This is a Carbon Monoxide tester

[captain]

Is bad air a problem?

Good question, how many incidents can be traced to bad air.

Gas or diesel engine driven compressors are most susceptable to having CO problems if the engine exhaust is too close to the compressor intake or is up wind of the compressor intake, to a lesser degree worn or poorly maintained electric motor driven compressors operated in an overheated condition could in some cases produce CO.

If the air at remote location is being pumped by an engine driven compressor I would have some concern but very little if the compressor is electricly driven unless it it located in an area where something such as an engine driven generator is in use. Most cases of CO is from the compressor intake sucking in CO from another source rather the compressor itself. In these case it could be an intermittant situation such as an idling car parked in the vacinity of the compressor intake and a monthy air quality test may not catch it but you might get a bad fill that one time.

 

[swamp diver]

Most of the ones outside of the US are not following existing testing rules now, but - explain your idea...?




We shouldn't have to test our tanks. The Ops should.

Don I applaud your efforts to increase awareness on this important topic and the fact that the majority of fill stations do not test their compressed breathing air quality despite PADI's recommendation that it be done on a quarterly basis. This is not only a problem offshore, but also right here at home where it is difficult to find an air analysis done at any dive shop these days, moreso as the economy contracts and the owner/operators try to cut costs.

The problem with quarterly air tests is they only represent a point in time and the air quality could go downhill the day after the test was done if a idling vehicle backed up to the air intake for example. The auto drains on the compressor could dysfunction in the interval between tests such that the filters become moisture saturated and no longer can protect the compressed air stream from contaminants. The end user or diver would have no way of knowing the air was problematic in these situations.

While quarterly testing is better than nothing, particularly if the operator is testing the system just before the filters are changed out, real-time monitoring is the way to go in the 21st century. The cost of real-time carbon monoxide monitoring has come way down and a commercial fill station can install this Analox CO Free monitor for only $US600 which will alert the compressor operator to elevated CO levels. A sensor replacement is about $150 every 2 years. It can also be wired in to the compressor's control panel such that if an elevated level of CO is detected the compressor will shut down.
Sport Diving - Carbon Monoxide Alarm
http://www.analox.net/site/content_datasheets/CO_Clear_datasheet.pdf

The CO-Cop is an excellent economical device for the traveling diver, but it is not comparable to a real-time electrochemical CO detector. For one it relies on the interpretation of a colour band which not all users may discern, particularly at the lower CO concentrations. The exact number of uses one can get out of a indicator cartridge can vary depending on exposure to humidity, other contaminants, etc. so it could be possible to have the device read negative when there is actually CO in the breathing air (false negative test) if the indicator cartridge is not fresh. That being said I think for the diver who is looking for some level of protection above the no level we currently have out there it is a very useful device, but one must remain knowledgeable regarding the device's limitations.

The other big advantage of real-time monitoring of CO during the fill process is that each and every tank is checked. It is not uncommon during these CO contamination incidents to find several tanks in a string contaminated but with widely varying levels from non-lethal to lethal. Unless all the tanks are checked with a hand held device it is possible to miss a contaminated tank. Your tank might be fine or only have a few ppm of CO, but your buddy's tank may have 100 ppm.

Real-time testing for CO contamination at all fill stations is probably what we should be pushing for in the 21st century. It would be nice if PADI and the other training agencies stepped up to the plate and also encouraged operators to install this affordable technology.

 

[bleeb]

Could those knowledgeable about compressors comment about the following? Many people have electrically powered CO detectors at home, usually plugged into a wall socket. They're not particularly expensive (<$50) and IIRC the sensors aren't restricted to a single 'incident' and are good for quite a few years if not abused. Do similar things these exist for the compressed air world, how expensive are they and how common might they be?

Side issue: Any installation might be more expensive might be higher if any such device had to be certified, regularly tested against lab standards, or traceable. Home use devices aren't expected to be regularly tested against lab standards, or even be frequently maintained, and are produced in much larger volumes. OTOH, given the legal liability, it would seem that they would have to be pretty robust by design to stay in business. Would this be a device that needs regular extensive maintenance, is it pretty much a plug-and-forget device, or somewhere in between?

This whole concept may be slightly off DD's original thread topic, since he's maybe aiming mainly at fill stations that aren't abiding by the existing standards they theoretically signed up for, but reading SB, there are at least a few fill stations out there who are much more concerned about the quality of their product who might take a precautionary measure like this. Maybe the presence or absence of continuous monitoring is another indicator of a particularly high-quality fill station?

 

[bleeb]

D'oh. I see swamp diver answer the first part of my question while I was typing. ('Does such a device exist?') Other questions are still there though: 'How common are they?' and 'How could you make them more common/reduce the cost?'.

 

[swamp diver]

Could those knowledgeable about compressors comment about the following? Many people have electrically powered CO detectors at home, usually plugged into a wall socket. They're not particularly expensive (<$50) and IIRC the sensors aren't restricted to a single 'incident' and are good for quite a few years if not abused. Do similar things these exist for the compressed air world, how expensive are they and how common might they be?

The home CO monitors sold at the box stores are not useful for examining compressed breathing air as they have their alarm limits set too high in order to reduce false alarm calls to the fire services. If I recall they are not allowed to show a CO concentration visually until it has reached 30 ppm, and they are not allowed to alarm audibly until a concentration of 70 ppm is reached for at least an hour. Seventy ppm CO at 5 ATA has a surface equivalent toxicity of 420 ppm which will result in a very sick diver. CGA Grade E air allows only a maximum of 10 ppm CO and here in Canada the maximum allowable CO in compressed breathing air is 5 ppm.

