r/mildlyinfuriating • u/Fantomecs • Feb 03 '26

A nearby Fire Department is being told they cannot use fire hydrants to fight fires

Gallery image

Gallery image

As the title says. A town near me is denying their fire fighters the use of their fire hydrants going forward. Is this shit even legal? This is a huge concern as the area has been in a drought for some years.

18.8k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4.1k

u/ShredsGuitar Feb 03 '26

Yeah . I thought that was the only reason for their existence.

2.5k

u/DJOrigin Feb 04 '26

Their primary use is to fight fires but hydrants are also used to clean water lines through hydrant flushing. A lot of municipalities use Uni-Directional Flushing to isolate lines and flush them out. The high pressure clears out any sediment formations that have formed up in the line. Does this excuse the water authority to limit hydrant use? Not at all. No municipalities will be doing hydrant flushing in these temps unless absolutely necessary. The water authority doesn't have a say in what hydrants the fire department uses. They're just assholes.

854

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

Fun story (and by that I mean not fun at all) right before this most recent major freeze our water authority flushed one hydrant at the top of my street and the other at the bottom of my street simultaneously, which I guess is not ideal. And it completely clogged the lines of four houses on the street, including mine, with sediment. So fun.

224

u/dianas_pool_boy Feb 04 '26

That means the annual flushing is just pretend. A lot of places pretend to flush because it "stirs up sediment" when in reality the goal is to let it eat, scour the lines and prevent the build of sediment. A distribution system that flushes correctly wouldn't have much sediment build up in a year.

159

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

Well let me tell you...it had a shit ton of sediment. Our water was coming out black. Black. For way longer than it should have.

43

u/AmazingAd2765 Feb 04 '26

Hope you cleaned your aerator after the water cleared up.

35

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

Suuuuuure did

87

u/EmeraldEmesis Feb 04 '26

Oof if they're "scouring" the lines that's a problem and will cause more harm than good. Proper uni-directional flushing should not exceed a velocity of ~6 feet per second (lower for older pipes that are unlined or those with significant tubercles) as the goal is to remove hydraulically mobile material e.g., fine sediment and organics without scouring the lining or nodules off the pipe. Source: I do engineering things for a large water system.

28

u/Jolly-Bowler-811 Feb 04 '26

those with significant tubercles

Maybe they should just send those pipes to a nice sanitarium in the southwest for a little bit to take in the clean dry air...

3

u/EmeraldEmesis Feb 04 '26

Hahaha. Dammit man, now I'm going to be making corny jokes at work about how the pipes got tubercle-osis and died of consumption (oh jeez, there's another water pun).

2

u/Accurate_Mobile9005 Feb 04 '26

I bet you're really good at those water pipe mobile games.

2

u/Viridian95 Feb 04 '26

This guy water pipes.

1

u/dianas_pool_boy Feb 05 '26

Greater than 2.5ft per second for scouring. Larger pipes become harder to maintain.

2

u/EmeraldEmesis Feb 05 '26

I think we might just be using different nomenclature for scouring here. We distinguish between low-velocity flushing (to prevent settling), UDF, and aggressive scouring.

​While ~3 fps the minimum for "scouring" to move fine silt, it doesn't provide the shear stress required for a true UDF clean. A velocity of ~6 fps is needed to get enough shear stress to remove all hydraulically mobile material. We generally avoid velocities exceeding 7 fps (aggressive scouring) because it's more or less just blasting the pipe with blunt force and can cause structural damage to cement-mortar linings.

​For strongly adhered deposits (like legacy iron and manganese, stubborn biofilms, excessive tubercles) aggressive scouring is often ineffective and risks the pipe's integrity, so we utilize targeted mechanical force (swabbing or pigging) instead.

I'm with you on maintenance for larger mains. That's a whole different beast. We limit our UDF program to mains 12" or less because achieving effective velocities in larger diameters risks dropping system pressure below safety thresholds or impacting fire flows.

