3 ms·
>> was the driving force behind a home-insulation scheme that was found to be the cause of 224 house fires. > House fires went down statistically. The absolute
by i336_ 9y ago
>> was the driving force behind a home-insulation scheme that was found to be the cause of 224 house fires.
> House fires went down statistically. The absolute number of fires was higher because more homes were getting insulation, but fires per insulated home went down.
Oh. I didn't know that. So you mean this occurred after the installation...?
> The real cause is business efficiency, hiring cheaper workers and not training them properly. You can't hold the government responsible for every grunt a private business hires.
Absolutely, yeah. I was trying to get at that idea but didn't quite articulate it. (Thanks.)
> You don't hear the current lot taking direct responsibility for the recent shooting in our offshore detention facilities.
Indeed :/
(I have to admit I honestly just don't understand why the offshore detention system has to be the way that it is. But this is largely due to my ignorance of the various variables and difficulties of the situation.)
- flukus 9y agoThe fires occur after the installation, 50% occur within 10 days of installation, here is a very long and detailed analysis (with some CSIRO analysis as well): https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2011/04/24/the-csiro-gets-hip-to-debunking-media-hysteria/ https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2011/04/24/the-csiro-g...
- i336_ 9y agoWow, this is great. Thanks for the link!
- Khaine 9y agoYeah, people tried to argue that the fire risk was lower, but that its because in a large number of cases the insulation was not actually installed, or was installed so poorly that it didn't improve the R value and therefore unlikely to be a fire risk.