ao link
Twitter
Linked In
Bluesky
Threads
Twitter
Linked In
Bluesky
Threads

You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles

Burning plastic insulation caused ‘lethal smoke’ at Grenfell, expert report says

Burning plastic on the outside of Grenfell Tower produced “dense and lethal” levels of toxic smoke in the flats of victims, an expert report prepared for the inquiry has concluded.

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Sharelines

Burning plastic insulation caused 'lethal smoke' at Grenfell, expert report says #ukhousing

Professor David Purser yesterday released a detailed report into the impact of toxic gases produced during the fire on residents of the tower who perished in the blaze.

He said that during the first 30 to 45 minutes of the fire the plastic in the cladding panels, insulation and window frames provided the majority of the fuel.

“The mixed toxic smoke products from approximately five kilograms of these materials was sufficient to produce dense, lethal smoke conditions in a flat,” he wrote.

“Once fire penetrated into any flat, the burning structural and contents materials caused a rapid development of lethal smoke conditions.”


READ MORE

Celotex investigating Panorama allegations ‘as a matter of urgency’Celotex investigating Panorama allegations ‘as a matter of urgency’
Four things we learned from the Grenfell survivors’ inquiry evidenceFour things we learned from the Grenfell survivors’ inquiry evidence
Government fire expert recommends continued use of combustible insulation on high risesGovernment fire expert recommends continued use of combustible insulation on high rises
Grenfell insulation firm ‘intentionally, dishonestly’ secured certificate saying product could be used on tall buildingsGrenfell insulation firm ‘intentionally, dishonestly’ secured certificate saying product could be used on tall buildings
Grenfell Tower Inquiry phase two preview: the testing and certification of materialsGrenfell Tower Inquiry phase two preview: the testing and certification of materials

He said that during the early stages of the fire “the main source of smoke particulates, carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide” is likely to have been the polyisocyanurate insulation burning outside the flats, and similar products in the windows.

The insulation was Celotex RS5000, which had been a popular insulation product before its suspension from sale after Grenfell and remains in common use on buildings across the UK.

“The contribution from each of the major products individually is sufficient to produce dense toxic smoke within the flat and adjacent lobby within a few minutes,” he wrote.

“But in practice the contributions from each burning item are summed as they penetrate into the flat, further increasing the concentrations of irritant smoke and toxic gases. On this basis, I consider that the toxic smoke and gases penetrating a flat during the minutes before the flat contents become significantly involved are sufficient to present a substantial hazard.”

He said that if just 5% of the smoke from the burning insulation entered the flats, it would be enough to render residents unconscious in between two and 25 minutes. If just 1% of the toxic smoke entered flats, residents would collapse within 40 minutes.

Professor Purser explained that residents in flat numbers ending in six were the first to flee the fire – as the floors had the same numbering pattern and these homes were directly above the origin of the blaze in flat 16.

Most of these residents survived – with the exception of two residents who sought refuge in another flat on the 23rd floor.

During the first 35 minutes of the fire (from 00.55am to around 1.30am), it would have been possible to evacuate the tower safely. He estimated that despite the narrow staircase, all 293 residents could have escaped in around seven minutes.

However, he said that as ‘flat 6’ residents were forced to flee, the internal lobbies and eventually the staircase of the tower filled with “dense, black irritant smoke”.

“Some flat 6 occupants have stated that the self-closing mechanisms on their flat doors did not work, so that the doors remained open unless deliberately closed. Several flat 6 occupants stated that they closed their flat doors before they left. These lobbies still filled quite quickly with dense smoke over a period of minutes,” he wrote.

“This smoke is likely to have also originated mainly from flat 6 on each floor, leaking into the lobby around the flat entrance doors and any other leakage paths.”

He said toxicology reports from victims point to inhalation of smoke, with carbon monoxide poisoning identified as the main cause of death.

The inquiry continues.

