Our highlights from the SFPE European Conference & Expo

Earlier this year, two of our team attended the SFPE European Conference and Expo in Edinburgh, an event that brought together fire engineers, researchers, policymakers and industry leaders to explore what’s next for fire safety.

In this article, we’re sharing a few of the key themes that resonated with us, from professional identity and accountability to emerging risks around lithium-ion batteries and timber construction.

 

What kind of Fire Engineer are you?

One of the most thought-provoking sessions came from Professor Luke Bisby of the University of Edinburgh, whose keynote was titled “Michelin Stars and Golden Arches.”

He posed a compelling question: Are you a McDonald’s line cook, or a Michelin-star chef?

At first glance, it’s an unusual comparison. But the analogy explores two different approaches to fire engineering. The McDonald’s model represents prescriptive design and like a standardised recipe, it’s repeatable, consistent, and follows a set of established rules. Think Approved Documents, BS 9999, BS 9991 and other guidance: frameworks that deliver safe outcomes across a wide range of scenarios.

The Michelin-star model, by contrast, represents performance-based fire engineering, relying on critical thinking, sound judgement, and professional experience to tailor solutions for more complex challenges.

Professor Bisby’s talk encouraged reflection on where each model fits, and how our systems can best support engineers in making informed, accountable decisions – especially when moving beyond the prescriptive route.

 

Is Fire Engineering really a profession?

Another session raised important questions around professional recognition. In the UK today, fire engineering is not a legally protected title – meaning that, in theory, anyone can claim to be a fire engineer, regardless of qualifications or experience.

This lack of formal definition creates challenges, particularly when it comes to accountability. The consequences of that ambiguity have contributed to tragedies like Grenfell, where questions around responsibility have had devastating implications.

Professor Bisby outlined a choice now facing the profession:

• Return to more prescriptive design, reducing the reliance on the individuals
• Or take steps to define, regulate and protect the role of the fire engineer, supporting competent professionals to deliver performance-based solutions with clear accountability

The Hackitt Review supports the latter, recommending statutory registration and legally defined responsibilities. It’s a significant shift but one that many across the industry view as an important step towards stronger public trust and better safety outcomes.

 

Lithium-ion batteries

Lithium-ion battery fires were a key focus at the conference, particularly in the context of EVs, battery storage, and micromobility devices.

These batteries present unique fire risks. When thermal runaway occurs, it can lead to rapid escalation, venting of gases, and even re-ignition after it appears extinguished.

Detection, suppression, and containment strategies are still evolving. What works for an e-scooter may not work to a full-scale EV charging hub in a basement car park, and at present, there’s no single guidance document covering all the scenarios.

As a result, performance-based thinking and engineering judgement play a crucial role in managing these risks. At BB7, we’re increasingly supporting clients with lithium-ion battery safety strategies, from car park retrofits to residential energy storage. Insurers are also showing a growing interest in how these risks are mitigated, which may influence both project delivery and insurance terms moving forward.

This is a fast-developing area, and the conference provided a valuable opportunity to have these conversations and align thinking across disciplines.

 

Building in timber

Mass timber, particularly cross-laminated timber (CLT), is gaining momentum as a sustainable and visually appealing construction material.

However, as fire engineers, it’s important we recognise the fire safety implications as well as the benefits.

Several sessions at the conference explored how timber behaves in fire, including structural integrity, charring behaviour, and the risk of delamination. Encapsulation methods (such as plasterboard) can provide protection, but their effectiveness depends on remaining intact during a fire. In real-world scenarios, we know linings may be compromised.

There’s also a recognised gap in large-scale research. Much of the current data is drawn from small compartment tests, rather than full-building scenarios involving multiple fire compartments.

Until the research base expands, these uncertainties need to be managed with transparency and care. Our structural fire engineering team supports clients in developing strategies that acknowledge these challenges, whether through enhanced detection and suppression or by exploring alternative materials where appropriate.

Timber is likely to play an increasing role in the built environment. Our focus is on helping it do so, safely and responsibly.

 

Looking ahead

The SFPE European Conference was a timely reminder that fire engineering is going through a transition. From professional identity to new materials and technologies, it’s clear that a rules-only approach won’t always provide the answers.

As engineers, we must combine our technical excellence with good judgement to create safe, sustainable buildings fit for the future.

At BB7, we’re actively contributing to these conversations, from collaborating with universities to advising on emerging risks and supporting clients in delivering robust, forward-thinking fire safety strategies.

 

Want to talk to us about your next project?

We’d love to hear from you. Get in touch to explore how BB7 can help you apply cutting-edge fire safety thinking from concept to completion.