Skip to main content

A Multi-national Survey of Low-Energy and Smoking Materials Ignition Fires

Fire Technology volume 52, pages 1709–1735 (2016)Cite this article

Abstract

The three-part study described in this paper involved a detailed evaluation of fire statistics from four countries to compare the number of deaths and injuries from structure fires started by a small open flame ignition source to casualty counts from fires started by smoking materials. First, a qualitative multi-national comparison of low-energy and smoking materials ignition fires is made based on fire statistics obtained from the U.S., the U.K., Japan, and Finland for the period between 2002 and 2012. From this comparison it can be concluded that, compared to the other nations, the U.K. appears to have more of a problem with smoking materials ignition fires resulting in fatalities; and that Japan appears to have appreciably more smoking materials ignition fires, but not fatalities from such fires, than the other nations. A more detailed quantitative analysis is then performed to examine the contribution of low-energy (match, lighter, space heater, etc.) versus smoking materials (cigar, pipe, cigarette, etc.) ignition to the U.S. fire problem. An attempt was made to address two issues with the U.S. NFIRS database, i.e., the fact that it is based on a voluntary sample of U.S. fire department incident reports and that many of the data categories relevant to the present study contain unknown fields. From this analysis it is apparent that smoking materials ignition fires tend to more commonly result in fatalities than low-energy ignition fires, while the overall volume of low-energy ignition fires and corresponding losses and injuries are greater. Finally, a logistic regression model is presented that can be used to predict the probability that a fire resulting in a fatality was started by low-energy ignition based on the age and race of the victim, the item first ignited, and the season in the year when the fire took place. The model indicates that older persons are generally more susceptible to perishing in a fire resulting from smoking materials ignition rather than low-energy ignition.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12

Notes

  1. Although past 2009 fire incidents in Northern Ireland have been excluded from the U.K. statistics, the comparisons between nations in this paper cover the period from 2002 to 2012 and the fire statistics for Great Britain are therefore assumed to be representative of the U.K.

References

  1. U.S. Fire Administration (2012) National fire incident reporting system (NFIRS). U.S. Fire Administration, Emmitsburg, MD

  2. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2006) Fire statistics, United Kingdom, 2004. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London, UK

  3. Department for Communities and Local Government (2008) Fire Statistics United Kingdom, 2006. Department for Communities and Local Government, London, UK

  4. Department for Communities and Local Government (2009) Fire Statistics United Kingdom, 2007. Department for Communities and Local Government, London, UK

  5. Department for Communities and Local Government (2010) Fire Statistics United Kingdom, 2008. Department for Communities and Local Government, London, UK

  6. Department for Communities and Local Government (2011) Fire Statistics Great Britain, 2010–2011. Department for Communities and Local Government, London, UK

  7. Department for Communities and Local Government (2012) Fire Statistics Great Britain, 2011–2012. Department for Communities and Local Government, London, UK

  8. Department for Communities and Local Government (2014) Fire Statistics: Great Britain April 2012 to March 2013. Department for Communities and Local Government, London, UK

  9. Department for Communities and Local Government (2012) Incident recording system—questions and lists. Department for Communities and Local Government, London, UK

  10. The Geneva Association (2014) World fire statistics bulletin no. 29. The Geneva Association, Geneva

  11. Hocken R (2012) Comparison of european fire statistics final report for the department for communities and local government. Department for Communities and Local Government, London

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sekizawa A (1994) International comparison analysis on fire risk among the United States, The United Kingdom, and Japan. In: Fire safety science—proceedings of the fourth international symposium. International Association of Fire Safety Science, London, pp 195–204

  13. Hall J (2003) Fire in the U.S. and Japan. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hall J (2005) Fire in the U.S. and the United Kingdom. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hall J (2004) Fire in the U.S. and Sweden. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA

    Google Scholar 

  16. U.S. Fire Administration (2011) Fire death rate trends: an international perspective. Topical fire report series, vol 12, no 8. U.S. Fire Administration, Emmitsburg, MD

  17. Hall J, Harwood B (1989) The national estimates approach to U.S. fire statistics. Fire Technol 25(2):99–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Miller D (2013) 2009–2011 residential fire loss estimates. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

  19. Honaker J, King G (2010) What to do about missing values in time series cross-section data. Am J Polit Sci 54(2):561–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rubin DB (1987) Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. Wiley, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Sekizawa A (1991) Statistical analyses on fatalities characteristics of residential fires. In: Fire safety science—proceedings of the third international symposium. International Association of Fire Safety Science, London, pp 475–484.

  22. Sekizawa A (2013) Challenges in fire safety in a society facing a rapidly aging population. In: 2013 SFPE annual meeting. Society for Fire Protection Engineers, Gaithersburg, MD

  23. OECD Health Data: Non-medical determinants of health. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/data/oecd-health-statistics/oecd-health-data-non-medical-determinants-of-health_data-00546-en

  24. Hall J (2013) The smoking-material fire problem. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA

    Google Scholar 

  25. (2011) National fire incident reporting system version 5.0 fire data analysis guidelines and issues. U.S. Fire Administration, Emmitsburg, MD

  26. Anderson A, Ezekoye O (2013) A comparative study assessing factors that influence home fire casualties and fatalities using state fire incident data. J Fire Prot Eng 23(1):51–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hasofer A, Thomas I (2006) Analysis of fatalities and injuries in building fire statistics. Fire Saf J 41(1):2–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Harrell F (2001) Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. Springer, Berlin

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. van Buuren S (2012) Flexible imputation of missing data. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Haynes H (2014) Fire loss in the United States during 2014. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors greatly acknowledge the financial support of the American Chemistry Council for the work described in this paper. The authors also want to express their gratitude to Mr. Nazneen Chowdhury, Dr. Tuula Hakkarainen, and Dr. Ai Sekizawa for providing the statistical data for this study from the U.K., Finland, and Japan, respectively. The authors also appreciate the critique provided on an earlier version of this manuscript by anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, 204 East Dean Keeton Street, Austin, TX, 78712, USA

    Austin Anderson

  2. Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses, Southwest Research Institute, 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, TX, 78238, USA

    Marc Janssens

Authors
  1. Austin Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marc Janssens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc Janssens.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anderson, A., Janssens, M. A Multi-national Survey of Low-Energy and Smoking Materials Ignition Fires. Fire Technol 52, 1709–1735 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-015-0550-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-015-0550-6

Keywords

  • Fire statistics
  • Logistic regression model
  • Low-energy ignition fires
  • Open flame ignition fires
  • Smoking materials ignition fires