Cyprus-Forum.com

[GreekIslandGirl]

I have no idea of what kind of gases they release when exploding/catching fire. I will await GIG to give us more details.

I'm waiting to hear from someone because the only/main thing I can find (apart from the usual fire products) is that the "steam" from the electrolyte can emit an anesthetic-like gas (see Kikapu's idea of everyone going to "sleep") and Hydrogen Fluoride (pretty toxic).

There has been no scientific work ever carried out GIG. It;s just assumptions.

Quote:
Another feature of Li-ion batteries is the potential for emitting toxic gases. So far it is HF (Hydrogen Fluoride) that has gained most interest as this is a very toxic gas. Other gases that can pose a danger include the chemical species in the oxidation and thermal breakdown of the initial LiPF6 salt solution. Most likely PF5, POF3 and HF are of greatest concern but also the fluorinated phosphoric acids can be of interest since they will give HF and phosphoric acid when completely reacted with water. The toxicity of all these gases is not fully established. The Swedish Work Environment Authority has exposure limits for total fluorides, HF and phosphoric acid but lacks data for the rest of the substances

The NGVi for total fluorides are 2 mg/m3 and HF has a TGVii of 2 ppm. NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, USA) states that HF has a IDLH (Immediately Dangerous to Life and health) value of 30 ppm. No exposure linits are given for PF5 and POF3 , however their chlorine analogues, PCl5 and POCl3 have NGV values of 0.1 ppm. The toxicity might, however, differ between the chlorine and fluorine species and there is no general rule like "fluorine is always more toxic". But, still, the limits are low and gases evolved from battery fires are certainly of great concern to both the fire fighters, people in the vehicles and in the close vicinity of the fire. Both of these gases are very reactive and very few measurements have been performed on these gases in the literature. Yang, Zhuang and Ross2 report measurements conducted using TGA (Thermal Gravimetry Analysis) and FTIR (Fourier transform Infra Red) on pure LiPF6 salt and salt solved in EC, PC, DMC and EMC but so far little or none work has been published on emissions of these gases from fire scenarios.

Yes, I was quite surprised to find virtually nothing out there especially since there have been so many incidences of such huge expense centred around the transportation (and use) of Li-ion batteries. My guess is that Sony might have some reason to silence the science? ...

[Paphitis]

I have no idea of what kind of gases they release when exploding/catching fire. I will await GIG to give us more details.

I'm waiting to hear from someone because the only/main thing I can find (apart from the usual fire products) is that the "steam" from the electrolyte can emit an anesthetic-like gas (see Kikapu's idea of everyone going to "sleep") and Hydrogen Fluoride (pretty toxic).

There has been no scientific work ever carried out GIG. It;s just assumptions.

Quote:
Another feature of Li-ion batteries is the potential for emitting toxic gases. So far it is HF (Hydrogen Fluoride) that has gained most interest as this is a very toxic gas. Other gases that can pose a danger include the chemical species in the oxidation and thermal breakdown of the initial LiPF6 salt solution. Most likely PF5, POF3 and HF are of greatest concern but also the fluorinated phosphoric acids can be of interest since they will give HF and phosphoric acid when completely reacted with water. The toxicity of all these gases is not fully established. The Swedish Work Environment Authority has exposure limits for total fluorides, HF and phosphoric acid but lacks data for the rest of the substances

The NGVi for total fluorides are 2 mg/m3 and HF has a TGVii of 2 ppm. NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, USA) states that HF has a IDLH (Immediately Dangerous to Life and health) value of 30 ppm. No exposure linits are given for PF5 and POF3 , however their chlorine analogues, PCl5 and POCl3 have NGV values of 0.1 ppm. The toxicity might, however, differ between the chlorine and fluorine species and there is no general rule like "fluorine is always more toxic". But, still, the limits are low and gases evolved from battery fires are certainly of great concern to both the fire fighters, people in the vehicles and in the close vicinity of the fire. Both of these gases are very reactive and very few measurements have been performed on these gases in the literature. Yang, Zhuang and Ross2 report measurements conducted using TGA (Thermal Gravimetry Analysis) and FTIR (Fourier transform Infra Red) on pure LiPF6 salt and salt solved in EC, PC, DMC and EMC but so far little or none work has been published on emissions of these gases from fire scenarios.