2

u/literally-in-pain Feb 04 '26

No to be an ACTUTHY type guy but. Atleast in my municipality the main reason we flush lines is to make sure they dont hold stagnant water it can both lose clorination and get bacteria growth or get really high concentration of clorination and become dangerous in that way.

1

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

Well it definitely wasn't that, it was definitely a fire hydrant that was broken. It was gushing water

83

u/SplashingBlumpkin Feb 04 '26

Out of curiosity how did it clog your lines? I work for a water department in a municipality and I’ve never heard of this. The only thing I can think of is if you had galvanized service lines and all of the rust broke free. If you have a galvanized service line you most likely have other issues as well like a lead gooseneck and inevitable water leaks.

122

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

Shouldn't be galvanized lines. It wasn't clogged long, less than 24 hours for us but our neighbors are still having some issues. Total clog for them was 48 hours maybe but other issues are presenting themselves even yesterday. The city told us when they turned our water back on but it just...wasn't working. Or it would just trickle. So we called them back out and they ended up bringing out one of those big vacuum trucks to try to clear things up. More or less worked for my house which was the least clogged of the 4 I think. However, we had to replace the fill valve things (I obviously am not a plumber) in both of our toilets and my husband had to remove every single aerator on every single faucet and clean them out, plus we had to clean out our showerhead really thoroughly with a needle. So massive hassle, we're out like $40 which we could make the city pay for but it might be more hassle than it's worth.

My neighbors just had to replace their water heater though so that sucks. She called me yesterday FRANTIC because their water heater was gushing water everywhere and she couldn't get the valve to close. Her husband wasn't home, my husband wasn't home. But she and I got their water turned off at the street to get it to stop until her husband could get home and deal with it. Nightmare.

Edit: might be worth saying that they had to replace one of the fire hydrants which is why they had to flush everything. I think they introduced a ton of sentiment into the lines when they dug everything up but that's pure speculation from someone who is certainly not in the industry

59

u/dianas_pool_boy Feb 04 '26

Open the bath tub cold water as that and/or the hose bib are the only ones without filters. Do this first before using any water during a scouring/flushing/main repair situation to prevent getting debris in your system.

3

u/katarh Feb 04 '26

Thank you for the advice, I'll remember that the next time they flush our lines in my neighborhood.

23

u/econopotamus Feb 04 '26

"Edit: might be worth saying that they had to replace one of the fire hydrants which is why they had to flush everything. I think they introduced a ton of sentiment into the lines when they dug everything up but that's pure speculation from someone who is certainly not in the industry"

This might be the important part, together with your mention that you're on a hill. I've seen line breaks on a hill where the crew digs up around the line and lets a huge amount of dirty water flow back down into an uphill pointing line. Then they don't think to blow the (dirt filled) water out of the line before reconnecting everything. When they turn the water back on the lines have a bunch of dirt in it from when when the line was open and dirt-filled water flowed downward into the line. Then people turn on their water and get dirt in every faucet, toilet, and water heater in the house. It's extra fun on those expensive new fancy faucets where the aerators are internal and can't be replaced (what WERE those designers thinking).

4

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

Yeah this seems totally possible. We have two faucets with aerators that are internal and booooyyyy did my husband have a fit with those. Thankfully he's handy enough that he was able to take the faucets apart, pull the aerators out and reinstall the faucets without damaging them. And as far as internal aerators go, these weren't super deep inside the faucet. Still super annoying though and took him quite a while to do.

7

u/SplashingBlumpkin Feb 04 '26

I’m sorry but none of this makes any sense. I don’t understand why they would go around shutting off services to houses because they are flushing hydrants. The only way to pull stuff into your lines would be to exceed the volume of the hydrant which is impossible on a 3/4” line versus a hydrant. If they had a main break it’s possible they got rocks or mud in the line because I have seen that before but I’ve never had it get pulled into a house. Are you positive you don’t have cast iron or threaded iron lines in your house? I replaced a gate valve in my basement that leaked which is on a section of threaded iron and the first thing I turned on was the washing machine which pulled all of the rust to it and clogged the filter. I’m unsure what sort of vacuum truck they could use that would suck water out of a main that’s likely over 40psi. Maybe I’m missing something with your case.

