http://users.livejournal.com/_mattt/ ([identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_mattt/) wrote in [personal profile] plumtreeblossom 2009-02-23 03:27 pm (UTC)

That's even worse!

The Massachusetts Building and Fire Prevention Code unfortunately cannot readily stop people from illegal acts in progress, even if the people are well meaning and intelligence and diligence are used to circumnavigate the hazard the code intends to protect.

I saw the story above and cringed a little, but these practices are (unfortunately) not uncommon.

The individual is clearly well-intentioned and they feel as if they have circumnavigated the hazard. They may very well have, but like many laws, it is applied uniformly to the smart and the stupid.

As I always say, such code violations are akin to not putting smoke alarms in your house (as required by code) and then saying that you'll just be careful and not start a fire. You may very well be, but the code makes no distinction.

In short, you cannot obstruct the exhaust from a dryer.

It's bad for the dryer motor, but worse, you are trapping the fire hazard inside your residence. Dryer lint can be strangely flammable, and nylon stockings aren't exactly NFPA rated inflammable materials.

The story above is clearly well-intentioned. They want to recapture heat and humidity lost in winter. They may diligently clean the filter and be far more safe than the average citizen in fire prevention. But at the end of the day, the code cannot factor in intelligence or diligence, and the configuration is still illegal.

Sorry to come off so passionate about this. I come across this a lot.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting