Lithium batteries

[MtB]

2 hours ago, blackrose said:

I had a battery explosion after installing LiFePo4 batteries on my boat. 

 

But it was a sealed lead/acid buffer battery that exploded as a result of me forgetting to remove the tiny vent plug! 

 

 

Did it kill you? 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, blackrose said:

You say that like it's a good thing? 😋

 

I say it like it was a reasonable response to a number of fatalities. 

 

How many people have been killed or seriously injured by faulty LFP installations, I ask again?

 

Actually I think I know the answer.... None. 

 

 

[IanD]

2 hours ago, David Mack said:

Given how high the "Not Known" category is in relation to the other listed causes, it is difficult to draw reliable conclusions about where the biggest risks lie.

That's true, but the point is not how big the other risks are, it's how big the risks of LFP are.

 

Before the ABC event it was easy to say "LFP are really safe, you don't need to take any special installation precautions" because that was what experience showed -- and most people thought, including me.

 

Regulators like ISO have been working on LFP regulations for some time and had identified risks like gas venting but these were essentially theoretical, it had never happened, no big urgency. BSS and insurers weren't taking much notice either.

 

After the fire/explosion this view no longer holds water, an LFP installation caused a fire/explosion which destroyed the boat and could easily have killed somebody. All of a sudden the industry woke up and went "Oh sh*t, we need to do something".

 

As usual the problem is to address the safety issue without make a knee-jerk reaction to a one-off (well, so far...) event which could cause big problems for boaters and builders -- BSS specifically said they didn't want to do this.

 

But in the meantime insurers are getting twitchy and in some cases placing silly requirements on boaters, because they don't understand the issue -- it was suggested some time ago that there should be an agreed common approach to LFP safety but at the time nobody was interested.

 

The IWA/CA Guidance Note is trying to advise on sensible precautions to make LFP installations safe, and hopefully this will help both boaters/builders/installers and insurers to agree on a common approach to LFP which prevents dangerous installations but also avoids regulatory overkill.

 

This is inevitably going to mean some level of increased regulation compared to the LFP Wild West where we are now, but that's what needs to happen now the industry has woken up to the previously underappreciated risk posed by LFP on boats.

 

36 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Did it kill you? 

 

I say it like it was a reasonable response to a number of fatalities. 

 

How many people have been killed or seriously injured by faulty LFP installations, I ask again?

 

Actually I think I know the answer.... None. 

 

It was very nearly one, if the ABC boat cleaner had been there just a little bit later... 😞

Edited July 13 by IanD

[MtB]

9 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

It was very nearly one, if the ABC boat cleaner had been there just a little bit later... 😞

 

Quite a lot later, I'd suggest.

 

It was me pointed out she'd noticed "Whisps of smoke" coming from the battery area and decided staying on board to complete the cleaning was a bad idea, and sensibly scooted off home.

 

I gather the office were not interested in her observations or opinions, her being only the cleaner...

 

 

Anyway the point is, no-one was killed or injured. Is "Might have been" now a criterion for future new BSS rules? 

 

 

[IanD]

4 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Quite a lot later, I'd suggest.

 

It was me pointed out she'd noticed "Whisps of smoke" coming from the battery area and decided staying on board to complete the cleaning was a bad idea, and sensibly scooted off home.

 

I gather the office were not interested in her observations or opinions, her being only the cleaner...

 

So if she had been there later and had been killed, would you (or others) still be protesting about extra regulation?

 

The office not listening shows how unaware they were of the potential hazards of overcharging LFP batteries, which is what we're trying to correct... 😉

[Tacet]

14 hours ago, IanD said:

 

 

P.P.S. On insurance, the Guidance Note says this (my bold):

 

"Owners must inform their insurer before installing lithium batteries and not assume that a lithium domestic battery installation is automatically covered under an existing policy. Most insurers apply conditions on the type of battery, professional installation, charging arrangements, storage, fire protection, unattended charging or the carriage of specific extinguishers." 

 

A Guidance Note that includes the words "Owners must" has misunderstood its own status.

[MtB]

10 hours ago, IanD said:

So if she had been there later and had been killed, would you (or others) still be protesting about extra regulation?

 

The office not listening shows how unaware they were of the potential hazards of overcharging LFP batteries, which is what we're trying to correct... 😉

 

Its the thin end of a very thick wedge when regulations are being written up to prevent "what if?" scenarios rather than being based on real events. 

[IanD]

41 minutes ago, Tacet said:

A Guidance Note that includes the words "Owners must" has misunderstood its own status.

Sorry but I disagree -- that is the official position of the BSS (see Installed Lithium Advice Note) and insurers, this note is simply passing that on to boaters as described in the Note itself.

 

The are only two levels available; optional/recommended and required/necessary. "Must" is the agreed word to be used for the second one, because "should" is capable of misinterpretation. It's the same meaning as in BSS regulations.

[Russ T]

15 hours ago, MtB said:

 

And just to point out gas explosions are not the only (or even the main) risk  where DIY gas work is concerned. Carbon monoxide poisoning is far more common. 

 

 

 

 

 

WHAT????!!!!!

 

You'd have the OP struggle along with his existing batteries for another decade??!! 

 

 

 

We started living aboard in 1999. It wasn't until 2019 that the BS scheme made CO alarms mandatory. Now in 2026 they are talking about introducing smoke alarms,a full time  30 years after the scheme introduction.

 

So,given that there are no documented incidents of any death on the UK inland waterways due to fixed installations of LFP batteries on boats,and only one incident on a"professional"install (with no details released to the GP),it seems likely you are correct. I reckon maybe another decade.

 

ETA And a full 5 years after I installed LFP batteries on our boat,and I was a late starter.

Edited July 14 by Russ T

[IanD]

39 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Its the thin end of a very thick wedge when regulations are being written up to prevent "what if?" scenarios rather than being based on real events. 

But it's not a very big "what if", is it?

 

The ABC boat caught fire and exploded, and the cleaner was lucky not to have been there when this happened.

 

If you want other "what-ifs" -- what if the boat had been moored in a marina with lots of other boats, and the fire had spread to them? That's happened on multiple occasions with petrol fires, as I'm sure you're perfectly well aware.

 

The simple fact is that the ABC boat had an LFP battery/BMS and external charging system, just like all the other boats with LFP batteries on board, and something (which ABC refuse to disclose...) went horribly wrong which shouldn't have happened but did. AFAIK it's the first recorded case of such an LFP fire/explosion caused by overcharging/gassing on a boat, but it still happened, and there's nothing in place to try and stop it happening again.

 

Before saying "oh, this was an exceptional case, used every day..." there have been other non-dayboat cases of gross LFP overcharging from things like an MPPT failing short-circuit and dumping the full solar panel voltage into the battery (see picture) -- and this could happen to any boat if there are no suitable failsafes in place, which I suspect many don't have. Yes this one didn't cause a gas explosion, but I suspect that's more by luck than judgement.

 

Yes these are relatively rare (but real...) occurrences, but the problem is that the consequences can be severe, and the regulatory bodies are not going to wait for somebody to be killed before taking action -- because if they did everyone would throw their hands in the air and cry "Why didn't they warn us?". More to the point for the near term, insurers are already starting to put lithium clauses into their policies, many of which are unjustified and will cause major difficulties for some boaters, and this problem will only get worse unless a sensible common policy on "LFP installs on boats" can be arrived at.

 

What we're trying to do is to come up with a set of sensible rules which if followed will avoid these kinds of incidents recurring, while fending off stupid decisions made by organisations who don't understand the issues and will throw excess regulation at the problem "just to be safe" because following the regs isn't their problem. If you want an example, one of the yachting associations (New Zealand?) came up with a proposed set of "lithium battery rules" which included the following:

 

1. All lithium battery installations on boats must be done by qualified professionals.

2. All battery/charging system components must be certified for marine use

3. Batteries must be encased in a steel (or similar) fireproof box which can contain a battery fire for 30mins

4. Battery box must include fire sensors, forced ventilation

5. A lithium-certified automatic fire suppression system must be fitted

6. All safety-critical systems (fire detection/suppression/ventilation, lights, navigation, pumps, communication) must run from a separate power source from the main battery bank so they continue to work in the event of an emergency disconnect

 

So I really wish people would stop throwing sh*t at those of us trying to do something to prevent this -- most of us also have LFP on board and several are electric boaters (including DIY), we're all on the same side here guys... 😉 

 

10 minutes ago, Russ T said:

We started living aboard in 1999. It wasn't until 2019 that the BS scheme made CO alarms mandatory. Now in 2026 they are talking about introducing smoke alarms,a full time  30 years after the scheme introduction.

