{"id":2443,"date":"2026-10-30T17:27:58","date_gmt":"2026-10-31T00:27:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/?p=2443"},"modified":"2026-10-30T17:27:58","modified_gmt":"2026-10-31T00:27:58","slug":"a-growing-concern-lithium-ion-li-ion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/2026\/10\/30\/a-growing-concern-lithium-ion-li-ion\/","title":{"rendered":"A Growing Concern lithium-ion (Li-ion)"},"content":{"rendered":"

This article is part of a series of posts led by CHASI Research Associate Len Garis, who has been a long-time partner of CHASI through his work with the\u00a0National Indigenous Fire Safety Council<\/a>. His guest blog posts explore a wide range of topics related to firefighting and firefighters in Canada. You can read all of his guest articles at this link<\/a>. <\/em><\/p>\n

CHASI\u2019s collaborations with the NIFSC, and many of their other research works, can be found on our NIFSC Publications page<\/a>. For questions about the NIFSC and their work, please visit their <\/a><\/em>contact page<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

A Growing Concern lithium-ion (Li-ion)<\/strong><\/h2>\n

By Len Garis and Todd Schierling <\/em><\/p>\n

The rise of lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries in electric vehicles (EVs) introduces a new and serious fire safety challenge. While the overall frequency of EV fires is statistically lower than fires involving gasoline-powered vehicles, the unique and severe nature of Li-ion battery fires, particularly in indoor environments, demands urgent attention. Data from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board indicates there are approximately 25 fires for every 100,000 EVs sold, compared to 1,530 fires for every 100,000 gas vehicles. The lower frequency of these fires might inadvertently create a sense of complacency, but their significantly higher severity requires a proactive re-evaluation of safety measures.<\/p>\n

The Unique Chemical Signature of Li-ion Battery Fires<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Li-ion battery fires are fundamentally different from fires involving traditional combustibles like wood or plastics. During thermal runaway, they release a uniquely hazardous chemical signature that distinguishes them significantly from conventional fires. These fires generate highly toxic gases such as<\/p>\n

Hydrogen Fluoride (HF)<\/strong>, Carbon Monoxide (CO), and Hydrogen Cyanide (HCN). They also release heavy metals like Cobalt, Nickel, Manganese, and Lithium, often as ultrafine particulate matter and aerosols. The generation of highly flammable gases like Hydrogen (H2\u200b) and Methane (CH4\u200b) during such events significantly escalates the risk of explosions.<\/p>\n

One of the most dangerous byproducts is;<\/p>\n

Hydrogen Fluoride (HF)<\/strong>, which is highly lipid-soluble and can rapidly penetrate skin and tissue. Unlike other acids, a particularly insidious characteristic of HF is its tendency not to cause immediate painful burns upon contact with diluted forms, leading to a delayed recognition of severe exposure. This delayed recognition can lead to critical delays in medical intervention, as the absorbed fluoride ions can cause systemic toxicity. Once absorbed, the fluoride ion systematically binds with vital electrolytes like calcium and magnesium, leading to cellular death and tissue liquefaction necrosis. Systemic toxicity from HF absorption can manifest acutely as hypocalcaemia and hypomagnesemia, which can trigger cardiac arrhythmias, muscle spasms, and seizures, potentially proving fatal. In the long term, chronic exposure can lead to fluoride accumulation in bones, causing skeletal fluorosis, characterized by bone hardening, joint pain, and limited mobility. Renal tubular damage and acute kidney injury can also result from systemic fluoride effects, alongside potential neurological impacts.<\/p>\n

The ultrafine particulate matter and aerosols of heavy metals released during a fire also pose a significant long-term risk. Ingested or inhaled particles can translocate throughout the body, accumulating in various organs over time. This accumulation can lead to a variety of long-term health issues, including neurotoxicity, carcinogenicity, organ damage (e.g., kidney damage, liver dysfunction, cardiovascular effects), and immunotoxicity. The latency period for heavy metal-induced diseases can range from years to decades, depending on the specific metal, dose, duration of exposure, and individual susceptibility, making accumulation from repeated exposures a primary concern.<\/p>\n

Amplified Risks and Challenging Extinguishment<\/strong><\/h3>\n

These unique hazards are greatly amplified in confined indoor environments like underground parking garages or residential garages. Limited ventilation, characteristic of such spaces, allows the toxic and flammable gases to accumulate rapidly to dangerous concentrations. This rapid accumulation not only intensifies inhalation risks for both civilians attempting to evacuate and emergency responders but also elevates the potential for vapor cloud explosions. The unique combination of these specific hazards and their accelerated concentration in built environments transforms what might otherwise be a localized fire event into a systemic risk for the entire structure and its occupants.<\/p>\n

Li-ion battery fires are also exceptionally difficult to extinguish. They require vast amounts of water for cooling, often over extended periods, and sometimes require the complete submersion of the vehicle to mitigate thermal runaway effectively. EV fires burn at much higher temperatures, averaging 5,000\u00b0F, compared to 1,500\u00b0F for gas fires. This prolonged suppression effort means firefighters are exposed to accumulating toxic hazards for significantly longer durations than in typical fire incidents. Li-ion batteries also have a persistent re-ignition potential, even after initial suppression, ensuring hazardous gases can continue to be released.<\/p>\n