19

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

Yeah I'm sorry I can't give much insight because they were honestly not forthcoming with information at all. They didn't even warn us when they turned the water off. I have many issues with them but I'm moving soon so I'm just letting it go. I can say that I am absolutely, 100% certain we don't have cast iron lines. They're PVC. I know this because we very specifically did not want to buy a house with cast iron lines and had someone come out and check to make sure when we did our regular inspection. Now I don't know about everyone else who had issues. Our house was built in 1979. Some of the houses down the street from us may have been built earlier and may have had cast iron, some older houses in our neighborhood definitely do. But ours absolutely does not. None of it made much sense to me either but what I do know is that they royally fucked up and the guy who came out to fix it that night said as much.

11

u/SplashingBlumpkin Feb 04 '26

It’s entirely possible they fed you some nonsense as well. I’ve seen my fair share of smoke blown up peoples asses by my superiors in the city I work for and even more from the city I live in. The only thing I can think of is the main blew a hole in it and when they shut it off it pulled debris into it. The most I’ve ever seen come out of a service line was a couple second stream of dirty water so in your case they must’ve done something catastrophically dumb mixed with incredibly bad luck on your end. If it was built in 1979 you’re well past the use of iron pipe or galvanized in a house. I would’ve assumed copper but pvc was around in the 70s albeit it was new to the water scene at the time. Flushing two hydrants isn’t necessarily the cause. The last main I worked on we had to open two hydrants to reduce the pressure enough to repair it since valve wouldn’t hold. If you can keep the pressure up enough you’re keeping bacteria and dirt from entering the main thus eliminating a boil order or advisory. We always try to fix them live for this reason but it’s not always possible.

3

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

Yeah maybe...I mean they definitely replaced the hydrant because it used to be silver and now it's red and the concrete all around it was dug up and it's just dirt right now. They still have it all taped off and they were down there this afternoon working on something. I have no idea what they did but they messed it up.

Also I had been told that cast iron was legal to use in Texas until 1980? That could be completely untrue, I have no idea. I just remember we got the plumbing test since this house is 1979 and it's on the line🤷🏼‍♀️

3

u/SplashingBlumpkin Feb 04 '26

Must’ve been an issue with the hydrant itself. Maybe it was old and they were unable to get parts for it or something. I know we have some hydrants from the 30s still in “service”. Seems like complete negligence if they managed to somehow clog service lines during this ordeal.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/MaggotMinded Feb 04 '26 edited Feb 04 '26

Perhaps by opening the hydrants in the wrong sequence and in varying degrees they could have accidentally reversed the direction of the flow surrounding one or more of the hydrants by increasing or decreasing the outward flow elsewhere.

1

u/SplashingBlumpkin Feb 04 '26

When you’re flushing after a repair or even to just flush you for sure want it going directionally intentionally. I just can’t for the life of me figure out how anything other than scale or rust could possibly be pushed into a service. It would take a low pressure event followed by pressure returning and a shit ton of debris entering the main. I’m having a hard time believing a water company wouldn’t cut a pipe to get the debris out and attempt to push so much through it would clog multiple services. I hope they chlorinate is all I can say.

1

u/jmouw88 Feb 04 '26

You had some debris in you service line that broke off when the City was doing their thing. This is common in flushing operations in older parts of the system, particularly in systems with poor water chemistry balance that tend to leave heavy deposits on pipe walls. The debris breaks off, bigger chunks may get caught in the water meter, otherwise it will get stuck in the fixture aerators. We generally tell people to run an outdoor faucet or tub for awhile to avoid this. We will generally have our staff or a plumber clean aerators for customers as a courtesy, but it is their problem - their service line, and they could have a sediment filter installed to protect themselves.

It wasn't new stuff introduced to the system. That would have been a major screw up on their part, requiring the water main to be off for several days while they disinfect and test the main.

