I’ve been in fire protection for more than 45 years, mostly in special hazards. Early in my career, I worked with carbon dioxide and Halon 1301. When Halon was banned for environmental reasons, the industry shifted to other agents like FM-200, HFC-227ea and Novec 1230 (FK-5-1-12).
I spent many years at Chemetron Fire Systems, which was owned by Kidde. After United Technologies bought Kidde, it consolidated various brands.
By around 2013, we realized Chemetron would eventually be absorbed into another UTC brand, so a group of us searched for a privately held company in the fire protection sector. Amerex, known for manufacturing fire extinguishers, wanted to expand, so they brought us on to form Janus Fire Systems in 2008. We started by focusing on clean agent systems.
Over time, we added both low- and high-pressure CO₂ systems, then developed an engineered dry chemical system. Today, we keep evolving to meet the market’s needs.
Demand for electricity has shifted over the years, especially after the 2008 recession. Power usage in the U.S. declined for a while due to efficiency measures—like energy-saving motors and LED lighting—and the outsourcing of some manufacturing.
More recently, there’s been an uptick driven by data centers and renewed domestic industry.
The added load from AI could be substantial, though its actual power footprint is still uncertain. NVIDIA chips are known to use plenty of energy, but new approaches might reduce consumption. Either way, most regions now need more reliable power generation.
Lithium-ion battery energy storage systems (BESS) are common, but they pose challenges. If a battery enters thermal runaway, there is no single solution that fully handles the resulting fire risk.
Fred Hildebrandt
Meanwhile, conventional generation methods—gas turbines, for example—already have well-developed fire protection methods. Looking ahead, small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) may become more important. Their technology is still emerging, so the industry has yet to fully understand how best to protect them.
Traditional baseload nuclear plants, built since the 1960s, have known risks. Manufacturers and underwriters have developed effective suppression strategies, usually with conventional systems. Combustion turbines that use natural gas or oil are more straightforward, given their segmented design, which allows for total flooding solutions.
Other forms of generation—like wind turbines and solar—also have recognized risks, but battery energy storage remains more complex. Lithium-ion batteries can enter thermal runaway, so designers often isolate units or retrofit old power plants for battery storage.
Neither approach is perfect and there is no universal fix if a fire starts.
Fred Hildebrandt
SMRs are another unknown. We understand typical generator connections and transformers, but the processes inside these smaller reactors are new territory. Industry-wide research and operational experience will determine optimal fire protection strategies.
Clean agents, whether CO₂, FK-5-1-12, HFC-227ea, or inert gas blends, quickly extinguish flames with minimal residue. They protect valuable equipment and maintain business continuity in places like data centers or telecom facilities. They rely on a total flooding approach, requiring an enclosed space and early detection. Because they leave little to clean up, downtime is minimal.
Dry chemical agents, by contrast, form a layer over the burning material, cutting off oxygen. This is an effective and lower-cost method, but it involves a bigger cleanup effort since the powder spreads throughout the protected area.
Dry chemical works well in industrial settings where immediate cleanup is less critical than quick suppression—hazardous material storage or flammable liquids areas, for instance. While it does not harm equipment over the long term, the residue must be removed before restarting operations.
Our leadership team has been through economic ups and downs together for decades. Starting a new business in 2008 was risky, but we partnered with a privately held company focused on long-term stability.
From day one, we concentrated on making it easy for distributors to order products and ensuring high completion rates.
We’ve kept our product lines as streamlined as possible, prioritizing on-time shipping and clear communication. If we commit to a date, we deliver. Mistakes can happen, but we’re transparent with customers and resolve problems quickly.
Fred Hildebrandt
We’ve also integrated some AI-based tools in-house, though it’s in the early stages. Ultimately, reliability is the biggest factor. Many customers appreciate consistent, high-quality products and dependable delivery above everything else. We track emerging technologies but adopt them thoughtfully, so we can pivot fast when needed.
We don’t employ service technicians ourselves. Instead, we partner with our distributor network, helping them with installation, upgrades and compliance. A lot of older CO₂ systems need to meet updates in NFPA 12 and we have the expertise to assist.
One challenge is that many experienced operators are retiring. Decades ago, plant operators knew their sites intimately. Today, there’s a real risk of losing that institutional knowledge. We try to offset this by providing better documentation—detailed manuals, schematics and training.
It can also be hard to find skilled technicians. Managing a data center’s specialized fire alarms one day, then working in a steel mill the next, demands different capabilities.
Another factor is that some businesses want a single provider for everything from extinguishers to emergency lighting, but certain functions require specialized technicians. We collaborate with distributors that go beyond simple checklists, ensuring systems remain safe, code-compliant and properly maintained.
People often assume a new technology will supersede existing methods, but I don’t see a single “silver bullet.” Halon 1301 was once seen as the ultimate solution until environmental concerns phased it out. Today’s agent testing is more rigorous, but fire persists and we still use proven methods like CO₂, inert gases, water mist and dry chemical.
Large wildfires still rely on the same tactics of cutting fire lines, dropping water or chemicals and deploying ground crews. In industrial applications, I expect our “toolbox” to keep expanding rather than one technology replacing everything else.
Another influence is the scrutiny of chemicals like PFAS, prompting a re-evaluation of agent formulations. Yet no single replacement has appeared. We’ll keep refining what we have, incorporating new ideas where they fit, without abandoning proven solutions.
