Modern
life and associated lifestyles require reliable and secure power supply. The
need for continuity on essential and critical services which include but not
limited to healthcare, financial system, telecommunication, emergency response,
navigation, transportation exert the need for energy storage systems that
ensure continuity of power supply. Battery storage technologies have even
become more critical in the modern world due to the need for replacement of
fossil fuels with renewable energy. Unfortunately, just like any other
technology, the battery technology has faced its own share of challenges that
has a bearing on engineering and the energy industry. This paper analyzes some
of the most recent battery related incidents and identifies the causes of the
problems and briefly discusses the potential impact on the energy industry.
Materials
that reasonably conduct electricity can be grouped into metallic and
electrolytic conductors. Metallic and electrolytic conductors, such as acids,
bases, and salts allow the movement of electric charge through a process known
as electrochemical reaction. Electrochemical reaction is any process either
caused or accompanied by the passage of an electric current and involving in
most cases the transfer of electrons between two substances—one a solid and the
other a liquid [1]. A battery is an
assembly of metallic conductors separated by electrolytic conductors to achieve
the process of electrochemical reaction. When electric power is being supplied
by a battery, the positive terminal is known as the cathode while the negative
terminal is the anode. A battery is called rechargeable if its electrochemical
reaction is reversible i.e., it can be charged and recharged. The battery has
therefore become a very critical technology in modern day engineering as one of
the means for energy storage.
Different
technologies have been employed in manufacturing batteries. These technologies
involve different combinations of metallic and electrolytic materials,
including lead–acid, zinc–air, nickel–cadmium (NiCd), nickel–metal hydride
(NiMH), lithium-ion (Li-ion), lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4), and lithium-ion
polymer (Li-ion polymer). Batteries range in size from small units that can
supply power in watts to large systems that can supply mega-watts. There are,
therefore, many applications of batteries from domestic to commercial. Devices
that use batteries for energy storage applications include but not limited to
portable consumer devices, light vehicles, road vehicles, trains, airplanes,
uninterruptible power systems, and storage systems for power stations. Lithium-ion
batteries are by far the most popular battery storage option today and control
more than 90 percent of the global grid battery storage market [2]. Lithium-ion
rechargeable batteries seem to be everywhere—they provide power for most
portable electronics, an increasing number of hand tools, as well as the latest
types of Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs, such as Nissan Leaf and Tesla
Roadster) and Extended-Range Electric Vehicles (E-REV such as Chevy Volt) [3]. “Demand for
Lithium-Ion batteries to power electric vehicles and energy storage has seen
exponential growth, increasing from just 0.5 gigawatt-hours in 2010 to around
526 gigawatt hours a decade later. Demand is projected to increase 17-fold by
2030, bringing the cost of battery storage down, according to Bloomberg [4].”
 |
Figure1: Cumulative lithium-ion battery demand for vehicle/energy storage applications (in GW hours).
Source: Bloomberg |
 |
| Figure2: Opportunities in Lithium-ion battery market |
Safety
is very important for energy storage systems like batteries including
Lithium-ion. Thermal stability is perhaps the most important of several
parameters that determine safety of Li-ion cells, modules, and battery packs [3]. “The key safety
aspects with lithium-Ion batteries are how they are put together and monitored.
The worst outcome involves thermal runaway, or an explosion. This would be a
major concern for big battery installations like the ones used to store
renewable energy, but they operate in a very controlled environment [4].” The following are
some of the safety incidents involving Lithium-ion batteries that are on record:
The
Boeing 787 Dreamliner is a long-range, wide-body, twin-engine jet airliner
which began commercial flights in late 2011. On 16 January 2013, all Boeing 787
Dreamliners were indefinitely grounded due to lithium-ion battery failures that
had occurred in two planes [5].
One such incident occurred on 7th January 2013 at exactly 10:21am EST
at Boston International Airport involving a Japan Airlines flight JA829J. The
Lithium-ion battery module in the auxiliary power compartment of the plane
smoked and caught fire. This aircraft was entered on December 20, 2012, and it
had only flown 22 times for a total of 169 hours by the time of the accident [6].
