Ten years ago in New Zealand we started down the home sprinkler path. Interestingly enough almost twenty years earlier one of the research departments of one of the leading plumbing pipe manufacturers over here had designed a pre-action sprinkler system, charged with air using a simple pressure diaphragm valve and an alarm panel to alert the owner should the pressure reduce below what was required to keep the system dry - then just using a bike pump the owner could repressurize the system. Simple low cost kiwi ingenuity. Unfortunately it was an idea a little ahead of its time and didn't move out of the research room. Putting water on a fire has been around since we thought all of matter was composed in part from these two ingredients (earth and wind being the other two). The technology to do so automatically has been around for well over a 100 years so one would think that the time to bring this into homes where we experience most fires is a no-brainer! So why the resistance? I've had some time to ponder this question, so will lay out a roadmap for moving forward. 1) Some of it is ignorance - as I have yet to meet more than a handful of people who argue against the value and benefit of sprinklers. (once they understand them)! So clear, simple, progressive and concise educational "targeted" messages is key. 2) Cost will always be a barrier as someone has to pay and unless you could make sprinklers cost neutral by trade-ups/offs, insurance rebates etc. then individuals would rather choose what they buy - after all it is their dollar! Regulation can help here as the public on the whole don't want an anything goes society. The whole reason for creating laws is to have a just, safe, empowered and enabling community. Often however regulation is viewed as a bureaucracy, so again education which is simple, clear and promotes understanding of the why for the law can help. I've recently had the good fortune to meet many of the personalities in the home sprinkler industry in the Western world and all celebrate the successes which you have achieved in enabling the IRC to require home sprinklers. It is a fantastic step in the right direction - but as all involved in this fight have experienced much more work will need to be done. 3) System complexity. I know a lot of research money has gone into refining the sprinkler head droplet density, spray pattern, etc. But all the public really need to know is that it is a "TAP". Sure you can clarify this by explaining it operates automatically from hot gases (given off by a fire), is located in the ceiling plane where the hot gases collect, has no moving parts, only works once, so wont leak. Looks nice, is out of sight, etc, etc. But what we should really be promoting is sprinkler technology, as the sprinkler head is the only unique addition to (what is already in a house). That's right plumbing! We need to connect with the homeowner to want to have the best plumbing they can afford - as few houses are not plumbed! Sprinkler technology is a natural and common sense addition to the evolution of (bringing) water into the home to increase its service and benefit to us. Just think about it. Plumbing was first brought into the home for the amenity of drinking, then cooking, then washing, then cleaning, then showering, then heating, then cooling, then flushing away waste, to this we can (with the humble "heat TAP" aka sprinkler head) add improved life safety and property protection. This evolution doesn't stop as I read just yesterday that someone has developed a bench scale Hydrogen gas splitter (of which water has two in every molecule) - so water in the home may in time provide energy for our cars too, who knows? - but technology continues the potential to enhance our lives if we embrace it. So potentially the way forward is not pushing sprinkler systems (as another add-on requirement in a house) but well designed plumbing, that provides this sprinkler benefit. In New Zealand we are trying to promote the use of a one inch ring (loop) main, installed in the ceiling space (out of flexible plumbing pipe - so it is snaked through the confined space easily) within close proximity to the locations of the sprinkler heads. These are then te e'd into the loop with short one inch branches. The rest of the plumbing needs then gets run off this one inch loop in typically the half inch size of the same pipe. Piping is thus kept to a minimum, is kept simple and is contiguous, with greatest synergy to the domestic plumbing requirements. Anytime a normal tap is opened the (sprinkler part of the) "plumbing" is validated as still having charged water behind it - thus providing daily feedback as just part of normal household routine. These are the simplest, cheapest, most incorporated systems possible. I call these however entry level systems - low cost, doing what the Model T Ford did for the automobile industry - that was make motoring accessible to the masses. OF COURSE those with bigger more complex houses, etc SHOULD be required to put in the more advanced and validated systems. But I can't help wonder that the bar being set for many in the home market is too high and thus the cost not justified. SPRINKLERS BUY TIME, should be the catch cry. More time to safely get out, more time for the fire service to arrive to control a smaller incident and save property. If you can afford it put in the bells and whistles version that puts the fire out before it starts, go for it - but how many people can afford to fly first class? So keep systems as simple as possible, incorporating them into what already happens in a home - they get plumbed. And please don't tell me plumbers can't do it! And I don't believe for a minute that they will do you out of a job. The housing market is huge! Let plumbers do the low cost housing, you guys go after the high end, which should have appropriately designed NFPA13R systems in most cases as a minimum - I've seen some of the high end housing over there and can't believe you consciously allow NFPA13D systems in there.
