3 ms·
It won't save the house if everything around is afire, but pictures like the burnt-down HP historical archive building[1] look like it could have been saved wit
by yongjik 9y ago
It won't save the house if everything around is afire, but pictures like the burnt-down HP historical archive building[1] look like it could have been saved with a sprinkler wall. (For god's sake, the trees next to it are perfectly OK.)
[1] http://www.pressdemocrat.com/business/7559762-181/hewlett-packard-archives-at-keysight-destroyed?artslide=2 http://www.pressdemocrat.com/business/7559762-181/hewlett-pa... (see picture 3)
- schoen 9y agoIndeed, some people in the recent fires were able to save their homes with a garden hose (!) depending on the intensity of the fire in their area, particularly when the fire was spread by flying embers. That's not unusual in wildfires, though only some fraction of buildings can be saved this way.
- blizkreeg 9y agoI'd argue some fraction is enough. It still represents millions saved in damages.
- schoen 9y agoYeah, I think it could be a very valuable precaution!
- flashman 9y ago> only some fraction of buildings can be saved this way In Australia, ember attack is responsible for 90% of the houses lost to bushfires. If you can prevent flying embers from igniting a house, you eliminate most of the risk to the building.
- dreamcompiler 9y agoEmbers are a big problem, and another one is vegetation near your house. If you have a big dry bush just outside your patio door and it starts to burn, the infrared coming off it can go right through the glass and catch the inside of the house on fire before the outside starts to burn. This is why we preach defensible space (no vegetation within 30-50 feet of the structure).