The
Boeing 787 Dreamliner utilizes two identical lithium-ion batteries that help
start the auxiliary power unit when the plane is on the ground and serve as a
backup for electronic flight systems [5]. The Boeing 787's
auxiliary power battery module is housed in the electronics bay behind the wing
and provides power to the aircraft when the aircraft's engines are turned off [6]. The battery pack
was a combination of 8 single cells of 75 Ah capacity connected in series,
together with a battery management and monitoring systems were packaged to form
the battery module. It is indicated that the aircraft was parked at Logan
Airport and passengers including crew had departed. In its parked state the
burning auxiliary power battery module was the only power source for the
aircraft.
The
main battery module and auxiliary power battery module of the aircraft are both
produced by Japan Yuasa Co., Ltd., with the same specifications [6]. When Boeing was
initially qualifying the design of their battery system in 2009, lithium cobalt
oxide (LiCoO2) was the most widely used cathode chemistry for most commercial
lithium-ion battery applications. This was due to its high energy density and
high voltage limit compared to alternative chemistries [5]. However, concerns
have been raised about the thermal stability of LiCoO2 and its tendency to
release pure oxygen when over-charged, providing an ideal environment for combustion
[7].
Flight JA829J incident challenged the application of large-scale lithium-ion
power battery modules. It brought the question as to why the thermal control of
the battery module suddenly broke out without pre-adjustment under the
protection of strict layers of fortification and caused a chain reaction. The
battery burning accident of Japan Airlines flight JA829J is a typical safety
accident in which the thermal runaway of the lithium-ion battery caused by the
internal short circuit is transmitted between the single cells inside the
battery module, resulting in a chain reaction [6]. Thermal runaway depicts
a process that is enhanced by heightened temperature, which culminates into energy
that further increases temperature, often leading to a destructive result. It
is a kind of uncontrolled positive feedback, and in chemical engineering, it is
associated with strongly exothermic reactions that are accelerated by
temperature rise. In electrical engineering it is associated with increased
current flow and power dissipation.
Despite
Boeing aircrafts being certified by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration,
this incident, and several others before it made Boeing 787 aircrafts fail to meet
the quality specifications and inspection standards of the National
Transportation Safety Board which stipulate that only one battery safety valve
opening accident is allowed for every 10 million flight hours. The accident
exposed the weakness of the external protection measures applied to prevent
external short circuits and overcharge and discharge that they could not cope
with internal short circuits. Boeing
redesigned the battery and charger, and designed a steel box to contain fires
and vent hot gasses outside the plane [8]. As lithium-ion
technology has matured, lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4) cathodes have gained
wide acceptance in applications such as power tools and electric vehicles due
particularly to their enhanced thermal stability over LiCoO2 cathodes [9]. Batteries made with
LiFePO4 cathodes operate within a lower voltage range and have slightly less
charge storage capacity than batteries with LiCoO2 cathodes [5].
Tesla,
along with other vehicle manufactures, have had several of their electric
vehicle models succumb to fire accidents. The table below lists some of these
incidents. These incidents are mostly due to thermal runaway of the Lithium-ion
battery. The common causes of EV fires include the self-ignition (or
spontaneous/auto ignition) in parked vehicles due to arson or sustained abuse,
for example, fire during the charging process, self-ignition while in driving,
and fire after the traffic accident such as the high-speed collision [10]. On Tuesday, May 8,
2018, at 6:46 p.m., a 2014 Tesla Model S electric-powered car occupied by an
18-year-old driver and two 18-year-old passengers was traveling south in the
1300 block of Seabreeze Boulevard, in Fort Lauderdale, Florida at a recorded
speed of 116 mph [11].
 |
| Figure 3: Photo of battery showing fire-damaged region at front that contained modules 15 and 16, loose individual cells (rust-colored), vertically stacked cells below loosened covers, and orange insulation caps covering high-voltage terminals [11]. |
The
vehicle’s 400-VDC, 85-kWh lithium-ion traction battery was located under the
floor of the car and spanned an area from the front tires’ rearward. The
battery was divided into 16 modules (numbered from rear to front), plus a
compartment for the battery management system. Each module contained individual
battery cells stacked vertically. Modules 15 and16, at the front of the car,
were the most severely burned [11].
