By that logic there shouldn't be any type of heat in a garage. Plus, every time you start your car you would risk explosion.
Using Gassifier in a Residential Area
- Thread starter JMann
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
- Status
Andrew Churchill said:
You're using logic in a discussion of government regulations? Thought you knew better....
I don't know the reasoning (if any) but it may be more to do with the idea of open flame and stored gas containers. I personally like to keep them widely separated.
Andrew Churchill said:
Presence of combustible vapors.
True, an oil- of gas-fired appliance is a hazard under that, as well, but that system will (or should) shut down in case of fire. A solid-fuel appliance does not go off "instantly," so it could continue to feed and spread the fire.
That's the theory, anyway. I think it's nonsense, in the context of modern equipment, but that's the theory behind the code.
Andrew Churchill said:
NFPA 211, Section 12.2.3 is the controlling code in this case. (broken link removed)
As I said, I think it's stupid, but that's what the situation is, until someone gets it changed.
Joe
Codes like this do not happen because the officials are sitting around thinking of more ways to regulate. It is usually because of stupid and uniformed people....that end up burning their garages or houses down. Unfortunately, there is no IQ test nor common sense requirement for purchasing or living in a house....and as a result, the codes have to address what people (by the millions) actually do.
There has been a move away from putting ANY heating systems in garages, including hot water heaters, etc.
Any code or regulation can be looked at as excessive in any single case - but statistics and actual experiences (and insurance claims) are used as a basis for most code changes. If you (plural) had not burned your houses down, chances are the code would not have been changed.
Without such codes, thousands more would die and insurance rates would be vastly higher - one or the other matters to most of us.
There has been a move away from putting ANY heating systems in garages, including hot water heaters, etc.
Any code or regulation can be looked at as excessive in any single case - but statistics and actual experiences (and insurance claims) are used as a basis for most code changes. If you (plural) had not burned your houses down, chances are the code would not have been changed.
Without such codes, thousands more would die and insurance rates would be vastly higher - one or the other matters to most of us.
Up here, folks occasionally fill up their vehicle with gas on a very cold day and then park it in the garage overnight. Very cold fuel expands, leaks out of the tank onto the floor and...
Webmaster said:
I have to disagree. Having extensive experience with the codes, most are downright asinine, and have no basis in reality.
In Maine (at least, back when I worked there), it was against code to install a 330-gallon and a 275-gallon tank together on a single fill. On a single fill, those tanks behave as a 605-gallon tank. Two 275's were allowed, and two 330's were allowed, but not a 330 and a 275. There is flat-out no legitimate reason for such a rule. There's just no problem that could possibly be solved by that.
Code here in NH used to require a 2" vent pipe on an oil tank, even though the fill pipe was 1.5" and there is no way that the compressible gasses leaving the tank would require a pipe larger than the incompressible liquid entering.
Most codes are just asinine nonsense which don't solve any problem, and often cause more problems by encouraging contractors to ignore the few that do matter along with all the rest. It's a "boy who cried wolf" situation, and the sheer volume of code makes it all the more likely to be ignored. The incredible complexity makes code enforcement nearly impossible, and most inspectors end up just going with a few items that they memorized (which are often things that they just heard from someone, and not actually in the code), and ignoring anything else out of ignorance.
Joe
I don't know building codes that well, but wonder if like OSHA regulations, they are "written in blood" (i.e. that the rule came after someone was hurt).
I read about a true story about the widths of the slats on baby cribs. One couple received a crib from the grandparents that didn't meet codes but was the one the father grew up using. The dutiful couple waited until the childs head was larger than the slat width before they began using the crib. One night they woke to the struggles of the child whose body has slipped through the slats, but not his head.
The story ended well (the child was fine), and the point is that sometimes the reasoning behind the rule is 180* from what we might think "logically".
That said, I'm sure there is a load of BS, out of date, regulations still hanging on the books. Too bad nobody has the time to clean them up!
I read about a true story about the widths of the slats on baby cribs. One couple received a crib from the grandparents that didn't meet codes but was the one the father grew up using. The dutiful couple waited until the childs head was larger than the slat width before they began using the crib. One night they woke to the struggles of the child whose body has slipped through the slats, but not his head.
The story ended well (the child was fine), and the point is that sometimes the reasoning behind the rule is 180* from what we might think "logically".
That said, I'm sure there is a load of BS, out of date, regulations still hanging on the books. Too bad nobody has the time to clean them up!
The fact is that anyone, including Joe and I, can be "In" on the code writing and code changing game. All you have to do is submit your suggested changes and reasons. There are then committees - usually consisting of experts from WITHIN the industry (folks like Joe and I) who talk about the changes (often in person as well as by phone and email/writing). Once again, you and I are welcome to comment on those changes.
Joe may have stories, I may have stories - but the bottom line is that the insurance companies and fire officials and testing laboratories like the end results of most code changes - increased safety and fewer claims. As with any aspect of modern civilization, it is imperfect. However, the makers of heating equipment have some STRONG lobbies, and I have to assume they were in on the code changes over the years.
