I find it ironic when words can have such a double meaning. “Passive” is defined as not reacting visibly to something, not participating readily or actively. “Passivity” is further defined as allowing people to do things without complaining or pushing back. For us in the wall and ceiling industry, we use the word passive to describe a methodology used in fire protection. While the two seem to be unrelated, they are closely related and it should make contractors mad and scare the public.
Passive fire protection is built on the principles of suppression and containment of a fire from the source. Despite the name, passive fire protection is at work all day, every day. Passive fire protection refers to protecting structural elements with coatings, membranes or non-combustible materials to prevent structural collapse. In reality, the term passive is maybe the wrong choice of words. Active fire protection sounds so much better. This is the methodology of fire protection that employs sprinklers and alarms. I am not opposed in the slightest to active fire protection, I am opposed to what we call trade-offs. A trade-off is the code allowance to eliminate some passive fire protection in favor of active fire protection. In other words, designers may opt to eliminate spray applied fireproofing if they install a certain type or more sprinklers.