Power Engineering - Fighting Fire with CO₂ Page 1

Advanced

Current Issue Articles Featured Topics Resources Media Center Buyers' Guide Blogs Events Advertise Products Classifieds Jobs

Power Engineering

| Add RSS Feed

Fighting Fire with CO2

By Dominique Dieken, P.E., Starr Technical Risks Agency Inc.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) has successfully been used as a fire extinguishing agent for many years.
The demise of Halon 1301 as a gaseous fire extinguishing agent, due to its ozone depleting
characteristics, has renewed interest in CO2. CO2 is a colorless, odorless, generally non-
reactive and electrically nonconductive gas that is slightly heavier than air. It is self-
propelling, leaves no residue and is inexpensive.

If it weren’t for one major drawback, CO2 would be the perfect solution to just about all fire
protection needs. The drawback is that CO2 displaces oxygen, which is its main fire
extinguishing mechanism. The minimum theoretical CO2 concentration to extinguish fire with
most fuels is 28 percent. But the maximum concentration at which harmful effects become
noticeable in humans is about 6 percent. It is obvious that any CO2 concentration suitable for
fire protection is also lethal to humans. Although the safety record of CO2 as a fire
extinguishing agent is relatively good, several fatalities have resulted from unintended CO2
system discharges. One of the more recent incidents occurred in 1998 at the Test Reactor
Area of Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, which resulted in one
fatality and several life-threatening injuries.

The industry design and installation

standard, National Fire Protection
Association Standard 12 (NFPA 12),
Carbon Dioxide Extinguishing
Systems, has been periodically
revised since its inception in 1929.
Starting with the 2005 edition of NFPA
12, new requirements for personnel
safety were added to the standard
which required that all existing CO2
fire suppression systems be
retrofitted with warning signs, lock-
out valves, pneumatic time delays
and pneumatic predischarge alarms.
These requirements affect most
existing CO systems in the power
2
generation industry. The 2008 edition
of NFPA 12 was partially revised to
add language concerning occupiable
vs. unoccupiable spaces.

Safety Signs
While most CO2 systems come with some type of warning sign, the signs need to be upgraded
in accordance with the 2008 NFPA 12 edition to meet the new (2002) revision of American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) Z535 format—the only format now permissible. The only
time signage can differ from ANSI Z535 format is when a formal signage training program
exists. This means that all personnel with access to the protected space must either be
trained or accompanied by personnel trained on the signage program. Because this exception
can be cumbersome, most facilities find it easier to simply change to or install the ANSI Z535
signs. These signs follow a three-panel pictogram format (Figure 1). Warning signs are
required in every protected space; at every entrance to protected spaces; in spaces near the
protected spaces where it is determined that CO2 could migrate, creating a hazard to

http://pepei.pennnet.com/display_article/326587/6/ARTCL/none/none/1/Fighting-Fire-with-CO-2-/ 3/17/2009 6:06:27 PM

Power Engineering - Fighting Fire with CO₂ Page 2

personnel; and at each entrance to CO storage rooms and where CO can migrate or collect
2 2
in the event of a discharge from a storage container’s safety device.

Click here to enlarge image

The sign’s required text differs according to its location (for example, within the protected
space as opposed to at the entrance to a protected space as opposed to outside the entrance
to CO storage rooms) and whether or not the CO is odorized. There are, therefore, six
2 2
different sign options, although typically only two or three will apply for a CO2 system at a
power plant.

Lockout Valve
Manual lockout valves were provided on many CO2 systems in the past and became a
requirement for all systems beginning with the 2005 edition of NFPA 12. The only exception is
where dimensional constraints prevent personnel from entering the protected space. Even
then, a lockout valve is required if CO2 could migrate and create a personnel hazard.
Essentially, the lockout valve requirement applies to every CO2 system typically found in a
power plant.

