New 2015 Regulations Regarding Lithium Electronics
Starting just a few years back, as the number of consumer electronics with high energy density lithium batteries began to skyrocket, a serious and growing concern regarding spontaneous combustion causing fires on airplanes became a priority in regards to making new regulations. The question of whether it’s actually dangerous or not, is a moot point, […]
http://www.gizbeat.com/5930/new-2015-reg...ectronics/
I think they should focus on more important things because how much riskier is a lithium-ion battery when shipped inside a phone than when it is shipped separately? Doesn't it have the same risk of spontaneous combustion? In fact I think it is more dangerous when inside a device because there is current flowing from the battery. If the battery is separate, the risk of it spontaneously combusting reduces because current is not being drained and there is a very slim possibility of overheating during shipment.
These guys don't have much else to do than seek out possible sources of danger. No matter how remote. They need to justify their jobs somehow I guess. I see things just getting tougher and tougher. Each year it gets worse.
There was one flight that likely went down due to batteries, but this was a cargo jet full of tons of them if I'm remembering correctly.
Just use a huge firesafe box for electronics and batteries. Problem solved.
I'm not sure why they consider it safe in the electronics. I think its due to energy in faulty batteries having somewhere to disipitate to.. Where as if loose it has nowhere to go and just builds up until combusting. I'm just thinking out loud. I haven't researched it.
@athos might have a better idea.
Hmm, my initial thoughts here were because the gadgets have BMS. Or perhaps because it would guarantee that the batteries would be isolated individually, so if one were to overheat it wouldn't trigger a chain reaction.
Right, that could also be a valid explanation, @"cookiedough": having somewhere to dissipate to.
The combustion happens when the battery experiences thermal runaway, when the electrodes come in contact with each other through faulty separators and such. Perhaps they believe the circuit path would prevent this because it would allow the battery to slowly balance out the state of the ions as the electrons flow backwards.
(2014-11-27, 22:42)cookiedough Wrote: [ -> ]These guys don't have much else to do than seek out possible sources of danger. No matter how remote. They need to justify their jobs somehow I guess. I see things just getting tougher and tougher. Each year it gets worse.
There was one flight that likely went down due to batteries, but this was a cargo jet full of tons of them if I'm remembering correctly.
Just use a huge firesafe box for electronics and batteries. Problem solved.
I'm not sure why they consider it safe in the electronics. I think its due to energy in faulty batteries having somewhere to disipitate to.. Where as if loose it has nowhere to go and just builds up until combusting. I'm just thinking out loud. I haven't researched it.
@athos might have a better idea.
(2014-11-27, 23:10)Athos Wrote: [ -> ]Hmm, my initial thoughts here were because the gadgets have BMS. Or perhaps because it would guarantee that the batteries would be isolated individually, so if one were to overheat it wouldn't trigger a chain reaction.
Right, that could also be a valid explanation, @"cookiedough": having somewhere to dissipate to.
The combustion happens when the battery experiences thermal runaway, when the electrodes come in contact with each other through faulty separators and such. Perhaps they believe the circuit path would prevent this because it would allow the battery to slowly balance out the state of the ions as the electrons flow backwards.
I totally agree. Lithium batteries are usually quite safe and enacting legislation regarding their transportation is overkill. It might also just be a PR move because they specifically prohibited transport of li-ion batteries in passenger planes. I'm sure passenger planes carry only a handful of batteries unattached to devices. What is the probability of a few batteries causing a fire in a plane? I'd say almost zero.
I doubt the victims of such incidents would call this overkill. We, as consumers, are being very whiny because it would inconvenience us. But if you think about it, it is actually comforting to see that the correct governing bodies are making attempts at preventing these accidents rather than turning a blind eye, and wait for the incident frequency to increase.
This combustion: Once it happens, if enough batteries are around a single defective one, it would trigger a very hideous chain reaction. The electrodes just need to cross a thin barrier and things will get ugly.
Yes, this is an inconvenience, and I am also hoping they will soon come up with a solution that would ensure safety of the carriers as well as grant consumers the option to have batteries flown as we please.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."