Patrick Schwobe, Principal Engineer at TLX Technologies, explains how integrated supervision supports system reliability and regulatory
Managing the foam phase-out: Alpine Fire outlines fluorine-free transition plans
Mark Thewlis, Operations Director at Alpine Fire, outlines how facilities can adapt to new regulations banning C8 foam and manage compliance safely
What do facilities need to do to ensure their fire suppression systems are compliant and effective in the wake of changing regulations? Fluorine-containing foam has been a vital part of the fire suppression industry for years.
But there’s a problem.
The foams are made using so-called ‘forever chemicals’; long-chain polyfluoroalkyl compounds (PFAS) that pose a significant risk to the environment due to their inability to break down in nature.
As concerns have grown, public pressure has mounted, and as of 4th July 2025, new regulations have come into effect banning the use of C8 Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF).
Facilities must now act to not only comply with new regulations but also ensure any existing foam stocks are safely removed and disposed of.
Will you be affected?
If you work in facilities such as chemical manufacturing plants, automotive facilities, oil refineries, military installations and many other kinds of industrial buildings; then there’s a good chance that your fire suppression system may use some kind of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) enhancement.
These foams, when mixed with water, smother fires and prevent vapour ignition by cutting off the supply of oxygen.
That means they’re commonly used in facilities where flammable liquids or hazardous chemicals are located on-site.
But each facility is different, so the extent to which you will be impacted largely depends on the system that you currently have in place and the steps you have already taken to go fluorine-free.
How to safely remove PFAS from your fire suppression systems
Because the use of C8 fluorine-containing foam is now prohibited, facilities must prioritise compliance with new regulations.
Those that don’t could face notices and fines, not to mention the potential reputational damage that comes with Environment Agency warnings and penalties.
That means you need to plan for the appropriate isolation, removal and disposal of any existing C8 foam stocks from your fire suppression systems without delay.
But this may not be as simple as you may think.
Here are a few key steps that facilities should take to ensure they’re on the right side of new regulations:
1 – Assess your risk
Don’t assume your system is clean just because you’ve removed C8.
Instead you need to conduct a detailed analysis to ensure that all traces of prohibited substances have been removed.
Expert engineers can help you to assess your system on site, conduct sampling tests to measure the extent of foam migration and detect the presence of banned C8 compounds.
2 – Flush your system
After working with all stakeholders to plan for any disruption you should then conduct a thorough clean of your systems.
This should involve completely draining water and residual foam concentrate from your system as well as systematically cleaning all pipework and components with a separate flush.
It’s vital that this activity is conducted carefully, complying with UK environmental regulations to avoid harm to the environment.
Once completed you should also retest your systems.
3 – Ethical disposal
There are strict rules governing the disposal of C8 foams.
That means that you need to work with certified partners to ensure the safe removal, disposal and ethical incineration of any C8 foams from your system.
However in the current climate, the availability of disposal incinerators has become restricted due to the surge of facilities rushing to comply with regulations.
This means that you may face delays or significant cost fluctuations as you attempt to dispose of any existing foam stocks.
4 – Explore fluorine-free alternatives
With further restrictions to fluorine-containing foams expected, another shrewd move would be to begin exploring what fluorine-free alternatives are available.
Known as synthetic fluorine-free foams (SFFF), facilities will need to analyse how compatible their usage would be with their current fire suppression systems and plan for any adaptations that need to be made to accommodate them.
Many companies are also looking into future-proof water-only-based systems.
The time to act is now
Transitioning to a fluorine-free future is a complex task for many facilities.
Despite the ban on C8 foam coming into force, many UK businesses are still struggling to comply with changing regulations.
But this isn’t a choice, it’s a necessity.
Whether it’s the immediate ban on C8 foams or the inevitable restriction of C6, a fluorine-free future is coming.
Waiting to see how this will impact your fire suppression is not a viable strategy, instead now is the time to proactively assess your systems and explore alternative solutions.
For more information on how you can prepare for a fluorine-free future, visit www.alpinefire.co.uk
This was originally published in the December 2025 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.
AFSA names regional directors and officers for 2025–26 leadership term
AFSA confirms 2025–26 board officers
The American Fire Sprinkler Association (AFSA) has confirmed its 2025–26 board of directors and officer appointments following elections held at the board’s October 2025 meeting in the US.
AFSA reported that Paul DeLorie of Hampshire Fire Protection Co., based in Londonderry, New Hampshire, has been elected chair.
Jay Strickland of Pye-Barker Fire & Safety in Forestville, Maryland, has been elected first vice chair.
Chris Johnson, president and co-founder of Piper Fire Protection, a Fortis Brand in Clearwater, Florida, has been elected second vice chair.
AFSA stated that Jeff Phifer of Crawford Sprinkler Company of South Carolina, in Lugoff, South Carolina, will serve as secretary.
Tommy Clements, president and Chief Executive Officer of VSC Fire & Security in Richmond, Virginia, has been elected treasurer.
DeLorie is Senior Vice President of Hampshire Fire Protection Co., which AFSA described as one of the largest merit shop fire sprinkler companies in New England.
A 1984 graduate of the University of New Hampshire, DeLorie has more than 40 years of experience in sprinkler design, estimating, sales, project management and senior management.
AFSA noted that DeLorie previously served as a board member and treasurer of the AFSA Patriot Chapter, now known as the New England Chapter.
He has also served on the Associated Builders and Contractors New Hampshire/Vermont Chapter board, including a term as chair.
AFSA confirmed that DeLorie joined its national board in 2014 and has chaired several national committees.
He served as the board’s treasurer for four years before his election as chair.
Paul DeLorie, Senior Vice President at Hampshire Fire Protection Co. and AFSA Chair, said: “I am honored to be chair and work alongside dedicated and talented board members who have great industry experience and passion for our cause.