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry

Closing statements

 

Day 85: victims' lawyers attack the fire brigade

 

Further expert evidence

Including some additional evidence from emergency call handlers, bereaved and relatives

 

Day 84: further evidence from survivors and relatives

Day 83: swift evacuation of tower possible if residents alerted

Day 82: initial fire was extinguished but then returned to the flat

Day 81: overheating fridge-freezer most likely cause of fire

Day 80: fire doors installed did not match product tested

Day 79: resident advised to stay put despite fire in flat

Day 78: insulation and cladding material below required standard

Day 77: molten plastic spread blaze down tower

Day 76: 'stay put' should be dropped when fire spreads across floors

 

Other witness evidence

Police, ambulance, gas suppliers, council, TMO and call room operators give evidence

 

Day 75: call room operators give evidence

Day 74: further evidence from TMO officers

Day 73: TMO boss failed to pass information to firefighters

Day 72: fire finally extinguished when gas switched off

Day 71: further questions over stay put advice

Day 70: the police evidence

 

The bereaved, survivors and relatives’ evidence

 

Day 69: video shows smoke billowing through fire door

Day 68: KCTMO removed self closing mechanism and never replaced it

Day 67: gaps in cladding fixed with duct tape

Day 66: 'don't fix broken system with a sticking plaster'

Day 65: survivor dragged disabled man down nine floors to safety

Day 64: KCTMO 'did not replace broken fire door'

Day 63: foam insulation inside cladding 'exposed' says survivor

Day 62: father gives harrowing account of son's death

Day 61: council’s management organisation slammed for faulty electrics

Day 60: stay put advice ‘led to deaths’, residents say

Day 59: residents describe problems with new windows

Day 58: survivor describes how daughter saved his life

Day 57: firefighter evidence ‘a slap in the face’, says survivor

Day 56: relations with contractor were ‘toxic’

Day 55: resident 'never happy' with stay-put advice

Day 54: tenant gives evidence about housing association

Day 53: stay put advice 'felt like trap'

Day 52: resident saved by son's phone call

 

The firefighters’ evidence

 

Day 51: firefighter feared encouraging residents to jump

Day 50: the LFB commissioner

Day 49: fire chief reveals frustration over lack of building plans

Day 48: internal fire spread 'bigger story' than cladding

Day 47: fire officer considered evacuating crews over building collapse fears

Day 46: 'we were improvising' senior firefighter admits

Day 45: firefighter urged for abandonment of 'stay put' policy

Day 44: firefighter recalls radio signal difficulties

Day 43: call hander 'uncomfortable' with insisting residents stay put

Day 42: residents only told to leave if they called fire brigade back

Day 41: breathing equipment delay 'hampered rescues on upper floors'

Day 40: chiefs told firefighters to abandon policy

Day 39: firefighters reveal dramatic rescue of children

Day 38: firefighters issue aplogies to families

Day 37: council 'unable to provide tower plans'

Day 36: QC defends inquiry process

Day 35: Javid would welcome interim recommendations

Day 34: water from hose 'too weak' to reach the flames

Day 33: 'oh my god, we've been telling people to stay put'

Day 32: further fire fighter describes lack of equipment and low water pressure

Day 31: 'incredibly difficult' task of recording information outlined

Day 30: struggle to maintain control over rescue operation described

Day 29: fire service 'overwhelmed' by survival guidance calls

Day 28: 'the building beat us'

Day 27: firefighters 'forced to abandon plans to reach roof'

Day 26: poor signage hindered rescue efforts

Day 25: water pressure left firefighting equipment 'like garden hose'

Day 24: decision to abandon 'stay put' explored

Day 23: TV images 'could have assissted' rescue effort

Day 22: description of hectic scenes in the control centre

Day 21: account from the fire service 'nerve centre'

Day 20: firefighter describes 'huge volume' of calls from trapped residents

Day 19: firefighter 'given no training on cladding fires'

Day 18: evacuation would have been 'huge catastrophe'

Day 17: firefighters describe access and lift issues

Day 16: scenes of carnage likened to 9/11

Day 15: firefighters recount trauma of survival guidance calls

Day 14: firefighters describe spread of blaze

Day 13: firefighters recall radio difficulties

Day 12: "it was like a war zone"

Day 11: questions raised over fire fighters' radios

Day 10: watch manager emotional under questioning

Day nine: lead firefighter 'not trained in stay put policy'

 

The expert reports: authors give evidence to inquiry

 

Day eight: where the fire started

Day seven: what was in the cladding?

