I have seen GFCI prevent many accidents over the years but I have also seen them bypassed as well. where back to the people who get zapped are the ones using frayed extension cords or cords with grounds cut off and plugged in back wards etc etc. Every time you read an electrocution report in any of the trade magazines the individual has done something to cause the accident. latest article was on a farm where pressure washer was totally corroded safety shields off and no ground and gfci bypassed wonder why some one died.
So exactly what is the "maintenance" on a basic sprinkler system? I'm asking because I'm installing sprinklers in the garage I'm building. I ran water pipes off the main cold coming in and I bought some of those sprinklers with the little expansion glass pieces in the centers. You certainly can't test tripping one of them because then you have to replace it.
Just got word from local FM on new rules to install sprinklers in Allegheny County Pa.
1- registered master plumber only can install
2- certified flow test
3- plan by design professional that means architect or engineer
4- several water company's will not t off main line you will have to install a separate water line to house
5- we have major pressure issues her that means pumps and tanks and fire alarm monitoring of system yea they can do this all for $3500.00 average WTF who came up with that assigned figure it will be at least twice that in this county and that's if pumps etc not involved. needless to say new housing starts are totally flat in this county for spring and 84 lumber located in this state just announced more store closings and layoffs and closing of a truss manufacturing plant.
A VFW I used to frequent was going to have to install a sprinkler system, at a cost of over $100K. It's a one-story building, with a zillion windows and doors, any one of which could be used in an instant. ...and no one sleeps there.
About 3 years ago I went through that. Prior to the start of build, builder swore that $5K would cover the cost of the sprinklers. Mid build, revised esitmate was $8K. Final cost was $12K.
Why? Only 2 licensed fire supression installers in county, knew they had a good thing going, wouldn't agree to a binding contract in advance.
Is the cost of all the systems divided by the number of lives saved ($ / life) a reasonable number.
Of course, the emotional reaction is........ it's worth it if it saves one life or the life of someone I care about.
But expenditures like this don't take place in a vacuum.... could the same amount of money be spent per capita and yield a greater number of lives saved?
California has spent ~$10 billion (& counting) to replace the Oakland bay Bridge. Failure of a single span killed one person. ..... one person in 50 years.
If the entire bridge had failed it possibly could have killed a few hundred?
So the taxpayers of CA are saving lives at $25,000,000 per life?
There are about 2500 deaths & 13,000 injuries per year in the US from house fires. How many of these deaths & injuries might mandatory fire sprinklers prevent?
At what cost?
Could we get more bang for our buck elsewhere? How about a mandatory GFCI retrofit in the US every residential unit as well as commercial space?
In our neck of the woods you'd require a back-flow preventer on your sprinkler system to avoid contamination of the domestic supply. That has to be inspected annually. Check with your local AHJ regarding any further requirements. You may be required to interconnect your smoke alarms to a flow switch. If it's a heated garage and depending on your location, you may require a low temperature alarm. In fact it might not be a bad idea to have one anyway and interconnect it to your monitored security system.
Re the bridge analogy- did they replace the bridge not only to save lives but also to have a bridge in operation? If an old bridge falls down not only do people die but you've got to replace the bridge anyway, and in the years it takes to do that you've got no bridge.
Prewires are pretty common in new construction these days. A relative bought an entry level home a couple of years ago that came with it, as did the last (somewhat higher level) house I had built. The spinkler system has an independent bell tied to a flow switch. I added a relay and brought it into the house alarm.
Just read a statistic in a trade magazine ( I don't know the source) One in four residences have an alarm system of some sort. I don't know what they mean by "sort".
Ok... First off Bob, we are all talking about an additional system on a home which will cost all of maybe $10,000 maximum on an average sized home... If you can not afford that cost on a home which will preserve lives and the home itself in the future and would rather be spending it on a fancier bathroom or kitchen, then you really should be living in a high rise tower with small brick lined rooms and an elevator ride of two minutes up and down...
It is NOT an immediate out of pocket expense to most people as they have a mortgage to build the house in the first place...
Second, fighting a fire costs a LOT more than the $10,000 a residential fire suppression system would cost... Think of a small town which has four fire apparatus... For a big enough fire they would all be at that one house dealing with it... That is an awful lot of water being pumped and diesel fuel to power the pumps... Now your community may have a mutual aid agreement with nearby communities to cover the now empty firehouses or to send additional manpower to a working fire, but that costs quite a bit of money for each truck sent by a neighboring community... Equipment and hoses are frequently worn out or damaged in fighting fires so that can add to the cost as all of that equipment must be replaced for your fire department to be at full functioning capacity...
So why shouldn't the government place a tiny portion of the burden of the costs of such work on the owner of the home by requiring automatic fire sprinklers be installed in homes... The fact that it will cost LESS to finish putting out any fires which have spread to the attics or roofs of fire sprinkler equipped homes and overhaul them AND that such systems will SAVE LIVES isn't enough for you, you feel that there should be no requirements at all...
