CO2 sensor

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Toros

Senior Member
Location
Tujunga, CA
Hi,
I have oil extraction & processing room in los Angeles
local Fire dept wants CO2 detection system in that room
where can I get some more info about wiring diagram-sequence of operation...?????

thank you
 
Toros said:
Hi,
I have oil extraction & processing room in los Angeles
local Fire dept wants CO2 detection system in that room
where can I get some more info about wiring diagram-sequence of operation...?????

thank you
Click to expand...


CO2 or CO? CO detection is pretty straight forward. CO2 might be more complicated, I haven't looked specifically in to it. Since our air is partially CO2 I suspect you mean CO.
 
Toros said:
Hi,
I have oil extraction & processing room in los Angeles
local Fire dept wants CO2 detection system in that room
where can I get some more info about wiring diagram-sequence of operation...?????

thank you
Click to expand...

Macurco has been around for quite a while. Either CO or CO2, they have you covered, along with a bunch of other gases.
 
In sufficient quantities, CO​2 (carbon dioxide) can sufficate (so can nitrogen which makes up the bulk of our atmosphere). CO (carbon monoxide) is both explosive and outright toxic.
 
Last edited:
rbalex said:
In sufficient quantities, CO2 (carbon dioxide) can sufficate (so can nitrogen which makes up the bulk of our atmosphere). CO (carbon monoxide) is both explosive and outright toxic.
Click to expand...

So, even though CO2 is not really an electrical hazard, it can be dangerous at certain levels, and appropriate monitoring for workers safety is valid.
 
rbalex said:
In sufficient quantities, CO​2 (carbon dioxide) can sufficate (so can nitrogen which makes up the bulk of our atmosphere). CO (carbon monoxide) is both explosive and outright toxic.
Click to expand...


I know from many of your posts that you are the article 500 guru here. I, however question this statement. Isn't the factual statement that lack of oxygen is what suffocates? And that occurs when CO2 or nitrogen displaces oxygen in the atmosphere. CO on the binds with hemoglobin more efficiently than oxygen so it displaces oxygen in the body and can build up over time. So for nitrogen and CO2 dangers, one would actually monitor the oxygen levels in the air not the gasses?
 
Strathead said:
I know from many of your posts that you are the article 500 guru here. I, however question this statement. Isn't the factual statement that lack of oxygen is what suffocates? And that occurs when CO2 or nitrogen displaces oxygen in the atmosphere. CO on the binds with hemoglobin more efficiently than oxygen so it displaces oxygen in the body and can build up over time. So for nitrogen and CO2 dangers, one would actually monitor the oxygen levels in the air not the gasses?
Click to expand...

Exposure to high levels of CO2:

https://ethanolrfa.org/wp-content/u...-Inhaled-CO2-Affects-the-Body-–-Fact-Sheet.pdf


SceneryDriver
 
Strathead said:
I know from many of your posts that you are the article 500 guru here. I, however question this statement. Isn't the factual statement that lack of oxygen is what suffocates? And that occurs when CO2 or nitrogen displaces oxygen in the atmosphere. CO on the binds with hemoglobin more efficiently than oxygen so it displaces oxygen in the body and can build up over time. So for nitrogen and CO2 dangers, one would actually monitor the oxygen levels in the air not the gasses?
Click to expand...
I agree, lack of oxygen is what suffocates, can be any gas. Some gases may have other potential health effects even if there is sufficient oxygen to go with them.
 
Strathead said:
I know from many of your posts that you are the article 500 guru here. I, however question this statement. Isn't the factual statement that lack of oxygen is what suffocates? And that occurs when CO2 or nitrogen displaces oxygen in the atmosphere. CO on the binds with hemoglobin more efficiently than oxygen so it displaces oxygen in the body and can build up over time. So for nitrogen and CO2 dangers, one would actually monitor the oxygen levels in the air not the gasses?
Click to expand...

No, as far as monitoring oxygen level. Incorrect method, got people killed doing it that way. Not my field so I cannot elaborate but google it.
 
My original response (Post #7) was based on a PM I received. I simply was emphasizing that monitoring carbon dioxide (CO2) was not a "Hazardous (Classified) Locations" issue; however, carbon monoxide (CO) is (It is Class I, Group C). As several others have pointed out an overabundance of virtually any gas (including oxygen apart from any HazLoc issues BTW) can have negative health issues. Health monitoring is not a specific area of my expertise but I've been involved enough with various gases to be aware of a few issues.
 
gadfly56 said:
OSHA's 8-hour TWA for CO2 is 10,000 ppm and the 15 minute STEL is 30,000 ppm. Submarine crews are exposed to chronic levels as high as 8,000 ppm 24/7.
Click to expand...
but we had all that pay to use up when we got back to shore and usually had a few months off as well, then a tour of classes before heading back out..lol
 
Since operations may involve using nitrogen for pressurization or to create an inert atmosphere to prevent oxidation, it makes sense that you would need to sense oxygen level (nitrogen always being present at high concentration in normal air.)
CO2 direct detection can be used because normal CO2 concentration is low and not harmful.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top