Don't anybody be packing any Hoover Boards too tightly, especially in
combustible containers.
On Feb 26, 2016 5:05 PM, "Pat Thompson" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I would agree with Bruce's assessment, NFPA 484 applies to combustible
> metals. Among these metals are some scary things like lithium, sodium,
> potassium, and magnesium. This standard does not address lithium used in
> energy storage cells (aka batteries) or the storage of them.
>
> Please allow me to chime in with a peeve that I've developed that stems
> from this topic (speaking in general, not specific to this forum). I would
> caution anyone in the discussion to be aware of the difference between
> lithium-ion batteries and lithium batteries. These are in fact quite
> different animals and I've often seen discussion over the issue of 'lithium
> batteries' when in fact the topic is actually lithium-ion. Here's a quick
> comparison:
>
> Lithium-ion battery: rechargeable, uses salts of lithium (not lithium in
> its elemental state), very common as consumer battery (cell phones,
> laptops, tablets, portable power tools, the list goes on....)
>
> Lithium battery: lithium is present in its elemental metal state, not
> rechargeable, less common as consumer battery (typically a replacement for
> conventional alkaline batteries - your C, D, AAA, AA cells but with more
> kick)
>
> The jury is still out on how to deal with these challenging products, both
> of which are rapidly becoming ubiquitous in our modern world. I'm no
> chemist but from what I've gleaned in reading is that the biggest issue
> with the lithium-ion battery fire is not the presence of lithium but the
> tremendous energy storage that these cells are capable of. Thermal runaway
> can occur when stored in tight proximity in packaging, be it in a warehouse
> or when being transported.
>
> For fire with lithium-ion batteries the consensus is cooling, i.e. water -
> and lots of it. What this translates to in density I have no idea - this is
> what FM, FAA and the aerospace industry, and many others are trying to nail
> down.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pat Thompson
> ATS Alaska
> Direct: 907-375-4176
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Bruce Verhei
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 12:13 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Lithium battery storage
>
> Using NFPA 484 would be similar to using aluminum storage standards for
> bringing a B-747-8 in a building.
>
> The lithium battery industry needs to address this in a reasonable manner.
>
> The aerosol industry did this. Maybe the lithium battery industry hasn't
> done this because they can see what the answers are likely to be. Lots of
> water. In-rack sprinklers. Vertical barriers every X lineal feet in racks.
> Minimum aisle widths. Maximum pile sizes for non-rack storage.
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 26, 2016, at 10:17, Brad Casterline <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Storing lithium in a battery is probably different.
> > Anyone see the guy on the news in a convinience store a few days ago
> > whose e-cigarette went haywire in his front jeans pocket?
> > It looked like a blowtorch!
> >> On Feb 26, 2016 12:08 PM, "michael G" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Would the lithium battery storage fall under the requirements of
> >> storage in NFPA 484? This does address lithium storage, but not
> >> lithium battery storage.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Michael Goodis
> >> Estimator, Project Manager
> >> IL#000635   NICET#135586
> >> Key Fire Protection Enterprises LLC
> >> 3200 Mike Padgett HWY
> >> Augusta, GA 30906
> >> Office- (706)790-3473
> >> Cell- (706) 220-8822
> >> Fax: (706) 738-2119
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> >> [email protected]]
> >> On Behalf Of David Blackwell
> >> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:32 AM
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: RE: Lithium battery storage
> >>
> >> FYI - In case some of you were not aware, the term has changed to SDS
> >> and the requirements for the forms being produced now have changed.
> >> See the OSHA website at
> >> https://www.osha.gov/dsg/hazcom/effectivedates.html
> >>
> >> The following section of text was extracted [in part] from a document
> >> linked from the main OSHA HCS page at
> >> https://www.osha.gov/dsg/hazcom/:
> >>
> >> The Hazard Communication standard (HCS) has been revised to align
> >> with the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification
> >> and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS Revision 3, 2009). This includes
> >> updates to the requirements for labeling and for safety data sheets
> (SDSs).
> >> [...]changes in enforcement due to the release of the revised HCS
> >> published in the Federal Register on March 26, 2012. The revised
> >> standard changes "hazard determination" to the specific requirements
> >> for hazard classification of chemicals, standardizes label elements
> >> for containers of hazardous\ chemicals, and specifies the format and
> >> required content for SDSs. [...] Chemicals must be evaluated in
> >> accordance with specific guidance outlined in Appendices A and B of
> >> the standard. The hazard classification will result in the
> >> specification of pictograms, signal word, hazard statements, and
> >> precautionary statements which must be included on the labels.
> >> Specifications for these label elements are provided in Appendix C of
> >> the standard. The SDSs will have a standardized 16-section format
> >> (see Appendix D of the standard) and includes the information from
> >> the hazard classification (e.g., hazard class, pictogram).
> >>
> >>
> >> Respectfully,
> >>
> >> David Blackwell
> >>
> >> David Blackwell, P.E.
> >> Chief Engineer
> >> (803)896-9833
> >>
> >> Office of State Fire Marshal
> >> 141 Monticello Trail | Columbia, SC 29203
> >> http://scfiremarshal.llronline.com/
> >> (803)896-9800
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> >> [email protected]]
> >> On Behalf Of [email protected]
> >> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 9:57 AM
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: RE: Lithium battery storage
> >>
> >> *** SCDLLR NOTICE *** This email is from an external email address.
> >> Please use caution when deciding whether to open any attachments or
> >> when clicking links inside the email.
> >>
> >> You have to look at a consensus amongst data, not just one MSDS or
> >> not just one study.
> >>
> >> In this particular case there are no absolutes, no guarantees of any
> >> results.  Take the info provided and use that to make your best case
> >> for a methodology.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Craig L. Prahl
> >> Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
> >> CH2MHILL
> >> Lockwood Greene
> >> 1500 International Drive
> >> Spartanburg, SC  29303
> >> Direct - 864.599.4102
> >> Fax - 864.599.8439
> >> CH2MHILL Extension  74102
> >> [email protected]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> >> [email protected]]
> >> On Behalf Of å... ....
> >> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 9:52 AM
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: Lithium battery storage
> >>
> >> Do we realize who writes those MSDS ?   Although MSDS content has gotten
> >> better over the years... just saying think about the quality of
> >> analyses in some of those MSDS's.
> >>
> >> This commodity is non-standardized territory.
> >> If ecological considerations are a factor, then dump loads of water
> >> warrants a second look.
> >>
> >> We might be able to guarantee control of a Li-battery fire with lots
> >> of water, but until we get *LOTS* of water, we can't guarantee
> >> extinguishment using water only, either.
> >>
> >> The engineers at Boeing probably have some experience with suppressing
> >> Li-battery fires.   Even though 'in safety there should be no
> secrets...'
> >> tell that to the economists.
> >>
> >>
> >> Scot Deal
> >> Excelsior Risk/Fire Engineering
> >> Scot Deal
> >> Excelsior Risk/Fire En
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >>
> >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink
> >> ler.org _______________________________________________
> >> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >>
> >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink
> >> ler.org _______________________________________________
> >> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >>
> >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink
> >> ler.org
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >>
> >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink
> >> ler.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sprinklerforum mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl
> > er.org
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> [email protected]
>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> [email protected]
>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Reply via email to