Table 1
The List of Selective EV Fire Accidents Occurred in 2018 [10]
From: A Review of
Battery Fires in Electric Vehicles
|
Date
|
Location
|
Vehicle
|
Incident
|
Comments
|
|
Jan [8]
|
Chongqing, China
|
Tesla, BEV
|
Fire in the parked
vehicle
|
Spontaneous
ignition
|
|
15 Mar [9]
|
Bangkok, Thailand
|
Porsche Panamera,
PHEV
|
Fire while being
charged
|
Car’s charging
cable plugged to socket in the living room without built-in safety systems,
and fire spread to the house
|
|
18 Mar [10]
|
Catalonia, Spain
|
BMW i3 REx, PHEV
|
Fire in the parked
vehicle
|
Spontaneous
ignition
|
|
23 Mar [7]
|
California, USA
|
Tesla Model X, BEV
|
Post-crash fire
|
Fire extinguished
on the scene but reignited twice at tow yard 5 days later
|
|
May [11]
|
Anhui, China
|
Other, BEV
|
Fire while being
charged
|
|
|
May [11]
|
Unknown
|
Yiema, BEV
|
Fire while being
charged
|
|
|
8 May [12]
|
Florida, USA
|
Tesla Model S, BEV
|
Post-crash fire
|
Fire initially
extinguished quickly but reignited during loading on tow truck and once again
at the tow yard
|
|
15 May [13]
|
Ticino, Switzerland
|
Tesla, BEV
|
Post-crash fire
|
Vehicle hit a
barrier, turned over and burst into flames
|
|
20 May [11]
|
Hangzhou, China
|
Jiangling, BEV
|
Fire while being
charged
|
|
|
2 May [11]
|
Hubei, China
|
Zhong Tai, BEV
|
Fire while being
driven
|
Self-ignited
without traffic accident
|
|
28 May [11]
|
Shenzhen, China
|
Other, BEV
|
Fire while being
charged
|
|
|
4 Jun [11]
|
Shandong, China
|
Other, BEV
|
Fire while being
driven
|
Self-ignited without
traffic accident
|
|
5 Jun [11]
|
Beijing, China
|
Other, BEV
|
Fire while being charged
|
|
|
15 Jun [14]
|
California, USA
|
Tesla Model S, BEV
|
Fire while being
driven
|
Fire extinguished
on the scene without reignition
|
|
12 Dec [15]
|
Gelderland,
Netherlands
|
Jaguar I-Pace, BEV
|
Fire in the parked
vehicle
|
The vehicle front
was burned but no involvement of the battery pack
|
|
18 Dec [16]
|
California, USA
|
Tesla Model S
|
Fire in the parked
vehicle
|
Fire started at
workshop parking lot, and the fire reignited twice
|
Samsung
Galaxy Note 7 was unveiled on 2nd August 2016 and officially released on 19th
August 2016. Samsung permanently ceased production of the device on 11th
October 2016, a day after announcing a global recall of the smartphone due to a
factory fault in the phones' batteries that caused some of them to generate
excessive heat, resulting in fires. On 8 September 2016, the U.S. Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) issued an advisory stating that “In light of
recent incidents and concerns raised by Samsung about its Galaxy Note 7
devices, the Federal Aviation Administration strongly advises passengers not to
turn on or charge these devices on board aircraft and not to stow them in any
checked baggage [12].” The European
Aviation Safety Agency followed suit on 9th September 2016 advising
passengers and crew members to keep these devices turned off and not to charge
them while on board of the aircraft and not to put them inside the checked
baggage.
