PV safety for fire department

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would recommend contacting Fire Captain Matthew Paiss of the San Jose CA fire department. He teaches PV system fire fighting to firefighters. If you search his name you will find a lot of his articles and interviews. If you PM me I will send you his email address.
 
Just tell them to fire up a 2000 GPM ladder pipe with a straight tip and blow the panels out of the way:happyno:
 
jimport said:
Does anyone have any safety presentation geared towards fire department operations around pv systems?

Thanks,
Click to expand...

The best way to handle these requests is to leave the firefighter training to the fire service. Forward along this link:

http://www.irecusa.org/workforce-education/allied-solar-professions/pv-safety-for-fire-fighters/

This course is free, and includes all the best practices available to date. Cpt. Paiss played a key role in its development. I doubt he would be available to do an in-person training, but I've worked closely with one of his peers for the past 2yrs, and I know he still offers that service. We've already done a fair amount of training in MD, including MFRI.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
If I thought they were in my way or a hazard to fire fighters fighting a fire, that is exactly what I would do.
Click to expand...

I can't tell if you're being serious or not. I would think that with solar modules flying around a roof, or damaging live conductors that aren't yet damaged, you'd be most likely creating equal or greater hazards as compared to what already exists.
 
jaggedben said:
I can't tell if you're being serious or not. I would think that with solar modules flying around a roof, or damaging live conductors that aren't yet damaged, you'd be most likely creating equal or greater hazards as compared to what already exists.
Click to expand...
I am very serious, if I see them preventing the fire from being put out...either that or just go full "defensive" which usually means a total loss to the structure.
 
As with everything you have to look at the risk vs reward for any tactic, and there would be many times the risk is too great to take the action.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
I am very serious, if I see them preventing the fire from being put out...either that or just go full "defensive" which usually means a total loss to the structure.
Click to expand...
Are you a firefighter, or are you just speculating? There will be many fires where the PV has no effect on what can be done to put out the fire, but there will be cases where they cause a huge problem. There have been at least two large fires in buildings with PV where the command staff saw the PV as a big enough risk that they chose to fight the fire defensively.
Some of the risks are the interference with vertical ventilation, the additional weight on the roof, and the potential shock hazard from the PV system.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ggunn said:
Are you a firefighter, or are you just speculating?
Click to expand...
40 years as a volunteer

There will be lots of fires in buildings with PV where the PV has no effect on the actions of the fire fighters. There will be others where the PV has a sever impact on how the fire is fought.
 
Last edited:
c_picard said:
Go ahead, I just wouldn't encourage someone who isn't in the fire service to repeat that advice. (I'm assuming pv_n00b is not)
Click to expand...
In most cases, the PV system will not be a real issue, but in the few cases where it is, the most likely action by fire department would be to just go defensive. That has happened on a couple of fires that I am aware of. However that often results in a total loss to the building, and it typically used where the fire and building conditions makes it unsafe for fire fighters to enter the building.

One of the biggest issues, is that the roof coverage takes away a lot of the vertical ventilation possibilities and that can result in extensive horizontal spread of the fire.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
I am very serious, if I see them preventing the fire from being put out...either that or just go full "defensive" which usually means a total loss to the structure.
Click to expand...

Exactly, at least on the latter :D

When I was getting some cu's at the last solar conference with Bill Brooks, he mentioned something that hit home with me.

As far as firefighters go, they are known to subscribe to a simple saying, "you risk a lot, to save a lot".

So in other words, if firefighters perceive a threat, in the form of a pv system, and there is nothing to save in a structure, then there will be very little to risk. Hence the honest and accurate assessment from don, that in this case it would be a total loss of structure.

Which is why I generally am an advocate for things like rapid shutdown, and newer fire codes that increase the safety of newer pv systems. Even though it is adding components, costs, and labor.

So when I design pv systems, I subscribe to the belief that you should use best practice, adhere to all codes, and go beyond code and best practice if you can.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
In most cases, the PV system will not be a real issue, but in the few cases where it is, the most likely action by fire department would be to just go defensive...
Click to expand...

So long as that decision is based on an informed risk analysis by the IC, and not a default stance driven by ignorance and fear, I totally agree.
 
c_picard said:
So long as that decision is based on an informed risk analysis by the IC, and not a default stance driven by ignorance and fear, I totally agree.
Click to expand...

That really depends on who the IC is and what his or her knowlege base is.

Just like electricians, there are all levels of skill and knowlege on the part of the firefighters and ICs, and just like with every group, half of them were in the lower half of their class.

One of the issues is the fear of putting water on energized electrical systems, but using a for nozzel set to a fog pattern of at least 30°, you can safely put water on energized electrical systems operating up to 5,000 volts as long as you are at least 30' away. You do have to be very careful as to energized euipment or wiring in standing water. Standing water is much more conductive than a hose stream.
 
Understood. (I've spent the last 2 years training firefighters on PV)

Here's are the links again, for those viewing that may not be aware:

http://www.irecusa.org/workforce-education/allied-solar-professions/pv-safety-for-fire-fighters/

https://lms.ulknowledgeservices.com/catalog/display.resource.aspx?ResourceID=352901

http://www.nfpa.org/news-and-resear...r-safety-and-response-for-solar-power-systems

These cover the water vs. electricity fairly well, as it relates to solar. I encourage folks to share these, I know first hand that many departments are still unaware of the resources available to them - leaving them to guess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top