Lightning protection is fundamentally a risk management exercise that prevents financial losses through assessment based on asset owner-determined tolerable thresholds, writes Richard Evert of the Earthing and Lightning Protection Association (ELPA).
Contrary to common belief, lightning protection is not mandated by South African law, nor will it be in the near future. Responsible protection follows the structured approach illustrated in the accompanying diagram.
Strategy: risk treatment
An effective lightning protection solution implements a three-pronged strategy:
- Lightning Protection Systems (LPS) for direct strike mitigation
- Lightning Surge Protection Measures (LSPM) for indirect strike management
- Appropriate behavioural protocols during thunderstorms for safety and continuity
Risk assessments should be scaled to the structure and context. The costs should remain proportionate to the property's value and function, avoiding unnecessary complexity for simpler structures while ensuring comprehensive coverage for critical facilities.
Qualified lightning risk assessment
A critical misconception is that property owners have been led to believe external parties should determine acceptable risk levels for their assets. The flow chart demonstrates how standards guide best practices, preventing both under-design and over-design of protection solutions.
LPS isn't required in every case, and confusion often exists between internal LPS requirements and separate LSPM requirements. This results in recommendations varying widely between designers – variations that asset owners mistakenly accept as normal rather than questioning designer competency.
Each structure presents unique challenges due to architectural design variations, construction methods, and diverse electrical implementations. Remote design without consultation with key stakeholders deviates significantly from established best practices.
South African industry needs clear guidance on assessment parameters and appropriate support for property owners rather than imposing unguaranteed solutions. Structures without lightning protection should be backed by risk assessments confirming such protection is unnecessary.
**About the author
Richard serves as National Director of ELPA, driving a holistic perspective, supporting service providers to deliver safer, cost-effective security in an environment with many stakeholders and commercially vested interests.
