Valuable technical systems, for example, electronic systems, are equipped with automatic fire-extinguishing devices, which operate with extinguishing agents from the series of the Halons. These are ideal, highly effective extinguishing agents which, however, will no longer be allowed in the future. As an alternative to the Halons, carbon dioxide and inert low-boiling liquefied gases are available. However, carbon dioxide is not very suitable for valuable technical systems. After fires which have been extinguished with carbon dioxide, corrosion occurs to the metal parts which are sensitive to such damage as a result of the effect of the carbonic acid which is formed from carbon dioxide and water vapor. This is especially disadvantageous for electronic components. After a fire extinguished in time with carbon dioxide, such secondary damage, often with long-term effects, can occur.
So far, nitrogen is the only one of the inert low-boiling liquefied gases that has been used as an extinguishing agent. Thus, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 3,830,307 discloses a fire extinguishing device with liquid nitrogen as the extinguishing agent. Nitrogen as an extinguishing agent has proven its worth in certain individual cases, for example, in mine fires. However, in contrast, nitrogen has turned out not to be very suitable for extinguishing open fires. The reason for this is its relatively low molecular weight of 28, which results in a low density ratio to the air and thus a poor sinking behavior. In this respect, other low-boiling liquefied gases seem to be more suitable. Thus, for example, the molecular weight of argon is 40, thus almost reaching the molecular weight of carbon dioxide, namely, 44. Gaseous argon has almost the same density as gaseous carbon dioxide. The density ratio to air, for example, at 0.degree. C. [32.degree. F.] and 1.013 bar, is 1.38 for argon and 1.53 for carbon dioxide. However, the high price of argon in comparison to nitrogen appears to be a disadvantage. This is especially true of other inert low-boiling liquefied gases. Due to the inevitable heat flow of the low-boiling liquefied gas into the storage tank, expensive evaporation losses occur. Whereas these losses can be tolerated with liquid nitrogen, since it is not very expensive to occasionally refill the storage tank with liquid nitrogen to replace the evaporated nitrogen, this would be a major cost factor in the case of argon.