Europe recently experienced its most deadly fire in decades in the twenty-four-story building Grenfell Tower in London, where dozens are assumed dead and the authorities fear the figure could rise above one hundred people.
The fire has raised some questions and concerns. It spread so explosively that in a matter of minutes the whole building was ablaze. How could that happen in a modern high-rise made mostly of concrete and steel? The culprit could be climate policies.
Last year, Grenfell Tower was refurbished to, among other things, fulfill environmental and climate standards. From The Sun:
Panels designed to improve energy efficiency were fitted to the block in a £9million refurb completed in May last year, ordered by the firm who manages the tower.
But they were filled with foam insulation that “went up like matchsticks” in the blaze.
Yet use of the materials is entirely legal and complies with all current building regulations.
And experts say the cladding now covers thousands of homes and offices across Britain.
The sub-contractors who carried out the work said the panels are a commonly used product and they did not manufacture them.
According to the Guardian, Dr Jim Glockling, Technical Director of the Fire Protection Association, said they had been lobbying the Government for years to review the safety of combustible materials on the outside of buildings. “It could be that this is the quest for sustainability trumping other concerns,” Dr Glocking warned.
In polemic terms, these fire victims could be casualties of the globalist elite’s war to save polar bears and glaciers. That may seem like an undue connection, but the fact is that global warming policies are causing real losses and suffering across the globe today.
The think-tank Copenhagen Consensus has gathered some of the world’s leading scientists and economists to make a list of investments and rank them according to the amount of good and alleviation of suffering they provide. Combatting climate change gives a disastrously low return on investment compared to other more pertinent needs. Here is a list of the top sixteen worthy investments in descending order:
Notice how refurbishing of old buildings with energy efficient panels is not on that list. Others have pointed out that the building did not have a shared fire alarm or a sprinkler system, both of which would have likely saved many, if not most.
In other words, when refurbishing the building, rather than spending money on a sprinkler system and a fire alarm they had to spend nine million pounds on saving polar bears instead.