Yes, I was quite surprised to find virtually nothing out there especially since there have been so many incidences of such huge expense centred around the transportation (and use) of Li-ion batteries. My guess is that Sony might have some reason to silence the science? ...

And who is responsible for the carriage of explosives? Who silenced that science?

http://www.dgiglobal.com/classes#cor

If you are insinuating that Lithium caused the disappearance of MH370, then you are a stupid idiot!

[Paphitis]

The risk posed by lithium-based batteries is, of course, fire. A fire can be triggered by several mechanisms, one being physical damage to the casing or the innards.

Most lithium-based batteries have a venting valve which opens when the internal pressure exceeds some threshold value above the ambient pressure. I believe the pressure differential which triggers the vent is somewhere between two or three atmospheres. The purpose of the valve is to allow gases produced by a fire inside the battery to escape, preventing an explosion which would make a bad situation even worse.

[GreekIslandGirl]

http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/...-outright-ban/
Lithium cargo facing outright industry ban
Posted on April 1, 2014 by Aimee Turner
A worldwide cargo ban on transporting highly combustible lithium metal batteries on passenger aircraft could be imposed on airlines as early as next week, writes Aimée Turner.

There was comprehensive testing of all the various chemistries and sizes in a series of simulated cargo fire scenarios using shipping cartons placed in a test Boeing 727 airframe – either through overheating or through directly heating the battery up to 190 degrees Celsius.

Test showed that smoke caused by the fire quickly engulfed the flight deck within eight or nine minutes of detection. In one test, after that test had finished with halon levels nearing zero and oxygen levels increasing, a single battery in thermal runway led to a flash fire, causing an explosion that ripped through the test airframe and blew the flight deck door off its hinges. Tests in the hold of a freighter aircraft showed that smoke started to pour into the flight deck within five minutes and became so severe that it soon became fully obscured by smoke. more:

That sounds positive because what is alarming and what was downplayed (after denials) was the sheer scale of the Lithium cargo. Unregulated in amounts it might be, but this was really stretching common sense!

Missing Malaysia Flight MH370 was carrying Li-ion batteries
By EMMA HUGHES
Published: Friday, 02 May 2014
Now that it has been confirmed that the missing Malaysia airlines flight was carrying around 2.5 tonnes Li-ion batteries, a spotlight has once again been placed on the fuel cells, which have previously been held responsible for incidents including smoke, fire, extreme heat or explosion.

Lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries have been confirmed as cargo on board the missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, which disappeared 56 days ago on 8 March this year.

According to a preliminary report released by Malaysia’s Transport Ministry, which contained a cargo manifest, the plane was carrying almost 2.5 tonnes of Li-ion...

- - - and now, we are reminded how long the plane flew for with nobody communicating on board ...

03 May 2014| last updated at 12:26AM

Malaysia Airlines (MAS) has clarified that the signals its operations centre received from flight MH370 on the night it went missing were in fact based on aircraft projection, and not on the plane's actual location.

"The word “Cambodia” was displayed by the Flight-Following System on the screen when zoomed-in, leading Malaysia Airlines to deduce that the aircraft was flying in Cambodian airspace.
"The Flight-Following System did not display the name “Vietnam”, even though the aircraft was over Vietnam airspace," said the statement.
....
MAS said to make the flight-following systems work successfully and effectively, it was important to have visual depiction of the aircraft’s position, coupled with confirmation by air-to-ground communications, such as through Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) or satellite communication.
In the case of tracking MH370, MAS said its flight-following system indicated that the aircraft was flying. However, there was no communication from the pilots.
....
On the cargo aboard MH370, MAS said about 2 tonnes (2,453kg) of cargo was declared as consolidated under one Master Airway Bill (AWB).
This Master AWB actually comprised 5 house AWB, out of which two contained lithium ion batteries amounting to a total tonnage volume of 221kg.

http://www.nst.com.my/latest/font-color ... s-1.585817

[Paphitis]

http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/...-outright-ban/
Lithium cargo facing outright industry ban
Posted on April 1, 2014 by Aimee Turner
A worldwide cargo ban on transporting highly combustible lithium metal batteries on passenger aircraft could be imposed on airlines as early as next week, writes Aimée Turner.