 

So,given that there are no documented incidents of any death on the UK inland waterways due to fixed installations of LFP batteries on boats,and only one incident on a"professional"install (with no details released to the GP),it seems likely you are correct. I reckon maybe another decade.

 

ETA And a full 5 years after I installed LFP batteries on our boat,and I was a late starter.

Please read my post above. It won't matter a jot to most boaters with LFP on board whether the BSS brings in regulations in 5 or 10 years, if next year they can't get insurance... 😞 

Edited July 14 by IanD

[Russ T]

18 minutes ago, IanD said:

Before saying "oh, this was an exceptional case, used every day..." there have been other non-dayboat cases of gross LFP overcharging from things like an MPPT failing short-circuit and dumping the full solar panel voltage into the battery (see picture) -- and this could happen to any boat if there are no suitable failsafes in place, which I suspect many don't have. Yes this one didn't cause a gas explosion, but I suspect that's more by luck than judgement

That Incident makes interesting reading. I wonder whether the professional/competent installer would have picked up on the fact that the array was oversized for the controller,and the BMS may well have done it's job otherwise.

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, Russ T said:

That Incident makes interesting reading. I wonder whether the professional/competent installer would have picked up on the fact that the array was oversized for the controller,and the BMS may well have done it's job otherwise.

Doesn't help, a 12V BMS will typically use MOSFETs rated at 30V-60V (depending on design quality/cost), shove 100V into these (that's only 3 series panels, quite normal) and they're likely to fail short-circuit (because that's what power MOSFETs typically do with major overvoltages).

Edited July 14 by IanD

[Russ T]

12 minutes ago, IanD said:

Doesn't help, a 12V BMS will typically use MOSFETs rated at 30V-60V (depending on design quality/cost), shove 100V into these (that's only 3 series panels, quite normal) and they're likely to fail short-circuit (because that's what power MOSFETs typically do with major overvoltages).

But if it was correctly sized,the mppt would not have failed,or at least less likely to have failed.If the voltage was limited to below the MOSFET rating too,it should also function properly.

 

My point is,how many competent/professional installers would examine an existing solar install when installing LFP. The answer,should be all of them, judging by that article 

Edited July 14 by Russ T

[MtB]

12 hours ago, IanD said:

So if she had been there later and had been killed, would you (or others) still be protesting about extra regulation?

 

No, but that's not what happened was it? 

 

She noticed the whisps of smoke and got out with a couple of hours to spare before anything dramatic happened. Hardly a life-threatening event. 

 

 

 

 

58 minutes ago, IanD said:

What we're trying to do is to come up with a set of sensible rules which if followed will avoid these kinds of incidents recurring, while fending off stupid decisions made by organisations who don't understand the issues and will throw excess regulation at the problem "just to be safe" because following the regs isn't their problem.

 

Well I am greatly reassured by this. My fear all along is your efforts will not be accepted and exactly what you describe will happen. 

 

More power to your elbow. 

 

 

[Russ T]

40 minutes ago, IanD said:

Doesn't help, a 12V BMS will typically use MOSFETs rated at 30V-60V (depending on design quality/cost), shove 100V into these (that's only 3 series panels, quite normal) and they're likely to fail short-circuit (because that's what power MOSFETs typically do with major overvoltages).

What would happen to a lead acid battery in this scenario? Presumably nothing good, as the author says:

 

Quote

Fortunately, our RV owner had chosen lithium-iron-phosphate batteries, not conventional lead-acid cells, which would have quickly been driven into thermal runaway with 100V feeding into them

 

[IanD]

43 minutes ago, Russ T said:

But if it was correctly sized,the mppt would not have failed,or at least less likely to have failed.If the voltage was limited to below the MOSFET rating too,it should also function properly.