“The
critical component in lithium-ion batteries is the thin separator that sits
between the two electrodes. If this barrier breaks down or is damaged by any
outside pressure, this can trigger excessive heat and could cause a battery
fire. Additionally, if this barrier breaks down to the point where the two
electrodes touch, short-circuiting and overheating will result, potentially
leading to a battery fire. Samsung rushed the production and design of the
Galaxy Note 7 in order to beat the release of Apple’s iPhone 7 and, in the
process, included an exceptionally thin separator in the batteries that could
increase the likelihood of fires or explosions. Battery scientists say that
Samsung’s aggressive design decisions made problems more likely, and that their
choice to push the limits of battery technology left little safety margin in
the event of a problem [13].” Over 16 trillion Won
($14.3 billion) was wiped off Samsung’s market capitalization amid increased
concern from investors over the potential damage that the recall could cause to
the world’s largest smartphone maker by market share [14].
In
2006 Apple recalled 1.8 million battery packs for its iBook and PowerBook
notebook computers because of an overheating problem. The affected Lithium-ion
batteries were manufactured by Sony and were used in the iBook G4 and PowerBook
G4. The company said the recall affected
1.1 million notebook batteries in the United States and 700,000 batteries
abroad [15]. It was then
reported that Apple's recall was the second-largest computer or electronics
recall in history from Dell. The Sony 1.8 million batteries for Apple and 4.1
million for Dell costed the manufacturer between $172 million and $258 million.
On
6th September 2006 the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a notice
for recall of ThinkPad Notebook Computer Batteries Due to Fire Hazard. The
product was the lithium-ion batteries used in ThinkPad notebook computers which
affected about 168,500 battery packs (an additional 357,500 battery packs were
sold worldwide). The battery distributer was Lenovo (United States) Inc., of
Research Triangle Park, N.C. and International Business Machines Corp., of
Armonk, N.Y. These battery packs were manufactured by Sony Energy Devices
Corp., of Japan. The hazard involved overheating, posing a fire hazard to
consumers. It was said that Lenovo had received one confirmed report of a
battery overheating and causing a fire that damaged the notebook computer. The
incident, which occurred within an airport terminal as the user was boarding an
airplane, caused enough smoking and sparking that a fire extinguisher was used
to put it out [16].
On
30th October 2008 the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission issued another
order for PC Notebook computer batteries recall due to fire and burn hazard.
The affected batteries were also Lithium-Ion used in Hewlett-Packard,
Toshiba and Dell Notebook Computers. The number of affected units were about
35,000 batteries (an additional 65,000 batteries were sold worldwide), and the
manufacturer was Sony Energy Devices Corporation, of Japan. The hazard
involved overheating, posing a fire and burn hazard to consumers. The
Commission indicated that there were 19 reports of the batteries overheating,
including 17 reports of flames/fire (10 resulting in minor property damage),
and that two consumers experienced minor burns. The recalled batteries were
included with, and sold separately for use in, the following notebook computer
models: [17]
|
Computer Manufacturer
|
Units
|
Notebook Model
|
Battery Model
|
|
Hewlett-Packard
|
About 32,000
|
HP Pavilion:
dv1000, dv8000 and zd8000
Compaq Presario: v2000 and v2400
HP Compaq: nc6110, nc6120, nc6140, nc6220, nc6230,
nx4800, nx4820, nx6110, nx6120, nx9600
|
Recalled batteries will have a bar code
label starting with A0, L0, L1 or GC
|
|
Toshiba
|
About 3,000
|
Satellite:
A70/A75, P30/P5, M30X/M35X, M50/M55
Tecra: A3, A5, S2
|
n/a
|
|
Dell
|
About 150
|
Latitude:
110L
Inspiron: 1100, 1150, 5100, 5150, 5160
|
OU091
|
The
National Transportation Safety Board lists other incidents involving Lithium-ion
batteries:
·
On
August 7, 2004, a fire destroyed some freight that included lithium-ion
batteries in a unit load device (ULD) at the Federal Express Corporation (FedEx
Express) hub in Memphis, Tennessee.
·
On
April 28, 1999, a fire destroyed freight, including primary lithium batteries,
on two cargo pallets at the Northwest Airlines cargo facility at Los Angeles
International Airport.
·
On
May 24, 1989, a box of 25 lithium-ion batteries that had been transported on a
FedEx Express airplane caught fire in the FedEx Express freight sorting
facility in Memphis.
·
On
September 26, 1996, wires connected to eight lithium batteries (type unknown)
apparently shorted and burned a hole in their package, which was in the Airborne
Express sorting area in Wilmington, Ohio.
