Transcript 1. FIRE NZ 2015 Stephen Kipp - the Fire Protection Association of

The risk of fire, how we react to that risk, and
why we regulate for fire safety
Presented by
Stephen Kip
M.Eng
Fire Safety Engineer
SKIP Consulting Pty Ltd
The risk of fire
What is ‘risk’
“Risk” is defined as the probability of an event
occurring, times the consequence of the event
r=pxc
i.e. high consequence, low probability events are still
significant “risks”
(See Australian/New Zealand Standard 4360, for more detail)
Qualitative risk analysis matrix for the
level of risk (from AS/NZS4360)
Consequences
Insignificant
Minor
Moderate
Major
Catastrophic
1
2
3
4
5
A (almost certain)
H
H
E
E
E
B (likely)
M
H
H
E
E
C (moderate)
L
M
H
E
E
D (unlikely)
L
L
M
H
E
E (rare)
L
L
M
H
H
Probability
E = extreme risk, immediate action required
H = high risk, senior management attention needed
M = moderate risk, management responsibility must be specified
L = Low risk, manage by routine procedures
Is fire a significant risk?
All deaths in Australia, ABS (2001)
All other
causes
23%
~128,000 total deaths
Cancer
29%
Intentional self
harm
2%
Heart failure
2%
Arteries
2%
Flu/pneumonia
2%
Diabetes
Heart disease
20%
2%
Accidents
4%
Stroke
9%
Respiratory
5%
3303.0 Causes of Death, Australia, Australian Bureau of Statistics (2001)
4% of 128,000 = ~5,120 accidental deaths per year
Causes of Accidental deaths (1985-87)
Others
14%
~5,000 accidental deaths
Submersion,
suffocation
8%
Fire and
flames
2%
Road Vehicle
55%
Accident fall
17%
7 x greater
Other
risk of accidental transport
4%
fall
Australian Bureau of Statistics, (Fire Safety and Engineering, Technical Papers - Book 1,
Warren Centre, University of Sydney, 1989)
100 accidental fire deaths per year
17% of 5,000 = ~ 850 accidental ‘slips, trips and falls’ deaths per year
2% of 5,000 = ~
New South Wales Fire Brigade statistics

More males than females die in fires. (~2x)

Children (0-4 yrs.) ~16% of fire deaths (2x)

Elderly (65+ yrs.) ~31% or 3x

~70% of fatalities occur in dwellings
(usually in apartments of fire origin)
Fatalities by Age
Cause of Building Fires
Arson is about
25% of all fire
starts
NSWFB Incidents and Responses, 1989-1999
Types of property involved
69%
63%
NSWFB Incidents and Responses, 1989-1999
MFB (Vic) statistics from 2000-2010 (62 deaths)

Elderly (65+ yrs.) 66% of all fire deaths.

Elderly (65+ yrs.) 3.7 times more likely to be a fire fatality.

People with a disability 4.2 times more likely to be a fire
fatality.

Smoking materials the leading cause of preventable fires
and 34% of fire fatalities.

Most common room of fire origin in fatal fires is the
bedroom (46%).
MFB (Vic) statistics from 2000-2010 (62 deaths)

58% of fire fatalities had a non-working smoke alarm, or no
smoke alarm present.

69% of fire fatalities occurred at night (8.00pm-8.00 am).

63% of fire fatalities lived alone (people who live alone are
7.1 times more likely to be a fire fatality).

19% of fire fatalities were hoarders.

