08-11-2018, 09:22 AM
Based on my admittedly incomplete internet research, the point to be made about the Grenfell tragedy is that the exterior cladding greatly contributed to the spread of the fire. This cladding material incorporated a petroleum-based insulation and put simply it was pretty darn flammable. Here's the tie-in with asbestos: the flammable cladding was a replacement for the original asbestos based material that was removed because 'asbestos'. Lots of people died because they breathed in burning petroleum based insulation or other fire related cause that the rapidly burning petroleum based insulation aggravated. Given the choice and an impartial assessment of the respective risks, most if not all of them would probably have opted to take their chances with the asbestos which depending on the nature of the material might never have posed an exposure risk and would definitely not have contributed to the spread of the fire.
In the case of the Grenfell, it literally is the case that 'the asbestos wouldn't have burned' rather than the idea that asbestos would protect against fire. The asbestos replacement was the fire.
In the case of the Grenfell, it literally is the case that 'the asbestos wouldn't have burned' rather than the idea that asbestos would protect against fire. The asbestos replacement was the fire.