As this hasnt been explained by anyone......
Who was the Judge/Judges for this award and what was the criteria.
was it
a) Least amount of shells put up ( less damage of the Ozone layer )
b) Little or no Nauticals used ( no dead fish in the lake )
or
c) Please respond with correct answer

I, too, am curious as to what is required for a competitor to win this award. What exactly did Australia do to earn this? I'm wondering if this has anything to do with some form of technology that somehow causes the fireworks to release smaller amounts of noxious chemicals into the atmosphere when they are set off, as well as into the soils and waters.

I recall that when potassium, a main ingredient in fireworks, is released into the atmosphere, it is broken down into perchlorates. I understand that perchlorates, in particular, can remain both in the atmosphere and in water for some time before subsiding and can therefore have negative implications on ecosystems as well as with respect to health when in high concentrations. My guess is that the Australian team was honored for possibly developing or adopting some technology that is aimed at reducing levels of harmful toxins associated with fireworks, including perchlorates.

Trav.

I recall that when potassium, a main ingredient in fireworks, is released into the atmosphere, it is broken down into perchlorates.

No, that's completely mixed up. Potassium perchlorate is a key ingredient in many fireworks (especially coloured stars etc.) and it is usually broken down as the fireworks burn. There is a lot of controversy over groundwater contamination by perchlorate in the US - most of this seems to be associated with plants that manufacture rocket and missile fuel. The largest release of perchlorate composition, though, is through the space shuttle launches in Florida every year - each SSB contains more perchlorate than is used annually by fireworks in the entire US and I don't recall perchlorate contamination ever being a problem in Florida.

I believe that Foti's green achievement award is because of their use of a reloadable/reusable cake system in this year's competition (they're not the only company doing this, but they were the only one in this year's competition). Here's a picture of one of their resuable fans as seen on ramp 4:


Paul.

Here's a picture of one of their resuable fans

While we talk about it : what is the difference between a fan and a Z-cake ? Judging from the picture, the fan must be the one that produces a semicircular motif, doesn't it ?

While we talk about it : what is the difference between a fan and a Z-cake ? Judging from the picture, the fan must be the one that produces a semicircular motif, doesn't it ?
A fan can produce a semi-circular motif if all the shots are fired at once. In a Z-cake, each shot is in sequence, but the firing order goes from right to left and then left to right and alternates between rows of the cake. Sometimes fans only have one row. I believe the Foti system has one row per ematch, but the delay between the shots can be changed depending on how the shot tube is inserted. In a Z-cake, there is only one ematch per cake and the fusing between the items is fixed in the factory (and gives the Z-pattern). Cakes that fire straight up also are fused in a Z style as that's the shortest fuse run internally - but you don't see the Z pattern (the back and forth firing) as all the shots are upwards.

One final thing, the angle of the items in a Z cake is usually quite a bit less than is possible with the kind of fan arrangement that's shown in the photo

Hope this all makes sense!

Paul.

Thanks for the clarification, Paul.

There is a lot of controversy over groundwater contamination by perchlorate in the US

I know, and that's simply because relatively few studies (a number of which were conducted by the US Environmental Protection Agency) have been aimed at this topic. Furthermore, as you had mentioned, there are clearly many major sources that are responsible for the release of large amounts of perchlorates that it becomes increasingly difficult to accurately measure those concentrations associated with fireworks themselves. However, though comparatively small, fireworks still can be a source (again probably not a huge source, but a source nevertheless) for perchlorate contamination in both ground and surface water. Some findings suggest that even small amounts of contamination can prove to be detrimental to human health and wildlife.

I don't recall perchlorate contamination ever being a problem in Florida

I don't think there are any currently existing major federal drinking water standards established with respect to perchlorate contamination in the U.S, but I do know that some states have set some regulation in recent years in order to meet health and environmental sustainability goals. I'm not entirely certain about Florida, but I read that, for example, California has enacted a Perchlorate Protection Act in 2003, while Massachusetts set standards for drinking water in 2006 in relation to perchlorates.

It's an interesting topic, but I suspect more and more research will eventually be conducted in the near future concerning it. I'm not too sure how effectively new or recent technology can reduce toxin or noxious chemical levels without losing the overall vibrancy of the fireworks, but at least it's a good approach.

Edit: Perchlorates don't seem to have any significant effect on ozone levels in the stratosphere.

Trav.

Paul, due to all the use of plastic for the covering of the mortars and lower effect pieces, what will they end up using to reduce the use of plastic? An average of 5000 shells are fired per show, meaning almost 1 ft. of plastic per mortar. Meaning 6000 ft. of covering (while adding the amount of lower effect pieces). Doesn't the covering have a big part in this as well?

