Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MVetter]

Water helps after the fact dealing with stranded energy but doesn't do much during the actual thermal event.

[Specter]

Water will also wash the copper sheets off so you get a bit more at the junk yard from them, but will turn very caustic with the lithium in it.  Think Lye.

During the thermal event, water will accelerate it.  Lithium will react with water, creating Lithium Hydroxide and Hydrogen and a shit ton of heat, which will mostl likely ignite the hydrogen.  Lithium will also oxidize and at higher temps can react with hydrogen and have other intermediate reactions.  The fact that it almost instantly wants to release all of it's valence electrons can add some 'fun' to the event as well.

Lithium is mildly toxic to people and also has some uses for mental patients.   There are other ingredients in the batteries, not to mention the plastic in their casings and other construction materials that are not too good for you either.  Cyanides may also be present after a fire.

It's not the greatest thing for wildlife but isn't just a total planet killer, like say, Hydrazine would be.

Aaron

[Curt]

I only suggested submerging in water because Europe was/is using the method of dunking burning EVs in containers full of water, and because it would be relatively easy to do by piping a central emergency tank water tank to each building compartment.

Water may not even be needed if the density was reduced so the batteries could be housed in isolable units with ventilation, probably constructed using fire resistant separators made of concrete, ceramic tiles or even cinder blocks.

They spent a billion dollars on it without accounting for the (sole?) incredibly obvious failure mode, where the probability of cell failure is multiplied by a vast number of cells. This is absolutely inexcusable. At higher levels of management, the same level of thought went into it as the thought that went into building, operating and maintaining a hydrogen station at Alice's: virtually none. It's just some committee who thought it was a good idea, mandated it, maybe wrote some checks and went onto something else. Somewhere, I guarantee there is an engineer who said this is going to be a problem and was ignored.

California forced PG&E to build it by 2024, and California will certainly allow PG&E to bill us for its construction and demolition. The people who did this will never be held accountable. Now I'm getting upset just thinking of all the incompetence.

[MVetter]

Oh, you're getting upset. How quaint. This is 45 minutes away from me and I have very specific thoughts about PG&E.

[Specter]

Curt, they knew damned well the risks and all of that.
The engineer probably told them, you need walls, this and that.
The higher ups said, well they cost XX dollars, is there a law that says we HAVE to have them?
Engineer:  well it's not a law but.... 
Exec:  I don't care, if it's not a law then we are NOT spending the money.

The exec then gives himself a nice bonus because hey LOOK how much money he saved the company on this project, because engineers are incompetent, but HE knows better.  wonk wonk wonk.

You have NO idea how many times this plays out in the power industry, day in and day out, all over the world.
If the engineer is smart, he initiates or tries to hold these conversations via E mail or some other recorded media, and sends a copy to a bcc that is OFF their servers... so later when the EPA comes sniffing, and the company mail servers   decide to have a 'glitch' and lose that e mail conveniently.,  he's still protected.

What just drives me to banging head on wall crazy is, this knowledge been known for decades, about lithium fires... now all of the sudden there's this huge case of amnesia, and people want to relearn what they should already know, it's basic stuff.   The wealth of ignorance is astounding sometimes.

Lith batteries, isolate as much as you can, and let it burn out.

Cars are unique because you CAN actually grab the whole 'event' and just throw it into a tank and close it off.  Harder to do with a connex box or a building.  That is the recommendation for cars because it's cheap, it's relatively inexpensive, and very effective.  Drowning it puts out ALL /ANY fires, and forces the lithium to relax it'self into the .. how shall I say this..... least energy potential state...  Water also puts out the Alpha fires too, the plastic and all the other crap that is burning as well as the lithium. keeps the smoke down, and makes disposal easier.

Another approved method is just to cover it with a fire blanket, and let it burn.  This keeps the fire contained to just under the blanket, and lets it just burn itself out as well.  It can take much longer to reach end state and of course, you still have a chance at cells not compromised, waiting to touch off themselves at a later day... anyways.

For a building, close it off, let it burn.  Water may be to try to save the actual structure, it's certainly going to do NOTHING for the battery fire.

Most industrial places, they'll have a fire pump and a water tank just for fires.  The water needed for a fire is HUGE, the normal city mains can not provide it, so they fill a tank, and have a dedicated pump to give them the volume of water the system will need if activated.  If a fire alarm is activated, or a sensor trips, the system arms itself, the pumps turn on and it charges itself so it's ready if / when needed.

Me, Id put a concrete wall, a fire break, between each module, put the cables underground where practical with some disconnect links as practical.  This way you pull the disconnects to electrically isolate it so the short circuit don' take the rest of the system out.  Popping each unit's main storage breaker will do the same thing, if it does short, well the battery is disconnected so won't get dragged in.