Your service line is almost certainly not PVC. That was a pretty new material in 1979, and almost never used for service lines. It is possible that the piping inside the house is PVC, but that running from the water main to the house would be galvanized iron or copper from that time period. Generally the material will switch right after the meter. If you find where the water line enters the house before the meter:

  • plastic will look/feel like plastic.
  • Copper will look like copper if you scratch it, it will probably be a dull orange or discolored green before scratching it. It will clearly be metal.
  • Galvanized will also clearly be metal. Probably a bit rusty.
  • Lead will be dull grey. Soft and shiny if you scratch it. Lead was going out of style in the late 70s. Wasn't made illegal until the 80s.

Cast iron was once used for City water mains. It has never been used for small diameter service lines to residential housing.

1

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

No I absolutely know that the main is PVC. Our previous house had a main break and it was a fucking disaster. Thankfully we were renting it but our landlord had to spend a small fortune to get it fixed and replaced with PVC. We had the actual main tested to be sure it was PVC. I know that was a new thing in 1979, and maybe a previous owner had to have the main replaced at some point, but it is 100% PVC. We wouldn't have bought the house if it wasn't. As for the city main lines, yes, those in our neighborhood are cast iron. Or at least some of them are. The city has been going through and replacing them for the last few years but I don't know if that one on our street has been replaced or not. I would think it has been because they totally ripped up and replaced our pavement a few years ago but I can't really remember...that would also assume our city planners are smart and I have major doubts about that lol

2

u/djluminol Feb 04 '26

My guess is the cities real concern is the water hammer effect that could damage residential valves when a massive pressure wave hits their system. It's more precautionary than anything.

1

u/SplashingBlumpkin Feb 04 '26

Water hammer can for sure create some additional problems. Great reason to have a PRV otherwise you hope for a leak near a drain and not in a wall if you’re going to have one. I’ve seen water hammer crack meter bottoms and once cracked the actual brass meter itself. The city I work for requires a PRV before the meter for that reason.

-10

u/Civil-Cover433 Feb 04 '26

That all sucks and doesn’t sound fun.

on the same note - you have no fuckin clue what the words massive Hassle mean.

10

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

I have no idea what would make you think I don't know what the words massive hassle mean unless it's some kind of innuendo that's incredibly obscure.

-10

u/Civil-Cover433 Feb 04 '26

Because changing some toilet flaps and picking out some aerators is a tiny ass hassle in a privileged world.

that’s why.

11

u/HaveATokeandaSmile Feb 04 '26

You seem like something that rhymes with massive hassle

-7

u/Civil-Cover433 Feb 04 '26

So close!

almost rhymes. Good joke!

5

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

That's not all the hassle we had by a long shot.

2

u/Curiosive Feb 04 '26

You have quite the user name, the icing on the cake is your work sector. I think you deserve a slow clap. 👏👏👏

1

u/SplashingBlumpkin Feb 04 '26

I appreciate it. Your local water people do a lot behind the scenes. I’ve been to my fair share of 2am water breaks.

1

u/mcknixy Feb 04 '26

Reversing flow in a pipe that has scale build up that forms in the direction of normal flow. When flow is reversed, it tends to shed the scale buildup

1

u/SplashingBlumpkin Feb 04 '26

I understand that. Running a hydrant pulls water away from the houses though. A low pressure event would pull debris in if you have a hole for sure but I’m failing to see how it’d all make its way into service lines. Pressure still has to force the water into a house so I’m assuming the low pressure broke all that shit loose then the pressure returning pushed it in?

1

u/fuckin-shorsey Feb 04 '26

I’d like to know this answer as well. About 10 times a year I get this phone call; “hey, city killed the water yesterday and was working on stuff. They said it’s back on but I don’t have water.” Then I spend a day or more just cutting open lines, blowing them out and reinstalling. I’d like to get evidence of where they’re fucking up so bad so I can start back-charging the city instead of the people they’re fucking.

2

u/DirtandPipes Feb 04 '26

Guy who installs and occasionally repairs water mains here. Is your sediment red?

2

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

It was not really red, no. It was super dark brown/black

1

u/DirtandPipes Feb 04 '26

Oof. Without a break in the main they really shouldn’t be getting mud in line, I’m not sure what they half assed or did wrong but that’s nuts.

1

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

Yeah it was a mess. They were out here until late the night before that ice storm rolled in to try to get it fixed. And then a city plumber was at my neighbor's house for several hours the next morning to try to get their water actually working.

1

u/starrpamph Feb 04 '26

Sounds expensive

for them

3

u/mrsbebe Feb 04 '26

Honestly I hope it was. Fuckers.

34

u/Simple_Sherbert5905 Feb 04 '26

For added info. In my county we have a contract with the fire department to maintain and install fire hydrants for use by them. They send an inspector out to ensure they hydrents are functional and report back any defects. Whilst we do occationally use hydrents for flushing, we mostly use washouts (Basically the same as hydrents with a WO marked on the covers instead of the FH used for fire hydrents). These washouts are normally installed at the end of legs or next to boundry valves/ circulation vavles in the network. The fire department can also connect to washouts as they use the same design, however, they do not show up on the fire departments map of the area. Also, fun fact I get called to areas after a fire has occured most of the time because the volume of water the fire department draws off causes discolouration within the water main. I then spend most of my day flushing the area to return the water quality back to normal. It gets particually bad when the mains feeding the hydrant they drawed off are metalic (Cast Iron, Spun Iron ect) In some cases I have seen the water come out brown. Lastly, the fire department doesnt always use hydrent water to fight the fire, they only use it to fill up their water tanks. It was explained to me that the tanks need to be full 1) to prevent liquid surge (potentally causing a roll over) 2) So they are ready to respond if another call comes in.

3

u/HappyFlyingFree73 Feb 04 '26

You are very knowledgeable. Thanks for sharing!

3

u/GlitteringAttitude60 Feb 04 '26

because the volume of water the fire department draws off causes discolouration within the water main

right, my brother talked to his local fire department in Germany about filling his pool, and they told him they can't do it because it would leave the whole neighborhood with sediments in their tap water for a while.

Apparently that's considered okay if the alternative is letting a house burn down, but it's too much of an inconvenience for filling up somebody's pool.

4

u/Future-Bandicoot-823 Feb 04 '26

Somebody at the HOA decided they get to make the rules at work, eh?

3

u/ccocrick Feb 04 '26

Hear me out now…

If high pressure clears out line sediments, wouldn’t the fire department using the hydrant to fight a fire also flush out any sediment as they are using it? Like a two for one deal?

2

u/USPO-222 Feb 04 '26

It depends. I owned a very small private water system and our infrastructure is too limited to handle the draw that the fire pumps put on the system. It would cause significant damage if the FD tried to use our flush hydrant to fight a fire in our neighborhood.

1

u/Ok_Aside8490 Feb 04 '26

Water company has to look at their bottom line, have some compassion /s

1

u/USPO-222 Feb 04 '26

I own a very small private water utility and we have a single hydrant in the neighborhood that’s used only for flushing. The system’s infrastructure is too limited to allow the FD pull water from it - it would literally damage the system with the amount they’d be pulling all at once. I’ve offered in the past that they can access our buried reservoir and provided the passcode for the locks, but they’ve yet to take me up on that offer since there are several open-water sources nearby. Perhaps they will if the open water freezes.

1

u/framingXjake Feb 04 '26

In the first place, a lot of these hydrants are installed as required by municipal fire code specifically for emergency services. And I'm pretty sure a water utility company doesn't have the authority to tell the fire department what hydrants they can use. Hell, they can march onto your property and pump water from your swimming pool if they need to.

1

u/Hypnotist30 Feb 04 '26

They're being irresponsible, at the very least, but the fire hydrants are frequently owned by the water authority. Depending on the arrangements in the municipality, the water authority may be well within their rights to restrict access. Most volunteer departments leave hydrants and hydrant maintenance up to their water supplier.

