Could a water-filled box work as a fire safe?

So here’s my idea: a cubic meter of water takes about 400MJ of energy to boil away. A typical house fire contains around 70GJ of energy, but most of that radiates outward. If I build a large metal box, fill it with water, and submerge a smaller waterproof box for the items I want to protect, wouldn’t that keep the contents cooler than a traditional fire safe?

This setup would limit the internal temperature to 100°C, which is way lower than the 197°C char point of paper. I know it’d be tricky to make a box that’s sturdy and leakproof under fire conditions, but it seems like it could be cheaper and more effective than traditional safes.

What do you think? Any obvious reasons this wouldn’t work?

Why not just buy a regular fire safe?

Commercial fire safes are designed to handle this sort of thing. Also, if your items are submerged in water, accessing and storing them would be a pain, which kind of defeats the purpose.

@Pax
You’re right about access being inconvenient, but this would be for items you don’t need often. I’m thinking this might be cheaper and safer because it keeps the temperature lower and could handle bigger fires better.

@Scout
I’d bet something similar has been tested before. Fire protection has been a problem for ages, and there’s a lot of demand for it—from homeowners to governments.

The reason it’s not common might be cost, space, or risk. Maybe it’s worth exploring alternatives like fire suppression systems or materials that starve the fire of oxygen.

@Pax
Yeah, I’d love to know why it’s not more common. Seems like a good idea on paper.

Scout said:
@Pax
Yeah, I’d love to know why it’s not more common. Seems like a good idea on paper.

Probably practicality. Big, heavy, and high maintenance.

@Scout
You could dig a hole, build a big concrete box with a water seal, and cover it with a loose lid and a grate to keep debris out. Lift the inner box to access your items. Commercially, though, this idea wouldn’t fly because people don’t like things requiring maintenance.

What about it becoming a steam bomb? Ever seen a boiler blow up?

Jules said:
What about it becoming a steam bomb? Ever seen a boiler blow up?

It doesn’t need to be sealed. Just leave a vent.

Scout said:

Jules said:
What about it becoming a steam bomb? Ever seen a boiler blow up?

It doesn’t need to be sealed. Just leave a vent.

[deleted]

Tan said:

Scout said:
Jules said:
What about it becoming a steam bomb? Ever seen a boiler blow up?

It doesn’t need to be sealed. Just leave a vent.

[deleted]

Pouring water in every few weeks doesn’t seem like a huge burden. Obviously, it’d need to be sized appropriately for the fire risk.

@Scout
You could rig up a toilet tank float system to automatically refill it. DIY all the way!

Dorian said:
@Scout
You could rig up a toilet tank float system to automatically refill it. DIY all the way!

Or just use the toilet tank itself as a fire safe? :smile:

@Scout
A heat-sensitive vent seal could work, preventing evaporation but opening under high heat. It’s worth considering.

Why not just bury it underground? Traditional but effective.

To avoid explosions, you’d need a vent system. Maybe something simple like plastic that melts in high heat or a soldered blow-off panel.

Still, you’ve got challenges: the weight of the water, corrosion risks, and potential for mold.

I’ve thought about something similar. My idea was to place sealed water containers, like 5-gallon jugs, on top of my fire-rated safe. In a fire, the jugs would melt and release water over the safe, providing a few extra minutes of cooling. It’s not perfect but could help.

I also moved all combustible vegetation at least 75 feet from my house for added fire safety.

This sounds like boiling sealed meat. Interesting concept.

What about the risk of bacteria like Legionella growing in the water? That’d be a weird theft deterrent. :smile:

The water would get gross unless treated, so you’d need some kind of chemical maintenance. Imagine showing people your fire-safe water tank: “It works, but don’t touch it!”

@Arin
Fair point. You’d probably want a strong chemical to kill everything in the water—way simpler than managing an aquarium setup.