There was comprehensive testing of all the various chemistries and sizes in a series of simulated cargo fire scenarios using shipping cartons placed in a test Boeing 727 airframe – either through overheating or through directly heating the battery up to 190 degrees Celsius.

Test showed that smoke caused by the fire quickly engulfed the flight deck within eight or nine minutes of detection. In one test, after that test had finished with halon levels nearing zero and oxygen levels increasing, a single battery in thermal runway led to a flash fire, causing an explosion that ripped through the test airframe and blew the flight deck door off its hinges. Tests in the hold of a freighter aircraft showed that smoke started to pour into the flight deck within five minutes and became so severe that it soon became fully obscured by smoke. more:

That sounds positive because what is alarming and what was downplayed (after denials) was the sheer scale of the Lithium cargo. Unregulated in amounts it might be, but this was really stretching common sense!

Missing Malaysia Flight MH370 was carrying Li-ion batteries
By EMMA HUGHES
Published: Friday, 02 May 2014
Now that it has been confirmed that the missing Malaysia airlines flight was carrying around 2.5 tonnes Li-ion batteries, a spotlight has once again been placed on the fuel cells, which have previously been held responsible for incidents including smoke, fire, extreme heat or explosion.

Lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries have been confirmed as cargo on board the missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, which disappeared 56 days ago on 8 March this year.

According to a preliminary report released by Malaysia’s Transport Ministry, which contained a cargo manifest, the plane was carrying almost 2.5 tonnes of Li-ion...

- - - and now, we are reminded how long the plane flew for with nobody communicating on board ...

03 May 2014| last updated at 12:26AM

Malaysia Airlines (MAS) has clarified that the signals its operations centre received from flight MH370 on the night it went missing were in fact based on aircraft projection, and not on the plane's actual location.

"The word “Cambodia” was displayed by the Flight-Following System on the screen when zoomed-in, leading Malaysia Airlines to deduce that the aircraft was flying in Cambodian airspace.
"The Flight-Following System did not display the name “Vietnam”, even though the aircraft was over Vietnam airspace," said the statement.
....
MAS said to make the flight-following systems work successfully and effectively, it was important to have visual depiction of the aircraft’s position, coupled with confirmation by air-to-ground communications, such as through Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) or satellite communication.
In the case of tracking MH370, MAS said its flight-following system indicated that the aircraft was flying. However, there was no communication from the pilots.
....
On the cargo aboard MH370, MAS said about 2 tonnes (2,453kg) of cargo was declared as consolidated under one Master Airway Bill (AWB).
This Master AWB actually comprised 5 house AWB, out of which two contained lithium ion batteries amounting to a total tonnage volume of 221kg.

http://www.nst.com.my/latest/font-color ... s-1.585817

There were multiple controlled events which are not possible if everyone was overcome by toxic fumes and died.

Also, there is NOTHING wrong with carrying Lithium in those quantities provided all the regulations are adhered to. This happens every day. Cyprus Airways do this as well.

In some cases, even explosives can be carried in vast quantities. In Australia, explosives are common place within the Mining Sector. They usually go on Air Transport.

[GreekIslandGirl]

I am guilty GIG of almost poisoning myself.
I always knew these batteries were dangerous, and I personally never used them without a protection circuit attached to them.The good thing about them is they can deliver huge amounts of current almost instantly. And sometimes you need such power.
Anyway I was with a friend who had some scrap Lithium batteries, and we got that funny idea of short circuiting one of those (actually it was a small lithium polymer battery, not lithium -ion, the former are a bit most dangerous) to see what happens.
We did that from a distance, knowing the possible risks.
Well you won't beleive what kind of flash and burst it did.
Final result, it ate a couple of tiles from my friends backyard and his wife was shouting like hell.

His wife?!? I read your story thinking you were going to tell me you were little kids when you did this! lol

Anyway, Lithium batteries causing problems to planes has been in the news recently ...

