Guest opinion: Canadian study set cost-benefit of sprinklers Guest opinion: Canadian study set cost-benefit of sprinklers (May 04, 2005)

By Michael Lambert

In response to Peter Carpenter's letter in last week's Almanac, and the accusation that I have not provided facts, one can simply look at four Guest Opinion articles published in the Almanac dated 1/13/04, 4/14/04, 6/30/04, and 4/13/05, [ www.AlmanacNews.com, archives] to find facts and sources.

It is very interesting that Menlo Park Fire Protection District board member Peter Carpenter chooses to compare his desired sprinkler ordinance with federal and state regulations that require seat belts, air bags, motorcycle helmets, the strapping of water heaters, and electrical and plumbing minimum standards, all with relatively modest costs.

This is a remarkably poor analogy. It is important to note that the common thread in all of these regulations is that they were enacted at a state or federal level, not in a local jurisdiction such as the fire district. These laws have benefited from extensive research conducted by the enacting legislative bodies, and each one has had a compelling cost-benefit analysis.

Because of the known probabilities associated to each measure with respect to death or injury, a societal cost can be measured. For instance, in the case of motorcycle helmets, the reported societal cost is less than $300,000 per life saved. Regarding the seat belts and air bags, from testimony to the National Traffic Safety Board in 1997, the net cost for driver-side air bags is about $70,000 per quality-adjusted life-year saved compared to manual seat belts. Given that the FAA's standard on implementation of safety standards appears to be $2.5 million per life saved (perhaps a federal standard as well), it is understandable why each one of those measures passed muster.

Now, consider single-family residential fire-sprinkler systems, and understandably, the absence of any state or federal regulations requiring them.

A document entitled "Analysis of cost benefits of installing fire sprinklers in houses" was completed in 1988 by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/library/whpu/index.cfm) that stated that the "net cost of saving one life" by means of fire sprinkler systems in new houses, already equipped with smoke detectors (as already required by code), was between $30.5 million and $46.5 million U.S. dollars (based upon the 1988 sprinkler system average cost of $2,400 in U.S. dollars in plastic pipe and $3,590 in copper pipe. Adjusted to Menlo Park sprinkler costs ($7,200 to $10,800) the net cost of saving one life would probably triple to $91.5 million to $139.5 million in today's dollars.

In case anyone has forgotten, these high costs are a direct function of the high cost of sprinkler systems, the marginal improvement to safety over smoke detectors and the very remote probability (more remote than Canada) that you will ever experience a fire or fire fatality.

It is quite understandable why the codes and state regulations provide a specific exemption not to require fire sprinklers in single-family homes.

Unfortunately, Mr. Carpenter is comparing apples to oranges.
Michael Lambert is an architect and Menlo Park resident.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.