A QLD electrician tells it like it is
|
Stopping the foil insulation rollout will not stop the danger from the insulation scheme, and safety checks will be next to useless. Foil insulation and its installation method is inherently unsafe. It may very well have good insulating properties, but so does asbestos, and we don’t use that anymore and we remove it where we find it because it is unsafe. Foil insulation will kill you a lot quicker than asbestosis will. Here are just a few likely scenarios that could evade Garrett’s new safety check.
There are so many different likely scenarios it is scary. It is not a matter of possibility that a ceiling with foil insulation becomes live, it is a matter of real probability. I have already told our employees that we do not work in ceilings with foil unless the power is isolated to the entire house. This also presents a very real maintenance issue: if you are tracking a wiring fault in a ceiling or installing new cabling, you have to remove or disturb portions of the foil to complete the work. The act of doing this could actually cause a fault that was not there before. All invoices submitted by electrical contractors in Qld must have a “certificate of test” attached which makes them liable for the safety of that installation in perpetuity to the effect of the work they have performed, in this case the electrical safety of the installation with regards to the foil insulation. No responsible electrical contractor would put their name on an invoice. I believe there would be a very real, sleeping liability for anyone putting their name to such a safety check. You cannot see any of the cabling in these type of installations as the foil is put over the top of the ceiling battens. Therefore you cannot put your hand on your heart and say it is safe unless you pull the insulation up again and inspect the condition of the cabling, connections, and light fittings underneath. My very real concern is that people will pay money to a sparky (unscrupulous or foolish enough) to tell them it’s OK, and give them a false sense of security. Foil insulation should be removed urgently. I am not being alarmist when I say that it is a certainty that more people will die. The victims in the future will not be 16 or 18-year-old installers — they will be plumbers, electricians, or dads putting the camping gear or the Xmas lights up in the ceiling. This will be a deadly legacy of this stimulus package that will kill people 20 to 30 years into the future unless the foil insulation is removed and quickly. To be fair, it was installed previously and there was an Australian Standard for its installation. However, the flood of unskilled and inexperienced installers into the market, armed with nothing but a Stanley knife, staple gun, and a roll of glorified alfoil made installation standards plummet. What was previously an el-cheapo, less safe product for insulating a home became a deadly, unsafe product. Chris Bowen repeatedly defended Peter Garrett on Lateline this week by saying Garrett had sought “expert advice”. A warning from the peak Electrical Contractors body in the country surely has to be considered “expert advice”. They had no axe to grind in issuing a warning about the safety of the foil insulation, other than the protection of life and property. This was an entirely foreseeable tragedy, expected and witnessed by people like myself who make a living by managing, preventing, and correcting electrical risk every day. If Garrett wants to get on the front foot with this, he should announce that foil insulation method is banned, and instigate a policy of removal immediately. Putting all politics aside, as a bloke who is climbing into another ceiling tomorrow and sending people out to do the same on my behalf, I want to make sure we all have a better chance of going home safely. |
|
|
|
17 Comments
What silly scaremongering. It all depends on where the foil insulation is installed. I put it up in my roof under the rafters. So it acts like sarking which is, shock horror, a foil. Sure if you staple aircell or the other foil insulation products on the ceiling joists you could have a problem. But you just need to be careful. It is not rocket science to avoid electrical cabling and downlights.
Poor Tim has missed the point totally.
But this statement from an obviously experienced tradesman should have become evident when Garrett was first warned a whole year ago - before anybody had died. It is so obvious now and should have been obvious after warning number one or two or three, to say nothing of the other ten warnings.
Chris is correct. Tim has missed the point. Foil installation should only be installed over the top of rafters and under roofing material as a sarking, and should be physically separated from wiring by at least 100 mm. At no stage should the electrical wiring be concealed by a conductor such as foil installation. Having crawled around in a few roof spaces in my time I am acutely aware of the hazards associated with wiring, especially older rubber wiring installed several decades ago. The issue of rodents chilling cable is real is apparently they need to wear down their teeth. All cabling is potentially susceptible to this type of activity.
As a matter of public safety, foil installation laid over roof joists should be banned, and any such material installed, whether as a consequence of subsidised installation or not, should be removed as a matter of public safety.
It is beholden on prospective state work safety authorities to order such a recall, even at the expense of a publicly subsidised removals scheme. It is pointless pointscoring against Garrett as he is such a soft target, and it would be an appropriate act of a statesman, if we can find one, to take responsibility for such an act of public safety, and throw aside the political ramifications.
Correction: would the moderator please replace “chilling” with “chewing”
I know nuffink but in these matters I defer to my bro who says
I too have followed the insulation foil fiasco in ceilings in the media.
