Impact case study database

Addressing policy makers in the EU

In June 2015 Hull summarised the University of Central Lancashire’s work on the need to quantify smoke toxicity at a meeting in the European Parliament. The participants included MEPs and Mr Gwenole Cozigou, the Director from the European Commission's Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (DG Grow) responsible for Construction Product Regulation (CPR). In January 2016 Hull was one of 30 scientists selected from over 300 for the Scientist-MEP pairing scheme, where he discussed the issue of smoke toxicity on a one-to-one basis with 12 MEPs and their researchers [A]. In March 2016, Mr Cozigou was an invited speaker at an international symposium on Fire Toxicity, organised by the University of Central Lancashire where, in front of 150 experts, he announced the launch of a study considering regulation of smoke toxicity of construction products. The study was limited to a pre-selected group of contractors, and the project started in December 2016. Hull was the only academic, amongst predominantly industry and trade association representatives, on the project steering group. During the study, but after the Grenfell Tower fire, Reuters reported that the study would not recommend regulation amid concerns that regulation “could increase product costs and potentially remove some products from the market.” [B]. Between September 6-7th 2017, Stec and Hull explained the Grenfell tragedy to a further 15 MEPs. The following week, the European Parliament had an hour-long debate on fire safety. Of the 25 MEPs who spoke, over 20 said that the European Commission needed to regulate smoke toxicity of construction products. Baron Khan of Burnley, then MEP for North West England, met with Hull and Stec before contributing to the European Parliament debate on fire safety in buildings. He said, “…that while fire toxicity in trains, planes and ships is regulated, there is a real lack of regulation in the construction sector. Renovation works at Grenfell were inspected 16 times by the local authority, showing current rules simply aren’t fit for purpose.” [C]. The Commission recognised that much more work was needed in fire safety of buildings and responded by announcing the Fire Information Exchange Platform (FIEP) to address these issues. The EC Smoke Toxicity study was finally published in January 2018 and concluded on page 101 that “regulation of smoke in general, including toxic smoke, leaking into or being generated in areas that are considered to be safe zones and / or escape routes need to be considered in new or amended existing regulations.” [D] However, with the ongoing review of the Construction Product Regulation, how to enact this proposal is still under consideration.

Raising awareness of the risk of smoke toxicity following the Grenfell Tower fire

On the 14th June 2017, the recently refurbished Grenfell Tower was engulfed in flames spreading around its external façade, leading to the deaths of 72 residents. In the aftermath, Hull described his relevant 2011 study showing the very high toxicity of burning insulation material that had been used on the Tower [6] on BBC’s Newsnight, Radio 4’s World at One, ITV, Channel 4 and Sky News [E]. Hull’s research was also reported in over 20 national newspapers. He explained that a 1 kg (50 cm x 50 cm) piece of polyisocyanurate (PIR) insulation was sufficient to fill an entire apartment with toxic fumes of carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide when burning, and, as Planning and Building Control Today reported, the government had no regulations to control it [F]. Hull’s work with the media after the Grenfell tragedy highlighted the importance of the combustible insulation in the disaster, and particularly the high toxicity of burning PIR insulation, alongside reports that several survivors had been treated for cyanide poisoning [E]. This led to a general recognition that smoke toxicity, rather than burns, had led to much of the tragic loss of life. As a consequence, the world-leading specialist in fire toxicity, Professor David Purser, was invited to join the team of expert witnesses to the Grenfell Inquiry in May 2018, followed by Stec as an expert in fire toxicity, in September 2018. [G]

Informing policy makers in the UK

Our high-profile media activity around the Grenfell Tower fire was followed by invitations to present our research to the UK’s Parliamentary and Scientific Committee, an All-Party Parliamentary Group, at the Houses of Parliament in September 2017. This was followed by two presentations to the All-Party Parliamentary Fire Safety and Rescue Group. Stec was invited to join Dame Judith Hackitt’s Review of Building Fire Safety Regulations, Working Group 6, Products and Classifications, which recommended including smoke toxicity in the Building Regulations [H]. The results were also presented to the Royal Institute for British Architecture Expert Group on Fire Safety who then presented their conclusions to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Communities, Housing and Local Government [J]. Between December 2018 and March 2019, a Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) consultation document on the review of Approved Document B (Fire Safety) [I] had four questions on the incorporation of smoke toxicity into the UK's fire regulations. The University of Central Lancashire’s response to the consultation in a letter to MHCLG included urging ‘the government to review the existing guidelines on smoke, including the major hazard of its acute toxicity and the longer term toxicity of fire smoke and residue.’ The conclusion of the consultation was that a discrete research programme was needed to address smoke and toxicity [K]. In May 2020 MHCLG released a tender for research to underpin smoke toxicity regulation in England. This provided GBP605,000 funding, for a three-year partly experimental project to assess the need and methodology for assessing smoke toxicity of construction products, awarded in September 2020 to a consortium led by OFR Consultants.