FIRE LOSS MANAGEMENT

FIRE LOSS MANAGEMENT

DISASTER MANAGEMENT

Part 2: WHY CAN’T WE CONVINCE THEM?

THE ESSENCE OF fire loss management is persuading somebody to take action. The action may be to correct a condition voluntarily, to pass a law, or to enforce a law. Many people resist persuasion. Thomas Raynesford Lounsbury, an American scholar and educator, told us, “We must view with profound respect the infinite capacity of the human mind to resist the introduction of useful knowledge.”

In addition to this normal resistance, we are plagued with some fallacies so thoroughly ingrained that our reasonable and logical arguments fall on closed ears. Some of the fallacies have been developed in previous articles in Fire Engineering

  • “We’ve never had a fire.”
  • “You guys would like to see fireproof paper.”
  • “We’re insured. Insurance companies don’t want to lose money, so we must be OK.”
  • “We meet all codes and standards.”
  • “A fire prevention campaign or home fire inspection should reduce the number of fire department responses.”
  • “We have a fine class of people here.”
  • “The other fire inspector had no complaints.”
  • “We have an excellent safety record. We have gone millions of man-hours without a time-loss accident.”
  • “Fire is an Act of God” —and some offshoots:
  • ‘The Mything Link in Fire Protection, June 1986; More Mything Links, January 1987; and More Dangerous Myths, September 1988.

    “For some reason, we are favored by the Lord.”

    “You bring about disasters by talking about them.”

    “A problem can be solved by eliminating the agitator; the king cut off the head of the messenger bringing bad news.”

  • “The most important item to discover after a fire is the cause.”
  • “It’s only temporary.”
  • “Most fires can be prevented by correcting people’s unsafe attitudes or habits.”

The most subtle fallacy of all is the inclusion of fire loss management in the general scheme of management by feedback, exemplified by the popular catch phrase, “It ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

In addition to the fallacies, there are problems of turf protection, cost of fire protection improvements, and other more subtle resistance. George Bernard Shaw told us not to confuse the right reason, which is socially acceptable, with the real reason, which is unexpressed.

We will never win all the arguments or convince everybody. But if we are to have even moderate success, all fire loss management advocates, engineers, inspectors, and line fire officers must understand where our opponent is “coming from.”

It is impossible to fight all the fights. The fire department should decide its priorities, bearing in mind that the principle effort is not to prevent all fires, but to prevent disasters.

Part one of this series presented an overview of the “fire slot machine,” a graphic model that illustrates the dynamic interplay between the probability or certainty of factors having a direct influence on disaster by fire. When all three of the “wheels” of the fire slot machine—-cause, extension, and management-line up properly, a disaster occurs. Let’s discuss, in this and future installments of this series, the “wheels” in more detail.

CAUSE

The causes of fire are all around us, often inevitable, and yet some are not recognized.

From time to time we hear that the causes of fire are “men, women, and children.” This very simplistic concept is dangerous because it focuses attention on the person who is involved in the ignition, but at the same time excuses those responsible for the disaster.

For the purpose of our discussion, the cause of a fire will be that which provides the initial ignition. Often we find causes given as “rubbish,” “flammable liquids,” “carelessness.” In our systematic approach to the problem, there is no place for such slovenly thinking.

There are countless causes of fire, and new ones turn up every day. A favorite “can you top this” game is played often at meetings of fire professionals when the subject gets around to the causes of fire: the sun’s rays through jars of colored water in drugstore windows; the sun’s rays concentrated by imperfections in the glass; antics of pet animals; spontaneous ignition in a pencil sharpener of the wood and wax shavings of reproducing pencils; friction matches in a pants pocket ignited—to the embarrassment of the owner—when he slid a fire pole; birds carrying lighted cigarettes to nests in eaves; cows kicking over lanterns; spontaneous ignition of plastic drafting triangles in a filing cabinet; the ignition of wooden structural members of buildings after several decades of exposure to steam pipes; the accidental creation of an electrical resistance sufficient to provide enough heat to start a fire without drawing sufficient current to blow a proper-size fuse. These are but a few of the more extraordinary methods of starting fires, and they don’t all necessarily involve carelessness. We can be careful only about hazards of which we are knowledgeable.

FRIENDLY CAUSES OF FIRE

As we have seen, the causes of fire can be divided into friendly, unfriendly, and friendly-unfriendly.

The cartridge fuses in the building kept blowing out. The owner used economic sense and replaced them with copper tubing. This is just one of many locations where fire started in his building.

(Photos by author.)

Friendly causes of fire are sources of heat from light, heat, and power that we find necessary or useful in our daily lives. These causes of fire, therefore, cannot be eliminated, but must he strictly controlled. We will develop each of these headings in only limited detail. A book could be written on each of the subheads in this series.

LIGHT

Fires started by light, as such, are relatively rare. One of the early pioneers, the story goes, saved his life by demonstrating to the Indians that he could start a fire with a magnifying glass, which concentrated the light rays from the sun sufficiently so that heat would be developed and a pile of shavings ignited. I recall a fire years ago in a neighborhood drugstore, started by the sun’s rays shining through the jar of colored water that all drugstores had in the window. But in our situation, light most often provides us a fire problem when it is accompanied by heat.

STATEMENT-TRUE OR FALSE: Safety is an attitude. Responsibility, maturity, and common sense … that’s all it takes.

ANSWER: BULL! Technical hazards require technical knowledge.

WHY CAN’T WE CONVINCE THEM?

Lighting can cause fires. These fluorescent fixtures are designed for installation on combustible fiberfaoard ceilings. Note the air space provided between surfaces.

The simplest form of light that also gives us heat sufficient to start a fire is the candle. Candles are widely used for decoration and tor emergency lighting. If the flame comes in contact with kindling, ignition takes place. The Brown’s Ferry Reactor fire (which cost the taxpayers over a billion dollars2) was started by a candle used to detect air leaks.

An ordinary light bulb—certainly of 100 watts or more and possibly of 60watts rating—provides sufficient heat to ignite kindling. The devastating Pentagon computer-area fire’ was started by an unprotected electric light bulb that came in contact with combustible material. Extension cords should always be provided with a guard to prevent direct contact between the light bulb and kindling. If the light drops and breaks and the kindling is a flammable vapor, a fire may occur. The hot filament stays hot enough to ignite flammable vapors for a sufficient time after the glass breaks and the light goes out. All electrical equipment in an area where flammable vapors are present, including extension cords, should be of the type listed for that location.

Having broached the subject of friendly causes of fire, I’ll leave the reader until next month. In the mean time, review your own experiences with friendly sources of fire.

2It cost an average of S 200,000 per day to substitute coal power for nuclear power for 18 months.

’On July 2, 1959. an extension cord light set fire to the low-density fiberboard ceiling in the Pentagon computer facility. A watchman had been equipped with an ineffective C02 extinguisher The fire destroyed the computer facility and collapsed a portion of the concourse.

Fire Burns Through PA Aerospace Supplier

A large fire broke out Monday night at SPS Technologies, an aerospace supplier in Abington Township.

Detroit Rescue Crews Use Boats, Frontend Loaders Amid Severe Flooding

Rescue crews in Detroit Monday had to rescue families left trapped by severe flooding that left streets and homes under water.