Letter to Editor: Sprinklers not worth the cost

Sprinklers not worth the cost

The Daily Herald recently suggested that communities reconsider their opposition to residential fire sprinklers.

Let's agree but do it with facts and analysis.

In 2011, Arlington Heights did this and soundly rejected a mandate. Part of the analysis was a cost/ benefit study to protect all village residents.

This simplification adds clarity. The cost was determined by aggregating the total square footage of homes (including basement) and multiplying that by the estimated $3.50 PSF fire sprinkler installation cost.

To this was added the cost of 30-year financing and annual backflow preventer inspections.

Finally, the property insurance savings was deducted.

This showed that it would cost more than $450 million to protect a community that had recorded just one accidental fire death over the prior 30 years!

If you add the lost investment return, the total cost soars.

All this for what?

Fire sprinklers in new homes would not reduce the poverty and neglect that are often primary factors.

Fire deaths in code compliant housing represent less than two percent of all accidental deaths. A person is five times more likely to die crossing a street and thirty-seven times more likely to die from poison or a fall.

Those interested in saving lives should focus on the relatively inexpensive emergency defibrillators.

Sudden cardiac arrest kills an estimated 250,000 people each year.

In comparison, fires claim 2,400 lives per year. While every death is tragic, we can't reduce life's risk to zero. H

however, poor analysis and special interest groups can increase risk by making homes less affordable and diverting financial resources from more pressing needs.

Building codes should be based on analysis and common sense - not irrational fears and ideas championed by special interest groups and contractors seeking fortune.

Bob Ruffatto

Arlington Heights