·
On
November 3, 2000, a package of primary lithium batteries in a FedEx Express
truck near Portland, Oregon, showed evidence of internal leakage and charring
around one battery.
·
On
April 12, 2002, a fiberboard box started smoking while it was inside a FedEx
Express ULD in Indianapolis, Indiana. The box contained lithium batteries (type
unknown) that had short-circuited, starting a fire and damaging the interior of
the box.
·
On
August 9, 2002, a lithium-ion battery in a Samsung minicomputer/Palm Pilot
wrapped in bubble wrap inside a fiberboard box short-circuited, causing the
bubble wrap to catch fire and start to melt.
·
On
March 5, 2002, near Houston, Texas, a fiberboard box of lithium batteries (type
unknown) inside an American Freightways truck was crushed when other freight
fell on top of it. The batteries and box caught on fire.
·
In
May 1994, while being delivered to a handling agent by road, a shipment of
small lithium batteries destined for Gatwick Airport in London, England, was
found emitting smoke from a Unit Loading Device.
·
In
April 2004, a flashlight began smoking in a seatback pocket on a Canadian
airplane. The flashlight became so hot that the flight attendants could not
handle it without oven mitts. The flashlight had a primary lithium battery and
had been manufactured and bought in Beijing, China.
·
On
November 3, 1999, the FAA Associate Administrator for Civil Aviation Security
sent a memo to several agencies, including RSPA's Associate Administrator for
the Office of Hazardous Materials, identifying four incidents that had happened
that year that were not on aircraft but did involve the overheating and
bursting of lithium-ion batteries in automatic external defibrillators.
·
Additionally,
the FAA has a record of 30 other incidents involving a variety of other types
of batteries that shorted and caused damage ranging from smoke to fire and
explosion.
·
On
October 29, 2004, a fire and small explosion involving a 9-volt lithium-ion
battery occurred on a chartered flight from the Raleigh-Durham airport in
Morrisville, North Carolina, to Parkersburg, West Virginia.
·
On
June 30, 2005, a package containing lithium-ion batteries was discovered at the
United Parcel Service (UPS) airfreight terminal in Ontario, California. One of
four battery packs within a package had caught fire and been completely
destroyed during transportation.
·
In
August 2004, the Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled about 28,000
lithium-ion battery packs that LG Chem Ltd. of South Korea had manufactured for
Apple PowerBook computers.” [18]
The battery
technologies are a critical approach in decarbonization of transport and energy
to help combat climate change. A low-carbon future rests on an essential, yet
also problematic, technology of Lithium-ion rechargeable batteries. The market
for lithium-ion batteries is projected by the industry to grow from USD 41.1 billion
in 2021 to USD 116.6 billion by 2030. The prevalence of electric vehicles (EVs)
and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) is amongst the major boosters of
the adoption of lithium-ion batteries, which is expected to increase further in
the future. Despite the promising growth
of the Lithium-ion battery storage technology, safety remains one of the major
factors of concern. Explosions of the batteries due to thermal runaway have
manifested in smartphones, personal computers, as well as some electric vehicle
models over the years. The battery industry is still in its infancy, but
a lot of resources and investment is going into this industry, and Lithium-ion batteries
still have the potential to bring about a technology revolution.
|
[1]
|
A. R. Despić and J.
O. Borris, "electrochemical reaction," Encyclopedia Britannica,
15 December 2011. [Online]. Available:
https://www.britannica.com/science/electrochemical-reaction. [Accessed 03
April 2022].
|
|
[2]
|
A. Zablocki,
"Fact Sheet | Energy Storage (2019)," Environmental and Energy
Study Institute, 22 February 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/energy-storage-2019. [Accessed 03 April 2022].
|
|
[3]
|
D. H. Doughty and P.
E. Roth, "A General Discussion of Li Ion Battery Safety," The
Electrochemical Society, January 2012. [Online]. Available:
https://doi.org/10.1149/2.f03122if. [Accessed 03 April 2022].
|
|
[4]
|
J. Wood,
"Batteries are a key part of the energy transition. Here’s why,"
World Economic Forum, 15 September 2021. [Online]. Available:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/09/batteries-lithium-ion-energy-storage-circular-economy/.
