cost-benefit analysis

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

megloff11x

Senior Member
I'd like the NEC to adopt a cost-benefit analysis on both current rules and proposed changes.

The 800lb gorilla is the AFCI. How much will installing all AFCI cost vs. how many fires do we think will be prevented vs. how many appliances will no longer work?

We can not eliminate all risk or danger to make ourselves 100% safe. We are not a nanny state (yet).

This should also apply to upgrades of existing installations. When do we bring it up to current code and when not?

My older car has no air bags and personally I think they cause more harm than good. On the other hand, if one of my seat belts was frayed, I would replace it.

Matt
 
Interesting that you bring up airbags. Seat belts are a good idea and are simple to implement. Airbags were invented to protect those idiots who don't fasten their seat belts.
AFCIs are the same thing. As far as I know, arc faults occur when connections aren't tight. If connections are done right, then you don't need the AFCIs.
The cost/benefit ratio is another concern. Suppose that an AFCI instalation will cost an additional $100 per house. If this money were spent on extra receptacles to eliminate the only required receptacle being behind the bed or on better quality ones, wouldn't this save more lives?
Yes, there should be a cost/benefit analysis but the Code panel is faced with the question: "If these devices would save one life and you don't vote to require it, then you are responsible for that persons death?" Since the panels are only concerned about safety [supposedly], cost is no concern.
~Peter:cool:
 
megloff11x said:
I'd like the NEC to adopt a cost-benefit analysis on both current rules and proposed changes.

The 800lb gorilla is the AFCI. How much will installing all AFCI cost vs. how many fires do we think will be prevented vs. how many appliances will no longer work?

We can not eliminate all risk or danger to make ourselves 100% safe. We are not a nanny state (yet).

This should also apply to upgrades of existing installations. When do we bring it up to current code and when not?

My older car has no air bags and personally I think they cause more harm than good. On the other hand, if one of my seat belts was frayed, I would replace it.

Matt
Click to expand...
My nephew was recently involved in a car accident, he acually saw it coming and had enough time to put his seatbelt on. Ya I know he should have had it on. Kids . anyway he said he leaned forward just before the hit and It was the air bag that knocked him and the driver out. no bull.
 
peter said:
AFCIs are the same thing. As far as I know, arc faults occur when connections aren't tight. If connections are done right, then you don't need the AFCIs.
Click to expand...

I know us members of the MH forum do everything perfect, but think about the non-members. :)

Let me share a story:

About three months ago, I had to put in almost 90 hours one week correcting the work of a former employee. I got power connected to three homes that week, and had shorts on all of my AFCI circuits, and some receptacles didn't work at all. I figured my employee had put the clamps too tight in the device boxes; that can cause the afci to trip. I started taking devices out to loosen the clamps, and to my horror, found that many of them were put in the box w/o the wires connected, and some were connected but the ground wires had been pulled from their clips and not even attached to the receps. This was my fault for not doing a proper QC check, but the guy had trimmed several houses and during this time I was checking his work and it was fine. I found some where the leads had been cut from the joint presumably by the drywall crew and their rotary cutter. Some just had the tape cut from them and they were touching the box or a neutral. I really couldn't tell if it was deliberate sabotage or pure laziness; possibly a combination of the two. Anyway, I went back through all three houses and opened every box. I found some of the same problems on non afci protected circuits and the breakers did not trip. Since this time, I have come to appreciate the afci quite a bit more. The fact is, no matter how hard we try to get the right employees and properly train them, there's always going to be a guy who's just too lazy to do it right. And sometimes, even the best can make a mistake. There can also be an instance that's beyond anyone's control. I think the afci is a step in the right direction to protect our customer's families, not to mention our own.
 