As for your Oakland Bay Bridge babbling bull, that bridge is older than 50 years... Construction started in 1933, and the bridge was modified in 1989 after another span collapsed during the Loma Prieta earthquake... Could it be that a 70-something year old bridge which has a high maintenance cost and a history of span failure even AFTER it was structurally upgraded more than 20 years ago should be replaced to make traveling over the Oakland Bay Bridge? You also neglected to mention in your "analysis" that 42 people were killed on a newer structure which was built starting in 1955 which totally collapsed in that same area... Yeah, the Cypress Street Viaduct killed many people in
1989 and it is connected to the Bay Bridge so to say that the highway system over in that area is what it needs to be safety-wise, you are full of it... So should CalTrans just take the risk that another major earthquake won't occur and pancake the entire eastern span of the Bay Bridge and have a major insurance loss in the Billions of dollars range for the structure, never mind the wrongful death and property loss claims for the thousands of cars and people who were killed when the whole thing gave way? Seriously, get a clue... Just because you see no logic to something, that doesn't mean that it isn't there -- just that you are UNABLE to see it past your biases and ignorance...
That is a piss poor excuse... Do you have door locks on your doors in small-town Midwest too? Or is the town so small and safe that everyone would be on red alert the moment a strange car pulled off the main road at the blinking traffic signal at the one intersection?
Wow... Sadly the ridiculous things that are being offered as challenges and/or excuses against requiring automatic fire sprinklers in homes are surprising me... Which shouldn't, I mean airbags became a requirement in cars because people were failing to use the seatbelts... In many accidents the combination of airbag and seatbelt will save your life...
But the probability of the entire bridge failing is small. Plus California has speciality contractors that excel at putting bridges & freeways back into service VERY quickly.
You can buy a lot of "down time" for $10 billion.
And you have to factor in the probability of failure over time (ie probability of failure on a per year basis)
What a pleasant reply......my point was, cost of systems (all of them) vs number of lives saved; that is $ per life saved.
Instead of insults, how about commenting on the numbers.
Instead of $10 billion on a new bridge, how about a less expensive bridge (less of a showpiece) , safe but more cost effective?
btw I worked on CalTrans research projects for years. I know the bridge designers at CalTrans in Sac. I also know that the politicians had WAY too much influence on the project, it was not driven by safety & structural engineering.
Instead of overspending on this particular bridge design, how about another lane on the 5 between LA & SF? That might save way more lives..... year after year.
Or individual safety upgrades throughout the state; tree removals, extra guard rails, crash barriers.
My point is...... expenditures do not take place in a vacuum.
Fire sprinklers MIGHT be a wise expenditure but maybe there are other choices that will save more lives for less money.
Now to consider the economic costs of fire sprinklers in new construction.
Before the "Great Housing Boom & Bust", the US built about 500,000 new homes per year.
At $5k to $10k per house for fire sprinklers we're talking about $2.5 billion to $5 billion per year. Yes, the cost is financed over 30 years but it is still capital ( the money was borrowed, someone loaned it) that could be applied to other uses in society.
According to the CDC numbers ~2500 people are killed in house fires in the US every year. Most people live in the "old homes", so how many of these 2500 people will be saved by this switch in new construction?
So what is the cost per life saved?
btw good luck suing the state of California for "wrong death" because a bridge or freeway falls on someone. The number of people killed by freeways & bridges over time is vanishingly small.
Spending money on "low return" so called "life saving" schemes is the real tragedy.
Technology like smoke detectors is way more cost effective, as are other potential ideas.
Do you think that air bags are a good thing? And cost effective?
$10,000. may seem like no big deal to those who can afford a new home your right they will spend 40k on a kitchen but what you are effectively doing is killing the ability to obtain a lower end house they are now out of range for exactly the people who need the protection in the first place instead of being able to afford a home they must settle for an old home or trailer home with all its problems instead of possibly knocking down an old home and rebuilding and living in a safe new home. like I said what have we been doing to protect those in older homes when it comes to affordable options to protect them jack Shit. Habitat for humanity has to cut down how many homes they can build every year because of all the new requirements. so 3- 5 family's each year in a city which has habitat which would have had a safe new home do not. Check the stats on how many low end new homes have been built since ICC went into effect in many states.
Did you imagine when you started this thread it would explode into so much conversation?? And did you notice that we have a lot more lurkers that have now decided to participate??
It just boggles the mind some times. ( @@ )
And for my .02 cents on the topic. I have seen the CONTROLLED video of a fire with out sprinklers and then with. And yes it is impressive. The problem I see is that fire does not always do it the Controlled way. Sprinklers will only help is certain situations, not all.
The problem as I see it is that it will take another 40 years in order to get enough stats to decide if the decisions that were made in 2010 were actually a good cost effective thing to do. Right now the decision was based mostly on projections of what it would be IF. I would think it would have been by far better if the law would have read like this. ================================================ Sprinklers in new homes are a voluntary install. If you voluntarily decide to install there will be a tax incentive to do so or $XXX.00. If you choose not to install there will be a small tax that will be applied to a escrow account that will help all Fire Departments in your state or you local area. ================================================ I know my wordage is not the best (not going to spend the time to use my legal format) but you should get the idea.
That would be a law that I could support. Clean, simple and effective. Unlike what was done which for the most part once again crammed it down the throat of the Pennsylvania people. Oh, then there is the thought that maybe this is a way of "job creation" that they keep talking about.
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.