“Our directors make a lasting impact on our communities and the success of our members.
“They are championing fire safety and supporting our industry’s growth, innovation, education and training.
“That’s what AFSA is all about.”
AFSA board structure and regional directors
AFSA stated that DeLorie will lead a board of directors that includes regional directors, at-large directors and the immediate past chair.
The organisation said the regional structure is organised into ten areas, with each director linked to a specific part of the US and their company affiliation.
Region 1 is represented by Brooks Bayne, co-owner and Vice President of Operations at AFP Systems, based in Tualatin, Oregon.
Region 2 is represented by Wayne Weisz, President of Cen-Cal Fire Systems, based in Lodi, California.
Region 3 is represented by Don Kaufman, President of Kaufman Fire Protection, based in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Region 4 is currently vacant.
Region 5 is represented by Linda M. Biernacki, founder and President of Fire Tech Systems, based in Shreveport, Louisiana.
Region 6 is represented by Jay Strickland, Vice President of Business Development at Pye-Barker Fire & Safety, based in Forestville, Maryland.
Region 7 is represented by Chris Johnson, President and co-founder of Piper Fire Protection, a Fortis Brand, based in Clearwater, Florida.
Region 8 is represented by Jeff Phifer, President and Chief Executive Officer of Crawford Sprinkler Company of South Carolina, based in Lugoff, South Carolina.
Region 9 is represented by Tommy Clements, President and Chief Executive Officer of VSC Fire & Security, based in Richmond, Virginia.
Region 10 is represented by Paul DeLorie, Senior Vice President of Hampshire Fire Protection Co., based in Londonderry, New Hampshire.
At-large, ex-officio and retiring AFSA directors
AFSA reported that several individuals will serve as ex-officio, non-voting members of the board.
These non-voting members are Dwight E. Bateman of VSC Fire & Security in Houston, Don Becker, AFSA Life Member based in Dallas Center, Iowa, and Bob Rees of API in High Point, North Carolina.
They also include Manning Strickland of Pye-Barker Fire & Safety, based in Forestville, Maryland, and Willie Templin of American Automatic Sprinkler, based in Fort Worth, Texas.
The list of ex-officio members continues with Larry Thibodeau of Hampshire Fire Protection Co. in Londonderry, New Hampshire, and Jack Viola of JFV Engineering in South Hadley, Massachusetts.
Ted Wills of Anchor Fire Protection/Sciens Building Solutions in Perkiomenville, Pennsylvania, is also an ex-officio member.
AFSA stated that the at-large directors are Hunter Brendle, President of Brendle Sprinkler Company, based in Montgomery, Alabama, and Mindy Buckley, Chief Financial Officer and co-owner of Allsouth Sprinkler Company, based in Buford, Georgia.
Michael F. Meehan, Chairman of VSC Fire & Security, based in Richmond, Virginia, also serves as an at-large director.
AFSA confirmed that at-large director and Immediate Past Chair Jack A. Medovich of Summit Companies, based in Mendota Heights, Minnesota, has retired from the board as of Monday 30 September 2025.
Region 4 Director Rod DiBona, Executive Vice President at Pye-Barker Fire & Safety, has also retired from the board as of the same date.
NFU Mutual highlights £102m UK farm fires bill and regional loss patterns
Farm fires cost UK £102m in 2024
NFU Mutual has reported that farm fires across the UK led to an estimated £102m in claims in 2024, despite an 18% fall in the number of incidents involving growing crops, buildings and farm equipment.
The insurer stated that agricultural vehicle fires added an estimated £37m to rural losses over the same period.
The company identified electrical faults, arson and lightning strikes as the leading causes of farm fires reported to its claims teams.
NFU Mutual explained that a cool and wet summer, together with farmers holding on to machinery for longer, likely contributed to lower replacement values and a reduction in combine harvester fire costs to an estimated £3.5m.
According to the insurer, combine harvester fire claims had reached an estimated £11m in 2022 and £7.4m in 2023, so the latest reduction does not remove the ongoing risk to crops and machinery.
NFU Mutual warned that each year hundreds of combines, tractors and balers are still lost to fire, alongside thousands of acres of crops.
Historical context and impact of farm fires
NFU Mutual’s Farm Fires report set the current figures against the organisation’s origins in early twentieth century fire loss.
Hannah Binns, Rural Affairs Specialist at NFU Mutual, said: “Back in 1910, seven farmers became frustrated at the losses caused by sparks from the nearby steam-powered railway, which often set haystacks ablaze.
“This collective developed into NFU Mutual and more than a century on, fire remains a constant risk to UK farms, with dangerous and devasting farm fires becoming all too common.
“These fires not only endanger the lives of farmers, farm workers and their families, but can destroy months or years of hard work, with long lasting consequences for agricultural businesses, structurally and financially.
“Beyond the immediate damage, the emotional toll of a farm fire can be significant, as individuals come to terms with the trauma and the added strain on an already demanding job.
“Farm fires can also cause disruption to local communities, damaging essential infrastructure such as power lines and overhead cables, and causing road closures that interrupt vital services.”
Regional farm fires costs across the UK
NFU Mutual’s analysis showed varied trends in regional farm fire claims across the UK between 2023 and 2024.
The East recorded a broadly stable picture, with estimated claims moving from £9.51m to £9.52m, a change of 0.1%.
The Midlands saw a reduction in estimated costs from £12.7m to £10.6m, a fall of 16%.
The North East recorded an increase in estimated claims from £12.3m in 2023 to £16.4m in 2024, a rise of 34%.
In the North West, estimated costs moved from £28.9m to £4.3m, a reduction of 85%.
Northern Ireland recorded an estimated rise from £5.2m to £7.3m, an increase of 42%.
Scotland’s estimated farm fire costs moved from £5.9m to £11.8m, an increase of 98%.