My analysis shows that over twenty years, assuming that AFCIs would prevent 75% of the fires that are said to be of electrical orgin, that there would be about 96,000 fires prevented with a total installed cost of ~21 billion dollars. That would be a cost of ~$226,000 per fire prevented. This is based on an assumed cost of $400 per dwelling unit to install the AFCIs required by the 2008 NEC. I did not exclude the fires that are said to be of electrical origin that occur in the areas that do not require AFCI protection, so the number of fires prevented will be less and the cost per fire prevented would be more.
 
i wonder if all this fuss was made when we went from fuses to circuit breakers? my old boss told me when gfci's came out, everyone just bought four or five. after inspection, the gfci would be removed and installed again on the next job. they refused to charge their customers for this unnecessary device and felt it would give them nothing but problems.
 
LawnGuyLandSparky said:
Do your figures take into account that AFCIs aren't going to prevent any fires in existing structures?
Click to expand...
Yes, that was accounted for...the first year of full compliance would result in the prevention of ~325 fires. There are a lot of assumptions made in the calculations based on the number of reported fires of electrical origin and the number of new housing starts. One major thing in the calculations is a document that says 85% of the dwelling unit fires of electrical origin occur in dwelling units over 20 years old.
 
What figure were you using in the cost benefit calculation for the value of a human life? I suspect that there might be some value typically used in such calculations. Seems like Princeton University has it at 1.54 million.
 
mdshunk said:
What figure were you using in the cost benefit calculation for the value of a human life? I suspect that there might be some value typically used in such calculations. Seems like Princeton University has it at 1.54 million.
Click to expand...
Marc,
I never said that, but in fact those type of decisions are made on a daily basis by manufacturers when they design and build things. (Remember the Pinto)
There has to be some limit as to how much we will spend to protect life. I mean we could drop the traffic fatalities by a huge margin if everyone drove tanks, without the weapons, of course.
If the NEC was a federal law, a rule like the AFCI rule would have triggered a requirement for a full cost benefit analysis and I really doubt that it would have passed.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
I mean we could drop the traffic fatalities by a huge margin if everyone drove tanks, without the weapons, of course.
Click to expand...
Great idea !!

See y'all later. I've got some serious letter writing to do...
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Marc,
I never said that, but in fact those type of decisions are made on a daily basis by manufacturers when they design and build things. (Remember the Pinto)
There has to be some limit as to how much we will spend to protect life. I mean we could drop the traffic fatalities by a huge margin if everyone drove tanks, without the weapons, of course.
If the NEC was a federal law, a rule like the AFCI rule would have triggered a requirement for a full cost benefit analysis and I really doubt that it would have passed.
Click to expand...

I like that idea even better with the weapons!!! People would then think twice before they drove like an idiot!!

Steve
 
value of a human life/airbags

value of a human life/airbags

Car companies put it at $200k, without explaining.

Airbags use one lethal force to cancel out another. Lately, though, the sodium azide or whatever is in the thing gives people bad burns. I guess you're supposed to be so grateful that you survived that you won't mind the skin grafts.
 
more stuff comes back to me. . .

more stuff comes back to me. . .

http://www.cnn.com/US/9909/10/ivey.memo/

Side saddle gas tank placement was ~$2.40 one way and 20 cents more the other way (numbers are approximate), so many people burned to death.

You don't want to know the stories I know on this subject.
 
Just a note on airbags - as I understand it airbags in the USA are designed to stop a moron who isn't wearing a seatbelt. In Europe the airbags are designed to reduce injuries to a seatbelt wearing occupant, and as such have much less violence in them when deployed.

As to AFCIs - I think the problem is that the right test equipment isn't out there for an EC to be able to commission and troubleshoot an AFCI yet. An AFCI is an incredibly clever thing, and you cant second guess how it will behave with a wiggy. You can with a $30,000 LeCroy scope, but thats way OTT for an EC; someone needs to market an AFCI recording logger you can leave at a site, and come back and read on a screen exactly what occurred to cause the AFCI to trip.
 
dbuckley,

That would be a nice tool to have. I thought by now that all circuit breakers

would have a little 'read out' window for amps being used. How nice would

that be, to open the door to a panel and see exactly what every circuit is

using. Not just for Electricians but for everybody and the parts to do it have

to be dirt cheap by now. Never happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top