Embed Size (px)
Perspectives on Flame retardants
Petra Andersson SP Fire Technology
www.sp.se
SP Fire Technology
Situated in Borås Sweden
SP Staff: approx. 900
Fire Tech Staff: approx. 55
www.sp.se
Perspectives on Flame Retardants
AdvantagesPrevent Fires, thereby:• Save lives• Minimise environmental impact of fires
DisadvantagesEnvironmental and toxicological impact during production, use and waste Emissions during fires
…necessary to weigh the costs of FRs against the benefits of their use.
Flame Retardants: Types
• Organic compounds containing– halogens, predominantly bromine and chlorine, + synergists
(antimony, tin)– Phosphorous – Nitrogen (often as a synergist with Phosphorous)
• Inorganic compounds– aluminium-, magnesium hydroxides– ammonium polyphosphate
• Reactive or Additive
Perspective on Flame retardants – Toxicity
Exposure from
- production – risks mitigated through emission control
- use – risk evaluated in e.g. EU risk assessments
- waste handling – risk evaluated in e.g. EU risk assessments
- fire
Exposure through
- inhalation
- dermal
- oral
Toxicity different for each FR
Perspective on Flame retardants – ecotoxicity - LCA
Perspective of Flame retardants – Fire-LCA
Weighs function of FRs against environmental cost…
Fire - LCA – Input needed
Normal LCA input data needed, e.g.:• energy consumption during production, use etc • raw materials needed • emissions during production and use, • etc.
Fire statistics, e.g.:• How many fires start in the product per year with and without
flame retardants?• How many products burn per year?
Fire Emission data:
• CO, PAH, CO2, Dioxins, Furans, etc.
Fire Emission data
Fire-LCA example of results
PAH
0
200
400
600
800
NFR TVToday
FR TVToday
NFR TVFuture
FR TVFuture
kg PAH
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Non FR P-FR Br-FR
kg
TV Case Study Furniture Case Study
Fire-LCA example of results
CO
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
NFR TVToday
FR TVToday
NFR TVFuture
FR TVFuture
million kg
PAH
0
200
400
600
800
NFR TVToday
FR TVToday
NFR TVFuture
FR TVFuture
kg
CO
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Non FR P-FR Br-FR
million kg
PAH
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Non FR P-FR Br-FR
kg
Fire-LCA example of results
PAH
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Non FR P-FR Br-FR
kg TCDD
0.00E+00
5.00E-06
1.00E-05
1.50E-05
2.00E-05
2.50E-05
Non
FR
P-F
R
Br-
FR
kg/million sofas
Furniture prod
Repl Prod
Landfill
Incineration
Heat Recovery
FR production
fire
Total
Furniture-case study
Comparing cancer risk results in a higher risk for the non-FR case in this study
Fire-LCA - Limitations
Focuses on environmental impact
Difficult to evaluate different emissions against each other
Does not include number of lives saved or injuries
Does not include costs for fire damage or cost for FR production
Does not include societal impact
Fire-CBA
Input parameters:
Production costs
End of Life, disposal costs
Fires: value of a statistical life, cost of burn treatment, cost of property (fire statistics)
Chemical exposure costs
Fire-CBA applied to TV with DecaBDE
Costs: incremental increases in cost to flame retard a product; additional costs for disposal
Benefits: lives saved; injuries avoided; capital costs avoided
Application to DecaBDE use in TV-sets• No cost assigned to the injuries due to exposure to DecaBDE• Incremental cost of manufacture of the FR and disposal of FR
material included• Cost of lives lost, injuries treated and capital costs associated
with fires included
…Between US$657 – 1 380 million can be saved each year by use of high level of fire performance in TV-sets.
Limitations with Fire-CBA
Difficult to estimate costs in some cases, i.e.
risk of thinner shells on Falcon eggs
anxiety
debate
risk for unknown impact
Conclusions
Not possible to make general conclusions about all Flame Retardants
The advantages and disadvantages with Flame Retardants must be evaluated case by case.
The application and the specific FR must be evaluated
Imperative to team up fire expertise and toxicologists/ecotoxicologists for a true evaluation of FRs
More research is needed into the toxicity/ecotoxicity of FRs in different applications and methods to evaluate FRs.
