Enough is Enough
Last April, one of my neighboring departments lost two firefighters when the kitchen floor collapsed as they were operating in a residential structure. Several separate items crossed my desk recently that emphasized how frequent such events happen and how without intervention they will continue to happen, especially in residential structure fires.
In 2008, we in the fire service believed we were successful in our quest for residential fire sprinklers when an amendment was passed to the proposed ICC Residential Building Code. The change would universally require sprinklers in all newly built dwellings. Soon after the vote, it became apparent that opposition, primarily homebuilders, were going to mount another effort to obtain a second vote on the amendment, claiming that residential sprinklers were an undue expense in the current economic climate that would drive up the cost of homes.
Several issues demonstrate the importance for us to bolster our efforts and once and for all demonstrate the need for universal sprinklers.
The Georgia Pacific Co. recently unveiled a new twist to the wooden I-beam construction approved for residential housing. My son, Todd, a career firefighter and volunteer fire officer in Indiana, brought this product to my attention. I-beams — which when I started in the fire service were made only of steel — span the length of the house to provide the primary support for floor joists. Current wooden I-beams are little more than lengths of pressed board sandwiched between 2×4s or 4×6s to provide that support. Floor joists that used to be solid 2×8s have been reduced to wooden trusses that result in quicker failures of residential flooring.
The new twist to wooden I-beams is a product that now is also made of truss construction. The Georgia Pacific Web site shows a photo of the new I-beam and its construction material. The beam itself has become a truss or series of triangles with the tagline, “Find your ductwork’s happy space.” The Web page also indicates “Customers can take pride in reduced timber consumption, usage and the ecologically friendly nature of engineered wood.”
Obviously with less solid wood, we can expect not only quicker floor failures but also more frequent and major I beam failures in these newly constructed houses. Both mean that we need to take some new steps to enhance firefighter safety.
There are sobering statistics in the new NIOSH alert, “Preventing Deaths and Injuries of Fire Fighters When Fighting Fires in Unoccupied Structures.” This 12-page bulletin is geared to make us pause during size-up at residential structure fires and conduct a risk-versus-benefit analysis. It reminds us as incident commanders that it is OK to use defensive tactics that do not place firefighters at risk to save just the building. A similar theme is echoed in an article in latest NFPA Journal, “Truss Issues,” written by longtime friends Ben Klaene and Russ Sanders.
So what else can we do? Right now, homebuilders are going green, using alternate energy-saving devices such as solar panels and geothermal heat pumps that won’t recoup their initial costs for many years to come. They are also using cheaper construction methods under the guise that they are more ecofriendly. Residential fire sprinklers are not only beneficial to saving the lives of residents and firefighters, they are also green. They save one of our most precious natural resources, water.
Instead of having to use thousands of gallons at 250 to 1,000 gpm to overcome a well involved structure, a single sprinkler head at 25 gpm in a fire’s incipient stage may extinguish or hold the fire in check for firefighters to extinguish no matter what the construction of the residence. How could our ecologically friendly homebuilders disagree?
In going “green” with sprinklers, one of our logical partners should be the federal government. We should take the opportunity to stress this point with our Congressional Representatives at the upcoming Congressional Fire Service Institute’s visitation and dinner in Washington DC. For example, using the stimulus package to financial institutions, Congress should dictate that no homes will be built with federally guaranteed funds that aren’t both energy efficient and “green”. The residential sprinkler system should be at the forefront of these “green” initiatives. There should be no other choice to save all of our resources, water, citizens and firefighters…because enough is enough.







March 25th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Go green put the wet stuff on the red stuff. You are correct with the green movement also think of the water run off going to creeks lakes and ponds. Also how many resources will be used to rebuild the home? Trees, gasoline and electric for equipment, plastic pipes wires. How many ton of debris went to the dump? The builders excuses goes up in smoke just like thier unsprinkled homes. We just have to keep our education of the public going. Be safe out there.
March 27th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Trade-offs with less solid lumber should require sprinkler to afford more time for escape and possible firefighting.
April 8th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Condolences to you for the loss of your fire fighters. Going green prompts most to think of recycling, driving less, turning out lights, etc. “Wet stuff on the red stuff” is what persons outside the fire service expect to see at a working fire. The concept of 250-100- gpms verses 25 gpm needs to be explained in greater detail and the point driven home about conserving water by using sprinklers for fire supression before enough ecologically minded persons will react to sway government to legislate for mandatory sprinkler installation in private residences. This might be a good topic for Fire Prevention Week at schools taught in conjunction with environmental awareness.
April 10th, 2009 at 10:37 am
It is unfortunate to see these tragedies occur. Regardless of whether or not we can accomplish the goal of residential sprinkler systems, we will continue to see these needless fatalities until we can effect a change in our fire service culture that forces us to use better risk/benefit decisions on our methods of attack. We continue to see so many of these unnecessary fatalies occur in vacant, unoccupied structures. We need to start incorporating and enforcing the concept of only allowing us to risk our lives for the benefit of saving lives, not risking our lives for the benefit of saving property. The “assumption” that there is always someone in a building is a dangerous concept to operate under. If you look back at the 2008 LODD reports from the NFFF, the statements show that in all but one fire, firefighters were attempting interior attacks on a KNOWN vacant/unoccupied structure. In my opinin, the one firefighter who perished during a KNOWN rescue is the ONLY fatality that is acceptable to me.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Lets not forget that a sprinkler keeping a fire in check will also reduce air pollution. How about that for going green.
Leave a Comment
Your Account
Advertisement
Categories
Archives by month
Archives by contributor
Subscribe