As usual it seems business interests and the dollar in a pocket mentality so prevalent in our government is dictating whether ionisation smoke alarms are dangerous or not…
https://thenewdaily.com.au/money/consumer/2018/06/19/smoke-alarms-ionisation-photoelectric/
https://www.nfpa.org/Public-Education/By-topic/Smoke-alarms/Ionization-vs-photoelectric
By chance, we have both ionising and photoelectric installed in out house.
Has Australia through inaction also been used as a dumping ground for yesterday’s tech? Ionisation smoke alarms, the ones with the radiation sticker.
Yes we are behind the curve. With timber the dominant material in nearly all houses and modern flammable furnishings common it makes us look a bit backward.
It would appear that while Australia had the knowledge we did not have the initiative to legislate.
And what do we do with all those radioactive warning labelled detectors we need to bin?
https://www.qld.gov.au/about/newsroom/smoke-alarm-legislation
Queensland, don’t know about other states has legislated for smoke alarms to be mandatory in all dwellings, You need to have them in nearly every room and interconnected! Certainly at the front of the pack, and great if it can also call the fire crew every time it alarms. Maybe?
This will save lives. It will also for some existing properties be very expensive to retrofit. As for pool safety fencing it is not an option, although the cut off date to comply is several state elections distant.
p.s. It may be that PE type detectors alone are not the best solution? It may not count. The honorable members of the Qld one humped camel state parliament have already decided for us.
My opinion based on unscientific sampling of myself is that Australia has and remains a dumping ground for virtually any product category that is past its time.
When the world was moving to DVDs and PVRs the venerable VHS remained a local staple; same with analogue TVs, then SD TVs and PVRs were sold for yonks while HD was rolling in.
My Citroen reflected that it was probably ‘leftovers’ from the UK market. Its ‘hi tech’ (as they advertised at the time) features had been superseded in the rest of the world. While the world got Pod plugs and the CD was going the way of vinyl we got a CD changers and no external input (that input was available for an addition $500+).
And so we go as a place where virtually any business appears to be able to offload its excess end-of-life production with the only exception maybe the fickleness of fashion.
I agee with you “The BBG”, I read an article on the ABC website about CSIRO tests on the smoke alarms. The result is that ionisation type are so slow reacting to a fire that they are dangerous and photoelectric are far safer. There is little publicity about this and our wonderful NCC/BCC does not require the safer photoelectric alarms to be installed, so I would suspect that most, if not all new houses have ionisation type alarms installed.
After reading the ABC article I checked the smoke alarms in my own house - they are all ionisation type so I have bought new photoelectric smoke alarms and will be fitting them in the next few days!
Could Choice do a comprehensive test of photoelectric smoke alarms so that a wider range can be considered?
One last warning - check the date of the Australian Standard compliance the latest is AS3786-2014 anything earlier than that is not compliant in some States!
Possibly the ionising detectors have been around for longer than the photoelectric ones. When we purchased of first set of fire detectors, the ionising ones were the only ones available.
More recent building work on the house meant that we had to install a battery backup, hard wired photoelectric one, to have the building work certified.
We keep both maintained/operational as their are disadvantages/advantages or both types.
Until ionising ones (or maybe photoelectric ones if something better becomes available in the future) are banned by either state (under their fire protection lefislation) or federal government (under import of radioactive products legislation), they will continue to be sold.
I also beleive that a well maintained, operational ionising detector is still better than no detector at all. This is something that seems to be missed in the discussion about the type of detectors.
That is definitely the case, but why allow inferior products to continue to be offered along side better ones for the replacement/new installation (in old houses) market when the world that we usually follow has ‘gone there’ already?
I love how 5 year old news suddenly gets regurgitated as a current story.
It has been well know for many years that all homes should have photoelectric smoke alarms and it also doesn’t hurt to have at least one of both types ionisation and photoelectric as they both have advantages in reacting to different types of fires.
What is more concerning in my opinion is the number of smoke alarms that are over 10 years old in peoples home and should be simply updated, because although they will successfully test their operational efficiency is downgraded…
Regardless of the merit of having one of each type if you are a Queenslander there is only one option. For new dwellings, renovations or rentals the changed obligations are already in place or on shorter time lines.