I can't tell you how many times I have been told over my 'career' to shut up and go away, my input is NOT welcome when I point out defects, and potential catastrophy points.   The main mindset is generally,  If we can go 2 more years, I retire, get MY pension and it's not MY problem anymore.   Im NOT spending that money, I won't get my end of year bonus if I do, or we just need to milk this a few years, I get promoted / retire / etc and this becomes someone elses problem.  or   Im not saying a word, because the next question will be, How did it get that way, or how was it allowed to be built that way, and THEN the corruption of the entire system is exposed, all the kickbacks, all the money slushing etc etc, and I don't want to be the one who rats everyone else out and have them come after ME now.

When the fire does happen, the corruption DOES get exposed, and the lawyers make out like bandits defending the guilty.  you know... the same lawyers who told them they don't HAVE to have the fire system in the first place.

Morgan you have every right to be upset, this kind of corruption goes on everywhere, it's not just your little gang of misfit toys, it's the entire industry.  It is all about money..  the insurance companies are getting better about forcing them to do things the right way, but there's still a lot of room for improvement, not to mention when the same Overseer, owns the bank, the loan company, the insurance company, and the repair company, well.. you see it.   

Accountants and Protect .vs. Rebuild is another issue.  well this cost 100k a year to protect, but only 400k to rebuild or repair it, the risk of a fire is 10 percent per year..so if I skip the protection and can make it 4 years without an incident, I just beat the odds, so im going to risk not protecting it.  YOUR health and safety, meh, not MY problem.  Accountants only see numbers, they don't have a clue OR a care about the rest of the stuff around those numbers... statistically it is in MY favor to make it past those 4 years w/o fire.    NOT building the protection is a less costly path, and saving money is my job so there you have it.   If the thing burns down 6 or 7 years later, they'll say, well it cost 500k for a new one (inflation), but we saved 700k (protection costs) building it the way we did, so were still ahead 200K.  rebuild it AGAIN, the same way w/o protection, it's still cheaper, and we have the case history to prove it.   I wish I was just making this up, but after sitting thru countless budget meetings on major projects, we are talking 300 million dollar plus projects, I can sadly say, yah, it IS this bad.

Unfortunately it tends to take someone getting hurt or killed to get people to do the right thing, you have to shame or embarrass them into doing it I have found, especially when doing it the right way costs more money.

Aaron

[Richard230]

It probably won't be a big surprise to anyone, but the news this morning is reporting that SJSU researchers testing soil samples located two miles away from this battery storage facility fire have found high concentrations of heavy metals of the type used in lithium batteries in the soil.

[Specter]

I would be highly suspect of that soil sample.
That sounds like moonbeam sniffing a lawsuit.  Unless the smoke blew right over and settled a ton of the crap on the soil; for any firefighting to leach that far, takes some time.  If the smoke did deposit that much down, it'd be on everything, in the water on your windows etc, not just in a convenient soil sample. 

Also, Lithium is a pretty common mineral TBH, so is copper.  Just because they found 'high' concentrations, does not mean it came from the battery plant.  Correlation does not prove causation.  What do they consider 'high' concentrations?  Exactly WHERE did they look, the junkyard? the used car lot?  How far down did they go?  what is considered a 'normal' concentration in those areas?  How was the sample taken, how was it tested, what did they use as a control? what are the 'testers' credentials, what is their affiliation?  Is the equipment NIST certified?  When was it last calibrated? ...YES these things DO matter.

If there are any real concerns, the EPA should be testing, and those tests should be made public.  The EPA / Health Dept should be testing anyways.  TBH so should the owners of the project to show 'good faith' in mitigation of both damage AND potential lawsuits.

This could get interesting BUT does it stick or does it fall off the radar in the week like so many other catastrophes?  What about the hurricane wiping out the carolina's, don't hear anymore, what about Hawaii,  silent,  hell the LA fires are dying down in media already.  Move along, give the sheeple something new to focus on while we hide the last thing.

Aaron

[Richard230]

An article in my newspaper today, written by Clara Halter and published by the LA Times, with the title of: Discovery at estuary is 'disturbing', says that soil samples collected by scientists at San Jose State University have recorded a "dramatic increase in nickel, manganese and cobalt at the Elkhorn Slough Reserve after the recent fire at the nearby Moss Landing Power Plant." The concentrations of these metals on the surface of the soil were "hundreds to thousands of times as much as the levels in the surface soil prior the fire or compared with levels measured deeper in the soil."

[Richard230]

In my newspaper today, near an article regarding the Moss Landing residents and businesses suing Vistra concerning the impact that their battery storage facility fire has had on their lives and incomes, was the attached half-page ad.