Firetrace CEO Tom Crane discusses why fire protection for electrical infrastructure is becoming more complex.
Because as a society we’re asking our electrical infrastructure to do more than ever before. At the same time, organisations are balancing new investment with ageing infrastructure.
In terms of the challenges this creates, the narrative has shifted. It’s no longer simply, “How do we suppress a fire?” It’s, “How do we maintain operational resilience when a fire occurs?” The equipment we’re protecting has a high value but the wider impact is the downtime. As an operator, how do you minimise downtime, protect a critical service, avoid regulatory scrutiny and prevent significant financial loss? That’s the shift we’re seeing.
Historically, the industry gravitated towards a small number of technologies. As regulations have changed, new technologies have emerged and hazards have evolved. There are now more options available, but there are more tradeoffs that need to be considered when selecting the right technology.
In our opinion, there isn’t a universal best solution because every application and every hazard has a different set of priorities. A manufacturing plant that’s trying to minimise downtime and clean-up requirements may need a completely different solution to a control room that’s focused on protecting sensitive electronics.
We started as a company known for tube-based suppression systems. Since then, we’ve expanded to engineered clean agent, powder-based and CO2 systems. That evolution has been driven by a simple philosophy: customers deserve choice.
Our objective has never been to replace one technology with another. Instead, we want to give customers the flexibility to assess their applications, identify the risks and select the technology that’s best suited to them.
CoolGen is a good example of that. It addresses growing customer priorities around sustainability through its nitrogen-based design, while also providing clean operation for sensitive electronics and supporting long-term environmental considerations.
The days of prescribing the same solution to customers are largely behind us because of the increasing complexity of electrical infrastructure.
When we carry out hazard analysis, every application is different in terms of asset criticality, operating conditions, occupancy levels, required uptime, maintenance requirements and regulatory compliance.
A suppression strategy that works exceptionally well in one environment may be completely inappropriate in another. We see that regularly. That’s why we train both our teams and customers to consider all of these factors before specifying equipment. We believe a consultative engineering approach is the only way forward.
