| Work Detail |
Firetrace International, a provider of fire suppression technology for the renewable energy industry, offers a range of measures to reduce the risk of fires in battery storage systems, giving manufacturers, developers and operators insight into what must be done to maintain the confidence of investors, policy makers and the general public.
A report from Firetrace International claims that negative media publicity over recent incidents of fires caused by faulty energy storage systems is sowing public opposition, and the firefighting specialist offers ways to reduce fires and suppress opposition .
As battery energy storage systems proliferate in the United States, so do reports of battery fires or overheating. From the Salt River Project to a Tesla facility, these fires are making headlines. The American Public Power Association is taking advantage of these fires, which mostly affect lithium-ion batteries, to reiterate previous comments from the Arizona Corporation Commission stating that lithium-ion chemistries used in lithium-ion storage facilities batteries created unacceptable risks. The fire has drawn attention to safety issues related to energy storage.
Firetrace International says negative coverage like this has led to the postponement of national energy storage infrastructure projects. Because of these types of fires, insurance companies are now less willing to cover energy storage projects. Those that do offer coverage have increased premiums, applied higher deductibles or denied 100% coverage. The report notes that this is despite the Electric Power Research Institute database showing that national incidents of energy storage failures have decreased from 16 in 2018 to six as of July this year.
To help energy storage companies regain the trust of investors, policymakers, and the public in battery energy storage systems, Firetrace outlines ways manufacturers, developers, and operators can lower the risk of hazards. common fire hazards. These include separating battery containers and other important equipment, ensuring that EPC contractors understand battery storage technology, having a sufficient water supply on site, ensuring that local fire departments are familiar with the installation, etc.
The report also cites the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), which states that water suppression systems are the most effective way to suppress a fire in an energy storage system. The NFPA recommends that buildings housing energy storage systems install sprinkler systems that meet NFPA 13.
In addition to a water suppression system, Firetrace recommends a battery management system and grouping energy storage units into small segments limited to certain kilowatt-hour amounts and spaced from other segments and walls.
“There are firefighting companies that claim their systems can suppress lithium-ion battery fires and prevent thermal runaway,” says Brian Cashion, director of engineering at Firetrace International. “We do not believe the industry can make these claims yet because there is no publicly available testing data to substantiate these claims in real-world testing scenarios and doing so risks a second wave of public scrutiny. It is crucial that we get the solution right.”
Additionally, the report suggests manufacturers implement monthly preventive checks and thermographic testing, and have spare parts on hand to minimize disruptions should improvements be implemented. Because home storage fire regulations vary from state to state, different standards inform design and installation practices, which the report says can decrease system safety and quality. The report also notes that NFPA suggests that systems that house enough batteries in a confined space capable of generating an explosion install deflagration prevention or venting systems in accordance with NFPA 69, Standard on Explosion Prevention Systems, and NFPA 68, Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting.
It is also important to take into account the regulations, although the report notes that “they are being developed randomly, with a state-by-state approach.” For example, each state may have a different fire code, which means energy storage systems may be designed differently depending on where they are located. For example, as of April 1, 2021, there were eight states in the 2012 cycle, 23 states (plus the District of Columbia) in the 2015 cycle, 17 states in the 2018 cycle, and two states (California and New York) in the 2021 cycle.
Additionally, solar and energy storage design and engineering consultancy Mayfield Renewables has noted that some US states adopt the International Fire Code (IFC) for energy storage, while others adhere to the IFC code. the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). |
