COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF SHORT-TERM/LONG-TERM COST OF

COLD FIRE V FOAM

It is not logical to compare Cold Fire to foam, because Cold Fire is not foam. Foam is a known dangerous,
toxic, poisonous and hazardous class of products. Accordingly, no logical mind should compare the two.
Therefore, Cold Fire pricing is irrelevant to how much foam costs, especially when Cold Fire can extinguish
a fully flame-engulfed burning car in 17 seconds; whereas you can never use foam in such cases because it
will strip the flesh of passengers. Yet, many people raise the issue of why foam is cheaper than Cold Fire. The
following is and attempt to comparatively explain that Gallon to Gallon price, Cold Fire might be slightly
higher, but actually it is far more economical and cheaper to use Cold Fire than foam.

Apart from that, it is easy to see the edge of Cold Fire compared to other extinguishing agent, especially toxic,
corrosive, dangerous and comparably ineffective foams. This miraculous edible plant-based product, Cold
Fire, possesses 21 unique positive characteristics not found in any other fire fighting product. It is: (1) Non-
toxic, (2) Biodegradable, (3) Non-corrosive, (4) Non-allergenic, (5) 100% Soluble in water, blending easily
without any need for special mixing, (6) Can be dissolved, prepared, kept and used in any type of fire-fighting
equipment, (7) Has uniquely high thermal insulating capability (8) Reduces heat in no time from thousands of
degrees to touchable surfaces, (9) Encapsulating hydro-carbons, (10) extinguishes on contact, (11) prevents re-
ignition, (12) decomposes smoke, (13) helps water penetration of surfaces; (14) reduces water use (15) reduces
water damage, (16) helps enhance decontamination from chemical and biological hazards by insolating toxic
fumes, (17) good cleaner in extinguishing messy fires and, (18) protects fire-fighters from toxic inhalation,
heat exhaustion, steam scolding, and skin burning, (19) Extinguishes class A, B and D Fires, (20) has
indefinite shelf life, (21) Economical; requiring very low concentrations. According to UL publications: only 1
Part of Cold Fire can replace 40 parts of F500.

Furthermore, Cold Fire protects fire fighters in the first place. NFPA determined that smoke inhalation is one
of the greatest threats of injury and death by fire. Heat exposure is an identical life threatening danger.
Superheated steam is always generated when water alone or foam are used to extinguish extremely hot fires,
resulting in life threatening risks to fire fighters. These dangers are often compounded by the presence of
metals, because fires are usually a combination of Class A, B, and D fires. Cold Fire enhances the safety of
fire fighters, victims, and those surrounding burning structures. By combining the ability to encapsulate the
hydrocarbons in smoke with the unique capability of removing significant amounts of heat, Cold Fire reduces
the density of smoke, the hazards of steam scolding and smoke inhalation while increasing visibility. The
resulting cooler flow of air reduces the risk of heat exposure, exhaustion, and superheated steam inhalation.
Furthermore, the fires are usually extinguished in considerably record short time when using Cold Fire. Thus,
dramatically reducing the probability of risks, water usage and water damage.

However, it is a different story for foam. For example, due to environmental concerns 3M Corporation, the
major manufacturer of Chemical Foams (known as FFF) decided to voluntarily discontinue the production and
phase out, by the end of 2000, this chemical that uses Perfluorootanyl Chemistry. Even Prior to this, many US
Federal and States Agencies including the Army tried avoiding these chemicals in fire-fighting because of
many serious problems: They are (1) Contaminating, (2) Hazardous, (3) Highly Toxic, (4) Corrosive, (5)
Composed of hydrolyzed Proteins and Fluoro-Chemicals, thus they decompose in fire and increase the risk of
re-ignition, (6) Pose serious risk for the safety of firefighters, (7) Cannot be used safely in fires where there are
human beings, e.g. Car in flames, (8) After fires, foam residues are very difficult and expensive to clean, (9)
Removal must be treated as hazardous waste, (10) Foams fight only horizontal fires (11) Do not fight
dangerous vertical or 3-dimensional fires, (12) Fail to kill most fires that have Class D elements, (13) Have a
very short shelf life, (14) Require replacement together with containers as hazardous material (sometimes less
than every 6 months especially in hot climates), (15) Take very long time to kill serious fires, (16) require a
separate additional tank in Fire –Trucks, (17) Use a lot of water, Thus (17) they cause extensive water damage.

