Fire in London high-rise building | Page 2 | INFJ Forum

Fire in London high-rise building

German construction companies have been banned from using plastic-filled cladding, such as Reynobond PE, on towers more than 22 metres high since the 1980s when regulations were brought in to improve fire safety at residential blocks.

Concerns that the panels could exacerbate the spread of fires led authorities to allow them only on buildings that can be reached by the fire brigade using fully-extended ladders from the ground. Taller buildings require panels with a more fire-resistant core and separate staircases for people to use if evacuation becomes necessary.

Frankfurt’s fire chief, Reinhard Ries, said he was appalled at the fire at Grenfell Tower and said tighter fire-safety rules for tower blocks in Germany meant that a similar incident could not happen there. US building codes also restrict the use of metal-composite panels without flame-retardant cores on buildings above 15 metres.


Germany is deemed to have some of the most stringent fire regulations in the world. High-rise tower blocks are common, particularly in former communist parts of the country, where they dominated new-build housing for decades. In Berlin and elsewhere, the austere blocks have become fashionable places to live, in part because of a housing shortage and the high cost of accommodation.

Berlin’s fire chief, Wilfried Gräfling, said the London fire made it clear that fire regulations should be tightened further with only mineral materials used in cladding panels. “We will try to persuade lawmakers that flammable material should no longer be allowed to be used as an insulant,” he told Der Spiegel. “Only mineral material that can’t burn, ensuring that it’s no longer possible for a fire to spread via the cladding,.”

The speed at which the fire spread at Grenfell Tower has led to intense speculation that external cladding panels made from aluminium sheets with a flammable polyethylene core may have fuelled the fire that tore through the block in the early hours of Wednesday morning. But the investigation into the tragedy will look at scores of other factors that could have contributed to the blaze, including the proper installation of fire barriers between the cladding on each floor and any holes left after the recent refurbishment through which fire could have spread.

In the UK there are no regulations requiring the use of fire-retardant material in cladding used on the exterior of tower blocks and schools. But the Fire Protection Association (FPA), an industry body, has been pushing for years for the government to make it a statutory requirement for local authorities and companies to use only fire-retardant material. Jim Glocking, technical director of the FPA, said it had “lobbied long and hard” for building regulations on the issue to be tightened, but nothing had happened.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-grenfell-tower-identified-as-omnis-exteriors


Interesting to read. A similar fire in a high-rise building would be unlikely/impossible abroad.

Did the UK change legislation, e.g., during Thatcher or Blair, or does the issue of fire safety go back further in the past?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Milktoast Bandit
It is excellent that people are showing up to demand responsibility from elected politicians, this time in front of No. 10. Some people need pressure to do their job properly.

londonprotest.jpg


https://www.commondreams.org/news/2...ter-forced-flee-londoners-protest-deadly-fire
 
The fact you dont get to choose is a big reason I dont like socialism. That's what it's all about. You take what you are given by the government and you don't complain.

So there are about 4.1m social homes here in the UK. The majority of them are filled, so we can assume more than 4.1m people in the UK are in the situation where they need social housing. Now it's not for lack of private housing. I work in the private rental sector and can tell you with experience that the homes we let out are still being turned over, they're available, unfortunately most private landlords won't accept those in housing needs, and even if they do, the majority can't afford to rent privately. This is the reality of my country's shitty housing situation, though it varies from area to area.

So without this "socialism" where would these people be? Out on the streets. If this option was preferable to being put up in a building that's potentially a deathtrap, then that's the option they'd take. Though funnily enough, most people favour shitty shelter over no shelter.