It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Deadly London Tower Fire Fueled By ‘Green Energy’ Rules

page: 1
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Disturbing, if true.

People are amazed at how this fire spread to engulf this huge building so very quickly.

Now it appears that experts are blaming the government-mandated exterior insulation cladding, which served to create a 'chimney effect' expanding the deadly fire at an exponentially increased rate...no doubt, resulting in many more deaths than would normally have been the case, had the 'Green Energy'Rules' NOT been required for this structure.

More alarming, still, is the fact that there are up to 30,000 other buildings in the UK, similarly outfitted/retrofitted with this cladding.

Some government heads need to roll (figuratively, speaking).



London’s Grenfell Tower was made worse by government “green energy requirements” that allowed fire to rapidly engulf the building Wednesday, leaving at least 17 people dead and scores more wounded or missing.

While it’s unknown what sparked the fire, experts say that the cladding, or exterior insulation, created a chimney effect through which the fire rapidly spread upwards. The cladding was added to Grenfell’s exterior in 2015 as part of a $12.8 million retrofit.




The Telegraph noted that cladding “is used as an insulation to make buildings more sustainable to meet green energy requirements.” Some 30,000 buildings in the U.K. have been retrofitted with cladding to cheaply comply with green energy mandates.

Grenfell Tower became more energy efficient, but the space between the cladding and the building increased the potential damage from fires, leaving hundreds of residents at the fire’s mercy.

“There were explosions everywhere you looked, lots of bangs, blue gas coming out everywhere you looked,” Mickey Paramasivan told The Telegraph.

FULL ARTICLE:
dailycaller.com...
edit on 16-6-2017 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

This is what happens when you throw money at a problem before thinking it through. They have all these billions of 'green dollars' and they have to spend them on something. If this is true; I hope they will put a little more thought into their next green energy scam.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
It wasn't green energy rules that lead to this cladding being fitted.


According to the people in the block the cladding was mostly fitted to make it look more attractive on the eye for the rich people who had views of the place.


The green energy insulation cladding has much more stringent fire safety regulations than whatever this stuff was they used.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 01:30 PM
link   
It doesn't sound to me like the policy is at fault. What's at fault is whoever decided to use the cladding to meet the policy requirements. The article kept referring to the cladding a cheap method. Whoever made that decision shouldn't have went the cheap route.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 01:31 PM
link   
That stuff just made the building a big chimney.
Can't believe nobody thought about that.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 01:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Painterz

It wasn't green energy rules that lead to this cladding being fitted.

According to the people in the block the cladding was mostly fitted to make it look more attractive on the eye for the rich people who had views of the place.

Ok.

What about the other 29,999 buildings?
edit on 6/16/17 by NthOther because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 01:37 PM
link   
The likelihood of anyone being held accountable for this?
If this is the case.
Que the "good intentions excuses" in 3...2...



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 01:37 PM
link   
It will be interesting to find out who received these retrofit contracts and their links to government officials.




edit on 16-6-2017 by Deny Arrogance because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Word is the fire was also started by one of those eco friendly/energy efficient propane fridges. Kind of reminds me of those government mandated "eco friendly" CFL light bulbs that contain dangerous levels of mercury.

The climate wizards have gone mad.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Konduit

Human beings are expendable in the global climate programme. In fact, human beings are the problem.

Maybe we should just look at this as population control.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
That stuff just made the building a big chimney.
Can't believe nobody thought about that.


Nobody has fires or fireboxes in their homes any more - green energy rules. In many homes, the fireplaces are bricked up, plastered and wallpapered over because it is a smoke free zone.

For anyone familiar with a firefox, you need three things; a fire box, where the combustible materials are placed (fire blocks, paper, kindling, twigs, branches, logs - in that order), a chimney for the smoke to go (the suction of the rising hot air and smoke going through a pipe creates a vacuum which draws in air at the bottom), and air vents (narrow holes underneath the fire which allow fresh oxygen to be drawn in - the narrow opening helps speed up the air and accelerate the fire.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Sadly, this came down to cost. The type of cladding used on the building is actually banned in the US and in Europe, but allowed under British rules.

It transpires the council rejected the use of fire resistant cladding to save £2 ($3.50) per square metre - a total saving of £5000 on the whole block.

Source : Th e Independent



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 02:56 PM
link   
N/M
Such a shame.😑
edit on 16-6-2017 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Insulation isn't bad... unless you don't engineer it right to be safe. So, I'd say it's about the lack of thought put into adding the insulation, not that it's a bad idea to insulate buildings so they are more efficient with energy.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Seems more like they tried to save £5000 on the cheaper cladding

edit on 16-6-2017 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: violet
Seems more like they tried to save £5000 on the cheaper cladding


Yup £5000, out of 12 million. Absolutely disgusting. Heads will roll for this.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Taggart

originally posted by: violet
Seems more like they tried to save £5000 on the cheaper cladding


Yup £5000, out of 12 million. Absolutely disgusting. Heads will roll for this.


As they should.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Taggart
Yup £5000, out of 12 million. Absolutely disgusting. Heads will roll for this.


IF the cladding is NOT restricted by the Fire Code, heads will not and should not roll. Under the law there is nothing wrong. It is the Fire Code that needs changed.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:04 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

When you also consider that adding sprinklers to the whole building was estimated to cost £265,000 - it also seems incredible this wasn't added when doing a £12m referb.

Even if you excuse missing these items as they are not required by the fire code for a referb - having a fire alarm system that did not work, along with a gas main running in the one and only main stairwell and alarm sounders that could not be heard in flats is absolutely inexcusable.

The residents committee themselves had been complaining of these issues since 2013 yet their concerns were brushed aside.

Heads really should roll - and the government has a lot to answer for as well having sat on a fire safety report since 2009 which went into great detail about how this type of cladding could cause rapid fire spread.

We had £300 million to upgrade the fire alarm at Buckingham Palace, but did not have the money to update council owned tower blocks to bring them up to the recommended code...

There have been several fires of this type in the UK - sadly, it has taken a very high profile block in the richest borough of London and a tragic loss of lives to finally get the government to look at the report.

This is the same report incidentally that Boris Johnson clashed with Londons chief fire officer over - telling the chief fire officer to 'get stuffed' as the Lakanal tower fire in 2009 would be a 'one off set of circumstances'...



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

So, crazy regulations have caused deaths, all in the name of "saving the environment"?

The rally sick thing is, some environmental types would say that was justified. Many seem to feel human life has less value than anything else. No fingers pointed at anyone here, but have read comments elsewhere that made their opinions clear on the matter.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join