Some may argue that smoke and CO detectors should not be required - I could state many reason (cost, radiation, etc.)......and there are surely codes which make things LESS safe that get through. But, all in all, the process is for the common good...I shudder to think what would happen without codes and standards on construction.
Joe may have stories, I may have stories - but the bottom line is that the insurance companies and fire officials and testing laboratories like the end results of most code changes - increased safety and fewer claims. As with any aspect of modern civilization, it is imperfect. However, the makers of heating equipment have some STRONG lobbies, and I have to assume they were in on the code changes over the years.
Some may argue that smoke and CO detectors should not be required - I could state many reason (cost, radiation, etc.)......and there are surely codes which make things LESS safe that get through. But, all in all, the process is for the common good...I shudder to think what would happen without codes and standards on construction.
Webmaster said:
Only additional restrictions are welcome.
Try getting a nonsensical code removed, and you will be met with a stone wall, at best, and threats against your ability to do business in far too many cases.
Webmaster said:
No real change. Codes don't really get applied in many, many areas, where the inspectors do drive-by inspections. Compliance becomes utterly voluntary in many towns as a result.
Joe
I have seen code restrictions removed, it is just a slow process and difficult if the old timer responsible for the particular article is still on the committee. The articles range from very broad requirements that are just guesses by some people who may or may not be familiar with the problem, to specific requirements from one case they studied to try and prevent from occurring again to well studied problems presented by industry workgroups lobbying for or against something.
The end result is they don't account for everything and they run over the little unique situations. Often you can get a professional engineer to review your situation, write a letter to the local inspector and be ok but sometimes even that won't work with a thick skulled inspector.
As an example, in Canada, aboveground fuel tanks had very tight restrictions on them at filling stations to encourage owners to use in ground tanks that are safer from a fire perspective. Well, over time, the massive environmental problems of groundwater contamination fro these old leaky tanks has led to the code being changed to allow large double wall tanks to store gas. Its taken 10 years of local inspectors giving variances but it has made it up to the code level.
The end result is they don't account for everything and they run over the little unique situations. Often you can get a professional engineer to review your situation, write a letter to the local inspector and be ok but sometimes even that won't work with a thick skulled inspector.
As an example, in Canada, aboveground fuel tanks had very tight restrictions on them at filling stations to encourage owners to use in ground tanks that are safer from a fire perspective. Well, over time, the massive environmental problems of groundwater contamination fro these old leaky tanks has led to the code being changed to allow large double wall tanks to store gas. Its taken 10 years of local inspectors giving variances but it has made it up to the code level.
Joe
Do I detect a bit of cynicism on your part regarding codes and code enforcement?
Har HAr HAR
Sadly, I have to say that for the most part I can agree with you. I have some inspectors that are great to get along with. They apply what makes sense and give lip service to the rest but in the end they are concerned with matters that truly involve safety. Those are the good guys. Our state mechanical guys were fantastic in helping us do a better job and enforcing what needed to be. The state boiler inspector I run into most of the time could not be better. Unfortunately the county where I live hired a local yokel retired contractor to do mech/boiler inspections. We literally had to tell him what he was looking at on a couple jobs. On another new house where the furnace was on the main floor and the duct system in a nice 4' high crawl space he never even looked at it. Walked in the house for a final, looked at the furnace for about 20 seconds, slapped a green sticker on it and left. Those are the ones that make you wonder what the home owner just spent $150-200 on the permit for. Frustrating to say the least for those of us who try to do things above board. It usually winds up to be a waste of money.
Do I detect a bit of cynicism on your part regarding codes and code enforcement?
Har HAr HAR
Sadly, I have to say that for the most part I can agree with you. I have some inspectors that are great to get along with. They apply what makes sense and give lip service to the rest but in the end they are concerned with matters that truly involve safety. Those are the good guys. Our state mechanical guys were fantastic in helping us do a better job and enforcing what needed to be. The state boiler inspector I run into most of the time could not be better. Unfortunately the county where I live hired a local yokel retired contractor to do mech/boiler inspections. We literally had to tell him what he was looking at on a couple jobs. On another new house where the furnace was on the main floor and the duct system in a nice 4' high crawl space he never even looked at it. Walked in the house for a final, looked at the furnace for about 20 seconds, slapped a green sticker on it and left. Those are the ones that make you wonder what the home owner just spent $150-200 on the permit for. Frustrating to say the least for those of us who try to do things above board. It usually winds up to be a waste of money.
heaterman said:
Just a wee bit...
heaterman said:
Yeah, or the ones who invent (more restrictive) codes of their own. That can end up costing thousands, either in re-doing something to match the inspector's personal whims, or in trying to fight such flagrant abuse of power.
heaterman said:
Yup. I can name whole towns where no crawlspace or attic has ever been inspected, because the inspection department simply refuses to enter them.
I'd rather have the insurance company send someone out to inspect the place - at least they have a vested interest in making sure that the system is installed safely. That's why companies like UL are so widely-respected - they work for the safety of the consumer, not just trying to collect permit fees with the least amount of work possible.
Joe
- Status
Similar threads
