OPSS Research Helps to Understand Complex Lithium-ion Battery Risks

OPSS Research Helps to Understand Complex Lithium-ion Battery Risks

New research from the OPSS shows why education is so important for Lithium-ion battery product owners
Contents

    It’s no secret that the increasingly popular Lithium-ion battery-powered e-Bikes and e-Scooters are associated with significant fire risks.

    Owners either do not understand these risks (or don’t appreciate their severity) or invest in less expensive products like chargers and conversion kits that are not made by the vehicle manufacturer and, often, have not met the required safety standards.

    This only serves to exacerbate the risks, and something needed to be done about it to educate owners (and potential owners) about the threat of Lithium-ion battery fires. So, back in 2023, the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) commissioned Warwick Manufacturing Group, a department of the University of Warwick, to carry out independent research into the safety risks associated with the conversion kits, Lithium-ion batteries and their chargers with e-Bikes and e-Scooters known as Personal Light Electric Vehicles (or PLEVs).

    Why is this research so important?

    That research has now been published, and, according to the OPSS press release, the results have made “tackling the rise in fires related to e-Bikes and e-Scooters a priority for Government.”

    Not only is that great news from a fire safety perspective, but the published research also benefits anyone who needs to understand the complex issues relating to e-Bike and e-Scooter fire safety.

    This is because the research dives into three key and previously un-explored areas:

    • How lithium-ion battery failures occur during real-world use and environments (i.e. away from test areas and out on the public streets)
    • The processes and materials used in product manufacturing that achieve safer product design and safer use of Lithium-ion batteries
    • Identification of potential shortcomings in technical requirements and product safety standards that have failed to keep up with the latest innovations

    Ultimately, the new research provides Government decision-makers with tangible evidence that can be used to shape future developments in an ever-evolving industry. Lithium-ion batteries continue to be adopted in devices and vehicles, and education – especially at this stage – is vital. The more people with access to physical evidence and research into the risks associated with Lithium-ion batteries, chargers and conversion kits; the better.

    What does the OPSS report show?

    The OPSS openly admits that data has not been collated for long enough or “with sufficient detail” to be analysed; but London Fire Brigade (LFB) data from 2017 to 2023 has shown an increase in the annual number of incidents involving e-Bikes, although e-Scooter incidents have not increased since 2021.

    When the data relating specifically to e-Bike incidents was studied, it was found that where they could pinpoint if the vehicle was an OEM (original equipment manufacturer) e-Bike or one using a conversion kit, more than three-quarters of the incidents involved conversion kits. 

    One thing that was notable in the report was that almost all incidents recorded by the LFB occurred indoors. Whether a battery was on-charge at the time or not could not be determined, however, the report states that “there is evidence to suggest that some consumers use incompatible chargers” and that these were rated at “up to twice the voltage of the battery involved in the fire.”

    The survey data also revealed that fire safety issues around PLEV fires are “more widespread than the LFB data suggests.”

    This is because, of the 7 per cent of respondents who either owned or had access to a PLEV (such as an e-Bike or e-Scooter), 22 per cent had experienced a safety issue at some stage and 14 per cent of those involved a fire, explosion, smoke or over-heating.

    It also showed that 35 per cent of owners had purchased a separate battery and/or charger and the proportion of these owners who had experienced an issue was much higher than those who had not (i.e. they were using the OEM battery and/or charger). 48 per cent of separate charger purchasers experienced an issue, while 41 per cent of additional battery purchasers had problems. In comparison, just 10 per cent of OEM equipment owners had problems.

    This, quite evidently, proves a link between mixing batteries and chargers that were not supplied by the OEM, and PLEV fires.

    Studies also revealed several factors that resulted in the process of thermal runaway including manufacturing defects. During the research phase, e-Bikes, e-Scooters and conversion kits made by several different manufacturers and available at different price points were disassembled and inspected to assess the design and build quality. The report states that during this process, some products showed “poor manufacturing processes” while others revealed an “absence of essential safety features such as temperature sensors” and “poor design choices that increase the likelihood of water ingress and cell overheating.”

    Another notable line from the report is that “the abuse testing has shown a clear correlation between the price-per-unit-of-energy of PLEV batteries and the safety outcomes.”

    Put simply, the less expensive the battery, the greater the risk.

    What does this mean for the future?

    The OPSS research highlights a critical and growing risk posed by lithium-ion batteries, particularly in e-bikes and e-scooters. With fire incidents increasing year-on-year, the need for greater public awareness and proactive safety measures has never been more urgent​.

    The connection between less expensive batteries and greater fire risks is something we speak about throughout the different courses available through the Firechief® Academy.

    For example, our fully accredited CPD level one course helps people to understand the magnitude of the risks posed by Lithium-ion batteries, why LiB fires happen and how the risks can be mitigated. We then go into more detail in the level two course, focussing on the reasons why these fires are so unique and the importance of further education.

    We’re committed to driving education and action through our Firechief Academy. Our CPD-accredited training courses equip businesses and individuals with the knowledge they need to identify battery fire risks and take vital, preventive steps​.

    However, raising awareness is of paramount importance.

    Every individual, workplace, and household must recognize the dangers of Lithium-ion battery fires and implement safety measures accordingly. The need to continue raising public awareness has only been strengthened by the content of the WMG report both for consumers and businesses. Individuals need to understand the practical risks of PLEV ownership including how and where to store and charge their vehicles and devices safely; while businesses will be forced to adapt their policies and insurance to factor in PLEVs while their owners are on the premises.

    By staying informed, using certified charging equipment, and following best practices for Lithium-ion battery management, we can all mitigate these risks and prevent unnecessary tragedies.

    To find out more about Lithium-ion battery fire risks, visit the Firechief Academy where you can book a spot on our next fully CPD-accredited webinars. Alternatively, browse our range of Lithium-ion battery safety products including fire extinguishers and DIN SPEC 91489-certified fire blankets.


    Disclaimer

    The information contained within this blog is provided solely for general informational and educational purposes and is not intended as a substitute for professional advice. Before taking any actions based upon this information, we advise the reader to consult all relevant statutory or regulatory guidance and, where necessary, to consult a qualified fire or industry regulation professional. The use or reliance on any information contained herein is solely at the reader's risk.