News

Fire in Hong Kong Exposes Structural and Systemic Failures in High-Density Residential Buildings

On November 26, 2025, a large-scale fire struck the residential complex Wang Fuk Court, located in Tai Po, in Hong Kong’s New Territories. Classified as a “Level 5 Alarm,” the city’s highest emergency level, the fire affected seven of the eight towers in the housing complex.

According to authorities, more than 65 people have died so far, dozens remain in critical condition, and around 300 residents are still missing. The incident has become one of the most severe residential fires in Hong Kong’s recent history and has triggered a technical discussion about responsibility within construction, architecture, and urban planning sectors.

Although this is the deadliest fire since the end of World War II, Hong Kong had experienced a similar tragedy in 1996, when the Garley Building caught fire, resulting in 41 deaths. At the time, it was widely described as the worst peacetime fire in the city’s history.

What is known so far

The fire started on the external scaffolding and spread rapidly across the building façades, reaching the interiors through the windows. The complex was built in 1983 under the government’s Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) and houses more than 4,800 people.

The building typology follows the pattern of public residential construction from the 1980s, with cross-shaped or trident floor plans designed to maximize land use and natural ventilation. Those same ventilation openings, however, allowed flames to enter the apartments during the fire.

The fire-safety system relied on internal compartmentation. But because the fire spread from the outside, along the façades, it bypassed these barriers and expanded vertically, fueled by the materials used in the ongoing renovation works.

Three material elements were decisive

Analysis by local specialists points to three main material factors that contributed to the rapid spread and high lethality of the fire:

1. Bamboo scaffolding:
   Still legally used due to contractual clauses, the scaffolding acted as a continuous combustible structure covering the building façades. The intense heat caused the plastic ties to melt, leading to collapses that blocked exits and hindered firefighters’ access.

2. Nylon or polyethylene safety nets:
   Used to prevent debris from falling during construction, these nets burned at a speed inconsistent with standard safety requirements. The behavior of the materials suggests the use of non-certified, non-fire-retardant nets.

3. Expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam adhered to windows:
   Applied as temporary protection during renovation, this material melted under the heat, facilitating the entry of flames into the apartments. Polystyrene is highly flammable and releases toxic gases when burned.

Together, these three components created a continuous vertical fire pathway (from ground level to the top of the buildings), eliminating any realistic option for conventional containment.

Responsibility of the construction company

The company responsible for the renovation work, Prestige Construction & Engineering Co., has been identified as a central agent in the tragedy. The company had previously been fined for safety violations yet still secured a HK$ 330 million contract to renovate Wang Fuk Court.

Reports from the Labour Department indicate that the company received formal warnings about fire risks just days before the incident but did not implement the required corrective measures. Three company directors were arrested on charges of manslaughter.

Regulatory failures increased the risk

Although the Hong Kong government announced in March 2025 the gradual replacement of bamboo scaffolding with metal structures, older contracts remained protected by exemption clauses. The Wang Fuk Court project fell under this exception.

Furthermore, inspections failed to stop the use of inadequate materials even after official notices. The punitive measures available (such as fines and warnings) proved insufficient to address real-world risk.

Urban density and evacuation challenges

The arrangement of towers in the complex created wind corridors that accelerated fire spread from one block to another. Urban density and narrow streets also made access difficult, limiting the positioning of rescue equipment.

The internal staircases—the only evacuation route—were quickly overtaken by smoke. Many residents could not escape in time, especially older adults and people with reduced mobility, who make up a significant portion of the building’s population.

Why does this matter for the sustainable construction sector?

The incident exposes weaknesses in fire-safety systems in older buildings and shows how design decisions, material specifications, and inspection processes are directly tied to building integrity.

Even in cultural or economic contexts where traditional materials such as bamboo are valued, their actual performance under current safety demands must be evaluated.

Likewise, the use of low-cost solutions (such as polystyrene and non-certified nets) can put lives at risk when strict technical criteria are not met.

Conclusion

The Wang Fuk Court fire was not the result of a single error but of a sequence of technical, regulatory, and operational failures. The combination of flammable materials, insufficient oversight, and a vulnerable architectural typology led to a large-scale tragedy.

This case underscores the need to revise retrofit practices in older buildings and adopt updated standards that prioritize safety and urban resilience. The challenge is to ensure that modernization and sustainability policies also incorporate objective disaster-prevention criteria.

Video

Energy Efficiency is Now Law! Brazil’s Construction Sector is About to Change.

Brazil’s construction sector will undergo significant changes in the coming months. Two new regulations will directly impact how residential, commercial, and public buildings are designed, built, and financed.