Investigators in Japan are investigating why a lithium-ion battery overheated on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner at Narita airport. Last year Boeing grounded its entire fleet of the next-generation plane after the lithium batteries on two of the aircraft caught fire. (The 787s returned to the air after being fitted with a modified system to protect the aircraft against battery fires.)

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economis ... xplains-19

- . - . I wonder if they bothered with the Boeing 777s ?

As well as wondering whether the Boeing 777 was similarly upgraded for such a cargo (never mind the unbelievable Li-tonnage on board), I was also wondering about the severity of the lies and the downplaying of the Li-ion cargo being on board, in the first place, by the government official ...

Well, guess who only a month previously was touting themselves as the main Asian manufacturers for Li-ion batteries for electric vehicles ... yup ... Malaysia!

http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/in-the-e ... icles.html

...aiming to become the regional Lithium hub by 2016.

[Paphitis]

I am guilty GIG of almost poisoning myself.
I always knew these batteries were dangerous, and I personally never used them without a protection circuit attached to them.The good thing about them is they can deliver huge amounts of current almost instantly. And sometimes you need such power.
Anyway I was with a friend who had some scrap Lithium batteries, and we got that funny idea of short circuiting one of those (actually it was a small lithium polymer battery, not lithium -ion, the former are a bit most dangerous) to see what happens.
We did that from a distance, knowing the possible risks.
Well you won't beleive what kind of flash and burst it did.
Final result, it ate a couple of tiles from my friends backyard and his wife was shouting like hell.

His wife?!? I read your story thinking you were going to tell me you were little kids when you did this! lol

Anyway, Lithium batteries causing problems to planes has been in the news recently ...

Investigators in Japan are investigating why a lithium-ion battery overheated on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner at Narita airport. Last year Boeing grounded its entire fleet of the next-generation plane after the lithium batteries on two of the aircraft caught fire. (The 787s returned to the air after being fitted with a modified system to protect the aircraft against battery fires.)

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economis ... xplains-19

- . - . I wonder if they bothered with the Boeing 777s ?

As well as wondering whether the Boeing 777 was similarly upgraded for such a cargo (never mind the unbelievable Li-tonnage on board), I was also wondering about the severity of the lies and the downplaying of the Li-ion cargo being on board, in the first place, by the government official ...

Well, guess who only a month previously was touting themselves as the main Asian manufacturers for Li-ion batteries for electric vehicles ... yup ... Malaysia!

http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/in-the-e ... icles.html

...aiming to become the regional Lithium hub by 2016.

What B777 upgrade are you referring to? Never heard of a Lithium Ion upgrade.

The international regulations stipulate that this consignment can be shipped on B777 or any other aircraft provided they are consigned and packed in a particular way.

There is effectively no limit. They can legally carry 20 tonnes!

[Paphitis]

The question needs to be asked! If there was a problem with the Lithium, such as fire, then why didn't they land?

Explosion was ruled out because the last Inmarsat Satellite handshake was some 6 to 7 hours after MH370 vanished from SSR at waypoint IGARI.

[Pyrpolizer]

The risk posed by lithium-based batteries is, of course, fire. A fire can be triggered by several mechanisms, one being physical damage to the casing or the innards.

Most lithium-based batteries have a venting valve which opens when the internal pressure exceeds some threshold value above the ambient pressure. I believe the pressure differential which triggers the vent is somewhere between two or three atmospheres. The purpose of the valve is to allow gases produced by a fire inside the battery to escape, preventing an explosion which would make a bad situation even worse.

Erm... no. And actually ALL kinds of RECHARGEABLE batteries have such valve including car batteries.
The purpose of that valve is to allow for the scape of gases during CHARGING.This valve will not save you in case of short circuit or fire.It simply is the first point likely to rupture, but not limited to that, depending on the pressure inside it can rupture everywhere.

[Pyrpolizer]

The question needs to be asked! If there was a problem with the Lithium, such as fire, then why didn't they land?

Explosion was ruled out because the last Inmarsat Satellite handshake was some 6 to 7 hours after MH370 vanished from SSR at waypoint IGARI.

There was a scenario on the net (a long time ago-i am sure you remember it because yourself said it is likely that it happened like that) by some pilot who explained the whole matter in a fairly convincing manner.
Just go back in the topic you will find it somewhere.