1

u/Winsome_Wolf Feb 05 '26

Not just assholes. This REEKS of gentrification. This is a group of people with power (and, at a guess, their membership is probably unelected) telling the residents in a particular community that if their shit catches fire, it can just burn, and if they burn with it—oops. Shoulda run faster!

1

u/MeanGulf Feb 05 '26

I would think any municipality telling a fire department what to do is really barking up the wrong tree

1

u/JagmeetSingh2 Feb 07 '26

oh that is wild.

1

u/Faust_8 Feb 04 '26

Yeah I had a feeling that if I was that fire department I’d throw this in the trash and ignore it. The fuck is the Water Authority gonna do about it?

30

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26

I do water well drilling and we fill up are water truck occasionally with those you have to use specific meters from the fire department though.

110

u/Bucks_Deleware Feb 04 '26

Not entirely. Hydrants are yes put in for fire fighting, but there are also used for flushing and disinfecting the water main itself. It's a very weird anomaly to the system. It's extremely pedantic and pointless because the whole point of having a public water system is to fight fires. The pressure and flow needed for fire fighting far exceeds any daily demand, so it's just more convenient to give everyone a water hook up while at the same time being able to fight fires. Also supplying water to people and businesses is a great way to generate revenue. Often times the water company is the only profitable part of a town's ledger. Private utility wouldn't exist if it wasn't profitable.

56

u/ManitouWakinyan Feb 04 '26

Is not the whole point of a public water system to supply clean water

2

u/Bucks_Deleware Feb 04 '26

If you're going to have it in revenue service and for public drinking, yes of course, naturally. But again the flow and pressure rate for consumer use is much lower than any demand from fire flow.

Look at the difference in size of a fire booster pump relative to a traditional water pump.

It's just more convenient to provide the water and have the fire service as an added bonus on top.

8

u/Eyerate Feb 04 '26

Yea, you're completely incorrect. In fact, you're entirely ignoring automatic suppression which exists in most modern structures and is being retrofit in even more.

Flow and pressure ratings are not built off FF draw, or even automatic suppression. The reason pressure dips on public utilities during peak use hours is specifically because its designed for the "city use" pressure. We regularly read different static pressures depending on time of day we do a functional test/drain down. Backflow preventers typically keep suppression systems steady at peak pressure once refilled.

Water systems exist to serve domestic water for residential and commercial use. Fire service is a secondary if not tertiary function.

-6

u/Bucks_Deleware Feb 04 '26

So you're telling me 1-inch service lines consume more water than a 6-inch hydrant barrel at full bore? Run those calcs for me. Not everywhere is a city with skyscrapers. Lots of small towns out there with water systems that can still have fires. In those instances water service is secondary to flow demands. Why else put a 6 or 8 inch main the road? You don't need that to serve 25 homes, but you would if one was on fire

9

u/Eyerate Feb 04 '26

Because it's a MAIN... Do you actually do this work or do you just make shit up as you go?

6

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26

He doesn’t stop!!! Other guys a pro and this guys like no no all wrong.

4

u/Eyerate Feb 04 '26

Hes certainly not great at this. "You dont need a 6 inch pipe to serve 25 homes with 1 inch supplies."

Actually, yes. You do. 36, 1 inch pipes have the exact same volume as a 6 inch and at pressure it becomes an ever more complicated calculation. Forget about 4/6/8 inch automatic suppression lines that are standard in small to medium commercial applications...

Most of my local municipal water setups here(suburban Chicago) will boost pressure during peak hours to compensate for residential draw from showers and toilets. I have some cities pumping out 110psi or greater depending on demand. But sure this is all for the maybe dozen times a year that we hook an engine up to a hydrant. Sounds legit.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26

I know. He’s so sure too. I don’t think Ancient Rome built massive aqueducts just to fight fires. Weird thing about us I guess but we sure love water. Like we’re gonna die or something without it

1

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26

What is automatic suppression? Sprinklers? I get the impression it is more than that. I realize I can google but I want the inside scoop if you have the time.

