Re: Automatic fire sprinklers

[Evan <evan.news.reply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 14, 1:59=A0am, DD_BobK <rkaza...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Why not?
>
> Because cost needs to be considered.
>
> Is the cost of all the systems divided by the number of lives
> saved ($ / life) a reasonable number.
>
> Of course, the emotional reaction is........ =A0it'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 =A0~$10 billion (& counting) to replace the
> Oakland Bay Bridge. Failure of a single span killed one person.
> ..... one person in 50 years.
>
> =A0If 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 =A0every residential unit
> as well as commercial space?
>
> I wonder if that would be money better spent.
>
> cheers
> Bob


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...

~~ Evan