AFFF Ban in the Countries

AFFF Ban in the Countries 

AFFF firefighting foam (aqueous film forming foam), which is mainly used to fight class B fires (fires involving flammable liquids), is currently being phased out and will be banned from 4th July 2025. AFFF is also used to fight and class A fires (flammable solids).

Class B fire is a fire in flammable liquids or flammable gases, petroleum greases, tars, oils, oil-based paints, solvents, lacquers, or alcohols. For example, propane, natural gas, gasoline and kerosene fires are types of Class B fires. The use of lighter fluid on a charcoal grill, for example, creates a Class B fire. Some plastics are also Class B fire materials.

Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) is being phased out in the United States due to its environmental and health risks. AFFF contains PFAS (polyfluoroalkyl substances), which are toxic chemicals that can accumulate in the body and cause serious health issues.

AFFF is “BAN” in Switzerland since 2011.

AFFF is “BAN” in South Australia from January 30, 2018

AFFF is “BAN” in South African country from January 30, 2020

AFFF is “BAN” in United States from July 4, 2025

AFFF is “BAN” in across the UK and EU country from July 4, 2025

AFFF is “BAN” in Japan country from October 1, 2025.

AFFF is “BAN” in New Zealand country from December 31, 2025

AFFF is “BAN” in Singapore country from January 1, 2026

US the Department of Defense (DOD) is required to discontinue the use of AFFF at its installations by October 1, 2026

Why is AFFF being banned?

AFFF contains PFOA (C8 AFFF / perfluorooctanoic acid) which belongs to a group of toxic chemicals called PFAS (C6 AFFF / polyfluoroalkyl substances). AFFF may also contain other chemicals that belong to this group.

All PFAS are known as ‘forever chemicals’ because they do not easily degrade in nature.

PFAS chemicals quickly dissolve in water and enter the ecosystem through soil, streams, and rivers. This causes environmental damage which can contaminate our drinking water and food supplies. PFAS have been found to accumulate in the bodies of animals and people, increasing in concentration over time. This can cause  a whole host of serious health issues including liver disease, kidney disease, decreased fertility, cardiovascular disorders and certain cancers.

A report by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) states, “there is evidence to suggest exposure to PFAS can lead to adverse health effects in humans (by eating or drinking food or water contaminated by PFAS)”.

·        Health risks

PFAS can cause liver disease, kidney disease, decreased fertility, cardiovascular disorders, and certain cancers.

·        Environmental risks

PFAS are "forever chemicals" that don't easily degrade in nature. They can contaminate drinking water and food supplies.

In 2014, Norway became the first country to ban the use of PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) in consumer products. This included textiles, carpets, and other coated products.

What are the challenges to phasing out AFFF? 

Phasing out Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) presents several challenges, including finding effective and readily available alternative foams with comparable fire suppression capabilities, managing the disposal of existing AFFF stocks, ensuring adequate training for firefighters on new foam technologies, addressing potential cost implications of switching, and navigating complex regulatory landscapes regarding PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) which are the primary concern with AFFF use.

Key challenges:

·        Performance limitations of alternative foams:

While "fluorine-free" foams (F3) are being developed as replacements, they may not always perform as well as AFFF in certain fire scenarios, particularly for Class B hydrocarbon fires, potentially compromising fire safety in specific situations. 

·        Environmental concerns with alternative foams:

Even if new foams contain no PFAS, there might still be concerns about their potential environmental impacts, requiring thorough testing and evaluation of their breakdown products.

·        Funding requirements: 

The transition to fluorine-free foam may require substantial funding.

·        Cost of transition:

Switching to new foam technologies can involve significant upfront costs for fire departments, including purchasing new foam concentrates, training personnel, and potentially modifying existing equipment.

·        Compatibility issues: 

Fluorine-free foams may not be able to withstand certain temperatures or be mixed with water in advance of use.

·        Disposing of existing AFFF stocks:

Properly managing the disposal of large quantities of existing AFFF, which can be highly contaminated with PFAS, is a complex issue due to limited disposal options and potential environmental regulations. 

·        Regulatory complexities:

Regulations regarding PFAS are constantly evolving, making it challenging to stay compliant while transitioning to new foam technologies. 

·        Training and awareness:

Firefighters need comprehensive training on the new foam technologies, including their proper application and limitations, to ensure effective fire suppression while mitigating potential risks. 

·        Lack of standardized testing protocols:

A lack of standardized testing methods for new foam alternatives can complicate the evaluation and comparison of their performance against AFFF. 

·        Industry adaptation:

Manufacturers and distributors of firefighting foam need to adapt production lines and marketing strategies to accommodate the transition away from AFFF. 

Potential solutions:

A potential solution to the environmental concerns surrounding AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam) is to transition to fluorine-free firefighting foams which maintain fire suppression capabilities while eliminating the harmful per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) associated with traditional AFFF formulations; other options include utilizing water sprinklers in appropriate situations, depending on the fire hazard, and exploring alternative fire suppression methods like dry chemical agents depending on the specific application.

·        Continued research and development of alternative foams:

Investing in research to develop highly effective, environmentally friendly foams with comparable performance to AFFF. 

·        Collaboration between stakeholders:

Fostering partnerships between fire departments, foam manufacturers, regulators, and environmental organizations to address challenges and develop effective transition strategies. 

·        Stricter regulations and enforcement:

Implementing clear regulations regarding PFAS content in firefighting foams and enforcing compliance to drive the transition away from AFFF. 

