I’ve been going over my new shop insurance which is actually rider to my contractors inusrance. I can pick up some substansial savings if I put in a theftfire alarm system. How much savings depends on the type of system. More savings for an atuomatic fire supression system. I have water in the shop so I suppose I could pick up some of those sprinkler heads if that would fullfil the requirments. Anyone else have alarms on their shops?
Don
Replies
Yes as long as you happen to be a licensed fire sprinkler company that can prove the system you install will met the standards the insurance industry. needs. The same goes for the alarm you install you will have to met the insurance industry standards.
ps.
you will probable need to prove you are trained in both fields to met the standards.
Edited 11/18/2002 1:26:21 PM ET by fredsmart
Well Fred, guess you just kicked me in the butt over that one. Actually the alarm I would not have tried myself as I would go for a good one tied to the phone system. But...from talking to my agent this am, even a self install cheapo with a bell on the side of the building from Lowes or HD would effect my rates some. The sprinkler system I think would have been much easier as long as it's water. The foam or others options are obviously beyond my skills and understanding. A standing water line with heat activated heads is another thing though. You seem a bit intolerant to my post, is this what you do for a living? If so, I imagine you could share much with all of us. Especially those that use their basments and garages for shops. Thanks for the thoughts.
Don
Don
I don't know about your location but I'm in Texas and in 1985 I built a new building to house my printing plant. I inquired about a sprinkler system it would add $4.00 a square foot to my construction cost. One of the expenses was a larger water line than regular service uses. Another factor to consider should you ever have a sprinkler system discharge you will have some loss, maybe not from fire, but you will have some loss.
Halon ( I think that's the way you spell it) is another choice you might consider. I'm not sure how it works but you can sustain life should it discharge. It replaces some of the oxygen so the fire is extinguished. It's a gas, you have no residue from what I'm told.
Back in the early seventies I was an Asst. foreman in the pressroom of the Houston Chronicle. One Saturday morning we had a fire (not an unusual occurrence),the room 60' wide app.25" ceiling almost a block long. The carbon dioxide discharged put out the fire. About 50 fireman were down cleaning up the mess after the room had cleared of the carbon dioxide and an electrician accidently discharged a second shot. There were 50 fireman all trying to go out this door at the same time, they were running for their life. I personally think it should not be used where there are live people or animals. This is the last thing I would ever use.
The people I worked for considered the Halon system. It cost $1800.00 to recharge our carbon dioxide system, every time we had a fire. The Halon would cost $7000.00 to recharge. Hmmmmm we know where their priorities were.
God Bless and Good Luck
les
Thanks for the info Les. Sounds like a fire system is out of the question. From talking to the agent this morning, as far as fire goes, he's not sure of the rules. Apparantly it's not common for anyone to pursue the systems beyond what's needed for fry cooks and that's all written into code.
While in the service I spent a couple of years in mobile trailers that could be put down anywhere (so they said). They had a Halon system. Each corner of the trailer had a basketball sized round tank with the stuff in it. Must not take much. The trailers weren't big, but those tanks looked even smaller.
Thanks again,
Don
Halon was disapproved as a fire control agent several years ago. Though not a poison, it does displace oxygen and therefore persons in a Halon filled room can suffocate. I downloaded the following paragraph from a website I found by ANDing "halon fire suppression" into Google Advanced Search.
"For 35 years, Halon 1301 fire suppression systems have been installed in cultural institutions as an alternative to water-based systems. Because halon is classified as an ozone depleting chlorofluorocarbon (CFC), the production of new halon was banned beginning January 1, 1994. Currently, there is no direct replacement for halon. Halon fire suppression systems must either be retrofitted or entirely replaced to accommodate another agent. Fortunately,
most halon fire suppression systems were built to last a very long time and may still be relied upon to provide effective protection. Once the halon gas has been discharged, however, it will be extremely expensive and ultimately impossible to replace. Therefore, institutions with halon systems must begin planning now for
replacement fire suppression systems."
CO2, being a gas we live with every day, is safer, but also works by smothering oxygen from the fire. Most of these large gaseous systems work by flooding the whole room with suppressant, requiring that an audio alarm sound upon release and that all in the room be trained to leave the room immediately. CO2 is heavier than air and will fill the room from the floor up, giving persons time to escape. Just don't crawl (but you should crawl in an active fire to avoid the hot gases near the ceiling).
--
Lee in Cave Junction, Oregon
On the Redwood Highway
Lee
I didn't know the Halon had been banned I have been out of the newspaper business for 25 years. The system we had sounded a siren for 90 seconds before it discharged. My office was up on the mezzene and the room was almost a block long. If I was in my office and the siren went off by the time it registered what was happening and I got out the door, down the stairs, and made a round of the room and be sure everyone was out, 90 seconds sure went by fast. I have run down the middle of the room with a cloud chasing me out the back door. the CO2 replaces all the oxygen in your body. You can't hold your breath and survive in it. Fireman wont go into a room without a steel cable hooked to their belt and a Scott air pack on, in its presence. Houston fireman back then.
The first we heard of Halon was in the early seventies the main selling point was it was so much safer for the personnel. A newspaper in Florida had a fire in the pressroom. I don't recall where it was but one of our guys went down to talk to the people face to face. There were people in the room when the Halon discharged and they weren't adversely affected. One of the fellows he talked to went in 5 or 10 minutes after the fire was out, He said breathing was a little difficult but not bad enough to leave the room.
I have such a fear of the CO2 systems because of my personnel experiences I just don't trust it. I went down to a locker room a level below the presses 3 hours after a fire to wash up. Some of the CO2 had settled down in the corner of the room where I was and I was almost overcome. I got out and got some air and was OK in a few minutes.
It doesn't seem right to ban Halon, how much would be discharged in a year in the whole United States. Sounds like a good way to raise the price out of sight and bring out a new product in the meantime.
Thanks for the info.
God Bless and Good Luck
les
Les, I think you're confusing CO2, carbon dioxide, with CO, carbon monoxide. It's carbon monoxide that replaces the oxygen in your blood. CO is found in automobile exhaust and other cases of imcomplete combustion (almost all fires).
I have past experience as both a volunteer firefighter and an emergency medical technician (EMT). CO2 can suffocate, by displacing the oxygen in a room, but not by replacing the oxygen in your blood.
In a fire, both gases can be found, along with many other products of combustion (some foam rubbers create cyanide gas when they burn). That is why firefighters wear airpacks (better known as BA's for breathing aparatus) and lifelines.
--
Lee in Cave Junction, Oregon
On the Redwood Highway
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled