|
| Back to Contents Page |
Home
Energy Index |
About
Home
Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page
| Back Issues of Home Energy |
EREN
Home Page |
Home Energy Magazine Online May/June 1996
LETTERS
Knob and Tube Not a Fire Hazard
In "Retrofits We'd Rather
Forget" (Jan/Feb '96), you made reference to insulating over knob-and-tube
wiring as being a fire hazard. This statement is incorrect.
Legislation was enacted in Washington state to
allow insulating over knob-and-tube wiring per Bonneville Power Administration
(BPA) specifications. This resulted because there were no documented
cases of a fire being caused by knob-and-tube wiring, whether insulation
covered it or not. Because the two conductors of knob-and-tube wiring circuits
are spaced some distance apart, it is nearly impossible to short out. Even
when covered with flammable materials such as wood shavings, the only way
you could get a short was if the insulating materials were wet ... then
they won't burn, so you couldn't start a fire anyway.
Overheating the wire would be the only method
of ignition for knob-and-tube. Nonmetallic sheathed cable (NMC) such as
Romex, on the other hand, can short as well as be overheated, increasing
the potential for fire. NMC has started fires, and we insulate over it.
As an extra safety measure, it is a good idea
to use Type S fuses or breakers sized properly for the wire size, the same
as you would for NMC. An inspection by the Washington State Electrical
Inspector and the installation of proper fusing (or breakers) is a requirement
when insulating over knob and tube wiring in Washington and where allowed
in other northwest states that follow BPA specifications.
Dale Hellewell
Energy Conservation Specialist
Grant County PUD
Moses Lake, WA
Editor's reply: It's true that insulating
over knob-and-tube wiring does not generally create a fire hazard and that
the nonmetallic sheathed cable electricians currently use could cause fires.
(Knob-and-tube was the most common form of home wiring until about the
mid-1940s. See "Knob-and-Tube Wiring Hang-ups,"
HE
May/June '91, p. 7.)
Weatherization program policies concerning
insulation in attics with knob-and-tube wiring vary, depending partly on
electrical codes. Since 1987, the National Electrical Code has prohibited
insulating walls, ceilings, and attics that contain knob-and-tube wiring,
but several states have adapted their codes to allow insulation after a
wiring inspecton. In the situation discussed in the article, the wiring
was not inspected before insulating with cellulose.
Knob-and-tube wiring can be a fire
hazard if the original fuses have been replaced with oversized fuses to
handle larger electrical loads (an all-too-common practice). Type S fuses
prevent homeowners from installing the oversized fuses, as long as the
Type S fuses are not oversized. It's also good to check for bad connections
or "hot spots," as described in "Assessing
the Integrity of Electrical Wiring" (HE Sept/Oct '95, p. 5). Once the
wiring has been inspected and proper fuse sizing assured, it should be
at least as safe after insulating as before. However, some weatherization
programs require a sign to be posted to warn attic-goers of the danger
of electrocution from concealed wires.
Less Confusing Appliance Labels?
The article "New Appliance
Labels Emphasize Energy Use," (Jan/Feb '96, p. 7) had some unconfusing
news. The new Federal Trade Commission labels will no longer compare refrigerator-freezers
based solely on volume, but will compare only those of similar style. Apparently
consumers were figuring out that models with side-by-side doors not only
cost more, but use more energy than the same capacity top-freezer models.
Did some manufacturers and the FTC find that confusing?
Noah S. Root
EcoLaw Institute
Tahlequah, OK
Befuddled Over Use of Tyvek
I couldn't help but notice some conflicting advice
in the Jan/Feb '96 issue. The article "Outward Bound:
Adding Efficient Living Space" advocated adding Tyvek underneath porches
lacking fully enclosed foundations. Later in the same issue, "Retrofits
We'd Rather Forget" illustrates with humor and persuasiveness the hazards
of doing just that, concluding that Tyvek "is designed for vertical ...
use." Perhaps you could clear up the confusion.
Barbara Shohl Wagner
Rochester, MI
Editor's reply: Sorry about the confusion.
In the first article, author David Connelly Legg suggested that Tyvek could
be used under a converted porch's floor insulation to protect it from wind.
In the second article, Nancy Hurrelbrinck told the story of retrofitters
Eddy Haber and Paul Knight, who attached Tyvek under a mobile home and
then filled the gap with cellulose, with disastrous results.
Legg did not mean that Tyvek should be used
to hold insulation against the floor, which the unfortunate crew in the
later article found out rather quickly does not work. However, even if
it's installed under floor insulation that is properly supported by other
means, the manufacturer does not recommend horizontal use of Tyvek. Tyvek
allows water vapor to pass through it, but can trap water inside, leading
to problems with wet insulation, mold growth, and so on.
It's possible that a ground cover could provide
adequate protection by preventing water vapor from the soil from permeating
the Tyvek. However, as a general rule, it's probably best to avoid using
Tyvek either structurally or horizontally. We all thank you for raising
this question, which certainly needed clarifying.
Damperless Fireplaces
I just learned from some friends in Los Angeles
County that natural gas fireplaces in California usually do not have dampers,
and some folks say there is a state law that any damper present must be
fixed in the open position. Understandably there is concern over lighting
up a "clean" gas fire indoors without venting. But this presents a sizable
hole for energy loss the 300 days a fire isn't lit.
Is this story accurate? If so, how are retrofitters
handling fireplaces? Do you folks have any idea how many damperless fireplaces
there are nationwide?
John Morrill
Arlington, Virginia
Editor's reply: The Uniform Mechanical Code
(and the California Mechanical Code) state that "[m]anually operated dampers
shall not be placed in chimneys, vents, or chimney or vent connectors of
liquid- or gas-burning appliances.... If the [gas log] fireplace is equipped
with a damper, it shall be permanently blocked open to a sufficient amount
to prevent spillage of combustion products into the room." Any jurisdiction
that adopts the UMC will have the same prohibition.
The solution? An automatic damper with interlock.
Other combustion equipment with dampers have an interlock preventing the
burner from firing unless the damper is open. One could use a damper assembly
with an end switch that would open a solenoid valve when open, but we don't
know of any package designed for this application.
As for other options, fireplaces with glass
doors and sealed-combustion air ducts don't need dampers (see "Fireplaces:
Studies in Contrasts," HE Sept/Oct '94, p. 27). Fireplace inserts
(wood stoves that vent through the flue of the blocked-off fireplace) control
the amount of heated room air lost up the chimney and provide hope of achieving
positive efficiency. Standard fireplaces can have chain-activated chimney-cap
style dampers installed at fairly low cost. Note that the code allows manual
dampers on hand-stoked solid fuel appliances and installations (and only
on these).
| Back to Contents Page |
Home
Energy Index |
About
Home
Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page
| Back Issues of Home Energy |
EREN
Home Page |
Home Energy can be reached at: contact@homeenergy.org
Home Energy magazine -- Please read our Copyright
Notice
|