The South East saw estimated claims rise from £9.4m to £12.9m, up 36%.
In the South West, NFU Mutual reported an increase from £20.2m to £24m, a rise of 20%.
Wales recorded an estimated decrease from £6.7m to £4.8m, a reduction of 29%.
Across the UK overall, estimated farm fire claim costs fell from £110.8m in 2023 to £102m in 2024, down 8%, with NFU Mutual noting that these figures do not include agricultural vehicle fire claims.
Suppression systems and machinery fire risk
NFU Mutual strongly recommended fitting fire suppression systems to high-risk agricultural machinery, particularly combine harvesters.
The insurer noted that suppression systems are widely used in sectors such as forestry and can prevent small fires from spreading and destroying entire machines.
According to the company, policyholders who operate combines fitted with approved fire suppression systems can access an insurance discount.
NFU Mutual added that keeping machinery clean and properly serviced remains an important control measure, especially during hot and dry periods when field work is most intensive.
Emergency response and NFCC support
The National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC) was cited in the report in relation to the impact of farm fires and wildfires on fire and rescue services.
Dave Swallow, NFCC Wildfire Deputy Lead and Lead Tactical Advisor, said: “Farm fires and wildfires regularly require significant fire service resource, often for extended periods of time, and they put lives at risk.
“NFCC supports and welcomes the NFU Mutual’s push for suppression systems to be fitted in farm machinery, reducing the risk of fires developing into large and more damaging incidents.
“Furthermore, we have worked with industry to produce guidance for farmers during the harvesting period, following an increase in potential risk of fires during this year’s hot, dry summer.”
NFU Mutual farm fire prevention advice
NFU Mutual Risk Management Services (RMS) set out practical steps for reducing the likelihood and impact of farm fires.
RMS advised farmers to maintain a clear fire plan that prioritises safe evacuation for everyone on site, including people working in or living near farm buildings, with particular attention to vulnerable individuals.
The guidance stressed the need to keep electrical systems in good condition, to use qualified electricians for installation and inspection work, and to avoid do-it-yourself modifications that can be affected by damp, rodents or overloaded circuits.
RMS recommended installing fire suppression systems on equipment such as biomass boilers and combine harvesters, and positioning water bowsers in fields on hot days to provide an immediate water source.
The advice highlighted the role of good housekeeping in reducing dust, chaff and stored materials that can add to fire load, block escape routes or create trip hazards during an emergency.
RMS also urged farmers to control hot work such as welding, cutting or grinding by carrying it out outside where possible, or in clear internal areas away from combustible structures and materials, supported by a strict permit to work process for anyone carrying out such tasks.
Actions to take when a fire breaks out
NFU Mutual Risk Management Services set out steps for farmers to follow if a fire starts on site.
The guidance advised that the Fire and Rescue Service should be called immediately, that everyone should be alerted to the fire and evacuated to a safe location in line with the emergency plan, and that any attempt to tackle the fire should only be made if it is safe to do so using correctly maintained extinguishers.
RMS stated that farmers should be ready to move livestock if the fire spreads, but only where it is safe, and should prepare to use farm machinery to support Fire and Rescue Service operations when requested.
The advice emphasised the importance of helping emergency services reach the incident quickly by using tools such as the what3words app to identify the precise location, sending someone to meet the fire crew and ensuring that the farm entrance is clearly signed and kept clear for access.
New UK guidance on lithium battery fire, explosion and smoke hazards from asecos
New lithium battery whitepaper for UK workplaces
asecos has published a new lithium battery safety whitepaper for UK workplaces, responding to requests from safety professionals for clearer guidance on emerging risks.
The company announced the document on Wednesday 26 November 2025 from Derby, UK.
Titled “Lithium-Ion Batteries – Fire, Explosion and Smoke Hazards You Must Address,” the whitepaper focuses on workplace hazards associated with thermal runaway.
The publication is intended to help organisations understand and manage the rise in lithium-ion battery incidents being recorded by UK fire services.
According to asecos, the document is designed to bring together evidence, legal context and practical measures in a single reference for duty holders.
Rising incident rates and thermal runaway hazards
The whitepaper highlights what asecos describes as a marked increase in lithium-ion battery fires attended by UK fire and rescue services.
The company reports that fire services are now dealing with at least three lithium-ion battery incidents a day.
It links these incidents to hazards arising from thermal runaway, including the potential for fires, explosions and heavy smoke generation.
asecos notes that these hazards affect a wide range of equipment powered by lithium-ion cells in workplace environments.
The company positions the paper as a resource to help safety professionals interpret these developing risks in the context of day-to-day operations.
Legal duties and support for organisations
asecos states that the whitepaper sets out how existing legal frameworks apply to lithium-ion battery use and storage in workplaces.
The document refers to the Health and Safety at Work Act, DSEAR and the Fire Safety Order as key sources of duty-holder obligations.
According to asecos, the paper explains how these laws influence the need for risk assessment, hazard control and documentation around lithium battery management.
It also discusses legal exposure where organisations fail to implement protective measures that regulators and insurers are increasingly expecting to see.
The company says the whitepaper outlines practical steps aimed at achieving what it describes as a “gold standard” approach to lithium battery safety.
asecos adds that the publication draws attention to the support it offers through free site surveys, its Derby showroom and annual maintenance plans.
Les Day, Commercial Director at asecos, said: “The lithiumion revolution has transformed how we work but it’s also created a complex, fast-evolving safety challenge.
“This whitepaper offers professionals the evidence, legal clarity and technical guidance needed to act decisively before an incident occurs.”
Practical relevance for battery risk management and compliance
Fire safety officers can use the whitepaper to align existing lithium-ion storage and charging arrangements with legal expectations linked to DSEAR and the Fire Safety Order.
