Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 36
  1. #1
    Ausfish Addict Chimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Gold Coast

    There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    The foam spill at the Bne Airport highlights the use of toxic material that is not even as good for fire suppression as the alternatives.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-1...lnews_brisbane

    Its time to change.

    Look at the alternative. http://www.pyrocooltech.com/faqs/ and explain why its not being used.

    Cheers
    Chimo
    What could go wrong.......................

  2. #2

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    This is just bulldust, hope the EPA hand them a huge fine. No excuses, even with a leak, their bunding should have taken care of it and stopped anythign entering the waterways.

  3. #3
    Ausfish Addict Chimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Thread Starter

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    They don't need to worry about bunding if they switch to pyrocool type foam which is not toxic or carcinogenic like what they are now using.
    What could go wrong.......................

  4. #4

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    You will probably the find the CAA has not accredited and authorised the use of anything else.......
    My dad was a firey at the bris airport fopr a very long time couldn't have a crap without permission.
    Jack.

  5. #5

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    Regardless of what is accredited or authorized or much else, two (2) pertinent questions

    1. Why did it take the authorities (that being the Qld Gov) four (4) days to notify the general public

    2. What was the Qld Gov trying to hide or achieve (or avoid ....) by doing this?

  6. #6
    Ausfish Addict Chimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Thread Starter

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    This is about using non toxic foam that extinguishes fires better and without side affects.

    Qld has banned the use of the stuff that is used on Federal controlled sites like the airport.
    What could go wrong.......................

  7. #7

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    1. So it has happened, can not turn the clock back, substitution then elimination will always be the most effective means but doesn't change the questions after the event , Why and What?

  8. #8

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    Quote Originally Posted by Chimo View Post
    Look at the alternative. http://www.pyrocooltech.com/faqs/ and explain why its not being used.

    Cheers
    Chimo
    Has the question been asked whether this fire retardant is safe to use on magnesium fires?
    It could well be why the CAA have not approved it.
    Jack.

  9. #9
    Ausfish Addict Chimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Thread Starter

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    Yes I believe it to be suitable for that use.

    This is on pg 8 NB Magnesium details
    http://www.pyrocooltech.com/pdf/TDFull-rev1.pdf

    Video

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKjSEd6cL3Q

    What could go wrong.......................

  10. #10

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    The arff (airport firies) switched to the environmentally friendly foam years ago. This was a foam deluge system in a hangar owned by Qantas. If only 20 fish were killed it would have been tilapia in the drain filled with literally hundreds of them so that gives you some idea of the extent of the spill.
    The prawns are on out the front and I can assure you the cast netters haven't slowed down.
    Bottom line, the arff trained with the bad foam for years out there. The whole airport is affected by that. I am not sure of the recharge conditions on private deluge systems but I'd say there will be pressure on them now to change over.

  11. #11

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    My understanding from talking to someone in the industry is that its dictated by insurance companies rather that government departments.


  12. #12

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    Quote Originally Posted by GBC View Post
    The arff (airport firies) switched to the environmentally friendly foam years ago. This was a foam deluge system in a hangar owned by Qantas. If only 20 fish were killed it would have been tilapia in the drain filled with literally hundreds of them so that gives you some idea of the extent of the spill.
    The prawns are on out the front and I can assure you the cast netters haven't slowed down.
    Bottom line, the arff trained with the bad foam for years out there. The whole airport is affected by that. I am not sure of the recharge conditions on private deluge systems but I'd say there will be pressure on them now to change over.
    It was bigger than initial reports by a long shot......
    There has been pumps and excavators going flat chat and there is a mass of reclamation going on from drains and sewers. Too little too late I'd say.
    Ne permissi illegitimatus carborundi

  13. #13

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    Quote Originally Posted by SatNav View Post
    Regardless of what is accredited or authorized or much else, two (2) pertinent questions

    1. Why did it take the authorities (that being the Qld Gov) four (4) days to notify the general public

    2. What was the Qld Gov trying to hide or achieve (or avoid ....) by doing this?
    1.The site is under federal govt control, not state control. State govt will have to handle the fallout outside of the airport grounds though.

    2. Unsure when the authorities were notified.......it could well have been undetected for 24 hours before being found.
    Jack.

  14. #14

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    Its just no good from everyone involved State and Federal,white spot and now toxic foam,someone is responsible for everything here,the checkers aren't checking and need to be flogged for it and then jailed.

    All policies and procedures have failed and all the fines too who ever can not fix it now.

  15. #15

    Re: There is no excuse for this; the alternatives do a better job anyway!

    1. Brisbane Airport Corporation (BAC) acquired Brisbane airport from the Federal Government under a 50 year lease in 1997. BAC is a private non-listed Queensland company and has full responsibility for the operations at BNE so lets drop this thinking the federal gov controls Brisbane airport.

    2. The question still remains why it took more than 4 days to notify the general public and from all accounts why commercial prawning operations were not notified until a week after the event which meant during this period (especially being Easter) commercial operations caught and sold hundreds of kg of prawns to the general public

    3. What was the Gov trying to achieve or hide by sitting on their behinds on this one

    4. The Qld EHP/EPA appear to have no credibility when it comes to the job they are supposed to be doing under a minister that appears to have absolutely no idea

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us