Facing Wildfire Risk, Homeowners Turn to New Innovations to Protect Their Homes

Some Bay Area homeowners and homebuilders are taking action to reduce their wildfire risk with new innovations. Consumer Investigative Reporter Chris Chmura reports.
Stay connected:
Follow us on Twitter: / nbcbayarea
Like us on Facebook: / nbcbayarea
Follow us on Instagram: / nbcbayarea
Follow us on TikTok: / nbcbayarea
Catch up on all the day's news:
www.nbcbayarea.com
Download our mobile app:
On iOS: nbcbay.com/R1BhqYM
On Android: nbcbay.com/rUcA97h
Watch us on OTT:
Add our channel on Roku: bit.ly/3ySK60j
Download our app on Amazon Fire TV: amzn.to/3FmmiEA

[@cranesouder7003]

Why do you always pick the most expensive way to fireproof your house? Here is my fire prevention strategy. I covered the entire exterior of my 1000 sq. ft. house with 1/2" sheetrock, then house wrap, then 1/4" cement board, then 1\2" cement board from ground level to three feet up. All exterior wood trim is covered with galvanized metal and the windows are plugged with removable 1/2" sheetrock. There is absolutely no combustible material on the exterior of the house including the roof. As an extra measure during fire season, I lean two foot tall 1/2" thick panels of sheetrock against base of the house to create a fire-resistant berm which keeps fire two feet away from the walls. Even if the sheetrock deteriorates and crumbles after several hours of intense heat the fire still has to burn through 1 1/4" of noncombustible cement board and sheetrock, which will not happen! The ground around the house has been cleared of any combustible material to a distance of at least six feet all around the house and any vegetation within sixty feet of the house is kept to a height of no more than four inches. Trees are kept far enough away so should any tree catch fire the flames will stay at least ten feet away from the house. To test my modifications, I built a four foot by eight foot test wall which replicates the house wall construction and two three foot by eight foot wing walls on each side of the wall, in order to contain the heat of the fire that I built at the base of the wall. I fanned the fire to simulate a twenty mile per hour wind which brought the fire up to around 1000 degrees. I kept stoking the fire for five hours. (I did the test without using the two foot tall 1/2" thick panels of sheetrock leaning against the house.) The end result was the that the first 12" of the exterior 1/2" cement board crazed, cracked and crumbled, however the next layer behind the 1/2" cement board which was 1/4" cement board became slightly brittle but did not crumble and the next layer behind that was 1/2" sheetrock which was unscathed. I also did a heat test on the entire wall while the fire was burning with the following results. The temperature within the first 12" was approximately 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, at 20" up the temperature dropped to approximately 600 degrees, at 40" up the temperature was approximately 350 degrees, at 60" up the temperature was 200 degrees, at 80" up the temperature was 125 degrees and at 96" up the temperature was basically ambient temperature. I found that the first 20" from the ground level are by far the most vulnerable.

[@cesarmelendezsahagun2036]

And how much did you spend in total $$ ?

[@paulmaxwell8851]

I applaud your impressive efforts, but it's overkill. You appear to be concerned with both direct flame impingement and radiant heat. This is a misplaced concern. If all combustibles are removed from the area surrounding the home you have only wind-driven firebrands to worry about. My wood-frame home is clad only with 1/4 inch Hardipanel and steel roofing, but withstood a fire in 2017 just fine. There's simply nothing to ignite and burn around the house: no wood decks, no fencing, no outbuildings within eighty feet, no plantings, no firewood pile, no combustible furniture, nothing. I landscaped with steel, concrete, stone and green grass. I do have permanently-installed sprinklers on the roof backed up with my own water supply and generator, just for added insurance ( I also run the system occasionally during heat waves to cool the home).

[@Sharon-bo2se]

I hope these companies and similar are looking north to places like Kelowna in British Columbia. We need to use strategies to prevent/minimize future fire damage.

[@patcuvie]

The fire officials I've talked to in San Mateo County have said a house wildfire sprinkler system could cause the water pressure to be lower for them making it more difficult to fight fires in the neighborhood.

[@FUKKelowna]

Set up a rain catchment system with an underground tank

[@SkylinersYeti]

most homes lost in wildfires catch fire from embers that kindle light fuels close to the house. The first five feet is some of the easies and most important area to saving a home from a wildfire. There is never 100 % grantee your home will survive but odds can be increased.

[@roberthenderson8296]

I just forwarded this to all of my family members

[@bobfuhr4520]

My house was made by fire. Brick, concrete, steel.

[@sonacphotos]

Same. Good luck getting it to burn unless the fire gets inside.

[@roberthenderson8296]

I really think my city should place some sort of defensive system in all of their newer residential buildings. It’s the city of Morgan Hill California

[@beingsneaky]

Anything to fight /prevent fire is worth doing he says . but apparently cutting down trees 30 metres away from the house is not worth it.

[@user-of7jy1kv4c]

excellent for fire. divine during heatwave...

[@beingsneaky]

Yeah he had trees right next to the house. And it seemed like some sprinklers under the roof. You need them up on the roof.

[@paulmaxwell8851]

Roof-top sprinklers are where we start. If you have the water, under the eaves as well can really help. They raise the humidity around the structure, creating a 'moisture bubble'.

[@stinkfinger8700]

that 1st house with the sprinklers- yeah its got a little resistance to a ground fire but if the fire is crowning- no matter how much water is being sprayed around, it will flash to steam and the house will catch fire anyway. need to have a defensible space around the home- nothing combustable within 50ft radius and in the next 100ft radius everything needs 10ft spacing. thats why he cant get insured, he hasnt done enough to help fireproof his home. + sprinklers on homes isnt the new innovation- that idea has been around for decades. its just the technology to start and run it is the innovation.

[@paulmaxwell8851]

Crown fires move fast. They're over quickly. Dr. Jack Cohen, in his lifetime of fire research, showed that almost all wildfires can be survived with just a few basics. Sprinklers make a tremendous difference. Minnesota is where most of the hand-on, real-world data is coming from: In one study of homes which were sprinkled, only one was lost. Why did it burn down? Because the owner had neglected to test-run the system that season. The science is clear. Defensible spaces are very important, but not enough; in California, over 90% of all house fires are caused by wind-driven embers penetrating roof structures and under wood decks. Sprinklers are money well spent. We did it, and now we're ready.

[@felinoaaron846]

Isn’t fair,😊

[@jaytee9152]

Insurance companies don't want solutions for California they just want out of California.

[@ocmetals4675]

Or you just build your house out of fireproof materials. Easier

[@markusr1308]

For starters stop building your houses out of (fire)wood

[@geistacwm]

New innovations? It’s a sprinkler with an App For 20k Not really confidence inspiring.