I hope a lesson has been learned from the California fires to build homes of fireproof materials in the wild fire zones and around the country.
What is your take on this?
2007-10-29
02:56:35
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Yafooey!
5
in
Home & Garden
➔ Other - Home & Garden
Some have mentioned the expensive costs. How much is a human life worth?
You can replace a home, but not a living person.
2007-10-29
03:05:53 ·
update #1
It looks like the UK is aware of the dangers of wooden structures. In the US nobody has addressed the question of a human life. Money is not important when it comes to protecting a life.
2007-10-29
05:49:41 ·
update #2
Most houses in the UK are built using largely non combustible materials, also are controlled to take fire prevention matters into consideration.the greater hazard is what occupants put into the house by way of combustible materials, The majority of our houses are built of bricks and mortar, I would not be happy living in a timber framed house surrounded by dense woodland,which seems to have been the case in many instances in California.
2007-10-29 03:10:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by SAPPER 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
That is a nice theory, but in reality, the costs would be substantial.
They can do things to make a house fire resistant, but there isn't anything "fireproof". Given enough heat, there will be damage. Even if your house didn't burn, the heat would likely destroy most of what is inside.
Even with the amount of homes lost in California, it is still a small percentage compared to the amount of homes nationwide.
2007-10-29 10:00:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by trooper3316 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
"fireproof" really isn't an option -- way, way too expensive and resource intensive -- but I continue to not understand why materials like autoclaved aerated concrete are not more widely available and widely used in North America. AAC is highly fire resistant, fairly lightweight, earthquake resistant and termite-proof. Oh, and excellent insulation. But it seems to be just barely hanging on in the US construction industry.
2007-10-29 10:01:22
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
That it would be nearly impossible to build fireproof homes and that the real problem is where the homes are being built and how the land is being managed.
2007-10-29 10:00:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The British have been abandoning timber new builds since the Great Fire of London way back in 1666.
2007-10-29 09:59:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by pirate_princess 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Suppose making a home fireproof would cost double today's cost.
Would you pay it? Could you afford it?
2007-10-29 10:40:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by fcas80 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
you can only do so much to protect against fire but when you are talking about forest fires thats another story
2007-10-29 10:00:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by brian m 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
They should but who'll be able to afford it? Houses are expensive as it is. But it should definitely be an option for those who can afford it!
2007-10-29 09:59:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by gatsgrl 3
·
0⤊
0⤋