Smoke Detector Controversy

In January 2000, a Canadian public affairs television program, W-Five, reported that the most common smoke detectors on the market do not detect smouldering fires and companies that sell them failed to inform the public of the device's limitations. A few weeks later, independent testing was conducted which disputed the program's claims. The result is consumers who are concerned about the safety of their families and the accuracy of both reports.

The research used by W-Five was provided by Texas A&M University, reportedly a leading testing lab for smoke detectors. Tests showed that both ionization and photoelectric style smoke detectors failed to sound alarms within the legal time limit. As well, in three out of four of their tests on ionization alarms, all 11 of them failed to detect smouldering fire three metres away. This is in violation of safety standards both in Canada and the United States.

Ionization alarms are triggered when smoke particles interrupt ion current that flows between two metal plates. Photoelectric alarms use a beam of light to detect the presence of visible smoke particles.

Different fires produce different types of smoke and some are more easily detected by the ionization alarms. Smouldering fires, such as couch fires, failed to trigger alarms in the Texas A&M research. Kitchen fires, which produce more smoke particles, were easier to detect.

In the United States, a leading manufacturer of ionization alarms has been sued for product failure. In July 1998, First Alert was found liable and forced to compensate a couple who lost a child in a fire. The judge ruled that First Alert ignored more than 400 complaints about its detectors and was ordered to pay US$20-million. In another case, the court awarded US$50-million after a First Alert alarm failed to warn them of a fire that killed two children.

The shadow of doubt that has been cast over smoke alarms has raised concern among fire fighters. The head of the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs has expressed his hope that people will continue to use and maintain their smoke alarms. This controversy also prompted the Underwriter's Laboratories of Canada (ULC) to conduct its own studies on alarm effectiveness published in February 2000. Their report states that both types of alarms detect all types of smoke and give people enough warning to evacuate their homes in the event of fire.

When the ULC questioned the integrity of Texas A&M's research, the head researcher's response was they had wanted to test the detectors in "real-world fire situations" instead of following the ULC's standard methods.

Consumer safety should not hinge on test methods but unfortunately the controversy continues. The silver lining may be that eventually smoke alarms will be improved and new products will be introduced.

In the meantime, consumers are advised to use both ionization and photoelectric detectors. If you currently have a photoelectric type, invest in an ionization detector and visa versa. Since research seems to indicate a limited detection range try to have one in each room. Combination alarms (which perform both functions) are available starting at about $40. Smoke detectors should also be interconnected so that when one alarm sounds there is a chain reaction. Those few extra seconds can make the difference between safety and tragedy. - By Lisa Harrison

Top of page