 

My point is,how many competent/professional installers would examine an existing solar install when installing LFP. The answer,should be all of them, judging by that article 

That's not how MPPTs work -- of course they're designed not to fail when run within their ratings (e.g. a 150V MPPT for 3 series panels with ~100V output), but nevertheless they do occasionally fail. And if they do, the most likely failure mode is short-circuit.

 

If this happens and they let the full panel voltage through to the BMS then what happens depends on the design and component ratings -- a 48V BMS will almost certainly survive, a 24V one might or might not, a 12V one will almost certainly fail (not designed to withstand 8x nominal input voltage). Guess which is most common on boats?

 

The point about LFP is that it really *is* the entire system that matters for safety, including all charging sources as well as the BMS/control system. So yes, an installer should check any solar installation.

 

Whether they also check for things like alternators frying due to heavy loading or dying due to the inductive spike is there's a HV disconnect while charging is a more subtle point; the Guidance Note points this out, you could say it's a cost issue for the boater rather than a safety one, but I imagine that if either happens and they have to buy a new alternator they're not going to be very happy with their installer... 😉 

 

13 minutes ago, Russ T said:

What would happen to a lead acid battery in this scenario? Presumably nothing good, as the author says:

 

Yes, the LA cells would have presumably boiled dry. But the issue is that the volume of gas emitted from a grossly overcharged LFP cell is *way* higher than from an LA cell, at least 500l/kWh (some report up to 6000l/kWh) compared to 25l/kWh for FLA (5l/kWh for VRLA).

 

LA batteries already have ventilation requirements when installed in boats, right now there are no such regulations for LFP -- which is entirely wrong, given the above facts.

Edited July 14 by IanD

[Russ T]

17 minutes ago, IanD said:

That's not how MPPTs work -- of course they're designed not to fail when run within their ratings (e.g. a 150V MPPT for 3 series panels with ~100V output), but nevertheless they do occasionally fail. And if they do, the most likely failure mode is short-circuit.

 

If this happens and they let the full panel voltage through to the BMS then what happens depends on the design and component ratings -- a 48V BMS will almost certainly survive, a 24V one might or might not, a 12V one will almost certainly fail (not designed to withstand 8x nominal input voltage). Guess which is most common on boats?

 

The point about LFP is that it really *is* the entire system that matters for safety, including all charging sources as well as the BMS/control system. So yes, an installer should check any solar installation.

 

Whether they also check for things like alternators frying due to heavy loading or dying due to the inductive spike is there's a HV disconnect while charging is a more subtle point; the Guidance Note points this out, you could say it's a cost issue for the boater rather than a safety one, but I imagine that if either happens and they have to buy a new alternator they're not going to be very happy with their installer... 😉 

 

Yes, the LA cells would have presumably boiled dry. But the issue is that the volume of gas emitted from a grossly overcharged LFP cell is *way* higher than from an LA cell, at least 500l/kWh (some report up to 6000l/kWh) compared to 25l/kWh for FLA (5l/kWh for VRLA).

 

LA batteries already have ventilation requirements when installed in boats, right now there are no such regulations for LFP -- which is entirely wrong, given the above facts.

So still potentially a situation that would cause a fire or explosion then?

[IanD]

41 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

No, but that's not what happened was it? 

 

She noticed the whisps of smoke and got out with a couple of hours to spare before anything dramatic happened. Hardly a life-threatening event. 

 

Well I am greatly reassured by this. My fear all along is your efforts will not be accepted and exactly what you describe will happen. 

 

More power to your elbow. 

 

So if someone strolls across an unguarded railway crossing an hour before the train, does that mean guards shouldn't be installed? What happens when the next person strolls across right in front of a train and gets killed? It's pure chance, isn't it? That's not how safety regulations work, you don't bet lives on the roll of a dice... 😉 

 

The IWA/CA Guidance Note will be going out to all organizations involved including boating ones, regulatory ones, equipment manufacturers, and insurers, with the aim of making it an accepted set of recommendations for all concerned -- including boaters who want to have a safe and insurable LFP installation, of course. As well as the group involved in drafting it, it has also been reviewed and approved by three different external "industry experts", whose comments were positive and see this as a solid attempt to try and get everyone "singing from the same hymn sheet".