Facility managers across industrial, commercial and public sites gain a single reference for checking whether lithium-ion powered tools, devices and systems are covered by suitable controls.
Risk assessors can draw on the incident data and thermal runaway discussion when reviewing workplace assessments that currently treat lithium-ion batteries in the same way as conventional batteries.
System installers and fire-protection contractors may need to consider how the “gold standard” measures described by asecos influence specifications for cabinets, ventilation and fire-detection interfaces.
Procurement officers can reference the legal and insurance sections when evaluating investment in containment products, maintenance plans or site surveys related to lithium battery hazards.
Workplace fires: The three sectors carrying most of the UK incident burden
Workplace fires concentrated in industrial, food and retail premises
System Building Services has analysed ten years of Home Office data and found that industrial premises, food and drink venues and retail buildings together account for more than 60% of workplace fires in the UK.
The company examined incident statistics for non-residential buildings between 2015/16 and 2024/25 using the Home Office FIRE0301 and FIRE0602 datasets.
Its analysis covers all recorded workplace fire incidents in non-residential buildings, including fatalities and non-fatal casualties, to map fire risk patterns in commercial settings.
Industrial premises recorded 1,656 fires in 2024/25, which System Building Services calculates as 24.85% of all workplace fires in that year.
Food and drink premises saw 1,275 fires, or 19.13% of the total, while retail premises recorded 1,177 fires, equivalent to 17.66%.
Combined, these three workplace types account for more than 60% of all 6,665 workplace fires recorded in 2024/25.
System Building Services links the higher industrial risk to flammable materials, high-temperature processes, heavy machinery and complex electrical systems operating under sustained load.
It notes that food and drink venues and retail premises couple public access with long operating hours, and in the case of hospitality, routine use of cooking and heating appliances.
Brian Michie, Managing Director at System Building Services, said: “Industrial environments carry inherent fire risks due to the nature of operations, but what many business owners overlook is how multiple risk factors can compound.
“A facility might have adequate fire doors, but if electrical systems aren’t regularly inspected or flammable materials aren’t properly stored, you’re still vulnerable.”
Hospitality settings such as hotels, boarding houses and hostels recorded 505 fires, equal to 7.58% of workplace incidents in 2024/25.
Entertainment, culture and sport venues saw 445 fires, or 6.68% of the total, while hospitals and medical care facilities recorded 433 fires, representing 6.50%.
Education premises accounted for 417 fires, or 6.26%, agricultural premises recorded 409 fires, or 6.14%, and offices and call centres saw 348 fires, equal to 5.22% of workplace incidents.
Electrical faults and smoking materials among leading causes
System Building Services reports that almost half of all workplace fires in the Home Office dataset – 49.89% – are recorded under unspecified or other causes.
Within the remaining category data, electrical distribution faults form the largest identifiable cause, with 2,126 fires, or 18.04% of workplace incidents.
These electrical distribution fires involve equipment such as fuse boxes, circuit breakers, wiring systems and distribution boards, often starting within walls or ceiling voids before detection.
Smoking-related materials form the next largest cause, with 1,505 fires, representing 12.77% of the total despite smoking bans in enclosed workplaces.
System Building Services notes that these incidents frequently occur in smoking shelters where cigarettes are not fully extinguished or in outdoor areas where embers reach combustible items.
Other domestic-style appliances are linked to 776 fires, or 6.58%, while space heating appliances are recorded as the cause in 433 fires, or 3.67%.
Matches and candles account for 366 fires, or 3.11%, showing that open flames remain a cause in workplaces during activities such as maintenance, religious observance or power outages.
Electric lighting is recorded as the cause in 362 fires, or 3.07%, often due to overheating luminaires, damaged wiring or lights installed close to combustible materials.
Blowlamps, welding and cutting equipment are linked to 182 fires, or 1.54%, mainly in industrial and construction environments carrying out hot work.
Cooking appliances are recorded as the cause in 108 fires, or 0.92%, while office equipment appears in 48 incidents, or 0.41% of workplace fires.
Michie said: “The electrical distribution figure is telling because these fires are largely preventable through regular inspection and maintenance.
“Businesses often focus on visible fire safety measures like extinguishers and alarms, but the hidden infrastructure poses just as much risk.”
Workplace fire trends from 2015 to 2025
System Building Services calculates that total workplace fires in non-residential buildings have fallen 29% over the ten-year period from 2015/16 to 2024/25.
The analysis shows that recorded workplace fires reduced from 9,347 in 2015/16 to 6,665 in 2024/25.
Between 2015/16 and 2019/20, yearly workplace fire totals fell steadily, with annual reductions ranging between 2.19% and 5.68%.
System Building Services notes that this pattern points to improved fire safety awareness and greater compliance with regulatory duties across many workplaces.
The sharpest drop occurred in 2020/21, when workplace fires fell 24.58% year-on-year to 6,134 incidents during the pandemic period.
Following the easing of restrictions, workplace fires rose 19.74% in 2021/22 to 7,345 incidents, though still below pre-pandemic levels.
The downward trend then resumed, with total workplace fires reducing by 5.46% in 2023/24 and by a further 5.23% in 2024/25.
Michie said: “The sustained reduction is positive, but we’re still seeing over 6,500 workplace fires annually.
“Each incident represents potential danger to employees and serious disruption to business operations.”
Wider non-residential fire picture and fatalities
The System Building Services analysis also examines fires across all non-residential buildings, including workplaces, communal housing and public-use buildings.
It finds that total non-residential fires decreased from 16,025 incidents in 2015/16 to 13,172 incidents in 2024/25, an 18% reduction over the ten-year period.
In the pre-pandemic years between 2015/16 and 2019/20, non-residential fires fell from 16,025 to 14,331, with year-on-year totals moving downward.