[Accessed 04 April 2022].
|
|
[5]
|
N. Williard, W. He,
C. Hendricks and M. Pecht, "Lessons Learned from the 787 Dreamliner
Issue on Lithium-Ion Battery Reliability," MDPI Open Access
Journals, no. 6, pp. 1-10, 2013.
|
|
[6]
|
F. Mou, Z. Xiao, C.
Jingbo, S. Yuming, L. Jianjun, H. Xiangming and M. Zongqiang, "A case
study of Japan airlines B-787 battery fire[J]," Energy Storage
Science and Technology, pp. 42-46, 2014.
|
|
[7]
|
J. Dahn, E. Fuller,
M. Obrovac and U. Vonsacken, " Thermal-stability of LixCoO2, LixNiO2
and Lamda-MnO2 and consequences for the safety of Li-ion cells," Solid
State Ion, pp. 69, 265–270. , 1994.
|
|
[8]
|
E. Beech,
"Design flaws led to 2013 lithium-ion battery fire in Boeing 787: U.S.
NTSB," Reuters, 01 December 2014. [Online]. Available:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-787-battery-idUSKCN0JF35G20141202.
[Accessed 28 March 2022].
|
|
[9]
|
H. Xiang, H. Wang, C.
Chen, X. Ge, S. Guo, J. Sun and W. Hu, "Thermal stability of
LiPF6—Based electrolyte and effect of contact with various delithiated
cathodes of Li-ion batteries," J. Power Sources, pp. 191,
575–581, 2009.
|
|
[10]
|
P. Sun, R. Bisschop
and H. e. a. Niu, "A Review of Battery Fires in Electric Vehicles,"
Springer, 03 February 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-019-00944-3. [Accessed 04 April 2022].
|
|
[11]
|
National
Transportation Safety Board, "Highway Accident Brief," National
Transportation Safety Board, Washington, DC 20594, 2018.
|
|
[12]
|
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), "FAA Statement on Samsung Galaxy Note 7
Devices," FAA, 08 September 2016. [Online]. Available:
https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-statement-samsung-galaxy-note-7-devices-0?newsId=86424.
[Accessed 04 April 2022].
|
|
[13]
|
B. Green and S. A. F.
Passenger, "Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd.: Galaxy Note 7
Crisis," Researchgate, 2017. [Online]. Available:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/James-Orourke-7/publication/330140699_Samsung_Electronics_Company_Ltd_Galaxy_Note_7_Crisis/links/5e6903aa299bf108eacded58/Samsung-Electronics-Company-Ltd-Galaxy-Note-7-Crisis.pdf.
[Accessed 04 April 2022].
|
|
[14]
|
A. Kharpal,
"Samsung Note 7 recall: More than $14 billion wiped off shares as
crisis rages on," CNBC, 12 September 2016. [Online]. Available:
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/12/samsung-note-7-recall-more-than-14-billion-wiped-off-shares-as-crisis-rages-on.html.
[Accessed 04 April 2022].
|
|
[15]
|
R. Kelley,
"Apple recalls 1.8 million laptop batteries," CNN Money, 24 August
2006. [Online]. Available:
https://money.cnn.com/2006/08/24/technology/apple_recall/index.htm.
[Accessed 04 April 2022].
|
|
[16]
|
U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission, Lenovo and IBM Announce Recall of ThinkPad Notebook
Computer Batteries Due to Fire Hazard, Washington, DC 20207: Office of
Information and Public Affairs, 2006.
|
|
[17]
|
U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission, PC Notebook Computer Batteries Recalled Due to Fire
and Burn Hazard, Washington, DC 20207: Office of Information and Public
Affairs, 2008.
|
|
[18]
|
National
Transportation Safety Board, Hazardous Materials Accident Brief, National
Transportation Safety Board, 2004.
|
|
[19]
|
Nature,
"Lithium-ion batteries need to be greener and more ethical," Nature,
no. 1476-4687, 2021.
|
