Issue Date: January 28, 2013 Web Date: January 25, 2013
New Lithium-Ion Battery Woes
News Channels: Materials SCENE, Environmental SCENE
Keywords: Lithium-ion battery, 787, battery fire, battery safety
Questions about the safety of using lithium-ion batteries for transportation applications have hit a zenith with two incidents in which such battery units onboard Boeing 787 Dreamliner airplanes caught fire or began to smolder. Airlines worldwide have grounded the new wide-body jets pending the outcome of investigations concerning the batteries and supporting equipment.
Boeing says the batteries on its 787s feature multiple backups to ensure safety, including protections against overcharging and overdischarging. It has declined to comment on the investigations.
Li-ion batteries can pack more energy into smaller and lighter weight units than other types of batteries. Those attributes have spurred enormous growth in their use for cell phones, laptop computers, and other portable electronic devices. Boeing selected the low-weight, high-energy-density batteries for the 787 Dreamliner to help reduce the new jetliner’s overall weight and bulk and thereby increase fuel efficiency.
A downside of Li-ion cells, however, is that they contain a flammable electrolyte solution consisting of lithium salts in organic solvents such as ethylene carbonate and ethyl methyl carbonate. This is not the case for other commercial battery types.
In Li-ion cells, heat generated by an internal or external short circuit, abusive electrical conditions, or other sources can, under some circumstances, ignite the battery liquid or rapidly raise its vapor pressure until the cell bursts, says Daniel H. Doughty of Battery Safety Consulting in Albuquerque, N.M.
Reports of fires in portable electronics caused by Li-ion batteries led manufacturers to recall millions of laptop batteries several years ago. The news shoved Li-ion battery safety issues into the spotlight. The recent incidents with the 63-lb battery units onboard Boeing jets have grabbed headlines in part because of the obvious difference from laptop computers in scale and potential danger.
Investigators have not yet determined the cause of the Boeing battery pack incidents that occurred earlier this month. In one case, a Japan Airlines (JAL) 787 Li-ion battery that powers the plane’s auxiliary power unit caught fire on Jan. 7 as the empty plane sat on the tarmac at Boston’s Logan International Airport. In the other incident, All Nippon Airways (ANA) pilots made an emergency landing in central Japan on Jan. 16 because of alarms warning of an electrical problem and an unusual odor in the 787’s cockpit. Both the alarm and the odor were traced to a damaged Li-ion battery.
The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board has ruled out excess voltage as the cause of the JAL fire. The agency says examination of flight recorder data indicates the auxiliary power unit battery did not exceed 32 V, the designed operating voltage.
Likewise, Norihiro Goto, Japan’s Transport Safety Board chairman, says flight recorder data show that the ANA battery’s output voltage was normal before alarms sounded in the cockpit.
Brian Barnett, a battery safety specialist at Lexington, Mass.-based technology development firm Tiax, says safety risks can be minimized with electronics to monitor battery performance.
- Chemical & Engineering News
- ISSN 0009-2347
- Copyright © American Chemical Society

Some Li-Ion battery chemistrys are much more suseptible to catastrophic failure than others.
Maybe someone should, during the next press conference, ask the question: "Which Li-Ion" chemistry is currently being used, and if the answer is anything other than "Li-Ion Phosphate" (LiFePO4), suggest that maybe they should contact a company named A123. They are one of the leaders in developing the safer LiFePo4 technology.
A quick web search would reveal a wealth of information reguarding the industries efforts and success in developing this kind of safer Li-Ion battery technology.
Fly Safe
The LiIon chemistry selected by Boeing is of the CoO2 cathode chemistry. This chemistry has nearly the highest exotherm Joule release of any current system. Unfortunately it has among the highest energy density among the same systems, and was one of the first chemistries to win widespread adoption. You are correct, LiPO4 and Li-Mg-PO4 (Valence)seem to be far more abuse tolerant, and generally safer. Their cathode exotherm is quoted at 5-10% that of CoO2 or mixed oxide systems. They certainly survive the "nail intrusion" and "bullet" tests a lot better than oxide systems if one can beleive mfg's hype, and somewhat rigged(?) tests.
Now Boeing isnt stupid, nor is Securaplane or Thales (contractors for 787 aux power systems), although, it certainly apears so. We may ask: HOW DID THE WORST POSSIBLE CHEMISTRY IN TERMS OF FIRE SAFETY WIND UP ON THE 787?
I dont pretend to know the reasons, but I find it interesting that the battery manufacturer GS-Yuasa is a Big Jap Battery maker, and not ONE but TWO Jap airlines happened to buy 787's. I am not making accusations of any kind here, but every country wants to have as much as possible DOMESTIC CONTENT in the products they buy, the USA is no exception, and I see nothing inherintly wrong with this.
GS-Yuasa happens to have "aircraft-qualified" Li-CO2 batteries available, the decisions were made, and the rest is history, as they say. Fortunatly no one was seriously injured or killed before the problem came to light.
Hopefully no GS-Yuasa execs are planning to commit Sepiku.
David Pacholok
Power Electronics Engineer
I remember a documentary about that H-bomb test and how it was at least 10 times greater than they anticipated.
And there's SO much of EVERYTHING that turns out we don't know squat about.