[RE-wrenches] California State Fire Marshal's "Solar Photovoltaic Installation Guidelines

Mon Feb 17 15:31:42 PST 2014

Dear
Esteemed Colleagues,
The purpose of this email is to start sharing solutions to the roof top access issue.  
I am not an
expert in fire fighting.  However, one of
our best clientele demographic is firefighters.  I have learned the following from them.   1) Firefighters avoid jumping on roofs.  I witnessed this avoidance first hand along
with their venting technique during a home fire of my own.  It was a single story house with flames
pouring out of the back bedroom window.  They stormed the house and simultaneously set up a HUGE fan in a door to
blow out the smoke and vent the house (the house was saved).  It is my understanding this is how Europe and
other parts of the world have been fighting fires for decades.  2) On the rare occasion where they 
jump on a roof, a 3 foot pathway for a person carrying an 80lb pack offers no
appeal and alternate access and egress are employed. 
When I look
at houses in Germany and Japan, when I look at cover after cover after cover of
Home Power, and all of the articles and pictures within,  I don’t see any of these anti solar pathways
being employed.     

I know what
it is like to be in that room out manned and out gunned.  I know what it is like to part of a truly
insane process.  However, something as
over the top hostile to solar as this roof top access thing is a line in the
sand that needs to be refought and reestablished.  There is no excuse for the solar industry to
cave on this rooftop access issue.  If
folks in the room won’t listen to reason, it is time to usurp the process and
appeal to more reasonable minds. 
Unless we
are going to outlaw steep roofs, metal roofs, slate roofs, mossy shake roofs
and snow on roofs, singling out solar is irrational, hostile and extremely
detrimental to solar’s rapid, mass integration.
I can't hardly think of a more important matter to the solar industry than this.  I am here ready, willing and able to serve.
Thank you for your time and attention on this important matter.Andrew Koyaanisqatsi
President
Solar Energy Solutions, Inc.
Since 1987,
Moving Portland and Beyond 
to an Environmentally Sustainable Future.
503-238-4502
http://www.solarenergyoregon.com/ 
"Better one's House too little one day
than too big all the Year after."

On Friday, February 14, 2014 9:47 PM, Exeltech <exeltech at yahoo.com> wrote:

William,
>
>Your frustration with the process is understandable, and quite justified to a great extent.
>
>However, to say "... those directly involved in the rule making process...", and alluding to your previous description including "industry advocates", is patently unfair.
>
>I'm one of those "industry advocates.  I, along with Bill Brooks and many others on these committees, do our level best to bring some modicum of sanity to an otherwise very insane process.
>
>Over the years, I've been to many meetings with "industry advocates" such as Bill and many others.  I've watched as he and our colleagues do their utmost to educate those who would vote these issues upon us in an attempt to help them "see the light".   A few we win.  Many we lose.  Problem is, there are more of "them" than there are of "us".  Code decisions are frequently made by people who have no direct experience in the solar energy industry, and it shows.  In spite of this, Bill, I, and others who ARE from the solar industry continue our efforts from within.  As Andrew from Portland proved in his post earlier this week .. even one person in the right place at the right time can make a difference.
>
>Your frustration is evident when we hear from you (and others) when you say .. "They're supposed to have the public's interest foremost in mind...".
>
>"They" in this context no doubt references the code committees and the constituent members, including those from our industry.
>
>It's just that some of us are on your side, and are continuing the struggle to the best of our ability.
>
>Richard Perez said it best in an editorial of perhaps 15 years ago, when code problems back then were as much an issue as they are today.  As best I can paraphrase .. ".. if this madness continues .. *they* will have us all sitting at home in perfect safety .. in the dark."  [Emphasis is mine.]
>
>Richard went on to exclude those of us within the solar industry from the ubiquitous "they" on these committees.
>
>The effort continues, but it's an uphill battle at best.  The work isn't often visible to you or others, but rest assured, our "industry advocates" are doing their best under otherwise very difficult circumstances.
>
>
>Regards to all....
>
>
>Dan
>
>
>--------------------------------------------
>On Fri, 2/14/14, William Korthof <wkorthof at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Subject: [RE-wrenches] California State Fire Marshal's "Solar Photovoltaic Installation Guidelines
>To: "RE-wrenches" <re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org>
>Date: Friday, February 14, 2014, 9:42 PM
>
>I wholeheartedly concur with the critics here. [rant mode on]
>
>I've long been very critical of certain elements of the Electric code...But the state fire Marshall guidelines are approaching outrageous. 
>
>I feel very let down by the industry advocates, trade groups, and especially those directly involved in the rule making process... They're supposed to have the public's interest foremost in mind---code standards are supposed to be based on the rigorous test that they demonstrably prevent loss of life and loss of property at an economically justified cost. Instead, it seems, the rule-making has advanced to secure a role for continuing stream of proprietary and incrementally more costly "safety" hardware along with a secure role for those in the process to secure themselves a reliable permanent stream of consulting gigs training and retraining ever more complex and unintelligible code rules.
>
>
>/wk
>
>William Korthof
>714.875.3576
>Sustainable Solutions
>#956904
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>
>List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
>Change email address & settings:
>http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
>List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
>List rules & etiquette:
>www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
>Check out participant bios:
>www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
>
>
>     
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20140217/f7e4e7dd/attachment-0004.html>