During 2020/21, the number of non-residential building fires dropped to 11,924, a reduction of 17% and the lowest level in the decade.
Unlike the specific workplace fire trend, non-residential building fires then increased for two successive years, reaching 12,952 in 2021/22 and 13,576 in 2022/23.
Figures then declined modestly to 13,297 in 2023/24 and 13,172 in 2024/25.
Fatalities in non-residential building fires varied between 11 and 23 deaths per year over the ten-year period.
The highest level occurred in 2015/16, with 23 deaths, while 2021/22 recorded the lowest level, with 11 deaths.
There were 12 fatalities recorded in non-residential building fires in 2024/25.
Michie noted: “The relatively stable fatality rate despite thousands of fires suggests detection and evacuation systems are effective when properly maintained.”
Financial and legal impact of workplace fires
System Building Services highlights that the costs of workplace fires extend beyond the initial damage to buildings and equipment.
It explains that businesses face direct expenses such as repairs, replacement of equipment and higher insurance premiums after a fire.
Indirect costs can include lost revenue during closures, failure to deliver contracts and customers moving to other suppliers.
The company notes that many businesses face long periods of interruption after an incident, ranging from months to several years depending on the damage caused.
Some businesses never reopen after a serious fire, especially where there is limited insurance coverage or few financial reserves.
Michie said: “A lot of business owners underestimate the full cost of a fire.
“Even a relatively minor incident can shut down operations for weeks while repairs are completed and safety inspections are carried out.
“For businesses operating on tight margins, that interruption alone can be fatal.”
System Building Services also draws attention to the legal duties set out in the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety Order) 2005.
Under this framework, responsible persons must undertake regular fire risk assessments, implement appropriate fire safety measures, maintain fire safety equipment and provide staff training.
Breaches can lead to prosecution, with penalties including unlimited fines and up to two years’ imprisonment for serious offences.
Following a workplace fire, fire and rescue services typically investigate the incident and may identify failings in fire safety management.
System Building Services notes that where failings contribute to injuries or fatalities, responsible persons may face criminal charges.
It adds that insurance claims may be refused or reduced if proper fire safety measures were not in place when the fire occurred.
Michie commented: “The legal consequences can be severe, but more importantly, proper fire safety measures save lives.
“No business owner wants to face prosecution, but they should be even more concerned about protecting their employees and customers from harm.”
Practical steps businesses can take to reduce workplace fires
System Building Services uses the analysis to underline the role of day-to-day fire safety management on sites with elevated risk.
It stresses the importance of programmed inspection regimes that reach beyond obvious fire safety features such as extinguishers, alarms and fire doors.
The company advises closer focus on electrical infrastructure, storage of combustible materials and housekeeping in plant rooms, storage spaces and voids.
Michie said: “Businesses can identify hidden fire risks by conducting thorough inspections beyond the obvious.
“Check electrical systems regularly, particularly in older buildings where wiring may be deteriorating.
“Look for overloaded sockets, frayed cables, and equipment that feels warm to the touch when not in use.
“Pay attention to areas where combustible materials are stored.
“Are they kept away from heat sources?
“Are escape routes clear?
“Fires often start in overlooked spaces like storage rooms, plant rooms, or roof voids where maintenance work has been carried out but debris hasn’t been cleared.
“Don’t rely solely on annual inspections.
“Train staff to spot potential hazards during their daily routines.
“Someone working in a space every day will notice changes that an annual inspector might miss.
“Regular maintenance, proper housekeeping, and a culture where employees feel empowered to report concerns can prevent most workplace fires before they start.”
How UK workplace fire data can inform risk management
System Building Services’ analysis of Home Office data offers quantifiable evidence about where workplace fire risk is concentrated across UK business sectors.
Fire safety officers can use the sector breakdowns and cause data to prioritise inspections in industrial premises, food and drink venues and retail buildings.
Risk assessors can integrate the electrical distribution and smoking-related incident figures into assessments of older sites and premises with high electrical loads or external smoking shelters.
Facility managers in hospitals, education premises, agricultural buildings and offices can benchmark their fire incident exposure against national figures for similar property types.
Electrical contractors and fire-protection contractors can draw on the cause data to support maintenance schedules for distribution boards, fixed wiring and space heating equipment.
Fire and rescue chiefs and senior officers can reference the ten-year trends in workplace and non-residential fires when planning prevention campaigns and business engagement programmes.
Architects and building services engineers involved in new or refurbished industrial and hospitality facilities can consider the incident data when specifying passive fire protection and electrical infrastructure.
DAS Fire confirms senior appointments to support data centre fire safety
Leadership appointments at DAS Fire
DAS Fire has announced a series of leadership changes in December 2025 as it continues to support fire detection and suppression projects for the data centre sector from its base in Reading, UK.
The company confirmed that Dave Parry has taken on the role of Managing Director with responsibility for guiding ongoing expansion.
He brings experience in leadership roles and is expected to focus on maintaining technically robust solutions and customer service.
DAS Fire stated that these appointments mark a new phase in the company’s development.
Claire Owens, Chief Executive Officer of Alpine Group, said: “These changes represent an important step forward for DAS Fire, we are deeply grateful to Stuart for his leadership and lasting contributions.
“We are deeply grateful to Stuart for his leadership and lasting contributions.
“With Dave’s experience and Paul’s continued dedication, we are well-positioned to build on our strong foundation and deliver the innovation, reliability, and service that our clients have come to expect.”
The company reiterated its commitment to delivering advanced, client-focused solutions and to maintaining high standards of quality, safety and customer satisfaction.
Stuart Parker to support DAS Fire as consultant
According to DAS Fire, long-serving leader Stuart Parker will step back from day-to-day responsibilities.
He will continue to work with the business in a consulting capacity.
The company said this arrangement allows DAS Fire to retain his detailed knowledge of the organisation and the sectors it serves.
His ongoing involvement is intended to provide continuity for existing projects and customers.
DAS Fire highlighted his long-standing commitment to the business and its growth.
Executive director role focused on customer engagement
DAS Fire confirmed that Paul Darke has assumed the role of Executive Director.
In this position he will continue to lead customer engagement activities.
He will also be responsible for commercial partnerships with organisations that work with DAS Fire.
The company said this role is central to maintaining its reputation for service and technical expertise.
DAS Fire added that the leadership structure is designed to support its work in the data centre sector.
How DAS Fire leadership changes relate to safety-focused clients
DAS Fire supplies fire detection and suppression services to the data centre sector, so leadership continuity is closely tied to how projects are delivered and supported.
The appointment of Dave Parry as Managing Director defines who will oversee the company’s expansion, technical delivery and customer service priorities.
The continued involvement of Stuart Parker in a consulting capacity means existing relationships and operational knowledge remain accessible to ongoing projects.
For customer-facing work, the Executive Director role held by Paul Darke clarifies who leads engagement on commercial partnerships and client service.
These developments are directly relevant for data centre facility managers who rely on fire-detection and suppression partners, and for system installers and fire-protection contractors who integrate such solutions.
Clear leadership responsibilities at DAS Fire can help these stakeholders understand decision-making routes, technical escalation paths and who to contact for planning and future upgrades.
The not-so-hidden fire risk: CheckFire calls for clearer guidance on rising lithium-ion incidents
Bruce Robins, Director of CheckFire, discusses the need for education and collaboration if the industry is to raise greater awareness of fire safety risks associated with lithium-ion batteries
The use of lithium-ion battery-powered devices is widespread, from smartwatches and phones, to laptops, tablets, vapes and e-bikes and is now embedded in every aspect of modern life.
However, many remain unaware of the risks associated with improper handling, storage and charging of lithium-ion batteries.
It is rare for these batteries to pose a risk if manufactured and used safely and correctly.
However, if damaged (by overcharging, malfunction or overheating for example), lithium-ion batteries pose a serious fire risk and can ignite without warning.
As these devices become essential in every sector (from education and hospitality to logistics, construction and healthcare), the fire safety industry must raise awareness, promote regular fire risk assessments and facilitate effective prevention strategies.
Widespread use and the ensuing risk
Lithium-ion batteries are valued for their lightweight design, high-energy density and rechargeability.
Schools, college and universities depend heavily on this portable technology for daily use, while the hospitality sector relies on the batteries for catering equipment, rechargeable cleaning appliances and emergency back-up power supplies.
The healthcare sector is also reliant, given the batteries’ necessary (and sometimes lifesaving) application across equipment including portable diagnostic devices, precision instruments and emergency power in the case of grid instability.
Meanwhile, retail spaces, warehouses and office blocks increasingly rely on lithium-ion battery-operated tools and apparatus – and many on a much larger scale, with e-bikes, e-scooters and electric vehicles (EVs) on site.
The integration of rechargeable devices, tools and systems into our everyday work means there is not one sector exempt from this unique fire risk.
According to insurance company QBE and figures released earlier this year, UK fire and rescue services now attend at least three lithium-ion battery fires every day, highlighting an urgent need for greater awareness and proactive risk management.
Those responsible for fire safety must be understanding of the risks associated with lithium-ion battery-powered devices.
But, more crucially, they must be equipped with the right knowledge and specialised tools to mitigate these risks.
How fire takes hold: understanding thermal runaway
Lithium-ion battery fires are unlike other more commonly experienced fires typical of most settings (that may involve wood, paper or textiles).
Instead, they are chemically driven.
While this type of battery is generally safe when correctly manufactured, used and charged in normal conditions, the primary hazard lies in a phenomenon known as thermal runaway.
It occurs when a battery cell enters an uncontrollable and self-heating state caused by manufacturing defects, overcharging, overheating or improper storage.
This dangerous condition takes place when a battery temperature reaches 60°C and above and a chain reaction of events leads to an explosive fire that’s hard to extinguish, coupled with the release of toxic gas and smoke.
Additionally, the intense, self-perpetuating nature of this type of fire can trigger thermal runaway in nearby undamaged battery cells and increase the risk of secondary ignitions.
The explosive nature of molten metal and the likelihood of collateral fires it causes is vast, meaning it is highly likely the fire will spread to surrounding areas – making fighting lithium-ion battery fires a challenge.
It is imperative those responsible for fire safety understand that lithium-ion battery fires require a distinctly different response to that of a traditional class of fire.
While fire extinguisher installation should align with an identified fire hazard in any setting, `traditional’ fire extinguishers (plain water, foam, powder, CO2 and wet chemical) are not suitable for tackling lithium-ion battery fires.
Given the potential for rapid escalation and thermal runaway, these fires demand specialised fire extinguishers designed to not only extinguish flames, but halt thermal runaway, dissipate intense heat and mitigate the risk of reignition or peripheral fires.
A growing risk across sectors
Addressing these unique risks requires a proactive and targeted approach – one that’s reliably informed and clearly communicated to all users of a building.
This applies whatever the setting, whether office space, a warehouse, an educational setting, a residential care home or elsewhere.
Precautionary steps can be taken to ensure there is little chance as possible of thermal runaway occurring.
Firstly, businesses and authorities should only choose high-quality products from reputable manufacturers to be confident batteries meet stringent safety standards and have undergone rigorous testing.
This will reduce any chance of malfunction.
When devices are overcharged, heat builds up, which can then lead to thermal runaway.
Manufacturers’ guidance and charging recommendations must be followed.
Avoid stacking devices when charging, unplug once fully charged and do not charge overnight or for extended periods.
Additionally, devices should not be exposed to extreme hot or cold temperatures – keep them out of direct sunlight and when not in use, store in a cool, dry place.