The pictures on TV suggest that the installers lay the foil over the ceiling joists i.e. just above the ceiling and not up against the external roofing material (iron, clay tiles etc). This method of positioning the foil is implied in the comments by the electrician below .
As the sparky correctly points out, this method is dangerous.
Also it will not produce good heat insulation in the building.
To maximise its effectiveness, the foil should be up next to the roof and this means away from the electrical cables.
That way 90% of the radiant energy coming through the roof is repelled by the reflective foil before the heat gets into the roof cavity.
I wonder if this is in Garrett’s guidelines?
Regardless of the intent, who knew what, who told who,what was read and what was not, what the Ministers staff knew and did not tell him, what correspondence was withheld from the Minister, whatever whatever, it is obvious the Minister will not be asked to resign. Of course it is well and reasonable for the Opposition to require answers to reasonable questions. It is not reasonable for the Opposition, lead by bully boy Abbott to accuse Garrett of being responsible for the deaths of 4 people, when there has not been an inquest. That, whatever we may think of his actions is not on. For Abbott to go on scoring political points day after day, keeping the “manslaughter in NSW” attack up, reveals the nature of the man. He made that point 2 days ago, without an inquest, he continues to make it, as does Hunt. I hold no brief for Minister Garrett in this matter, he finally is responsible for his departments actions, but the continuous accusations of directly causing the deaths of the 4 men is poor form. I would expect better of a self confessed God fearing Catholic. But then he has form in non Christian attitudes.He would want to be careful the only point the electorate remember from this episode, is his accusations of causing death. If I was convinced he was only doing it out of concern and sympathy for the deceased and their families? I’m not.
I assume the # of deaths for foil insulation has increased due to the stimulus driven boost to the industry however, were people dying from this very same procedure beforehand and if so, why wasn’t it banned then?
It would be too much to expect Abbott to do any research on what happened prior to the stumulus installations. That would not suit his politically motivated attack on Minister Garrett. He gave a very good imitation of an undertaker giving instructions to pall bearers during an interview earlier today. The man makes a mockery of genuine sympathy to the bereaved families. Gutter politics from Abbott, he is back in his element.
Doesn’t this all point to something seriously lacking in building standards for houses in Australia? In other words, there has been a problem for a long time but the odd handy man or rat frying him/it self plus occupants is not normally political headline stuff.
The real question is what proportion of all electrocution or all fire deaths in domestic dwellings is due to the wiring being too easily damaged, not just what has happened with the additional problem of poorly implemented insulation.
Just in reply to tim stephens.
It may not seem like” rocket science” tim, but the reality of what I see every day is foil insulation stapled directly to ceiling battens covering cables, lights and junctions boxes completely. That is what is happening.
“SillyScaremongering” you say? I install, repair, remove, replace, electrical cabling and appliances for a living and I do it every day. The roof space in homes and premises is where I spend a lot of my time. I don’t know what you do for a living tim, but i will bet my lefty its not working in ceilings. I am not being alarmist, this is a very real danger for people in my line of work, and will continue to be so until the foil insulation is removed.
Chris perhaps you can inform us how many deaths have been attributal to ceiling installation before the stimulus programme started. Perhaps for previous 5 years, I would presume the figures are available for public consumption.
I have no idea david.
I read in the CM today a claim by the foil installers association that no deaths had been attributed to it before, I have no reason to doubt this. I personally believe it is inherently unsafe, but with reputable, experienced people installing it this risk can be minimised.
The issue has been the standard to which the recent flood of foil insulation has been installed. If I was an established foil installer I would be ropeable at what the cowboys have done to their livleyhoods.
Unfortunately, I believe as a public safety measure, with 38000 homes with this stuff in the ceiling, the best option is removal. The second best in the installation of rcd/mcb (safety switch) protection on each final subcircuit. The option of last resort is inspections, this will only tell you if it is safe today, not tomorrow, not next week, not in 10 years time
There is a “chronic” risk to the installation of all types of insulation if it is installed incorrectly from fire. With foil insulation, there is the “chronic” fire risk and the more “acute” electrocution risk.
As I said, asbestos is a great insulator, but we don’t use it because it is dangerous and we remove it. Foil will kill you a lot quicker than asbestosis will.
For the record foil insulation including “reflective sarking” has been around alot longer than Mr.Lehman has had his electrical licence. Indeed , if pulling out the sarking is the way then we should also pull out all metalic pipes, roofing materials, guttering, solar panel frames, window frames etc. I suppose that is unless you pay Mr.Lehman and his likes at the Master Electricians “Buisiness Association” the privlege of inspecting your roof at say $90 an hour.