They should simply insert reusable plugs of some sort for mortars and stuff.

As for saustin's post on nautic pieces, not only that but the covering caps on roman candles as well I see near the orbite and fish are eating them. That's kind of sad. La Ronde should have a clean up team for the lake after each display. Because there are pieces of kraft and coverings all over the lake. It's really sad and unproper for the enviroment.

If saustin had no other thoughts, I would have also marked down as a choice for c) least amount of compostion in their fireworks.

It'd be nice to see fireworks with less polluting compostion. But that makes it less of an enjoyable firework.

Pat

Paul, due to all the use of plastic for the covering of the mortars and lower effect pieces, what will they end up using to reduce the use of plastic? An average of 5000 shells are fired per show, meaning almost 1 ft. of plastic per mortar. Meaning 6000 ft. of covering (while adding the amount of lower effect pieces) per display! . Doesn't the covering have a big part in this as well?

They should simply insert reusable plugs of some sort for mortars and stuff.

As for saustin's post on nautic pieces, not only that but the covering caps on roman candles as well I see near the orbite and fish are eating them. That's kind of sad. La Ronde should have a clean up team for the lake after each display. Because there are pieces of kraft and coverings all over the lake. It's really sad and unproper for the enviroment.

If saustin had no other thoughts, I would have also marked down as a choice for c) least amount of compostion in their fireworks.

It'd be nice to see fireworks with less polluting compostion. But that makes it less of an enjoyable firework.

Pat

Another simple suggestion of what may be included in the criteria is how many paper mache shells vs how many plastic.
For example: Zaragozana shells in Canada are for the most part plastic. Lidu shells are paper.

that will not be really a fair competiton because not a lot of companies uses plastic shells other than the ones who just buys from zaragozana... I think zaragozana's only one of the few companis out there who uses plastic shells most proffesional manufacturers uses paper shells i think

I think zaragozana's only one of the few companis out there who uses plastic shells most proffesional manufacturers uses paper shells i think

Not precisely, Hands Fireworks located in Ontario, is more known for their consumer fireworks rather than their 'somewhat' proffesional fireworks, but you can still call it professional. If you simply look up "How It's Made (Fireworks)" you'll notice that plastic shells are used to create the firework, rather than paper. Either way, destroying trees and making paper shells is bad for the environment, and even plastic isn't good. But, 90% of the shells are kraft paper, which is pretty durable to keep things compact. I find plastic shells would give a nicer break, but spherical kraft paper shells also create a nice break as well.

For one thing, Royal uses 100% kraft paper, no plastic. From what some encountered that night from the Royal display, kraft paper fell also over the audience, and covered the sidewalks and streets from a 1000 feet away (a few hundred feet after the Molson Company, right beside the Radio Canada company). So I'd rather stick with paper rather than plastic. Majority of the displays we saw this year contained paper shells. Plastic aren't popular anymore due to large amounts of polution, but I can't just say that it's plastic. It's also paper.

I'm just going to save space and let others write their thoughts now . I just wanted to explain in point form to Vander...Zaragozana isn't the only one. And there are defenitley more than a few. If you've ever been to Japan, they still use 70% plastic in their displays (meaning majority made of plastic rather than paper nowadays). Speaking of which, Mylène posted a link to a video of Japan's largest firework in the world (48", only 12" inches shy from my height!). Setting car alarms with fireworks sounds like fun!

(if Paul doesn't mind, I'll take up a bit more space! )

I'm trying to start my own shells, and most make them homemade. My friend has started his shells (mostly 1"- 3" shells). But what he hasn't realized is that he should never use PVC pipe as a mortar!

Pat

For one thing, Royal uses 100% kraft paper, no plastic.
Only for their own brand of Chinese shells. The shells they fire from Panzera, Vincente Caballer and Zaragozona are plastic in some cases. Many roman candles contain plastic elements internally too - indeed, Plasticos Gamon in Valencia is one of the largest manufactures of plastic inserts for fireworks. I believe they are working on developing a biodegradble plastic for fireworks use.

I find plastic shells would give a nicer break, but spherical kraft paper shells also create a nice break as well.
A well made paper shell always gives a better break (in terms of symmetry) than a plastic one. Plastic is used because it's faster to manufacture compared to the steps that are needed to build a paper shell. Though with the advent of Jim Widman's "WASP" machine (see http://www.ctpyro.com ) - even paper shell manufacture can be automated now.

Paul.

im pretty sure that japan uses mostly paper shells

I think Foti won the green award because they are a certified carbon-neutral business.

See http://fotifireworks-carbonneutral.com

Paul.