For some settings, like warehouses and factories, it is important that designated charging areas are distanced from flammable materials.
Routine visual inspections of lithium-ion battery-powered devices will enable identification of wear and tear, swollen batteries, cracks and any other warning signs.
When the time comes to dispose of the batteries, they must not be thrown in the bin or incinerated.
Instead, designated recycling centres ensure safe disposal.
Finally, proactive preparedness is critical.
As well as raising greater awareness of this type of fire, it would be wise to install a specialised lithium-ion battery fire extinguisher, which is also equipped to tackle Class A fires to combat peripheral fires, in any setting with an FRA-recognised lithium-ion battery risk.
Adhering to regulations
Compliance with fire safety regulations is crucial for all facilities and premises across every sector.
In England and Wales, the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (RRFSO) covers ‘general fire precautions’ and fire safety duties required to protect ‘relevant persons’ in the event of a fire.
The RRFSO places the legal duty for overseeing fire safety on the “responsible person” – anyone with significant control over the premises, for example a business owner, employer, a landlord or a facilities manager.
In schools, the responsible person is typically the headteacher, while in healthcare and medical facilities, it is likely the Chief Executive of the healthcare organisation.
The responsible person must make sure the setting is as free from fire risks as reasonably possible, including emerging threats like those from lithium-ion batteries.
The RRFSO was recently updated to stipulate considerations for lithium-ion batteries in all fire risk assessments.
A critical requirement of this legislation, the fire risk assessment (which is overseen by the responsible person but completed by a trustworthy fire safety expert) must be subject to regular review.
This means every workplace, warehouse, healthcare setting and educational institution (to give only a few examples) must take into account any changes in activities or to the way the building is used or if usage of technology or rechargeable devices is altered and formally review and adapt the existing fire risk assessment.
Collaboration and education of vital importance
The effective management of this growing threat is not the responsibility of one group alone.
Manufacturers must be well-informed so they can prioritise safer designs, reduce the risk of malfunction and provide clearer guidance on battery usage and disposal.
Every business and workplace, whatever the sector and setting, must be equipped with the detailed knowledge and correct fire safety equipment to produce targeted fire safety plans and ensure compliance with safety standards and regulations.
Meanwhile, fire and rescue services and other fire safety experts, must continue to share insights, impart best practice precautions and prevention and develop and maintain fire safety protocols.
Preparedness, education and collaboration is key.
This proactive approach, incorporating all those with responsibility for fire safety, will ensure thorough and proper mitigation of the growing lithium-ion battery threat.
This was originally published in the December 2025 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.
PFAS timelines clarified as OHEAP advises UK businesses there is no ban
OHEAP responds to PFAS questions in the UK
OHEAP Fire & Security is advising UK businesses that no PFAS firefighting foam ban currently applies in the country, despite new rules introduced in the European Union.
The company said headlines about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have led some organisations to believe their existing foam extinguishers are no longer compliant.
According to OHEAP Fire & Security, there is currently no legal requirement for any UK organisation to remove or replace PFAS-containing extinguishers.
The firm stated that it is already preparing for possible regulatory change but stressed that current equipment remains compliant in the UK.
OHEAP Fire & Security said it wants customers to avoid unnecessary expenditure or disruption based on mistaken assumptions about EU legislation.
EU PFAS regulation and current UK position
OHEAP Fire & Security explained that the European Union has introduced a PFAS ban under Regulation 2025/1988.
The regulation came into force on 23 October 2025.
It includes a ban on the sale of PFAS-containing foams in the EU after 23 October 2030.
It also requires the complete removal of PFAS-containing extinguishers in EU member states by 31 December 2030.
OHEAP Fire & Security emphasised that these deadlines do not apply in the United Kingdom.
The company noted that the UK Government and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) are following their own process.
According to OHEAP Fire & Security, the HSE launched a six-month consultation on PFAS use in firefighting foam on Monday 18 August 2025.
The consultation is scheduled to close on Wednesday 18 February 2026.
OHEAP Fire & Security stated that UK decisions on PFAS in firefighting foam will only be made after this review concludes.
The firm reiterated that, for now, nothing has changed for UK businesses and all existing fire safety equipment remains compliant.
PFAS timelines and planning for UK businesses
OHEAP Fire & Security is calling for calm and clarity from organisations reviewing their firefighting foam provisions.
Nicholas Heap, Managing Director at OHEAP Fire & Security, said: “There is a lot of misinformation circulating, and we want to reassure our customers.
“The UK has not introduced any PFAS ban, and UK businesses do not need to remove or replace equipment at this time.
“OHEAP Fire & Security will guide customers through any future changes in a planned, cost-effective way.”
The company stated that early indications point to the earliest possible UK ban falling in late 2026.
OHEAP Fire & Security reported that a phase-out period of around five years is likely if a UK ban is introduced.
On that basis, the firm said existing PFAS foam extinguishers might not need to be removed until 2031 or later.
The company highlighted that these projected timelines would allow businesses to plan budgets and replacements in a controlled way.
OHEAP Fire & Security added that long notice periods should help organisations avoid unnecessary disruption to operations.
PFAS-free alternatives and ongoing support from OHEAP
OHEAP Fire & Security stated that it is already helping customers prepare for possible future PFAS restrictions.
The company said it is monitoring legislative developments and will provide factual updates as new information becomes available.
OHEAP Fire & Security confirmed it will offer guidance on replacement options only when regulations require change.
The firm outlined that it is already transitioning some organisations to the Hydrex ECO Fire Extinguisher.
According to OHEAP Fire & Security, Hydrex ECO is a PFAS-free extinguisher that is positioned as an environmentally responsible option.
The company said Hydrex ECO allows customers to move towards PFAS-free equipment in line with the direction of anticipated future regulations.
