http://aca.ninemsn.com.au/stories/2117.asp
|
A cause for alarm 5 June 2006 A house fire robbed Colin Zonneveld of most of his family. All he has left is 11 year-old son, Shayne. What makes the tragedy harder to bear, is the fact Colin believed his home and his family were protected by what's called an ionisation smoke alarm. "We thought we were doing the right thing, thought we had everything right, but obviously we didn't," Colin says. Adrian Butler is a former firefighter turned smoke alarm salesman. He claims the most common form of smoke detector — the ionisation alarm which is found in 97 percent of Australian homes — is ineffective. Most Australians might not realise that there are two types of smoke alarms available. Photoelectric alarms detect slow, smouldering fires — the kind that start when you drop a cigarette onto the bed or couch. Ionisation alarms work by detecting gases and particles coming off hot, flaming fires. They often lure owners into a false sense of security because they go off every time you burn your toast. They're identifiable by a radioactive symbol on the back and found in more Australian homes because they're the cheaper option. "For 25 years people have been using the wrong smoke alarms in their homes," Adrian says. A large-scale study of 21 alarms conducted by New Zealand's Consumers' Institute showed disturbing results. Both types of alarms picked up blazing fires quickly, but when it came to smouldering fires, some ionisation alarms took up to 10 minutes to go off — and some did not go off at all. The Australasian Fire Authorities Council is finally informing people that photoelectric alarms are more effective for detecting smouldering fires and in cases of such fires, "ionisation alarms may not alert occupants in time to escape safely." |
