Reader's response (Final draft)

In the article, “Use of cladding buildings here have grown in recent times: Experts,” Mokhtar (2017) reports the opinions of experts regarding the usage of cladding in midst of the Grenfell Tower fire incident, which took the lives of many. “Engineering experts” claims that cladding reinforces the aesthetics and durability of the building. On the other hand, cladding potentially extends as a fire hazard. Furthermore, different climates require different cladding methods. Here in Singapore, the cladding procedure has standards to ensure fire safety by the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF). While it is true that cladding poses a potential fire hazard, with strict government standards cladding can be safe.

Blazes due to cladding are almost always due to cutting costs and the lack of strict regulations. According to Booth (2017), despite the multiple inspections of the Grenfell Tower during construction by council officials, the flammable material was still applied onto the tower. In addition, the council substituted a cheaper alternative to save costs. In another article by Toscano and Spooner (2015), A fire broke out in Lacrosse building caused by “combustible construction materials” due to cladding was not regulated properly as stated by chief fire officer Peter Rau, that the cladding material was unable to avoid the spread of fire that is compulsory by the building code. The lack of strict cladding regulations by the council/ government for both the Grenfell Tower and Lacrosse building fire were both contributing factors to the fast-spreading blaze.

In Singapore, where strict building regulations are enforced, huge fires are rare. In an article by Ong (2017), an SCDF spokesperson states that strict safety construction standards include the dismissal of flammable materials used for cladding and annual cladding tests. Also, engineers and architects have to submit their building plans to SCDF for endorsement. These regulations and supervision by the SCDF contribute towards Singapore having one of the lowest numbers of fire fatalities in the world. After the Grenfell Tower fire, building regulations in the UK were reviewed once more as stated in an article by Walker (2017). It was then discovered that many buildings contained the same unsafe material used in Grenfell Tower, which proves that government regulations in the UK are not stringent enough - before which if implemented, may have prevented the Grenfell Tower fire to have spread upward so fast.

That being said, no matter how strict government regulations are, cladding is inherently a potential fire threat. In an article by Boult (2017), experts state that the extra cladding layer acts as a “chimney” for flames to spread upwards through the cavity between the cladding layer and the building’s framework. Even with non-flammable cladding materials, the nature of cladding still poses a threat for a fire to spread upward quickly. However, the threat can be managed by using non-flammable cladding materials to prevent the spread of fire.

In conclusion, cladding itself is a fire threat. However, with stringent regulations over the use of materials in buildings and construction supervision by governments, the fire threat of cladding can be minimized. While there will be people who disagree with this viewpoint due to the inherent danger cladding poses, it has been shown repeatedly that weak cladding regulations are always present in fire cladding related accidents. As displayed by Singapore's low fire fatality, it is evident that by imposing strict regulations and supervision, cladding can be less of a fire threat.

References

Booth, R. (2017, July 14). Flammable Grenfell Tower cladding 'passed' by council officer in 2015. Retrieved September 30, 2017, from https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/14/grenfell-tower-cladding-passed-by-council-officers-in-2015

Boult, A. (2017, June 16). What is cladding, and why can it be a fire risk? Retrieved September 30, 2017, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/cladding-fire-risk-grenfell-tower/

Ong, J. (2017, June 18). Guarding against a Grenfell-like disaster in Singapore. Retrieved September 30, 2017, from http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/guarding-against-a-grenfell-like-disaster-in-singapore-8985482

Tascano, N. & Spooner, R.(2017, April 28). Docklands apartment tower fire fuelled by material in building's walls, says MFB. Retrieved September 30, 2017, from http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/docklands-apartment-tower-fire-fuelled-by-material-in-buildings-walls-says-mfb-20150427-1mukhx.html

Walker, P. (2017, July 28). Building regulations to be reviewed after safety tests following Grenfell. Retrieved September 30, 2017, from https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/28/government-announces-independent-review-building-regulations-grenfell-tower-fire

Edited 1^st October 2017

       Edited 2^nd October 2017

       Edited 5^th October 2017
Edited 23^rd October 2017