In the IEA Global EV Outlook 2022, Norway, Iceland, and Sweden were reported to have the highest electric car shares of the new car market: 86%, 72% and 43%, respectively. Electrification of the transport sector has multiple benefits but has also raised some concerns. Fires in electric vehicles are reported almost daily in the media and social media channels. However, fires starting in an electric vehicle traction battery (i.e., lithium-ion battery) are rare. If the traction battery catches fire, it can be difficult to extinguish since the battery pack in an electric vehicle is generally well protected and difficult to reach. To cool the battery cells, firefighters must prolong the application duration of suppression agent. This results in the use of large amounts of water, that potentially could carry pollutants into the environment. In this work, the analysis of extinguishing water from passenger vehicle fires are reported. Three large-scale vehicle fire tests were performed, the vehicles used were both conventional petrol fuelled and battery electric. Tests were performed indoors at RISE, Borås and the test setup allowed analysis of both combustion gases and extinguishing water. Results show that all analysed extinguishing water was highly contaminated. Additionally, the ecotoxicity analysis of the extinguishing water showed that the extinguishing water was highly toxic towards the tested aquatic species, independent of the traction energy of the vehicle.

Fires involving electric vehicles have attracted considerable attention in the media. In particular, the toxic gases released upon combustion of electric vehicles and lithium-ion batteries has been a major concern. In this study, the results of six large-scale vehicle fire tests are presented including three electric vehicles, two internal combustion engine vehicles, and one electric vehicle with the battery pack removed. Additionally, separate battery component tests were performed. In two of the vehicle fire tests a sprinkler system was used to assess the effect of water application on the combustion gases. Furthermore, calculations of the heat release rate, peak heat release rate and total heat release were performed, as well as chemical analysis of gas and soot. Peak heat release rate and total heat release were affected by the fire scenario and vehicle model, but not significantly by the type of powertrain. Regarding the combustion gases, hydrogen fluoride represented the largest difference between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine vehicles. Additionally, battery specific metals such as manganese, nickel, cobalt and lithium were found in higher concentrations in the electric vehicle tests than in the internal combustion vehicle tests, in which larger quantities of lead were found.

Electrified transport has multiple benefits but has also raised some concerns, for example, the flammable formulations used in lithium-ion batteries. Fires in traction batteries can be difficult to extinguish because the battery cells are well protected and hard to reach. To control the fire, firefighters must prolong the application of extinguishing media. In this work, extinguishing water from three vehicles and one battery pack fire test were analyzed for inorganic and organic pollutants, including particle-bound polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and soot content. Additionally, the acute toxicity of the collected extinguishing water on three aquatic species was determined. The vehicles used in the fire tests were both conventional petrol-fueled and battery electric. For all of the tests, the analysis of the extinguishing water showed high toxicity toward the tested aquatic species. Several metals and ions were found in concentrations above the corresponding surface water guideline values. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances were detected in concentrations ranging between 200 and 1400 ng L^–1. Flushing the battery increased the concentration of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances to 4700 ng L^–1. Extinguishing water from the battery electric vehicle and the battery pack contained a higher concentration of nickel, cobalt, lithium, manganese, and fluoride compared with the water samples analyzed from the conventional vehicle.