Because all components in a fire protection system are required to be listed for fire protection
service, the valve must have a visual indication of its position and a provision that allows it to
be locked in the closed position. In addition, the valve must be supervised. This means that
the valve must have a normally closed electromechanical switch. This switch should be
electrically connected to the CO2 system’s control panel so that when the valve is in the
closed position, a supervisory signal is initiated, and an open circuit, ground fault or loss of
integrity results in a trouble signal, as required by NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm Code. A
service disconnect switch is not a permissible substitute for a lockout valve.

NFPA 12 permits the “authority having jurisdiction” (federal, state or local fire prevention
bureau or insurance carrier) to waive the valve supervision requirement. A typical example
would be a situation in which an older existing system is provided with a lockout valve that
does not include electronic supervision. In such a case, the valve should be equipped with a
seal for when it is in the open position, along with a procedure to restore the seal after the
valve is closed. A weekly documented visual inspection of the valve should also be required.

Click here to enlarge image

These CO2 upright canisters are safely and

securely stored in stands and equipped with
proper valves and alarms.

The lockout valve is typically located on the discharge side of the CO2 supply and the
protected space where it is easily accessible. Power plant personnel should consult with their
CO2 system’s manufacturer or an authorized representative regarding which lockout valve is
recommended and how to connect its supervising hardware to an existing control panel.

Predischarge Alarm and Time Delay

While many existing CO2 system designs for gas turbine enclosures are already provided with
time delays, NFPA 12 permits the omission of the time delays for unoccupiable areas “where
the provision of a time delay would result in unacceptable risk to personnel or unacceptable
damage to critical pieces of equipment.” Gas turbines meet this definition. While NFPA 12
does not specifically mention generator enclosures, generators such as those at larger

http://pepei.pennnet.com/display_article/326587/6/ARTCL/none/none/1/Fighting-Fire-with-CO-2-/ 3/17/2009 6:06:27 PM

Power Engineering - Fighting Fire with CO₂ Page 3

hydroelectric generating stations may also meet the definition for omission of time delays. In
all cases where time delays are omitted, it is critical that a formal procedure be in place that
requires lockout/tagout of the system anytime the protected space is entered.

If the time delay is provided, no specific time requirement exists, but typically 30 seconds is
considered reasonable for most machinery enclosures. The time delay usually consists of a
mechanical accumulator device located on the discharge piping near the CO2 supply. It must
be listed for its intended use.

Almost all CO2 systems are hydraulically calculated to ensure that the CO2 supply, the piping
and the nozzles are designed to require the minimum amount of CO2 concentration within the
protected space.

One additional caution associated with retrofitting an existing CO2 system with a lockout
valve, pneumatic time delay and/or pneumatic discharge alarms is that the addition of such
hardware results in additional equivalent pipe length to the system. Thus, NFPA 12 requires
that the system flow calculations be verified and “be in accordance with” the current edition of
NFPA 12. Unless the original designer has (and is willing to revise) the hydraulic calculations,
it could be difficult to comply with this requirement. The addition of a single lockout valve
should not significantly affect the flow characteristics of a system; however, the addition of
pneumatic delays and alarms may, especially if the designer did not leave a generous safety
margin. The verification requirement could also be complied with “reverse engineering” by
performing an actual discharge of the system while simultaneously measuring the CO2
concentration within the protected space. That is the best available method of not only
“proving” the system’s design and testing the new hardware’s functionality, but also of
knowing the system will, indeed, extinguish the fire.

Author: Dominique Dieken is a Senior Fire Protection Engineer with Starr Technical Risks
Agency Inc., a member of the C. V. Starr & Co. Inc. group of companies. Starr Tech is an
insurance agency serving the power generation, petrochemical, chemical, energy, oil and gas
industries and other complex occupancies with property insurance coverages and technical
loss control support.

Divers Help Keep Plants Up and Running

By Ken DeCoursey, Siemens Water Technologies

When Joe Borho and Jim Couser go to work, they know it will be wet and possibly very cold
and muddy. It is usually also quite dangerous, requiring that they be totally focused on the
job at hand.