There is an electochemical low-level CO detector available from CO Experts which gets around these UL/CSA limits as it is not sold to the general public. The unit will visually indicate a CO level of 10 ppm and give an audible alarm at 25 ppm. The sensor's stability is quite good and should last about 5 years. One cannot easily calibrate the device, but if it is checked yearly against a known CO standard the accuracy can be verified. Cost is $140 and one would put the detector in a plastic bag and then bleed air from the second stage into the bag. After about a minute it will show if there is an elevated CO concentration.
Aeromedix.com - CO Experts Model 2004 Low Level Carbon Monoxide Monitor/Detector

Side issue: Any installation might be more expensive might be higher if any such device had to be certified, regularly tested against lab standards, or traceable. Home use devices aren't expected to be regularly tested against lab standards, or even be frequently maintained, and are produced in much larger volumes. OTOH, given the legal liability, it would seem that they would have to be pretty robust by design to stay in business. Would this be a device that needs regular extensive maintenance, is it pretty much a plug-and-forget device, or somewhere in between?

The quality of the home devices is much better today than a decade ago but as mentioned the high alarm threshold limits make their use inappropriate for diving applications.

This whole concept may be slightly off DD's original thread topic, since he's maybe aiming mainly at fill stations that aren't abiding by the existing standards they theoretically signed up for, but reading SB, there are at least a few fill stations out there who are much more concerned about the quality of their product who might take a precautionary measure like this. Maybe the presence or absence of continuous monitoring is another indicator of a particularly high-quality fill station?

I have yet to see a real-time CO monitor at a dive fill station, but I have seen lots of them at fire halls. The presence of a current air quality analysis would be a good start for most commercial dive fill stations.

 

[DandyDon]

I have yet to see a real-time CO monitor at a dive fill station, but I have seen lots of them at fire halls. The presence of a current air quality analysis would be a good start for most commercial dive fill stations.

It's great that fire station compressors are using available technology to protect firemen. Scuba air is just as important to me, and I think that breathing CO tainted air at pressure may increase risks; how do we force operators around the world to embrace the 21st century with such safety...?

• We don't want increased government controls in all the various nations, nor would I trust the governments anyway.
• Padi and the other agencies seem to be doing nothing beyond typing out rules to be ignored.
• Most tourist divers seem to shop based on price, comfort and food.
• But in spite of the outcry we could expect from operators if we did pressure them to use such equipment and train employees well on how to maintain it, the per tank cost would be pennies.

I realize that carbon monoxide deaths and injures are not a common problem, but it is still a reasonable preventable risk that I would like to dive without.

 

[swamp diver]

It's great that fire station compressors are using available technology to protect firemen. Scuba air is just as important to me, and I think that breathing CO tainted air at pressure may increase risks; how do we force operators around the world to embrace the 21st century with such safety...?

• We don't want increased government controls in all the various nations, nor would I trust the governments anyway.
• Padi and the other agencies seem to be doing nothing beyond typing out rules to be ignored.
• Most tourist divers seem to shop based on price, comfort and food.
• But in spite of the outcry we could expect from operators if we did pressure them to use such equipment and train employees well on how to maintain it, the per tank cost would be pennies.

I realize that carbon monoxide deaths and injures are not a common problem, but it is still a reasonable preventable risk that I would like to dive without.

I think your assessment hits the nail on head particularly the statement indicating that the installation of a real-time CO monitor such as the Analox unit would really be pennies per fill for the dive operation in the big scheme of things.

PADI has chosen to develop guidelines with regard to air quality testing frequency yet has decided not to enforce these guidelines. The responsibility to follow the guidelines is left up to the individual shop/resort owner and a large number are not testing their breathing air on a regular basis which places the end user at increased risk for exposure to air quality problems.

At some point PADI's insurance carrier which pays out large settlements in the event of a fatality or injury from contaminated air at a PADI resort or dive op may do an audit and decide there is a significant problem with sporadic air contamination in the dive industry. In order to reduce their financial exposure, the insurance carrier may then require real-time CO monitors at all PADI facilities. Until this point in time when the insurance carrier decides these incidents are costing them too much money it will be left up to the individual diver to ensure their personal tank air is CO-free by using one of the devices mentioned.

 

[DandyDon]

That sucks. It would be nice to organize a pressure movement on the largest scuba forum board in the world, but doesn't seem to be much interest.

 

[swamp diver]

I don't want to discourage you from doing what you feel is necessary to raise awareness, but in my experience none of the training agencies have been very eager to deal with air quality issues from an enforcement standpoint. I am sure it has to do with the potential liability of monitoring the fill stations for air quality, and if something does goes wrong then there will be certain amount of liability risk which could extent to the monitor/enforcement agency.

Who knows what might happen if you tried to organize a movement to get better compliance with the PADI guidelines. Sometimes a campaign at the right time and and surrounding a particular incident is enough to get liftoff.

 

[DandyDon]

Scubatoys.com does have a much better price on the tester: CO Cop - Carbon Monoxide Tester, Scuba Tanks, ScubaToys, CO Cop - Carbon Monoxide Tester There does seem to be a problem with being unable to select the Yoke tester but I have emailed Larry. Should be fixed soon, or contact them direct.

Maybe I'll give up and get one. As their ad says...

While there are only a couple deaths a year from Carbon Monoxide in Scuba Air... some feel that is a few too many... and how many people have gotten sick and not died? The only way to know for sure that your air is safe, is to test it.