Please don't be offended with any of the above comments - they are intended to share knowledge for everyone's benefit. Regards, James Fire Engineer New Zealand Fires are fast - home sprinklers are faster - don't delay inquire about one today - see http://homesprinklers.fire.org.nz and keep yourself safe and NZ green. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, 24 November 2010 05:44 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: I'm speechless (Steve Dobson Article) I think the fight would be even more difficult if any one point is made that the effort is about creating jobs. Creating jobs at my expense won't sit well with any hard working, taxpaying, citizen and especially when it's for something that he hasn't seen a real need for. If that be the case, what the naysayers will play on is this, the Fire Industry needs revenue so they are working to force you to put in a system that per the odds will never be used but you will be required to pay to install, maintain and have inspected for as long as you own that property. You will have to involve local government agencies in your life on another level and pay them and other service providers (water purveyor, fire alarm monitoring service, system inspectors, etc.) more fees and taxes for this system. Government officials when seeing a new cash cow will find more areas where this new technology will need to be provided, maybe in all existing rental houses since many renters are low income and tend to be more susceptible to fire loss. Then extend that to requiring the systems to be installed before you can sell your house. Sorry to play Devil's advocate here but for residential sprinklers to be perceived by the public as a life-safety and property protective benefit, the industry needs to be very careful of their intent and desire and how that is portrayed. A while back I got a letter from the County Sherriff's office saying I needed to pay a $45 fee for having a home alarm system. This is supposed to cover their cost of responding to false alarms. Gee I thought that big chunk of money they suck out of me each year would cover something like that. Point being, there are those who will exploit the good in any issue for their for own benefit. Craig L. Prahl, CET Fire Protection CH2MHILL Lockwood Greene 1500 International Drive Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax - 864.599.8439 CH2MHILL Extension 74102 [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 11:25 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: I'm speechless (Steve Dobson Article) Craig, I'm in agreement with you and the author's argument also. But you chip away one small piece at a time. Our esteemed colleague Ed Vining fought against a law in California requiring sprinklers retrofits in all schools in the state. His logic was impeccable. Useful life span of school buildings, cost of water supplies in many rural areas, numbers of lives lost versus cost benefit, number of buildings lost versus cost benefit. The entire idea was absurd, particularly when the proponents pulled out the life safety card, the "Who'll think of the children?" gambit. As far as I know the legislation passed and California spent millions of dollars protecting it's children from a non-event. I'm dubious about the cost of residential sprinklers if the argument revolves around life safety. Like the author I think the emphasis is on the wrong thing if that's our only reason. Life is dangerous, fire is going to happen, and we've mitigated deaths per capita from fire to a negligible statistic (of course unless it's you or yours). Dr. Gatling invented his famous gun to save lives, but that's a story for another time. If we mandate sprinklers to put people to work that's a reason I can get behind. That there'll be a reduced death rate from fire is an added benefit that makes it more valuable legislation than something that creates the same amount of jobs without the life saving benefit. We need to get the message across that sprinklers increase value and societal wealth like every other constructive endeavor. To quote, in part, Oscar Wilde, "(We)...know the price of everything and the value of nothing." On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 7:52 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > People don't see the costs of personnel or the other components because what > they see is the big chunk of money they give their local government every > year in their property taxes. I've paid for it, I expect it to be provided. > > I don't believe his main argument is the expense, his argument is the logic > behind the need for saving lives in one small venue when there are other > hazards which result in far more fatalities but which are not of equal or > greater concern by the powers that be. > > Craig L. Prahl, CET > Fire Protection > CH2MHILL > Lockwood Greene > 1500 International Drive > Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 > Direct - 864.599.4102 > Fax - 864.599.8439 > CH2MHILL Extension 74102 > [email protected] > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Vince Sabolik > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 10:37 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: I'm speechless (Steve Dobson Article) > > Why speechless? > > This Dobson guy or someone like him more or less, stands between our > industry and > a viable residential market. His point wasn't a lie. Through his eyes > there's the expense > complying with a residential law that the homeowner never saw coming, > much less got a > chance to vote on. And then there's the attitude of just not wanting > the government in our home, > so to speak. > > Home fires aren't important to most people unless that it's happened to them. > > People don't understand the costs of the personnel, equipment and > facilities, code trade-offs, additional > hydrants, pipe sizes, and water suppies - all needed to fight the > fires that never happened to them. > > I personally don't see a thriving residential market unless folks > understand these costs vs residential sprinklers. > > And a law that's forced will always be resisted. > > Wouldn't our industry's efforts be better spent showing the public > what a community of sprinklered homes > would look like on a balance sheet? > > It's been about thirty years since residential sprinklers first start > showing up (in California if I remember) and nothing > we've done has developed a lasting market. Maybe it's time to think > outside of the box. > > And then maybe after that, Mr Dobson will be the one that's speechless. > > > > Vince Sabolik > Christi Fire Protection, Inc. > 11351 Pearl Road > Strongsville, Ohio 44136 > > T 440 572-7730 F 440 572-7719 Email: > <mailto:[email protected]>[email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] > > To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] > > To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 [email protected] http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) --------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by MailMarshal --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by MailMarshal --------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