The first measure is the mandatory National Energy Conservation Label (ENCE). From now on, no new project can be approved without demonstrating a minimum level of energy efficiency. This includes technical criteria such as building envelope (walls, roofs, and façades), lighting, and HVAC systems. In other words, efficiency is no longer optional—it becomes a legal requirement to obtain a building permit.

The second change is the creation of the Brazilian Sustainable Taxonomy, a framework that defines which projects can be considered sustainable in the country. It will serve as a reference for banks, funds, and investors, guiding the financing of projects that generate positive environmental and social impact. In the construction sector, this includes new buildings, retrofits, and the installation of passive solutions such as shading devices, thermal insulation, and bioclimatic strategies.

With the new rules, the logic of the sector shifts. Projects will need to deliver verified performance. And financing will be directed to those who demonstrate positive impact based on objective criteria.

Want to dive deeper into the topic?

If you work in construction or are preparing to enter the sector, it’s important to understand how these changes will affect your projects.

Watch the full video on our YouTube channel to learn about the technical details, timelines, and the steps you need to take to adapt to this new reality in Brazilian construction!

Disclaimer: The video is in Brazilian Portuguese, but simultaneous translation and subtitles are available in multiple languages.

Curiosity

Why Do So Many Modern Airports Have an “X” Shape?

If you look closely at some of the newest large-scale airports—such as Beijing Daxing, Abu Dhabi (Terminal A), or Chengdu Tianfu—you’ll notice a recurring geometry: terminals shaped like an “X,” a star, or branching arms radiating from a central point.

The reason for this choice is not aesthetic—it is entirely technical. It is a geometric solution to a logistical problem.

The challenge: moving a lot of people with minimal effort

In airports that process more than 40 million passengers per year, the movement of people and aircraft needs to be highly efficient. In linear terminal models, the larger the building becomes, the longer the walking distances and the greater the need for systems such as underground trains or internal buses. These systems are expensive to build, consume energy continuously, and require constant maintenance.

The X-shaped or radial layout solves this by concentrating the service core in the center (check-in, security, baggage systems) and distributing gates in several directions. This geometry reduces maximum walking distances, improves space usage, and increases operational efficiency without relying heavily on mechanical transport.

Example: At Beijing Daxing Airport, with 700,000 m² of built area, the distance from the center to the farthest gate is only 600 meters. Passengers can reach their gate in under eight minutes—without moving walkways or trains.

Why does the “X” work so well?

The X or star geometry fulfills three central objectives in large-scale airport design:

1. Minimizes internal distances
   By distributing piers radially, the walk from check-in to any gate rarely exceeds 600–800 meters, even in terminals handling hundreds of daily flights.

2. Maximizes aircraft contact stands
   More “arms” = more active façade area for aircraft to dock directly at the terminal, reducing the need for remote stands and apron buses.

3. Produces a compact building volume
   This reduces the amount of exposed façade area, improving thermal performance and lowering the load on heating and cooling systems.

This last point is crucial for energy efficiency. A compact building exchanges less heat with the outdoor environment, requiring less energy to maintain indoor comfort. In extreme climates (such as Abu Dhabi or Mumbai), this translates into measurable savings.

And what about sustainability?

When discussing sustainable construction, people often think of technologies like solar panels or reuse systems. But in projects of this scale, sustainability begins with form.

A key concept here is the shape factor, the relationship between external surface area and internal volume. More compact structures have a lower shape factor—meaning less thermal exchange with the outside and greater energy efficiency.

In simple terms:

Two terminals with the same usable area can have completely different thermal performance simply because one is linear and the other is compact. Geometry matters.

Additionally, radial layouts can eliminate the need for underground trains entirely—as seen in the new redevelopment design for Pittsburgh International Airport, which removed its APM (automated people mover) by relocating departure volumes closer to the landside terminal. This reduced energy use and mechanical failure points.

What about materials?

There is a carbon cost to building these mega-structures. Designs with large spans—such as Abu Dhabi’s terminal (with 180-meter arches) or Daxing’s free-span roof—require substantial volumes of steel and concrete, materials with high embodied carbon.

The trade-off comes from longevity and operational efficiency. The less energy the building consumes over decades, the more likely it is to offset the environmental impact of the initial construction.

This is why engineered timber solutions (already used in smaller airports such as Portland) are not yet feasible for projects at this scale.

Conclusion: the “X” as a solution, not a symbol

The growing use of radial forms in airports is not about futuristic aesthetics. It is a practical response to spatial, operational, and energy constraints.

• Reduces passenger walking distances

• Increases land and façade-use efficiency

• Improves thermal performance with less reliance on active systems

In other words, the X-shape allows the building to do more with less—less distance, less energy, less internal transport.

For those who design complex buildings, radial airports offer a direct lesson: geometry can be a sustainability tool, as long as it is applied with physical and constructive logic.