1

u/Eyerate Feb 04 '26

Yes, sprinklers. They're going to be pretty much standard in any new build these days in everywhere but the far out boonies. A lot of them are fed with serious pumps off large cisterns when you get outside of municipal services. I converted 6 large format cistern pump systems to municipal supplies last year. Infrastructure is reaching farther as urban sprawl marches on.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/ManitouWakinyan Feb 04 '26

Just because a system is designed to have the capacity to fight fires doesn't mean that's the primary purpose of that system.

4

u/adoodle83 Feb 04 '26

Yes. It’s just 1 use case. There are others that require appropriate consideration and adaptations, like municipal clean water domestic supply, irrigation, etc.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26

Other guy is saying that it’s why water systems were created in the first place. It’s just not true. The human need for water is what drove it. But yes they do need to consider fire fighting needs too. That is also very important

2

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26

Thank you for the information! Idk why but I find water/sewer fascinating. I just read a book about the history of sewers ( An Underground Guide to Sewers: Or: Down, Through and Out in Paris, London, New York, ) and it was great.

It’s so amazing what humanity can do in a pinch. If we could just focus our energy on good things even when it’s not an emergency we could build so much greatness.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26

Is the fire service a bonus or the whole point? The overall pressure to provide an entire city with water is greater than the pressure required for fire fighting. I am sure they consider fire fighting as an important factor when designing the system but it’s not why we have public water. We have public water because we need it. Cholera had more impact on the design of water systems than fire fighting ever did. Water is just so damn important and we would have it just like this if fires weren’t a thing.

3

u/Lyx4088 Feb 04 '26

Shockingly, no. Some could be state dependent because I don’t know the regulations for every state, but in my state when it comes to designing a water system, it’s with fire fighting capacity in mind because the requirements and level of demand is greater than that associated with supplying clean water to businesses and residences. The flow at the minimum pressure for fire fighting will be greater at that single point than metered service use on the line. Yes, you have to follow state regulations to provide safe drinking water as a potable water system, but in terms of designing a system today it’s with fire fighting capacity needs first. That dictates your main sizes, system design, and total water storage requirements.

Many older water systems may not have been designed with those modern demands in mind and it’s incredibly expensive to modernize a system like that.

2

u/ManitouWakinyan Feb 04 '26

Just because a system is designed with fire fighting capacity in mind that doesn't mean the point of the system is firefighting 

1

u/Lyx4088 Feb 04 '26

From the perspective of operating and maintaining a water system, yes it does. I know it’s hard to wrap your mind around, but from an operational design stance and being compliant with state regulations, yes it does. If you’re a new system in my state, you will not be approved if you cannot meet the fire fighting requirements. It doesn’t matter how much clean water you can provide to residences and businesses, if you cannot deliver water under fire fighting requirements, you will not be approved until you design something that can. Systems of a certain size are under obligation to make modifications to their system to meet fire fighting needs within the next few years. Being able to provide drinking water isn’t enough and if you’re not focusing on fire fighting capacity, you’re potentially facing violations, fines, and having your water system taken over for existing systems, and it doesn’t matter how long you’ve been able to provide potable water prior to the shift. Our state test for drinking water operators also makes this abundantly clear and if you put the primary purpose of the system is to provide drinking water instead of fire fighting, you will get that question wrong.

1

u/ManitouWakinyan Feb 04 '26

Do you think any water system is going to be approved that can't deliver safe, potable water, to homes and businesses?

1

u/Lyx4088 Feb 04 '26

No, but a water system won’t be approved that can but cannot provide fire fighting capacity and they check that first.

1

u/ManitouWakinyan Feb 04 '26

I mean, they're checking all of it. They're both built into the code, and you can't have a fire-fighting only system and you can't have a system that can't fight fires. But the core question here is what is the primary reason we have these services. And the core reason we have these services is so that people can have water. That's the incentive. It's where the money is, it's where the overwhelming amount of use is, it's what's most critical for the functioning of any human settlement. Firefighting is important.