Therefore, the choice is clear. The lives and health of fire fighters as well as the damage to their environment--
to air and water supplies together with all the very high human cost and suffering, apart from the long term
costs of correcting that, require consideration. How much saving can one make when the life of even one fire
fighter is lost because of re-ignition or inhalation of toxic fumes, or hot steam scolding? How much would the
country pay to treat one case of the consequences on one human health? Or, How much is the cost of one skin
grafting for someone whose skin came in contact with foam and peeled off? How much would the country pay
to treat the cancer, kidney failures and liver damages? How much would the country pay to treat the poisoned
waters? After all these costs, how much is the REAL saving?

Usually, people do not logically think about the cost of chemicals in comparison with natural products or the
actual cost of usage. Obviously, chemical products are usually cheaper. WHY? Because, the cost of chemical
raw materials is exceptionally cheap. For example: One type of natural vitamins cost $17.99 for 30 tablets
while the chemical formulation of the same vitamins cost $ 2.65 for a 100 tablets bottle -- with a minimum
margin of added profit of 250% or more to the cost. That is to say, the actual cost is about less than ONE
Dollar for the whole bottle of 100 tablets! That is to say: ONE natural tablet cost $0.59 and the chemical cost
$ 0.01.

Similarly, plastic bottles are far cheaper than glass bottles? Because plastic, as a chemical, is made from
petroleum by-products. It is the WASTE of oil that remains after refining. Most fire-fighting foam is made
from such WASTE of oil and/or protein waste remains in slaughterhouses, of pigs and cows after the meat is
cleaned and sold. It is WASTE. Some people in Muslim countries indicated that the biggest concern is that
pigs are clearly Najis and cows remains are also Najis because they are not Halal-slaughtered. The questions
that need to be answered then: Would any splash make the clothing and body of firefighters Najis, so they
cannot pray in them? Would the places, where the fire is extinguished and all areas where there was run-off,
be desecrated or Najis?

In contrast, Cold Fire is 100% NATURAL and cheaper to use than foam. Yet, it is important to note that Cold
Fire is not made from jungle or desert plants nor collected from the wilderness. It is made from agriculturally
cultivated plants. The seeds, the tilling of land, the planting, the irrigation with water, the harvest, the juicing
of plants, the factory blending and the salaries of farmers and workers cost money. It is not like collecting
garbage and mass processing it, which means no cost apart from collecting that waste and running it through
machines as is the case of foam! Cold Fire is a unique blend of mineral salts extracted from especially grown
edible plants. Despite all that, it is cheaper to use Cold Fire.

To put the above information in monetary figures, the following cost-effectiveness analysis highlights the
tangible and non-tangible differences that substantiate the ACTUAL COST associated with buying and using
one gallon of COLD FIRE in comparison with one gallon of FOAM. Using US pricing, the following gives
an idea about how to calculate the REAL cost of using ONE gallon of Foam and one gallon of Cold Fire.

TANGIBLE AND QUANTIFIABLE COST.

ONE YEAR PER GALLON COST COLD FIRE FOAM
The Initial Cost $ 29.95 $ 24
Corrosion & Container Replacement Cost $ 00 $ 9
Restocking Cost $ 00 $ 5
Least Additional Amount needed For same Fire $ 00 $ 133 [(3-10) Average 7 times)]
Average Removal-Clean Up Cost $ 00.00 $ 21.85 ($1,200per 55Gallons)
Total Per Gallon Usage Cost $ 29.95 $ 192.85
HARD TO QUANTIFY COST (Each country finds its own cost by multiplying the X-factors with their actual cost):
Water Cost 1 Gallon 50-100 Gallons
Damage due to amount of Water used 1x 75x
Water-Damage to Property due to Time Length 1x 9x
Cost of Time Length Payment for Fire Fighters 1x 6x
Environmental Damage (Air, Ground, Water) - 2 (Cures) + 5 (Damages)
Life Loss (Re-ignition, Exhaustion, Inhalation, Burn) 1 7
Short Term Health-damage (Exhaustion,
Inhalation, Skin Burn) 0 10
Long Term Health Damage (Cancer, Liver, Brain,
Lungs, Kidney, Fertility, etc.) 0 10
Judging from the above comparison, the REAL cost of using foam is substantially far more expensive than
Cold Fire. It is about time that people in the developing countries, especially the progressive and
environmentally conscientious, to think about the actual cost of using dangerous and APPARENTLY cheap
products! Yet, the most important consideration in any fire situation is SAFETY--safety of fire fighters, safety
of people and property as well as safety of the Environment. However, without the safety of firefighters,
especially during devastating fires, all other safeties are jeopardized.

We in the Safety Technology Group of AIM International, Inc. with our integrated safety approach are
willing to help make Cold Fire accessible to the developing world.