 

I think it's our best chance at ending up with a sensible solution to "the LFP problem" -- if I didn't I wouldn't be helping with it, this has all consumed a lot of time over the last year or so... 🙂 

 

8 minutes ago, Russ T said:

So still potentially a situation that would cause a fire or explosion then?

Yes, which is precisely why there are rules (RCR/BSS?) about LA ventilation.

 

Since LFP emit 20x/100x/250x/1000x more gas (depending which LFP/LA numbers you use) the fire/explosion risk when overcharged is much higher, unless suitable precautions are taken.

Edited July 14 by IanD

[Russ T]

9 minutes ago, IanD said:

45 minutes ago, MtB said:

Expand  

So if someone strolls across an unguarded railway crossing an hour before the train, does that mean guards shouldn't be installed? What happens when the next person strolls across right in front of a train and gets killed? It's pure chance, isn't it? That's not how safety regulations work, you don't bet lives on the roll of a dice.

So why weren't co alarms and smoke alarms introduced when the scheme was?

[IanD]

Oh yes, I forgot -- "hybrid" batteries (LFP/LA in parallel, with or without a "long wire") are a no-no, because all the LFP manufacturers specifically say something like "Do not connect in parallel with batteries of different chemistries", and the first safety rule is always "must be installed according to the manufacturer's instructions".

 

That's going to be an unfortunate result for all those boaters who have installed such systems, but some of us have been saying for years that this is a bad idea... 😉 

[MtB]

3 minutes ago, Russ T said:

So why weren't co alarms and smoke alarms introduced when the scheme was?

 

And in the case of the ABC conflagration, did the smoke alarms and CO alarms go off? 

 

Would that not have been sufficient warning to souls on board to get off?

 

 

Never mind reams of new regulations starting with "Must be a professional install".

 

 

 

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, Russ T said:

So why weren't co alarms and smoke alarms introduced when the scheme was?

Look, what's the point you're trying to make -- that there shouldn't be any restrictions on LFP use because "they're really safe"? Or are you just arguing for the sake of it?

 

If it's the first one (and you have a dodgy LFP installation) -- good luck with getting insurance in future, you'll need it.

[blackrose]

3 minutes ago, IanD said:

Oh yes, I forgot -- "hybrid" batteries (LFP/LA in parallel, with or without a "long wire") are a no-no, because all the LFP manufacturers specifically say something like "Do not connect in parallel with batteries of different chemistries", and the first safety rule is always "must be installed according to the manufacturer's instructions".

 

That's going to be an unfortunate result for all those boaters who have installed such systems, but some of us have been saying for years that this is a bad idea... 😉 

 

Assume a LA buffer battery on the other side of a B2B charger isn't in parallel?

[Russ T]

Just now, blackrose said:

 

Assume a LA buffer battery on the other side of a B2B charger isn't in parallel?

No,it isn't,and any one who has a hybrid setup can easily change it by installing a b2b

[IanD]

7 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

1. And in the case of the ABC conflagration, did the smoke alarms and CO alarms go off? 

 

2. Would that not have been sufficient warning to souls on board to get off?

 

3. Never mind reams of new regulations starting with "Must be a professional install".

 

1. Nobody knows

2. Maybe, if they weren't deaf

3. Nobody is suggesting such a rule, in fact we're actively trying to prevent it

 

(see the list of the NZ YA proposals for other inappropriate rules we're also trying to avoid being imposed)

3 minutes ago, Russ T said:

No,it isn't,and any one who has a hybrid setup can easily change it by installing a b2b

And that's what they'll have to do. Unfortunate for them because a suitable B2B (e.g. Victron Orion XS) costs several hundred quid, and a length of wire costs a few quid... 😉 

Edited July 14 by IanD

[Russ T]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

1. Nobody knows

2. Maybe, if they weren't deaf

3. Nobody is suggesting such a rule, in fact we're actively trying to prevent it

 

(see the list of the NZ YA proposals for other inappropriate rules we're also trying to avoid being imposed)

And that's what they'll have to do. Unfortunate for them because a suitable B2B costs several hundred quid, and a length of wire costs a few quid... 😉 

A few hundred quid is a drop in the ocean to the savings they have already had and will continue to get, assuming the requirements are not too Draconian