Tweet

Tom Roche, Secretary of the Business Sprinkler Alliance

 With the clock ticking on net zero, the built environment is under increasing pressure to make its buildings low carbon and more resilient. But despite investments in the energy efficiency of buildings, the UN has indicated the built environment is not on track to decarbonise by 2050, and in 2021 was responsible for 37% of the world’s CO2 output.¹ Clearly, the sector must act now to meet its sustainable development goals. But as we continue on this net zero journey through the use of sustainable building materials and practices, we need to question whether these sustainable design features will lead to unexpected fire hazards or an increase in fire risk. Fire incidents are a part of the built environment and fire safety should be at the front end as a holistic part of the design process. When a building is not designed or built to withstand potentially catastrophic risks such as fire, it can nullify the benefits gained from sustainable construction.

Green buildings have energy and environmental benefits through the use of sustainable materials, systems or features and may well be recognised and awarded by Green rating systems. However, sustainable design is relatively new and can include unconventional materials and hybrid forms of construction that have not been proven over time. This can increase risk due to the lack of comprehensive understanding of fire performance. You only have to look at the devastating consequences of a fire to realise that a building’s sustainability does not account for its immunity to fire.  In January 2021, a fire that destroyed a prized motorcycle museum in Austria, one that was lauded for its green credentials, was a stark reminder of the vulnerability of buildings where safety and resilience has not matched the pursuit of sustainability. A similar structure in England, the Carbon Neutral Laboratory in Nottingham, suffered a similar fate. It too was largely complete and built with excellent sustainability credentials, but then destroyed by fire. The timber construction was lauded for its sustainability credits, but it meant the building was vulnerable to such a fire, especially as the building did not have active fire protection.

When the Carbon Neutral Laboratory in Nottingham was rebuilt in line with regulations using the same design principle and materials as before, the contractor Morgan Sindall, said it is “indistinguishable” from the previous building. There was no increase in fire resilience and no active fire protection.

The very same building went on to win the ‘Sustainability Project of the Year’ at the annual Building Awards. Organised by Building Magazine, the awards recognise the best of the industry with the rebuilt laboratory praised for its sustainability credentials and carbon savings. The original fire was consigned to history and had no bearing on the claims for the efficiency and carbon neutral credentials.

Green project destroyed

One has to question why a ‘Sustainability Project of the Year’ is a project that burnt completely to the ground and then needed to be rebuilt; a building fire that could be seen for miles; a building fire that required over 60 firefighters to tackle and use thousands of litres of water to quell; a building that required what was left of the structure to be removed and would need to be disposed of by specialist contractors; a building that required materials to be procured again, shipped to site again and erected by scores of contractors…again.

It raises the question of how sustainable such a project can be over its life when one considers the impact of fire; how the issue of fire could be addressed and whether fire should be more of a factor in that measure of sustainability. So how can this be? It is simple. None of the metrics that define prized sustainability awards consider fire or its impact. A building that burns to the ground and needs to be rebuilt does not incur any penalty in these schemes. Fire is simply an issue that is either not covered or has minimal impact in those scoring schemes or it would seem in the judging panels for sustainability ratings and prizes.

Another fire that made headlines occurred at the Premier Inn in Bristol in 2019. Despite the efforts of 60 firefighters who fought the blaze, the unsprinklered hotel was largely destroyed. The event disrupted local roads, businesses and stretched resources. The rebuilt hotel was completed in 2021 and has a BREEAM ‘very good’ rating by achieving more than a 40 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions over and above the standards set in prior Building Regulations. There is no mention of the environmental cost or how the CO2 emissions balance the impact of the previous devastating fire event. Sadly, automatic sprinklers were not installed in the rebuilt hotel to aid with resilience to fire.

When you look at the devasting consequences of fire, you begin to realise that a building’s sustainability does not account for its immunity to fire. Fire is a likely event in the life of any building. It has an undeniable impact on sustainability as this event shows through its economic, environmental and social impact on the community. A fire event can be designed for and limited to prevent large costly fires through a combination of strategies. It is an event in the life of a building that claims of such sustainability should anticipate.

One of the most effective methods to defend against such fires is the use of sprinkler systems which contain and control fires before the fire and rescue service arrives. Whether you are building an office or hotel, a warehouse or industrial facility, the consideration of automatic sprinklers as a key part of the fire strategy at the earliest stages of the design process will enable stakeholders to defend their asset in terms of its long-term sustainability and value.

The aspects of fire safety are noted as being covered separately by Building Regulations – the same Building Regulations which are currently under review. We expect buildings to have lifespans of 30 to 50 years – a period in which it would not be unreasonable to expect a fire event to occur. Isn’t it time that we also reviewed how we define sustainability and considered fire as part of this given such factors? If we are going to successfully green our buildings, fire safety and sustainability must go hand-in-hand.

For more information about the Business Sprinkler Alliance visit www.business-sprinkler-alliance.org