·        Public awareness campaigns:

Educating the public about the environmental concerns related to PFAS in firefighting foam to support policy changes and responsible management practices. 

About AFFF alternatives:

Most of these seven aqueous film forming foam alternatives have been presented to Congress as potential replacements for the fire suppressant. Each has its pros, but it’s equally important to consider their cons (mainly cost). 

Finding the right solution for your business depends entirely on your budget and the types of fires you’ll be expected to put out.

Alternatives to aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) include: 

·        Fluorine-free foams (FFFs)

These foams are a more conscious alternative to AFFF. They are made with a combination of phosphate betaine silicone surfactant (PPSS) and hydrocarbon surfactants. 

·        Hi-Ex foam

This High expansion foam is PFAS-free and uses a stable bubble structure to suffocate fires or a large volume of foam is needed to cover a wide area. It can be used with fresh or seawater. 

·        Water Mist Extinguishers

Water mist extinguishers can be used to extinguish class A, B and C fires and fires involving electrical equipment. They are environmentally friendly, non-toxic, and easier to clean up than foam extinguishers, reducing the damage caused by firefighting.

·        Carbon dioxide (CO2)

This is an environmentally friendly fire suppressant that can be used against fires involving electrical equipment and flammable liquids. 

·        Clean agents

These are synthetic fire suppressants that can be used against fires involving flammable liquids, gases, and electrical equipment. 

·        Wet chemical

This is a solution that can be used against fires involving cooking oils and fats. 

·        Dry chemical

Dry chemical agents are effective for extinguishing class B fires because they interrupt the chemical reaction of the fire and smother the flames. There are various types of dry chemical agents used for class B fires:

1.   Sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO₃): Sodium bicarbonate-based dry chemical agents work by releasing carbon dioxide gas, which displaces oxygen and suffocates the fire.

2.   Potassium bicarbonate (KHCO₃): Similar to sodium bicarbonate agents, they release carbon dioxide to inhibit combustion.

3.   Monoammonium phosphate (NH₄H₂PO₄): Monoammonium phosphate-based agents are versatile and can be used for class B fires. They form a solid barrier over the surface of the flammable liquid, cutting off the fire’s oxygen supply.

4.   Ammonium phosphate (NH₄)₃PO₄: Ammonium phosphate dry chemical agents work by forming a blanket-like barrier on the fuel surface, creating a barrier between the fuel and the oxygen.

5.   Potassium carbonate (K₂CO₃): Potassium carbonate agents are less common but can be used for class B fires. They help to suppress the fire by releasing carbon dioxide and inhibiting combustion.

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has been funding the development of F3 products since 2017. The DoD released specifications for F3 in January 2023, which will help transition from AFFF to (MIL-PRF-32725) F3. 

What does the MIL-PRF-32725 specify?

·        The specification requires that no PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are intentionally added to the production of F3 foam 

·        The specification outlines performance-based standards for F3 foam, which is intended for use on class B hydrocarbon liquid fuel fires 

What are the transition plans?

·        The DoD requires military bases to stop purchasing AFFF by October 1, 2023, and to eliminate the use altogether by October 1, 2024 

·        The FAA has also released an Aircraft Firefighting Foam Transition Plan 

Important considerations when selecting an AFFF alternative:

·        Fire hazard assessment:

Carefully evaluate the type of fire risk to choose the most effective firefighting agent. 

·        Application compatibility:

Ensure the chosen alternative is compatible with existing firefighting equipment and infrastructure. 

·        Training and safety protocols:

Proper training for firefighters is crucial when transitioning to new firefighting foam technologies. 

On about INDIA

While there isn't a specific, nationwide "ban" on AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam) in India, there is growing concern and regulatory movement towards phasing out its use due to its harmful PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) content, similar to trends seen in other countries; meaning manufacturers and users are increasingly looking for alternative firefighting foams with lower environmental impact. 

Key points about AFFF in India:

·        PFAS Concerns:

Like globally, the primary concern with AFFF in India is its potential to contaminate water sources due to the presence of PFAS chemicals, which are considered persistent and toxic. 

·        Regulatory Developments:

While no outright ban exists, Indian environmental agencies are actively monitoring and discussing regulations to limit the use of PFAS-containing firefighting foams, including AFFF.

·        Alternative Foams:

Companies are increasingly developing and promoting "fluorine-free" firefighting foams as a safer alternative to AFFF. 

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has removed the requirement for AFFF containing PFAS from their Standard on Aircraft Hangars. The NFPA has also added chapters to help users determine if AFFF containing PFAS is needed at their facility.

Fire safety legislation changes periodically, and it can be difficult for a busy organisation to stay up to date and compliant. Our highly experienced fire safety consultants offer you peace of mind by ensuring your organisation meets current fire safety regulations to keep people safe. We are always happy to advise you and answer any questions you may have.

Reference:

1.        https://usafefire.com/understanding-pfas-in-firefighting-foam/

2.        Robert H. Hill, Jr. & David C. Finster, Laboratory Safety for Chemistry Students (2d ed.: John Wiley & Sons, 2016).

3.        Fire Inspector: Principles and Practice (Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2012), pp. 204-06.

4.        https://ecology.wa.gov/Waste-Toxics/Reducing-toxic-chemicals/Addressing-priority-toxic-chemicals/PFAS/AFFF

5.        https://www.hwhenvironmental.com/afff-alternatives/#:~:text=Rather%20than%20foam%20or%20water,released%20via%20nozzles%20and%20piping.