This study was performed by RISE Research Institutes of Sweden on behalf of Volvo Trucks. RISE Research Institutes of Sweden was requested to conduct a study regarding the differences between fires in conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) trucks and electric trucks. A set of guiding questions (see section Aim) were given by Volvo Trucks and in this report these questions have been answered. The questions have been answered by performing literature searches and through previous knowledge of RISE. However, for some questions, due to scarcity of data on electric truck fires, knowledge regarding electric passenger cars has been used. In addition, contact has been made with fire and rescue services around the world (Australia, UK, USA, Sweden and Finland) to collect their views on management of fires in electric vehicles (EVs). The main conclusions are: • Data on electric truck fires are scarce due to the low number of vehicles as well as the low number of fire incidents. Available data show that battery electric passenger vehicle fires are less common than ICE vehicle fires, but that the risks are different. The main differences are that battery fires tends to be harder to extinguish than fires in ICE vehicles and that there is a risk of accumulation of flammable gases, especially in enclosed spaces, upon thermal runaway. • Lithium iron phosphate (LFP) type cells, in comparison with nickel-based type cells (such as lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (NMC) and lithium nickel cobalt aluminium oxide (NCA)), have a higher thermal runaway onset temperature, a slower temperature increase rate, a lower maximum temperature as well as a lower gas production in total amount. However, the specific total gas production (L Ah-1) can sometimes be higher for LFP-type cells and depends on the state of charge and on the amount of electrolyte in the cell. However, the safety of a battery pack in a vehicle is determined by several factors such as preventive measures aimed at reducing the occurrence of fires (safe design). For example, by early detection and pro-active mitigation using the battery management system and thermal management system and by limiting the thermal propagation in the battery pack, reducing the extent of damage. • Fires in enclosed spaces, such as in underground parking garages and tunnels, generally imply a higher risk for firefighters due to the trapped smoke, decreased visibility and longer access routes than in open structures. Risk reduction measures for battery fires should focus on early detection of harmful events, reducing thermal propagation in the battery pack and on limiting the extent of fire spread. The severity of the consequences of vehicle fires (no matter if is an EV or an ICEV) in enclosed spaces could be reduced using suppression systems, such as a water sprinkler system, to hinder fire spread between vehicles.

Lately, concerns regarding fires in electric vehicles in enclosed spaces such as in road tunnels and parking garages have been raised and there are indications that parking of electric vehicles may be prohibited in some spaces. For the success of electromobility and the transition from fossil to renewable fuels, it is important to understand the risks and consequences of fires in electric vehicles and to provide technical solutions if necessary, so as not to hinder the widespread adoption of electric vehicles.

In this work, a literature review on fires in vehicles has been conducted. The focus was on fires in enclosed spaces involving electric vehicles. A comprehensive risk assessment of electric vehicle fires was performed using systematic hazard identification. In addition, a workshop with representatives from three Swedish fire and rescue services was carried out to evaluate the emergency rescue sheets/response guides.

The main conclusions are; That statistics regarding vehicle fires need to be improved, as of today the root causes of fires are missing in the data, which could potentially result in non-fact based regulations; The data studied in this work does not imply that fires in electric vehicles are more common than fires in internal combustion engine vehicles; Fires in electric vehicles and internal combustion engine vehicles are similar in regards to the fire intensity and peak heat release rates. 

The most effective risk reductions measures on vehicle level, to decrease the number of fires in EVs, could not be defined based on that relevant data on the root causes of fires in EVs are currently not publicly accessible. The most effective risk reduction measures, to limit fire spread, on infrastructure level were the use of fire sprinkler systems, fire detection systems (early detection) and increased distance between parked vehicles.

Energy storage is essential for enhancing the stability, efficiency and sustainability of the modern energy supply chain. It can help reduce the dependency on fossil fuels and increase the use and market penetration of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, which are intermittent and variable. The most common technology for short storage times (minutes to days) is electrochemical energy storage, and more specifically lithium-ion battery energy storage systems (BESS). In line with the EU ambition for more sustainable electric vehicle batteries, it is likely that second life applications and repurposing of electric vehicle batteries will increase. One of the main challenges for the deployment of BESS is the fire safety of lithium-ion batteries. Today, there is a lack of national guidelines in Sweden for how to design a BESS in terms of fire safety, which causes uncertainty. Without national guidelines, each municipality and local fire and rescue service must develop their own advice, which may result in inconsistent and costly solutions with a varying degree of fire protection. The aim of this study was to produce national guidelines for the fire protection of BESS. The guidelines were produced by literature searches, review of relevant laws, regulations and standards, review of international guidelines, workshops, information retrieval from project partners and through studying lessons learnt from previous incidents. The produced guidelines (found in Appendix C, in Swedish) are formed around three application categories, based on the type of application and user, which reflect the size of the BESS. For the first category, BESS for single-family home use, guidance is given for separated placement of BESS, remote fire alarm, and separated ventilation. For the second category, BESS for multi-dwelling blocks or businesses, recommendations regarding placement, detection and ventilation are increased. It is also advised to have an installation that allows the fire and rescue services to ventilate fire gases without opening doors and that emergency response plans are produced. For the third category, BESS for large-scale commercial applications and mobile BESS, some further requirements are introduced. They include risk analysis, separate building and fire cell demands, as well as recommendations for CCTV and gas monitoring as well as fire hose connection. The guidelines assume that current national laws and building regulations are complied with. Additionally, insurance companies may have their own guidance which should be checked before installation. The guidelines produced in this project should thus be used as a supporting tool or when an increased level of protection is sought. The guidelines only address BESS with lithium-ion batteries. It was not included in the work to evaluate whether special requirements should apply for reused or remanufactured batteries (second-life).