Borho and Couser work for Siemens Water Technologies as dive service crew supervisors for
the intake service line. Their job is to make sure the company’s underwater equipment is
maintained and repaired so that customers experience as little downtime as possible. These
divers specialize in intake, or traveling water screens, designed to remove trash and large
pieces of debris (typically greater than one-quarter inch) from power plant intakes.

The traveling water screens are vertical conveyor machines partially submerged in water.
Because the screens are installed in challenging environments, they can experience
mechanical wear, corrosion and damage.

A Dive Crew Is Born

The intake dive crew was formed in May 2005. Based in Madison, Ind., the crew found they
were almost immediately in demand. In fact, demand was so high, the company added a
second dive crew in March 2006, one-and-a-half years ahead of schedule. Before the crew was
formed, Siemens’ underwater equipment maintenance was outsourced to external diving
crews, but this proved to be unsatisfactory.

The Siemens crews operate in teams of three, with one or two members heading underwater
while a “tender,” who is connected to the divers via cable, remains on the surface and
communicates with his underwater colleagues with an intercom. With their diving suits and
apparatus, the divers look like they might have walked straight from the set of Twenty
Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, only with much more high-tech equipment. Images
captured by high-resolution cameras on the divers’ helmets, for example, often provide the
tender with better visibility than the divers have. This allows the tender to provide the divers
with additional information about their environment.

“Sometimes the water is so muddy you can’t see your hand in front of your face, even with
strong flashlights,” said Couser, who has been with Siemens since 2005. “You have to know
your equipment really well to perform in such extreme conditions.”

Being a certified commercial diver requires a special kind of mental and physical
preparedness. Borho and Couser’s crews sometimes climb into murky lakes, rivers or even
narrow wells that most people wouldn’t even dream of dipping their toes into.

To be accepted as a trainee, an applicant must pass physical examinations to make sure he/
she can cope with the stress and strains of the job. Qualified divers undergo training for nine
months before they can become a certified commercial diver. An engineering background is
also necessary so the diver can maintain and repair the equipment. The divers must also be
mentally prepared to go as far as 140 feet down into extremely unwelcoming water to
accomplish some complicated engineering feats.

http://pepei.pennnet.com/display_article/326587/6/ARTCL/none/none/1/Fighting-Fire-with-CO-2-/ 3/17/2009 6:06:27 PM

Power Engineering - Fighting Fire with CO₂ Page 4

While most of the work is cold and unpleasant, sometimes the crews get to dive in near-
perfect conditions. Couser recalled one job in Indonesia, a diver’s paradise.

“Some people pay a lot of money to go diving there, yet we got to go diving and get paid for
it, which was really neat,” he said.

Teamwork and trust are critical ingredients for the divers’ success. They know that they can
trust each other with their lives when they head down into the murky depths.

“I became a diver because I have always loved the water and I love to travel. But even more
important is the sense of family with the other divers,” said Borho. “We spend so much time
together that we can anticipate each other’s thoughts and actions.”

Nuclear Power Plant Challenges

The intake dive service crews are often required to work on highly secure jobs such as nuclear
power plants. When a nuclear power plant in Northeastern Ohio purchased new replacement
baskets, main carrier chain and lower foot shaft assembly units, divers were needed to
remove the existing lower foot shaft units of the traveling water screens and properly install
the new units.

Stringent security and background checks must be run on all contract employees by an
independent security agency before the plant can grant permission to enter and begin work at
a nuclear facility. The highest safety training certification levels for OSHA and all other related
categories are also required. Siemens’ intake crews maintain these training levels as part of
their yearly certification for employment.

Once the employees were cleared for work, the dive team began rebuilding two of the plant’s
traveling water screens. After the divers completed the work, they made additional dives to
make sure the chain was properly seated into the foot wheels to prevent premature wear and
ensure long equipment life.