At least 35% of fire fatalities were smokers.
So what do these statistics tell us?
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts, for support rather than illumination."
Andrew Lang (1844-1912)
But they do tell us the probability (likelihood) of
a fire occurring is low, but the consequence can
be significant
How do we react to fire risk?
So if the probability of fire (rate of occurrence) is so low,
why is it such a big deal in legislation, the Media etc.?
Acceptable Risk =
Calculated Risk (P x C) + Community Outrage
Acceptable Risk = Calculated Risk (P x C) + Community Outrage
AR = (P x C) + CO
Usually reflected in
the prescriptive
outcomes of
legislation
Often determined by
statistics from deaths,
injuries etc.
Input to Public Policy
process by the
community (coroner,
politicians, royal
commissions etc.)
Risk categories
Examples of measurable
risk levels
Typical quantification values
Category I
Intolerable and unjustifiable risk
10-4 per year
Limit Royal Society,
car accident deaths
Car Accident deaths
Category II
Tolerable only if cost significant
10-5 per year
Category III
Limit for WA Environmental Protection Authority
Tolerable only if cost < gain
Workplace accidents
10-6 per year
Existing Class 3 bldgs, 4 x 10-6
Category IV
Broadly acceptable, Negligible risk Existing Class 9a bldgs, 3 x 10-6
Objective for NSW Dept. of Planning,
U.K. Royal Society
Drowning accidental deaths
10-7 per year
Lightning strike deaths
Category V
Acceptable, Trivial risk
Lighting Strike Deaths
What about the cost of safety?
∞
Cost versus Safety
Cost ($)
A legislative benchmark
gives some indication of
acceptable safety vs cost
e.g. speed limits and BCA
performance requirements
Absolute safety costs an
infinite amount of money
Safer?
0
Safe enough?
0
100
Safety (%)
For example, most fire brigade matters cost should not be a significant influence,
but for professional engineers/consultants it is a key factor and ethical obligation
Why do we regulate for
fire safe buildings?
Why do we regulate for fire safe buildings ?




The community does not accept multi-family deaths, deaths
in care facilities (hospitals, nursing homes etc.) as being the
same as deaths in one’s own home or from car accidents,
cancer, smoking etc.
The community considers the death of two children in a
hospital fire different to the death of two elderly people in
their own home.
For example, the Black Saturday bushfires in Victoria's
Australia resulted in 173 fire deaths, but heat stroke deaths
in the three day heatwave a week earlier were 374 in
excess of expected.
This ‘varying value of human life’ factor influences the
political process.
Why do we regulate for fire safe buildings ?

Fire is a ‘rare’ event with potentially catastrophic
‘consequences’ (so can still be a ‘high risk’ event).

Fires that burn within a building will burn more fiercely that
a fire burning in the open air outside (the concept of
‘enclosure fires’)
Why do we regulate for fire safe buildings ?

When a person is asleep the sense of smell (olfactory
sense) is switched off and therefore normal human
reactions to fire will not operate effectively.

Certain groups in society, especially those who are under
care or supervision, are at greater risk from fire (the aged,
disabled, children etc.)

Fire safety system performance degrades overtime (like
all mechanical, hydraulic or passive systems)
Essential Safety Measures Reliability over Time
We ‘maintain’ systems
to avoid this stage
Reliability
and/or effectiveness
Monthly
of building fire
hydrant test
safety systems at
time of installation
and commissioning
(max 100%)
Yearly
hydrant
test
6 year
hydrostatic
test
Design life of building
in years (typically a minimum of 25 years)
Who determines Acceptable Risk ?

Building fire safety legislation represents the Governments
direction (via community feedback) to describe
“reasonable” and “acceptable” risk for the community at
large to bear in terms of cost, resources and other
impacts.

The Government does this because, broadly speaking, the
community is incapable of establishing and maintaining
agreed acceptable risk levels.
Example of Acceptable Risk at an individual level
Individually
accepted risk
Imposed risk
Who determines what is
Acceptable Risk for the community ?

Typically, risks we choose for ourselves (and our family)
are not regulated, unless a significant ‘community
outrage’ exists.

Risks we have imposed on us are usually regulated to
protect us from factors beyond our control.

Fires that spread beyond a family unit are an example of
this and that is why fire safety standards are generally
lower in houses, despite the statistical evidence.
Thank you