Day six: the cause and spread of the fire

Day five: expert highlights key issues

Day four: firefighters defend response to fire

Day three: council and contractors appear for the first time

Day two: lawyers for the survivors make their case

Day one: expert evidence released on cladding and stay put

 

The commemoration hearings

 

30 May: Grenfell Council 'recognised it should not house disabled victim above four storeys'

29 May: Anger on day six of the Grenfell Inquiry

25 May: Grenfell families 'forced to live in chimney with stay put policy'

24 May: Grenfell family complained about father being housed on 17th floor

23 May: Tributes to children on third day of Grenfell hearings

22 May: Emotions run high as Grenfell bereaved shown footage of the tower burning

21 May: Grenfell victims share tributes as inquiry opens

 

Never Again campaign

Never Again campaign

In the days following the Grenfell Tower fire on 14 June 2017, Inside Housing launched the Never Again campaign to call for immediate action to implement the learning from the Lakanal House fire, and a commitment to act – without delay – on learning from the Grenfell Tower tragedy as it becomes available.

One year on, we have extended the campaign asks in the light of information that has emerged since.

Here are our updated asks:

GOVERNMENT

  • Act on the recommendations from Dame Judith Hackitt’s review of building regulations to tower blocks of 18m and higher. Commit to producing a timetable for implementation by autumn 2018, setting out how recommendations that don’t require legislative change can be taken forward without delay
  • Follow through on commitments to fully ban combustible materials on high-rise buildings
  • Unequivocally ban desktop studies
  • Review recommendations and advice given to ministers after the Lakanal House fire and implement necessary changes
  • Publish details of all tower blocks with dangerous cladding, insulation and/or external panels and commit to a timeline for remedial works. Provide necessary guidance to landlords to ensure that removal work can begin on all affected private and social residential blocks by the end of 2018. Complete quarterly follow-up checks to ensure that remedial work is completed to the required standard. Checks should not cease until all work is completed.
  • Stand by the prime minister’s commitment to fully fund the removal of dangerous cladding
  • Fund the retrofitting of sprinkler systems in all tower blocks across the UK (except where there are specific structural reasons not to do so)
  • Explore options for requiring remedial works on affected private sector residential tower blocks

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

  • Take immediate action to identify privately owned residential tower blocks so that cladding and external panels can be checked

LANDLORDS

  • Publish details of the combinations of insulations and cladding materials for all high rise blocks
  • Commit to ensuring that removal work begins on all blocks with dangerous materials by the end of 2018 upon receipt of guidance from government
  • Publish current fire risk assessments for all high rise blocks (the Information Commissioner has required councils to publish and recommended that housing associations should do the same). Work with peers to share learning from assessments and improve and clarify the risk assessment model.
  • Commit to renewing assessments annually and after major repair or cladding work is carried out. Ensure assessments consider the external features of blocks. Always use an appropriate, qualified expert to conduct assessments.
  • Review and update evacuation policies and ‘stay put’ advice in the light of risk assessments, and communicate clearly to residents
  • Adopt Dame Judith Hackitt’s recommended approach for listening to and addressing tenants’ concerns, with immediate effect

CURRENT SIGNATORIES:

  • Chartered Institute of Housing
  • G15
  • National Federation of ALMOs
  • National Housing Federation
  • Placeshapers

 

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Add New Comment
You must be logged in to comment.
RELATED STORIES