During the project, the dive crew encountered some unique challenges. The underwater work
to remove and reinstall the lower foot shaft units on a traveling water screen is typically
performed during a factory rebuild. In such instances, the entire screen is pulled and shipped
to a rebuild facility for rehabilitation. It is not unheard of, however, to do this work with the
screen still installed in the well and the lower unit under water. Because these screens were
nuclear safety-related back-up screens, it was important that personnel closely adhere to and
not deviate from the work schedule. Therefore, pulling the screen from the well and shipping it
to a rebuild facility for a six- to eight-week rehabilitation operation was not an option.

Because the screens were in a secure concrete building with small access doors that
prevented the equipment from being easily removed, the existing old main carrier chain and
basket assemblies had to be lifted by boom crane through a roof hatch. A concrete plug had
to be removed from the roof hatch opening to allow the old equipment to be lifted out and the
new replacement parts to be lowered in.

Another hurdle occurred when the boom crane, which was being used to lift the equipment
from the staging area over the building and down through the roof hatch, broke down. This
was a critical project setback, slowing the job for several days while a new part was ordered
and delivered. Despite these obstacles, the crew adapted by revising their planned schedule.
They worked through the delays and still finished the job within the allotted plant outage.

Once the traveling water screen rebuilds were completed, both units were tested to make sure
they were within OEM specifications. The dive crew then certified that the screens were in “as-
new” condition and ready for operation.

Author: Ken DeCoursey is service manager for intake products at Siemens Water
Technologies.

Power Engineering April, 2008

Author(s) : Dominique Dieken

| Add RSS Feed

More April, 2008 Articles > Search Archives >

Power Engineering Article Categories:

http://pepei.pennnet.com/display_article/326587/6/ARTCL/none/none/1/Fighting-Fire-with-CO-2-/ 3/17/2009 6:06:27 PM

Power Engineering - Fighting Fire with CO₂ Page 5

Business Projects/Contracts

Industry News Deregulation

Environmental Русский язык

Power Generation Young Honeywell Automation & Control

Professionals Solutions

HoneyWell Press Releases HoneyWell Product Information

Power Engineering International Current Issue Table of Contents

Power Engineering Current Issue Table of Contents

Potencia Current Issue Table of Contents

Nuclear Power International Current Issue Table of Contents

Middle East Energy Current Issue Table of Contents

Search Products Buyer's Guide >

Search Industry Jobs >

Magazine & E-Newsletter Subscriptions >

Return to Previous Page

Power Engineering Webcasts

Squeeze More Out of Your Power Plant by Modernizing Your

Control System
Original broadcast on
November 20, 2008

Turbine Inlet Cooling with Indirect Evaporation - With Greater

Density Comes More Power
Original broadcast on
October 29, 2008

LIVE AT COAL-GEN:
The Real Meaning of 'Carbon Capture Ready'
Original broadcast on
August 14, 2008

Sponsored White Papers Library

Recently Added White Papers

How Automation Technology Can Improve Performance of Your Power Plant

(08/25/2008, Honeywell)

Security Solutions to Meet NERC-CIP Requirements (08/24/2008, Honeywell)

Open Systems Technology: Progress Offers Opportunities and Risks (08/23/2008,

Honeywell)

Wireless Technology Delivers Value to the Power Industry (08/22/2008, Honeywell)

Improving Power Plant Performance Through Technology Upgrade (06/26/2008,

Honeywell)

Advanced

http://pepei.pennnet.com/display_article/326587/6/ARTCL/none/none/1/Fighting-Fire-with-CO-2-/ 3/17/2009 6:06:27 PM

Power Engineering - Fighting Fire with CO₂ Page 6

Home | About Us | Contact Us | Corporate Website | Privacy Policy | Courage and Valor Foundation | Site Map
| View all PennWell sites | View all PennWell events
Also Visit: Electric Light & Power/Utility Automation T & D | PennWell Petroleum Group | WaterWorld
Copyright © 2009: PennWell Corporation, Tulsa, OK; All Rights Reserved. | Terms & Conditions | Webmaster

http://pepei.pennnet.com/display_article/326587/6/ARTCL/none/none/1/Fighting-Fire-with-CO-2-/ 3/17/2009 6:06:27 PM