Re: Automatic fire sprinklers

[mleuck <m.leuck@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 12, 11:55=A0am, jamesgangnc <jamesgan...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Jan 12, 12:51=A0pm, "Ed Pawlowski" <e...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > ?
> > "nick markowitz" <nmarkow...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote
>
> > > The smoking in bed is one scenario where a sprinkler would not save
> > > your life due to smoke inhalation.
>
> > Once it became a blaze though, it could save others if the smoke has no=
t
> > already gotten to them.
> > Smoke detectors are far more important than sprinklers to warn people.
>
> > > Why is there no single sprinkler head easy install kit for existing
> > > homes where they could be easily attached to an existing water source
> > > in a basement area where pipes are usual very accessible and where
> > > many fires start.
> > > and could well serve to suppress a fire. At one time a saw a small
> > > garden hose kit with single head you attached to back of washer and
> > > then hanged on ceiling.
>
> > Some 20 =A0years ago I saw a water valve that replaced the one on the f=
eed
> > line to your boiler. =A0In the case of a fire from the boiler, it would
> > activate as a sprinkler. =A0The idea was that many fires start at resid=
ential
> > heaters so this would take care of one common source. =A0 I never saw i=
t in
> > production though.
>
> A compromise might be to have sprinklers at fireplaces, kitchens,
> laundry rooms and gas heat/hw. =A0Dryers are common fire starter. =A0Lint
> plus hot is bad.

I'd go even farther and outlaw electricity to the house, someone here
once said "If it saves ONE life it's worth it" so......