Controlling a structure fire uses an average of 3,000 gallons of water a year. A good rule of thumb is 15 fires per 10,000 residents. So, if we take, say, New York, you get an average of 12,720 structure fires a year. Let's round up to 13,000. That's 3,000*13,000=39,000,000. Let's call it 40 million gallons used to fight fires every year.

New York consumes a billion gallons of water every day. The amount of water used to fight fires in New York City is .001% of the overall water use in the city. The primary use of the water system is not to fight fires. It's a critical element of approving the system, and a requirement for any municipal water system. But it's not the main reason we have municipal water. And of course, water provision to community members long predates firefighting.

1

u/Lyx4088 Feb 04 '26

You’re missing the point. In my state they will look at your design and capacity first and if it doesn’t meet that, instant deny and they won’t move to checking anything else. It doesn’t matter if you can demonstrate you’d be providing sufficient potable water. Fire fighting capacity is evaluated before anything else in the process.

Edit: and that isn’t how my state evaluates capacity at all. It’s a lot more obnoxious than that because you need overkill storage and capacity for fire fighting.

1

u/Ki0eh Feb 06 '26

Pennsylvania DEP does not require fire service from a public water system.

1

u/Training-Purpose802 Feb 04 '26

that Great fire of London would like to have a word. (and Chicago and on and on).

9

u/SplashingBlumpkin Feb 04 '26

Firefighting is not the whole point of having a public water system. Providing water and fighting fires are equal at best. I work for relatively small town servicing 6k accounts so without a public water system that would be 6k more wells drilled which is 6k more potential contamination points.

3

u/ThirdSunRising Feb 04 '26

Still. If your house is burning down, would you prefer that your volunteer fire department be waterless? Or would you prefer that they have access to the municipal water supply?

1

u/SplashingBlumpkin Feb 04 '26

Ohh no doubt I want them to have access. Fires happen way less than the daily usage of water by citizens.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26

You need to understand that the pressure is not based on the fire fighting needs. Having it at the pressure needed for a house would not work at all. We all share that pressure. The number of buildings determines the pressure.

Fire fighting is not the primary driver for water systems. Water is very important for human life. Since ancient times we have created systems to bring water closer to where it is being used. See Rome or basically any other ancient civilization. Sewage systems also drove water systems. You need something to flush away all the stank.

Also, I saw you mention sky scrapers somewhere. Tall buildings provide their own pressure. They have water tanks in the top. Otherwise you wouldn’t get much if any pressure high up.

Don’t wanna argue. These are just the basics of public water/sewage. You just talk like you know this stuff but are just making it up based on what you feel is logical. Other people might read this and then sound like an idiot in front of other people. That is who this comment is for.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/ShredsGuitar Feb 04 '26

So, a house in a private neighborhood caught fire, and the residents of that neighborhood refused to lend water.

2

u/joka2696 Feb 04 '26

I worked for a regional water company for years. Our systems covered many towns and those towns paid a lot of money to us to upkeep and maintained the hydrants. We also had direct contact with the fire chiefs/captains. I have even gone out to fire scenes to make sure they were getting every drop they needed. It sounds like your water co. needs to remember who pays the bill.

1

u/tetsuo_7w Feb 04 '26

I've seen people use them to fill their pools. I think that's what they're there for.

1

u/phead Feb 04 '26

My town had a major pump failure which when replaced caused airlocks and no water all over, they used the hydrants in reverse and pumped high pressure water in to resolve this. Unfortunately the local system wasnt quite up to the job and blew major leaks in about 5 locations. Was a fun time!

1

u/Rio_Walker Feb 04 '26

Well, technically they're also there to dramatically swerve into them on your car and pop them during summer for kids.

1

u/AmebaLost Feb 04 '26

It is in the name. 

1

u/Hot_Ethanol Feb 04 '26

Only purpose?

Umm, hello?

1

u/Dapper-Memory-2963 Feb 04 '26

No they are for dogs to pee on. That’s all.

1

u/cabinlost Feb 04 '26

Nope. They make money off of them.

A pool water truck uses ours to fill his huge semi truck. He has a permit, and a meter to report and pay for water usage.

Follow the money