Global Warming?

Every argument has a counter argument. Some positions are correct, some are incorrect, and some are just muddled by emotion. Is our species moving forwards to adapting and thriving or marching forward to extinction? Global warming will not ruin the earth, it only impacts what is living upon it.

My background is in the sciences, which is based on facts. Politics have to do with agendas which can be based on the manipulation of facts to suit one’s purpose or agenda. Whatever the reasons, good or bad, there are consequences.

One of the things that always gives me pause is the hysteria surrounding one’s position on global warming. Human society has supposedly been on the verge of disappearing since recorded history. The earth was flat and if one went too far one would fall off, eclipses forewarned of doom, human sacrifices would appease the gods so the rest of the population would thrive.

With regards to global warming, human society, in relative terms, is probably less than a split second to the age of the earth and maybe a little more since living organisms have populated our planet. Could you make a judgement of a person’s behaviour in less than a second? Our personal observations and data are just too small of a sample size to make a definitive judgement thus we must look to science and historical evidence for answers.

The video linked to this blog makes the case that we might have a CO2 deficit and that all the industry since the late 1800’s may have save ours and other species. It is an interesting piece.

Full Disclosure: In University my studies were skewed towards environmental sciences and psychology. I was involved in one of the first re-cycling program in Toronto. I make my living servicing the oil patch but I am still involved in recycling through my business.

– Frank, Owner, CEO Direct Workwear Ltd.

Are You Visible On The Job Site?

X on back, vertical on front, stripes 360 around the arms and legs but do you know why?

We do after market striping and we get many requests for to vertical stripes to be sewn on the back of a garment to accommodate logos.  We won’t do it. It is a safety hazard.  A person operating equipment at night can recognize that if he or she sees an X then the person wearing the garment is facing away from them. If the wearer is wearing hearing protection they can’t hear equipment coming or possibly hear the approach at a noisy site.

Many people, to try to save money, feel with all the tape on the front and back taping around the arms and legs is not necessary. I tell them to drop the back and front to make a point. Arms and legs gives the wearer 360 coverage. Also if the upper or lower body is obstructed there is still visibility.

About 20 years ago I heard a story of a worker crossing a rural, two lane, highway in southern Alberta. It was a moonless night and the driver of vehicle didn’t see the person until it was too late. I don’t know if this is true or an urban legend but the point is obvious.

Fashion vs Safety:

Black is cool but is it safe. Recently a lot of workwear has been manufactured in black or darker colours.  At night it may not make a difference but during the day you may not be as visible. Many sites are now insisting on level 2 visibilities. That means the background has to be visible during the day. This usually is orange or lime yellow garments. The background colour is for daytime visibility and the retro-reflective strip is for nighttime visibility. Logically: the larger the background the greater the visibility. That is why you may see coveralls that are solid orange with just two inch retro reflective stripes.  In a future blog I will discuss colour and retro-reflectivity.

How effective is my striping:

As mentioned I will in the future discuss the science of colour and retro-reflectivity however, I will leave you with two rules: If it is dirty, clean it. It is worn replace it. To work, especially at night, the retro- reflective stripes have to be clean and complete to be effective. Imagine your safety glasses have grease or mud on them. You can’t see well enough to do your job safely. If stripes are full of grease, oil, or dirt it can’t do its job and the approaching operator can’t see you effectively. Yes, it can cost money to replace PPE but what is the cost of an injury or death?

….but that is just my opinion.

-Frank, Owner, CEO, Direct Workwear Ltd.

Fire Retardant Clothing Misconceptions

We seem to get a lot of questions about fire retardant clothing and many misconceptions or understanding revolving around what is fire retardant and good practice. I will deal with the fabrics first.

Generally there are four types of fibre and or blends: 100% cotton, 88% cotton/12% nylon blends and inherently fire retardant fibres such as Nomex (an aramid) or Modacrylic. It is not unusual to find any of these fibres to be blended with other fibres.  With the exception of 100% Cotton, which may wash out after about fifty washes, these fabrics fire retardancy will not wash out. In purchasing any garment one should read the laundering instructions or google them to maximize the life of the item. It should be noted fabric softeners should not be used as they can coat the fabric diminishing the effectiveness of the cloth.

In our industry we tend to concern ourselves with hydrocarbon flash. Not all garments labelled as fire retardant meets the criteria for hydrocarbon flash. For example, items that only meet NFPA 701 criteria (A test in which determines the garments ability to deter flames from spreading or in other words self-extinguishes). THE NFPA 701 criterion appears basically to be the standard for curtains and sleepwear.

Having said this one must presuppose that the manufactured when making a claim of fire retardancy has had the product tested in an accredited lab. It also has to meet the standards of the environment one will be working in. If unsure, the provider should be able to get test results.

It should be noted that these tests are conducted under laboratory conditions. In the field if a coverall, for example is soiled with a combustible material, some of that may have to burn off. The point is to keep the item one is wearing as clean as possible. This includes the usage of proper cleaning methods to avoid the garment being contaminated by a lipid (or fat) based substance, such as liquid detergent.

Another point that, to me, has almost reached an urban legend status is the idea that only your outerwear has to be fire retardant. There are two components that should be considered: fire and heat. We know that fire retardant fabrics will not sustain a flame once the source has been removed but heat is another matter. If one is wearing a synthetic material under their clothing it could melt from the heat. If worn against the skin it could be very painful if it melts into the skin and potentially lethal from complications. What should be worn is anything made from a natural fibre or fire retardant cloth against the skin. In the jurisdiction I am in it is  the law to wear natural or fire retardant fabrics beneath your outerwear.

Regardless, law or no law you can survive a hydrocarbon flash. Many manufacturers have invested thousands and thousands of dollars to develop and improve products. There is lots of information on the internet about these fibres, textiles and the manufacturing processes. All I care about is that everyone has the information to work safe and be safe.

….but that is just my opinion

-Frank, Owner, CEO Direct Workwear Ltd.