Sales of electric vehicles doubled in 2021 compared to the previous year and nearly 10% of the global new-car sales were electric in 2021. In the recent IEA Global EV Outlook 2022, Norway, Iceland, and Sweden were reported to have the highest electric car shares of the new car market: 86%, 72% and 43%, respectively. Electrification of transport has multiple benefits but has also raised some concerns. For example, the use of rare metals and their sourcing are concerns from an environmental perspective, the capacity of the electricity network and the limited number of charging stations has been raised as an implementation barrier, and the new fire and explosion risks of batteries have caused concerns amongst users, property owners and rescue services alike society.Fires starting in the traction batteries (lithium-ion battery) are rare but if the battery catches fire, it can be difficult to extinguish since the battery packs are generally well protected and difficult to reach. To cool the battery cells, firefighters must prolong the application duration of suppression agent. This generally results in use of large amounts of water/fire extinguishing agent, which could carry pollutants into the environment.In this work, extinguishing water from three vehicle fires as well as from one battery pack fire has been investigated. Large-scale fire tests were performed with both conventional and electric vehicles. Tests were performed indoors at RISE, Borås, which also allowed analysis of combustion gases for both inorganic and organic pollutants in the gas and liquid phase.It was found that nickel, cobalt, lithium, manganese and hydrogen fluoride appeared in higher concentrations in the effluents from the battery electric vehicle and lithium-ion battery compared to from the internal combustion engine vehicle. However, lead was found in higher concentrations in the effluents from the internal combustion engine vehicle, both in the combustion gases as well as in the extinguishing water. Ecotoxicity analysis showed that extinguishing water from all vehicle and battery fires analysed in this work were toxic against the tested aquatic species.

The project BREND investigated risk with alternative fuel vehicles inside ro-ro spaces. BREND 2.0 is a continuation and has in particular investigated two of the major risks identified in BREND, namely the risk of toxic gases from electric vehicle fires and the risk of a pressure vessel explosion for fire exposed biogas or hydrogen vehicle tanks. Simulations of electric vehicle fires inside a ro-ro space based on real input fire data has been performed. Field experiments that investigate the conditions that can lead to pressure vessel explosion were made with fire exposed biogas and hydrogen tanks. Recommendations are given about how ro-ro space fires in alternative fuel vehicles, or indeed any vehicle fire, can be managed.

Fire safety of ships is a key issue as evacuation and extinguishment is more difficult at sea than it would be on land. There is therefore a long tradition and regulations in place to maintain the fire safety of ships. The current shift to more sustainable transport solutions has now led to the introduction of lithium-ion batteries for ship propulsion. These can offer significant benefits in terms of reducing greenhouse gas and particulate matter emissions. They also introduce new risks, however. When damaged, li-ion batteries may go into thermal runaway, a state that produces significant amounts of heat combined with flammable and toxic gas. This is a challenge, and safety is one of the key questions asked when introducing battery propulsion at sea. Extinguishment of battery fires is a piece of the puzzle when it comes to enabling safe battery propulsion at sea. Fire suppression systems are used today for such applications, yet no standard test method exists to evaluate their performance. This work proposes an approach that may be used to evaluate such systems and that can be used as input towards the development of a test method. Specifically, a test method aimed at evaluating the performance of fire suppression system under critical battery failures and at lowering the risk for module-to-module propagation. The test method designed here performed well and sustained the 18 tests that were done. Overall, repeatable test conditions were obtained that allowed for the performance of fire suppression systems to be investigated. All fire extinguishing systems had a positive impact in some position but not all points and it was not possible to draw any conclusion on their ability to mitigate the risk for module-to-module propagation. The tests showed that mitigating this can be possible with careful design of systems and perhaps combinations of different means.