OHEAP Fire & Security added that this approach enables businesses to upgrade at their own pace over a longer term.
The firm stated that it aims to help organisations manage any eventual transition smoothly and in a cost-effective manner.
PFAS decision-making and equipment strategy in the UK
Procurement officers responsible for extinguishers and firefighting foam in UK organisations can use this information to avoid premature replacement of PFAS-containing equipment.
OHEAP Fire & Security’s explanation that current PFAS foam extinguishers remain compliant in the United Kingdom means replacement cycles can be aligned with confirmed regulatory decisions rather than media coverage.
Facility managers in industrial, commercial and public buildings can factor the potential earliest ban date of late 2026 and a likely five-year phase-out into asset planning.
This allows them to phase in PFAS-free extinguishers such as Hydrex ECO Fire Extinguishers alongside normal renewal programmes instead of undertaking immediate whole-site changeovers.
Risk assessors and fire engineering consultants can reference the distinction between European Union Regulation 2025/1988 and the current UK position when reviewing firefighting foam specifications and advising clients.
Fire-protection contractors, system installers and fire engineers can use the projected timelines and OHEAP Fire & Security’s stated support offer to plan service visits, replacement programmes and stock management over several years.
Specialists working with multi-site portfolios across the EU and UK can also separate EU deadlines from UK consultation dates when coordinating equipment strategies in different jurisdictions.
Correction: this article previously incorrectly stated ‘It includes a ban on the sale of PFAS-containing foams in the EU after 23 October 2025.‘
Minimax extends methanol-ready fire protection for marine bilge applications
Minimax targets methanol engine room risks
Minimax has adapted its Minifog marine XP high-pressure water mist extinguishing system for methanol-fuelled ship engines, with a focus on bilge fire risks in engine rooms.
The company announced the further development from Bad Oldesloe on 2 December 2025.
According to Minimax, the system can now be applied to both pure methanol engines and dual-fuel propulsion arrangements.
The bilge area beneath engine room machinery is identified as a location where flammable liquids can collect and create rapid fire spread.
Minimax states that the updated Minifog marine XP configuration is intended to address new requirements for bilge protection when methanol is used as a marine fuel.
Testing Minifog marine XP against methanol fires
Minimax reports that the methanol-focused version of Minifog marine XP has undergone testing at the company’s in-house fire research centre.
The manufacturer carried out guideline-compliant trials using a standardised replica of an engine room space with methanol fuel present.
Various nozzle configurations were evaluated to understand their performance when controlling and extinguishing real methanol pool fires.
Each test used a 30-second pre-burn period followed by a requirement to extinguish the fire completely within 15 minutes.
Minimax states that the fire tests followed International Maritime Organization (IMO) circular MSC.1/Circ. 1165 for high-pressure water mist systems.
The effectiveness of the Minifog marine XP configuration against methanol fires has been confirmed by Lloyd’s Register, according to the company.
According to Minimax, methanol is considered a future marine fuel option because it produces fewer emissions than diesel or heavy fuel oil.
From a fire protection perspective, the company notes that methanol burns with an almost invisible flame, produces no smoke and has a low flash point that can support rapid fire development.
Foam-based fire protection for bilge areas
Minifog marine XP for methanol applications is supplied with an associated fluorine-free foam concentrate for use in machinery space and bilge protection.
Minimax states that this foam concentrate is less harmful to the environment and aligned with current regulatory expectations on fluorinated substances.
Otto Stoehr, Foam Project Manager, Minimax Fire Solutions International GmbH, linked the system design to the company’s global support capability.
Otto Stoehr, Foam Project Manager, Minimax Fire Solutions International GmbH, said: “Minimax Minifog marine XP fights methanol fires safely and completely.
“In combination with our global service network, you can rely on reliable, sustainable, and high-quality fire protection from the market leader.”
Mathias-Christian Herrmann, Head of Competence Center Marine, Minimax Fire Solutions International GmbH, highlighted the emphasis on performance under regulatory test conditions.
Mathias-Christian Herrmann, Head of Competence Center Marine, Minimax Fire Solutions International GmbH, explained: “Our customers need solutions that work in an emergency case.
“That’s why we test according to international regulations and even go a step further with our systems.
“Research and development are part of our DNA.”
Dr Matthias Prall, Extinguishing System Manager, Minimax GmbH, focused on the behaviour of foam when applied to methanol fires.
Dr Matthias Prall, Extinguishing System Manager, Minimax GmbH, said: “The quality of the foam is crucial.
“In previous tests, we were able to show that water mist is not effective for extinguishing fires in this case.
“We need to form a blanket of foam on the burning material that covers it and then separates it from the oxygen in the air.
“The foam must be able to withstand the aggressive medium.
“Our system has been tested and proven to do this reliably.”
Minimax states that the validated performance of Minifog marine XP in these tests supports its use for bilge protection on methanol engine and dual-fuel ships.
Implications for methanol marine engine safety planning
Methanol-ready high-pressure water mist systems with confirmed performance in bilge areas are directly relevant for marine and shipping fire officers responsible for engine room risk control.
The detailed test procedure, including pre-burn duration and extinguishing time, provides technical context for fire engineering consultants and mechanical and electrical engineers evaluating methanol machinery space solutions.
Information on compliance with International Maritime Organization circular MSC.1/Circ. 1165 gives standards and certification bodies, including organisations in roles similar to Lloyd’s Register, a reference point when reviewing methanol-capable systems.
The use of fluorine-free foam concentrate in Minifog marine XP may inform decisions by equipment specifiers, fire-protection contractors and system installers working on bilge protection for methanol and dual-fuel engines.
By outlining how Minifog marine XP is configured for methanol engines and bilge areas, Minimax provides data for risk assessors and facility managers in marine operations considering future fuel choices and associated fire protection measures.