On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 1:22:05 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 10/1/2015 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:40:49 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:

The smoke alarms 'tweets' when the batteries needs to be changed.

We don't wait until it starts it's INCESSANT chirping. Do you
want to listen to it for an hour, day, week before you get around
to replacing the battery? Easier to be proactive and replace it
before it complains.

I change it immediately upon hearing it tweet.

We don't keep "spare batteries" (for anything) on hand.

Not even for flashlights? That seems risky. Do you change them on a
regular schedule whether they need them or not? Do you not have any battery
operated flashlights? That seems risky too.

We have two or three of the larger "maglites", a couple of small
"pen-light" style with rechargeable batteries, and numerous of
the "disposable" HF offerings (again, with rechargeable cells).

We also have several "crank" flashlights and shake-lights.

In an outage, we use CFL's powered by any of the ~13 UPS's
scattered around the house.

Most "batteries" here are AA or AAA (or, the larger gelled electrolyte/AGM
batteries in the UPS's) -- all these small flashlights, remote controls,
electronic magnifiers, etc. So, we keep 4 spares in a charger and
swap them out with whatever needs them when the time comes.

Aside from the CO/smoke detectors, *nothing* uses 9V batteries so
no reason to keep them on hand.

I suspect
this is true of many folks as it seems common for people to UNPLUG
their smoke detectors when they start chirping. Then, forget
to buy the battery and end up operating with no smoke detectors
in place (at least, we hear of homes lost to fire wherein the
smoke detectors had no batteries in them -- this seems like a
logical explanation of what transpired).

How "common" do you think this is?

It do4esn't matter how common it is to the folks who failed to
replace their batteries! : It's not common for folks to get
struck by lightning -- yet I don't run outside and stand under
a tree when we have an electrical storm! :

You're changing the subject instead of answering my question. I didn't ask
how about terrible it is for those that have been impacted by their mistake,
I asked you how "common" you think it is.

You said it was "common" for people to remove the batteries and leave them
out. I say it isn't. A tragedy, yes, but common? I think not.


Yes, you hear about the homes/lives that were lost to those fires, but you
don't hear as much about the people whose homes and/or lives were saved
because their detectors worked. The good news doesn't often make the
headlines because it doesn't sell.

Of course! But, they were saved because they *did* replace their
batteries. As *we* do! The difference is, we don't wait for the
detectors to chirp to prompt us to do so.

When detector 1 chirps, do you JUST replace it's battery? What about
the other detectors? Should you anticipate that they will be needing
replacement soon? Or, wait for them to start chirping as well?
(How is being proactive in that case different from my approach of
anticipating detector 1's failure?!)

"Family doesn't die in house fire. House saved. More at 11."

My guess is that "common" is not the right word to apply to the sad
situations.

Note that modern smoke/CO detectors *acknowledge* this practice
by requiring 110VAC operation (with battery for "backup") *or*
having 10 year batteries, etc.

10 year batteries are not required nor do all "modern" battery operated
detectors have 10 year batteries. "Modern" detectors that use standard
batteries are readily available on the consumer market.

Scroll down past the 10 year battery section he

http://www.kidde.com/home-safety/en/.../smoke-alarms/



So, obviously "enough" people died because they (effectively)
disabled their detectors to merit changes in the way those
detectors are designed/made. That suggests *someone* thought
it enough of a problem to address it!

Addressed it by offering options, but not by *requiring* it.

A problem doesn't have to be "common" for it to be addressed. It is not
"common" for people to be killed by the Takata air bag inflator ripping
through their necks, yet over 23 million inflators have been recalled.

My only objection is to your use of the word "common". In terms of the
number of detectors installed, the practice of taking the batteries out,
and leaving them out, is not "common". An issue worth addressing?
Absolutely. Common? Until I see the numbers, I'll vote No.


Just FYI...

Many new-ish battery operated smoke and/or CO detectors are designed such
that they cannot be (easily) mounted if they don't have batteries installed.
A spring loaded tab extends in such a way as to prevent either mounting or
(with some older models) from closing the battery door.

Obviously, making the mounting impossible/very difficult is the best method
to help prevent the "use' of a detector without batteries. The user would
have to physically put the detector someplace else (hopefully not in a
drawer) while they run out and buy batteries.

Most detectors are *easily* removed. Ours require a twist to unlock the
detector from the base, then unplug the three conductor cable assembly.
Thereafter, where you put the detector is up to you -- the *house*
won't complain that the detector is "missing"!

I didn't say anything about detectors be hard to *remove*, I said that
the newer ones are difficult to *install* without batteries - as a safety
feature. Let me explain:

In the old days, you could twist the detector off the base, remove the
batteries from the back, and simply twist the detector back on, saying to
yourself "I'll pick up some batteries tomorrow". On some models, you could
open the front panel, take the batteries out and close the door. Tomorrow
comes and goes, as does the next day and the next, until that detector is
forgotten about and people die.

These days, most detectors will not allow the user to twist the detector
back onto the base without batteries installed. This adds a layer of safety
because the detector will (hopefully) be left out in the open as a reminder
that it has no batteries.


What *will* get complaints is a detector that chirps every few minutes
until you "feed it". Given how easily it can be disconnected, it's
obvious why so many *do* get disconnected -- "while I remember to run out
and buy batteries" (which I suspect is rarely done "right now")

See my paragraph above. A detector that can't be remounted without batteries
being installed first is much safer than the old style. Yes, you can still
disconnect it, but hopefully people will now say "I'll pick up some
batteries tomorrow. Since I can't reinstall this detector until I do, I'll
put it right "here" as a reminder."

When my basement CO detector came to the end of it's 7 year lifespan, I
took the batteries out to stop the chirping. I could not reinstall the
unit. I brought it upstairs, put it on the kitchen table and then
put my cars keys on top of it. I doubt that *I* would have reinstalled it
without the batteries anyway, but I'm sure that some folks would have. I'm
sure many lives have been saved because of that feature.