With the economic downturn I suppose they could all do with some extra work anyway. In addition all that energy efficient sarking would certainly reduce demand for expensive air conditioners to be fitted.
And Chris, speaking as a fellow electrical contractor/energy efficiency professional I think your recommendations are quite wrong and show a lack of understanding.
One thing your article has shown is that there is a need for continuing professional development in the electricall industry, did you know..the greatest source of house fires caused by electrical faults is from all the halogens installed!! Check the figures,
So before we get on your horse have a look at the poor practices in your own industry. Indeed a recent Government report indicates electrical energy use in home is predicted to rise chiefly because of all the halogens that are going in.
Of course reflective sarking has been in use for a long time, but it is generally installed on top of the roof trusses, NOT on top of the ceiling battens covering light fittings and cabling alike. It is not the fact that it is metalic, and conductive, it is the method of installation in this case which dangerous, NOT the actual material itself.
And yes….. halogen downlights are the biggest single cause of house fires, but this usually happens in concert with incorrectly installed ceiling insulation. My previous post makes that point, that there are chronic fire risks associated with incorrectly installed insulation. There has been a change to the australian standards associated with the installation of halogens, and they must all have “heat guards” installed with them. I replace/ repair incorrectly installed halogen downlights every week, mostly with energy saver downlights that run at 13w as opposed to 50w. As far as halogens go, it is purely a consumer driven phenomena that had them so widely installed, we put in what people want, I always caution people away from their use. And yes…… most definitely there are poor practices in our industry, which is why I am saying that inspections on their own will not work to reduce the risk. Without a doubt, removal is the safest option, second best is safety switch protection on all final subcircuits as mandatory, last of all are inspections and reporting.
Before I will commit our company to any involvement with the safety checks, I want to see a written, approved test procedure published that all within the industry have to follow to be able to claim any rebate, and to give the best chance that they are being carried out correctly in the majority of cases. Even then, there will ongoing risks from the inherently unsafe nature of the installation method for the life of the product.
So what is it exactly is it that I don’t understand about this issue saja? Point out to me exactly what is incorrect, unlikely, or wrong with my line of argument. We (the electrical contractors) didn’t cause this debacle, but we are going to have to be the ones to mitigate the danger and risk associated with it. If that means that once a proper test procedure and rectification processes are in place to ensure this can be done safely, then yes we will charge people for the work to be done safely and professionally.
Chris
My point is your alarmist attitude scaring and misinforming. for example
Insulation= (worse than) asbestos,
Foil insulation and its installation method is inherently unsafe
All in all I appreciate there is a danger, but where do we begin? With halogen installed inappropriately, with electrical installations that no longer pass the mandatory test requirements prescribed in the AS3000 . Maybe it is the standard of the electrical industry that can now be seen coming out of the attic. In the whole I stopped going in roofs because I was not prepared to compete with other “licensed electricians” and their unqualified employees who conducted such poor quality work whilst undercutting prices? How many electrical companies employee “trainees”, “labourers” and “apprentices” do unsupervised works? Too many
I think that pulling out correctly installed insulation will help as much as pulling the tin off the roof, frames out the windows and metal pipes. I understand your concerns but don’t think scaremongering will help people understand the issues.
And from a positive view its good to see a tradie like yourself giving an honest opinion and it is a pity that the commonwealth did not engage such opinions before rolling out such contentious schemes
Saja
Insulation is not the problem, i have insulated every home i have purchased. Incorrectly installed insulation is a hazard, and unfortunately incorrectly installed foil insulation is immediately, obviously, inherently dangerous.
I am only advocating removal of the “conductive foil installed directly over the ceiling battens” type of insulation. And I am only drawing a paralell between the “dodgy method foil” and asbestos because of the obvioius and proven dangers of foil installed this way, and the obvious and proven dangers of asbestos. Both are excellent methods of insulation, but the hazards associated with them out weigh their efficacy as an insulator.
You are correct about the electrical industry not being without its “dodgy brother” operators, all industries are. However this supports my point with regards to the fly-by-night inexperienced foil installers……
If the electrical industry with a 4 year apprenticeship, to be an electrician, 2 year course to be a contractor, further auditing and accreditation programs for such things as “master electrician” and a system of licence checks and renewals has its bad apples….. How much more likely is it that the people who have flooded into the industry to install the cheapest, easiest to use product, with no training or experience ……. have a higher proportion of “dodgy bros” operators…. ergo a higher rate of dangerous and shoddy work.
Its not scaremongering, that IS what is happening, I see it every day, it IS a hazard, and it will continue to be a hazard for as long there is foil insulation installed in ceilings with the unsafe method I have outlined.