{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.010833880499015102, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0013131976362442547, 'mean_word_length': 4.905038759689923, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Editorial: Lighting in life-threatening situations

The fire in the 24 storey Grenfell Tower in London in which at least 80 people died has made me think about the role of lighting in life-threatening situations. So far, the reporting of the fire has concentrated on the reasons for the rapid spread of the fire up the outside of the building via the external cladding and the wisdom of the advice to the occupants to stay in their flats but the public inquiry now being set up will eventually turn its attention to the performance of the normal stairwell lighting and/or the emergency lighting in helping people escape. Questions such as did the lighting work as designed; did it work at all and was it effective in smoke will be asked? Then questions about the state of the lighting installation will be asked such as when was the whole emergency lighting installation last tested; what maintenance has been carried out on the lighting of the stairwell and so on? Certainly, the standards and guidance applicable to both normal and emergency lighting in high-rise buildings are going to come under scrutiny and those responsible for the design, installation and maintenance of the lighting in Grenfell Tower will have some questions to answer. Another aspect of the Grenfell Tower fire that has been revealed is that similar fires involving external cladding have occurred in the UK and in several other countries yet these seem to have had little effect on practice. Is this because there is no convenient mechanism for sharing experiences? Such events as the Grenfell Tower fire are mercifully very rare which means information about what happened when they do occur needs to be shared at an international level. For lighting, the CIE is the obvious forum for such exchanges but its reputation for delay counts against it. Fortunately, with modern communications an international body is not essential to collect and review international information. What is essential is that whatever organization collects the information has the status and recognition to be able to access information from different countries and to command support for its recommendations. Around the world, there are a number of groups having these characteristics ranging from professional bodies through universities to government laboratories. It would be good to see one of them accept the role of international clearing house for information on the role of lighting in life threatening situations. More generally, lighting for emergencies is a subject of little interest until some disaster occurs. It is then that the differences between the world of standards and procedures and the real world are exposed. It is only after a disaster when standards and procedures have been found wanting that a fundamental review occurs. The Grenfell Tower fire is such a disaster. Whether or not the lighting fulfilled its role has yet to be determined but if it is found wanting a fundamental review of the role of lighting in life-threatening situations should be undertaken.