Is there a better method out there for containing and extinguishging residential fires?If so could you please educate us on what it is. Because to the best of my knowledge sprinklers would have saved both of my grandparents. The smoke detectors worked, the extinguisher operated but could not put out the fire.One single sprinkler and they would still be with us. Please let me know what these better methods are so I can use them in my home.
In ending, sprinklers should be a choice. If they are doing their jobs; NFPA does their job on education, builders do their job to install/educate/implement systems properly sprinklers will get to be the system of choice. However, I'm not convinced this is the best choice and honestly have been given a lot more evidence that there are better methods out there.
I live in the north and my question is how much damage is going to be done by accidental discharge of systems by frozen/cracked/broken/drilled lines. It happens to water lines around here all the time and will happen to sprinkler lines as well. My guess is that any deductions in insurance rates that some companies now give may will turn into increases once repair/cleanup bills start coming in for inadvertant activation. I have seen it happen in commercial buildilngs already in our area.
Saving property is a great idea but the easy answer is "that's what insurance is for". Get the people out of the house, don't let the firefighters in if it's not safe and let it burn to the ground. (Sidebar: My home burned when I was 12 years old. Not to the ground. We spent the next 16 months fighting with the insurance comapany about whether it could be fixed or had to be rebuilt.)
What will sprinklers do to save those millions of homes that are already built and will house people for the next 50-100 years until the home is raised/rebuilt/upgraded?
There are cheaper technologies (smoke detectors, fire stopping, etc) out there that would protect/save a lot more people than sprinklers will over the next 20 years and can be retrofitted into existing homes.
I don't disagree that Sprinklers will save lives/injury but as is typical with many of these organizations they tend to take things way too far and don't look at or talk about all of the options. They tend to give the opinion/information that best furthers their agenda.
Don't be fooled by their non-profit status either. They are a "membership" organization that is supported by people that make money from installing sprinklers as well as firefighters and other non-profits.
According to the CDC, the number of fire deaths/year in 1 & 2 family homes is 2500, not 3000.
Risk of dying is cut by 80% when working smoke detectors are present. The actual statistics for sprinklers doesn't add to this as all the homes had working smoke detectors.
No record of a MULTIPLE fatality in a sprinklered building, but there are records of single fatalities. Otherwise the risk of dying would be cut by 100%, not just 80%.
Is there a better method out there for containing and extinguishging residential fires?If so could you please educate us on what it is. Because to the best of my knowledge sprinklers would have saved both of my grandparents. The smoke detectors worked, the extinguisher operated but could not put out the fire.One single sprinkler and they would still be with us. Please let me know what these better methods are so I can use them in my home.
sp77776 7 months ago
In ending, sprinklers should be a choice. If they are doing their jobs; NFPA does their job on education, builders do their job to install/educate/implement systems properly sprinklers will get to be the system of choice. However, I'm not convinced this is the best choice and honestly have been given a lot more evidence that there are better methods out there.
t3songer 1 year ago
I live in the north and my question is how much damage is going to be done by accidental discharge of systems by frozen/cracked/broken/drilled lines. It happens to water lines around here all the time and will happen to sprinkler lines as well. My guess is that any deductions in insurance rates that some companies now give may will turn into increases once repair/cleanup bills start coming in for inadvertant activation. I have seen it happen in commercial buildilngs already in our area.
t3songer 1 year ago
Saving property is a great idea but the easy answer is "that's what insurance is for". Get the people out of the house, don't let the firefighters in if it's not safe and let it burn to the ground. (Sidebar: My home burned when I was 12 years old. Not to the ground. We spent the next 16 months fighting with the insurance comapany about whether it could be fixed or had to be rebuilt.)
t3songer 1 year ago
What will sprinklers do to save those millions of homes that are already built and will house people for the next 50-100 years until the home is raised/rebuilt/upgraded?
There are cheaper technologies (smoke detectors, fire stopping, etc) out there that would protect/save a lot more people than sprinklers will over the next 20 years and can be retrofitted into existing homes.
t3songer 1 year ago
I don't disagree that Sprinklers will save lives/injury but as is typical with many of these organizations they tend to take things way too far and don't look at or talk about all of the options. They tend to give the opinion/information that best furthers their agenda.
Don't be fooled by their non-profit status either. They are a "membership" organization that is supported by people that make money from installing sprinklers as well as firefighters and other non-profits.
t3songer 1 year ago
Over 100 firefighters are killed in home fires a year. 100 + 2850 civilians= 2950.
"The United States mortality rate from fires ranks sixth among developed countries" Shameful; wouldn't you agree?
Home fire death rate cut 50% by smoke alarms. Fire sprinklers cut death rate by 80% (fact) Better odds.
It would be great to cut the risk of dying by 100%; clearly impossible.
NFPA is a non-profit organization dedicated to saving lives since 1896. It's all about that.
.
fyrsistr 2 years ago
According to the CDC, the number of fire deaths/year in 1 & 2 family homes is 2500, not 3000.
Risk of dying is cut by 80% when working smoke detectors are present. The actual statistics for sprinklers doesn't add to this as all the homes had working smoke detectors.
No record of a MULTIPLE fatality in a sprinklered building, but there are records of single fatalities. Otherwise the risk of dying would be cut by 100%, not just 80%.
It's all about the money for these guys.
SuperSkids 2 years ago
nice video
controlsFire1 2 years ago