Firefighter and Civilian Safety Risks from Toxic Gases<\/strong><\/h3>\n

For both firefighters and civilians, exposure to the byproducts of Li-ion battery fires presents unique and severe risks. While respiratory protection like a Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) is crucial for mitigating inhalation hazards, dermal absorption<\/strong> represents a substantial and often underestimated route of entry for fireground contaminants. Research indicates that elevated skin temperature, induced by exertion and protective gear, can significantly increase dermal absorption, with studies showing up to a 400% increase for every 5<\/strong>\u2218<\/strong>C rise in skin temperature<\/strong>. Contaminants can penetrate turnout gear or transfer to the skin during doffing or post-incident activities, even after the fire has been suppressed.<\/p>\n

Firefighters face unavoidable exposure to complex toxic mixtures from both traditional combustion byproducts and the unique chemical hazards of Li-ion battery fires. The long latency periods associated with contaminants from traditional fires, such as PAHs (often 5 to 40 years for cancers), and the similar multi-year to multi-decade latency for Li-ion specific contaminants mean that firefighters are accumulating a complex array of toxins throughout their careers. This cumulative exposure, potentially with synergistic effects, contributes to a broad spectrum of long-term health issues, including various cancers, cardiovascular disease, and neurological impairments. The introduction of Li-ion battery fires adds a new dimension of unique pathologies, such as skeletal fluorosis and specific electrolyte imbalances, on top of existing occupational risks.<\/p>\n

For civilians, particularly those in residential settings with attached garages or in commercial\/public indoor charging facilities, the risks from toxic gas exposure are immediate and severe. The rapid accumulation of highly toxic gases like HF and HCN, coupled with the potential for delayed recognition of HF burns, poses direct threats to occupants attempting to evacuate or those unknowingly exposed. Reports from some areas, such as Hernando County, Florida, indicate that Li-ion battery fires are becoming the “leading cause of fires in residential houses,” including incidents involving golf carts charging in garages.<\/p>\n

The Need for Better Data and Awareness<\/strong><\/h3>\n

While the overall fire frequency for EVs is statistically lower than for gasoline vehicles, a critical distinction must be made. EV fires, while less frequent, are significantly harder to extinguish, require far more water (often ten times the amount), burn at much higher temperatures, and pose persistent re-ignition risks. This paradox can lead to complacency, even though their higher severity demands urgent attention.<\/p>\n

The observation by Verisk that “a third of EV fires are linked to charging” strongly suggests that charging is a significant contributing factor, warranting focused data collection. Despite the general statistics on EV fires, there appears to be a critical lack of granular, publicly accessible data specifically on the frequency of fires occurring at indoor charging stations. While a National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) study indicates a rate of “EV Charging Stations: 2 annual fire incidents per 100,000 units\u201d, the scope of this data\u2014whether it differentiates between residential and commercial settings, indoor and outdoor locations, or fires originating from the charger unit versus the vehicle battery while charging\u2014requires further clarification.<\/p>\n

For instance, “charging station fires” could encompass distinct scenarios: a fire originating directly from the charging unit itself, a fire originating from the vehicle’s battery while it is actively charging, or a fire involving a smaller Li-ion battery (e.g., from a micro-mobility device) being charged within a residential environment. Each of these scenarios presents unique risk profiles and demands different mitigation strategies. Therefore, future data collection efforts need to be highly granular to inform targeted prevention strategies, such as improvements in charger design standards, advancements in battery management systems, or enhanced consumer education on safe charging practices.<\/p>\n

Conclusion: A Shift in Perspective is Needed<\/strong><\/h3>\n

While the infrequency of Li-ion battery fires might lead to a false sense of security, the practice of charging lithium battery-powered vehicles indoors, particularly in parking garages with major living occupancies above, should be re-evaluated. The low likelihood of a fire, though statistically true, is not the sole factor to consider. The key difference lies in the nature of the fire itself. The extreme toxicity, the re-ignition potential, and the difficulty of extinguishment make these fires far more dangerous and difficult to manage than those involving gasoline or natural gas.<\/p>\n

The fact that gasoline and propane fueling are not permitted indoors or in parking garages with residences<\/u><\/em> above is based on the principle of preventing catastrophic events, even if their probability is low. This same logic should be applied to Li-ion battery charging. The severe and unique health risks posed to both civilians and emergency responders necessitate a fundamental rethinking of current safety measures and building codes. The introduction of Li-ion battery fires adds new and unique pathologies on top of existing occupational risks for firefighters, underscoring the need for more sophisticated, multi-faceted, and long-term health monitoring programs. The urgency is further highlighted by local reports that indicate Li-ion battery fires are becoming a “leading cause of fires in residential houses” in some areas. The shared goal is to enhance public safety and protect emergency responders from these evolving hazards.<\/p>\n

Authors\u00a0 <\/strong><\/h3>\n

Len Garis is director of research for the National Indigenous Fire Safety Council,<\/em> Ret.<\/em> Fire Chief for the city of Surrey, B.C., associate scientist emeritus with the B.C. Injury Research and Prevention Unit. Contact him at lwgaris@outlook.com<\/a>.<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Todd Schierling is the president of the BC Professional Firefighters Association and a Captain with the Surrey Fire Services and an IAFF Field Service Representative. Contact him at <\/em>todd@bcpffa.org<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This article is part of a series of posts led by CHASI Research Associate Len Garis, who has been a long-time partner of CHASI through his work with the\u00a0National Indigenous Fire Safety Council. His guest blog posts explore a wide range of topics related to firefighting and firefighters in Canada. You can read all of … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":232,"featured_media":2445,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"generate_page_header":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[399],"tags":[404,328,398],"class_list":["post-2443","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-firefighting-friday","tag-electric-cars","tag-fire-prevention","tag-firefighting-friday"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2443","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/232"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2443"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2443\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2446,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2443\/revisions\/2446"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2445"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2443"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2443"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ufv.ca\/chasi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2443"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}