Following is an extract from the current Queensland legislated requirements for existing owner occupied dwellings. Very simply you can only install replacement or new smoke detectors if they are photo-electric in Queensland. I’m not aware of a ban on the sale of the older ionising type in Queensland. In respect of consumer law it would be interesting to know the exact legal position of the retailer involved with any sale of an item that cannot be legally installed as of 01 January 2017.
For existing dwellings
From 1 January 2017
Existing smoke alarms manufactured more than 10 years ago must be replaced with photoelectric smoke alarms which comply with Australian Standards (AS) 3786-2014. (Note: the date should be stamped on the back)
Smoke alarms that do not operate when tested must be replaced immediately.
Existing hardwired smoke alarms that need replacement, must be replaced with a hardwired photoelectric smoke alarm.
It is also recommended that:
smoke alarms be either hardwired or
powered by a non-removable 10-year battery; and
ionisation smoke alarms be replaced with a photoelectric type as soon as possible.
From 1 January 2027
All private homes, townhouses and units will require hardwired photoelectric, interconnected smoke alarms. If a hardwired smoke alarm cannot be installed, non-removable 10-year battery smoke alarms can be installed in place.I was discussing this issue with our expert in this area, and he mentioned that the most important thing is to have multiple interconnected alarms. He made the point that ionisation alarms aren’t necessarily rubbish products to be banned, they just need to be used in the right situations - which in most cases is not in homes. He mentions that you should install at least one photoelectric smoke alarm in your home.
We have some further info in this guide:
Brendan - the Choice guide is very useful.
You may find it also useful to include the following links in the guide to assist Choice readers in Qld access a more complete list of the requirements. These include dates for compliance and installation location requirements not listed in the Choice guide. For any owner of a property in Qld following only Choice’s guide is better than no protection however it may not be sufficient to meet all Qld legal requirements. Most importantly you can not install an ionisation type smoke detector in Qld in a residential property as a replacement or new device. It is also very likely that you will need more than one alarm device to meet Qld legislation.
Queensland Govt Guide - Smoke Alarm Legislation
Queensland Fire and Emergency Services Advice for Smoke Alarm Installations
If Choice’s expert in the area has a better reference for Qld requirements it would be useful to see it included.
Personally I don’t disagree with the need for improving how we detect household fires. There is clearly from Choice’s guide a range of differing and typically lesser requirements in states other than Qld. The cost for some consumers in Qld of upgrading will not be that great. For others the expense will not be minor or a trivial task. I could complain that the current legislation was not a major electoral promise.It would have been better for the Qld Govt to have provided some direct assistance for the transition and a more pragmatic approach to the provision of solutions to existing dwellings.
It would be appropriate for all Queenslanders and those in other states to see a Choice review of Interconnected PE fire alarm systems, both in hard wired systems as well as wireless inter-connected. Also those that offer the option of fail safe battery backup power with back to base call outs that are 100% NBN compatible? An estimate of the fair labour time and costs to install might also help us up here. It’s also important to note if any of the systems are suitable for self install or they will require a licensed electrician to install. Not expensive on a new build or reno - but $$$$ for a retro fit?
As a minimum any future Choice Smoke Alarm tests need to be assessed for the ability to meet the current QLD legislation. Hopefully Qld is a big enough Choice member base to deserve this support?
Is Choice up to it?
I have smoke alarms in each of the bedrooms and 3 more in the living areas in which I replace the batteries each June 1
How do I know as to what type of smoke alarms that I have ? How does one tell the difference between the two types of smoke alarms ?
It will say on the unit what type it is. We have a mix of them here.
When next changing the battery…or before if you desire, check whether the internal components (or back of tte outside of the detector) have a radioactive symbol on it. If it does, it will be an ionising detectors.
The symbol will look something like this 
Great post. Also the cost of smoke alarms for people with hearing loss would be useful in next choice article
I’d be nervous about any manufacturer who thinks “WEEKLY TESTING IS REQUIRED” …
Yes, in stark contrast with the one above it “{TEST} WHENEVER THE BATTERY IS REPLACED”.
Honestly, who really tests their alarms when they should, short of inadvertently burning toast?
