to cool off and no longer support combustion) because jet airliners crashed into those building at high speed and full of fuel and blew the windows out and breached floors and ceilings. The fires heated the support girders so much they buckled and they would have reignited fires as soon as oxygen was reintroduced.What's also relevant is that 9-11 all happened 23 years ago and cannot be changed and you are trying to pretend that the environmental movement and Green New Deal and atheists are partly to blame. Your behavior here is contemptable!

You have a number of replies addressing your claims about the environment and you choose to focus on halon, a minor, minor, minor, minor, minor, minor, minor, minor, minor, minor, minor, minor side detail? And you don't even address the elephant in this tiny off room, that halon could not have been effectively employed on 911 to save the towers or lives. And halotron has replaced halon. It wouldn't have helped the towers, either.From Halotron I - Wikipedia:

Wikipedia on Halotron I:

---

[Halotron I] was originally introduced in 1992 to replace the severely ozone-depleting Halon 1211 (bromochlorodifluoromethane). Halon 1211 has a global warming potential of 2,070,[2] whereas Halotron I's GWP is 77, a 96 percent reduction.

​

In December 2011, Halotron I was tested against "hidden fires", spurred by the effectiveness its predecessor demonstrated on an in-flight fire aboard a Delta L-1011 flight on March 17, 1991. The test was conducted at UL, and demonstrated similar effectiveness as Halon 1211, with significantly less human and global harm.[4] Although the fire extinguishing effectiveness is similar, Halotron I requires a larger chemical volume to get the same ratings as Halon 1211.

---

Please address the replies showing that your major claims are wrong. I'm referring to those claims you made about The Green New Deal generally and pollution, the ozone layer, and climate change specifically.And include links to where you're getting you're information from. Including links is just the easiest thing in the world. The link to this forum, https://www.evcforum.net/Threads.php becomes EvC Forum: All Topics. And there are tons of dBCodes described at dBCode Help. Try 'em, you'll like 'em, and they'll jazz up your rather dry messages a little.--Percy

Can you also try to get USA 1776 to understand simple stuff like why something might work to snuff out fires in a confined space might not work in an open space?

Impossible. Understanding basic science and rational thought is anathema to his political and religious agenda.
Showinghim that he is wrong does not make him want to explore reality. It reinforces his idea that he and his dogma are correct and we are all evil atheists or satanists.As my father would say about the ultra religious.They live by the dogma. "Don't confuse me with the facts. My mind is made up."Besides. Who should we listen to, experts in the field or a piano tuner with unsourced, unevidenced claims?

Long long away and far far ago; in one of my earlier lives, back when professional Fire Departments were a Big City phenomena, I was a Volunteer Fireman and also a University of Maryland Extension Service instructor on fire fighting and prevention.John Deere had just developed a new line of smaller, lighter fire trucks with smaller water carrying capacity and a new pumping system that produce very high pressure lower volume hoses and nozzles. Unlike the traditional nozzles this was more like a rifle with a pistol grip mammoth all fingers squeeze trigger and a forearm for the other arm to grab. They were designed mostly for two uses, the field fires where the high pressure allowed reaching distant places but also as First on the Scene house fires.That latter use was the most fantastic new use. When you showed up at a house fire the relatively thinner, lighter and more flexible ¾" hoses could be deployed much faster than the old cotton 1½" lines and so you could attack the fire far quicker.BUT the big difference was how this newer technology was used. You fought the fire in a whole different way. Once you entered you simply crawled as low as possible directly into the middle of the room, rolled over onto your back, aimed the nozzle straight up with the selector set to widest spray, squeezed that massive trigger for two to three seconds and let go.The combination of the wide spray pattern and very high pressure produced a mist rather than stream that immediately turned into steam. The steam expansion (1:1700) simply removed all the oxygen and snuffed the fire out. It was amazing, unbelievable, somewhat scary.But the technique ONLY worked in relatively enclosed spaces. The technique that was so effective in a building did nothing out at the field or forest fire.

We seem to be going down a rabbit hole, but I feel it is a very important rabbit hole. Maybe the peanut gallery can learn some lessons. Rarely, if ever, is there a silver bullet. Fires and fire fighting are a microcosm that can teach important lessons in life and in science.
At times radical ideas are needed to overcome an obstacle. For example, high explosives used in order to put out oil or chemical fires. Other times the oldest simplest way is the most effective. Water. There is still no more effective way to put out a structure fire than spraying water on it. There is a wide variable between those two types of fires and many other types of fire. Depending on the circumstances of the fire and the fuel, the response needs to be and will be different. Halon was not some sort of magical solution for all fires. If it had been we would have been presented with some evidence of this. Instead all we received after multiple requests was more unevidenced assertions, from a person with no expertise in the field
Halon's causing depletion of the ozone layer is a known, scientifically confirmed fact. The thinning of the ozone layer can have known, scientifically confirmed consequences on life. Global climate change has known and scientifically confirmed consequences on life. These are all backed by scientific evidence.
This yahoo has presented no evidence or sources for claims to the contrary.. All we have received are more assertions from a person with no expertise in the field.
So peanut gallery, I present to you a small snippet of the religion vs science debates. People on the science side have mountains of evidence. People on the religion side have unevidenced assertions. The religious decry expertise and rely totally on their gut feelings and what some else told them of how to understand their holy books. They then expect us all to follow this warped view of their scriptures.
Then another religious nut comes along that has been taught a different view of the same holy books. We are expected to then accept this version
Meanwhile, science putters along examining facts and data. At times someone will come up with new ideas of what the facts and data mean then other people will challenge them and try to come to the same conclusions. Usually they old view holds strong, but sometimes the paradigm does shift and science shifts with it. This is not a defect in science, this is science at its core,

One very important lesson is kitchen fires. If you are frying something in oil and the oil catches on fire, DO NOT USE WATER!!! The best method is to smother the fire with baking soda, or better yet have a fire extinguisher in your home (fully charged and checked annually). If you don't have baking soda, try to move the fire to a safe place off of heat and let it burn out. I actually have a cousin who suffered severe burns from a kitchen oil fire, it's not something want to mess with.Stepping down from the soap box . . . The hubris of the conspiracy theorists and science deniers is quite the thing to behold. They don't know the science they are rejecting, and yet they think the people who have studied the science for the majority of their adult life are all wrong. After demonstrating their ignorance and hubris, they then expect people to think they are right about religion.

quote:

---

It is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel [unbeliever] to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn … If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well, and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books [Scriptures], how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?
--St. Augustine

---

Even better for grease fires is "Just put a lid on it!". Simply place the pot or pan lid or a slightly larger pan lid on it. Snuffs it out. Safer than trying to move the pan.Other things, electric fire use fire extinguisher or if you can reach the plug, unplug it. Then you can treat it as a normal fire and use water. But water ONLY after unplugging.Wood, paper, fabrics use water.Pancakes, tell the kids they are 'Cowboy Pancakes'.

Are you trying to say that because Halon can put out fires it means it can't deplete ozone in our atmosphere?

I think the argument is halon can put out fires and even if depletes ozone it is irrelevant because of jesus.
Yadda yadda jesus. Yadda yadda jesus.The whole "can put out fires" seems to be a red herring.

For home use there are three types of fire extinguishers; identified as A, B or CA type are for solids, wood cloth, paper, plastics and rubbers.B are for flammable liquids, grease, fats, gasoline, alcohol, paints and such.C are for electrical fires.All fire extinguisher will be labeled and some will work over two or more types such as BC or ABC.Read the labels.

Also, extinguishers have to be replaced after a certain period of time. My ABC extinguishers have a 12 year expiration.