DOT bans checked, loose lithium batteries on flights

If you've been feeling like you didn't already have enough zany and / or pointless Department of Transportation rules to abide by, you're in luck! Starting January 1st, 2008, you can no longer pack "loose lithium batteries" into your checked luggage on flights. If your battery is attached to a device -- or is packed into a plastic bag -- you're okay. According to the report, "Common consumer electronics such as travel cameras, cell phones, and most laptop computers are still allowed in carry-on and checked luggage," though, "The rule limits individuals to bringing only two extended-life spare rechargeable lithium batteries, such as laptop and professional audio/video/camera equipment lithium batteries in carry-on baggage." The new ban is related to lithium batteries' propensity to explode, and not due to any terrorism concerns. We're not sure what they're getting at with that plastic bag rule, but this should make everyone's already complicated travel plans just slightly more annoying.

[Via Gadling, image by rbrwr]

[OctaneZ @ Dec 28th 2007 3:47PM]

If individually bagged it would help keep the contacts from shorting.

[Motorola 3G Victim @ Dec 28th 2007 3:54PM]

The new ban is related to lithium batteries' propensity to explode when short circuited.

When attached to a device or placed inside a non-conductive plastic bag the batteries are protected from accidental short circuit during the flight.

[Will @ Dec 28th 2007 4:24PM]

This is actually a good idea. A fire in the checked baggage below deck in the cargo compartment could be catastrophic. See Valujet flight 592.

[Nogami @ Dec 29th 2007 1:39PM]

Well, except for the fact that 592 going down had nothing to do with lithium batteries (it was oxygen generators that caused the fire). There's also a substantial difference between a fire caused by a battery or two igniting inside someone's luggage, then a fire caused by several boxes of oxygen generators (which are specifically designed to produce oxygen with a very hot chemical reaction).

I think it more boils down to more government ass-covering by means of regulations, so if something does, someday take a plane down, they can say "we did everything we could!". Better to inconvenience billions of passengers instead...

As Corp. Hudson once said, "I feel safer already!"

[Khris @ Dec 28th 2007 3:59PM]

I'd like to see children kept in airtight plastic bags while I fly too.

[cortes.john @ Dec 28th 2007 4:36PM]

please!

[indiecognition @ Dec 28th 2007 4:06PM]

As ubiquitous as Li-Ion batteries have become, has there ever been a problem with a battery exploding on an airplane?

Whether or not there is any technical basis for the new restrictions and regulations, I believe that these changes are designed to make it look like the TSA/Dept. of Homeland Security are doing more...which is enough to convince plenty of idiots that the work they're doing is successful and/or worthwhile. In other words, it's a Spectacle...performance art designed to lie...you know, propaganda.

Either that, or the next US megaweapon will be powered by free, confiscated batteries. Maybe the administration is planning to drunk-dial Ahmadinejad on New Years, just to goad him into war.

[fred @ Dec 28th 2007 4:16PM]

No retard, they just explode in the laptops. Good job on working in your Anti-TSA schtick, but it doesn't really apply here. THIS IS NOT A BAN, PEOPLE! A ban forbids things. This just changes the way you have to carry these items, and limits the amount you can carry. IT MAKES SENSE. Don't cut off your noses to spite your face here.

[Jason @ Dec 28th 2007 4:37PM]

First off, its not the TSA that created the rule, they are only enforcing it. The rule was researched and developed by PHMSA, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, an operational unit of the DOT (there are like 12 of them, FHWA, FTA, FRA, MARAD, FMCSA, PHMSA and a bunch of others I cannot remember).

And yes, there have been fires caused by them, or believed to be caused by them. The major issue is the fact that the fire suppression systems in planes are not able to deal with lithium based fires.

[Fred @ Dec 28th 2007 4:09PM]

Octane and Moto say it pretty well. I hate those inane rules that keep my plane from catching fire. Stupid Government! I will admit that I was pretty incensed when I started reading this story, and I think I still am, just at a different person now. I make it a point not to call out bloggers on the sites I read, but Josh this was pretty lame, man. I think you should be careful with the "We're not sure what they're getting at with that plastic bag rule" statement because I'm not sure how much "We" you're gonna get when your Engadget brethren read that.

[bver100 @ Dec 28th 2007 4:12PM]

I wonder if they have to be in plastic bags on carryons as well..

[eurokid @ Dec 28th 2007 4:18PM]

So without checked luggage, that means I have to leave two of my 4 extra batteries -- extra cellphone battery, extra notebook battery, extra dslr battery, extra hdcam battery -- at home ?!

And even when I check a bag, stuff disappears too easily (my wife and I have both been victim of theft of items, luggage mishandling and deliberate damage) and there's no guarantee your bag makes it to your destination.

This is just getting ridiculous :/

[Fred @ Dec 28th 2007 4:21PM]

Ship them to yourself at your destination?

[seoultrain @ Dec 29th 2007 12:50AM]

you can buy another identical laptop/cellphone/camera as an extra-battery-holder.

[Ben @ Dec 29th 2007 1:22PM]

No. You can take them all in your carry on bag. You need to read the rules again.

[Ian @ Dec 28th 2007 4:20PM]

Interesting a body such as the TSA feels the need to regulate lithium ion batteries. Meantime ariplane fuel tanks still have wiring going through them and as the fuel is used up a highly flammable gas is created around the wiring. A spark and Booom. This fix is easy and cheap. Attach an inert gas cylinder to the tank and as the fuel is used up the inert gas fills the void. A cheap and extremely useful fix. Is it mandated? Nope? Is it an issue? Yep! Seems small batteries hassle for passengers has a much higher priority for organizations. Sigh....

[Fred @ Dec 28th 2007 4:23PM]

Maybe I'm mistaken but isn't the TSA more involved in passenger related issues? Wouldn't your concern be better addressed by the FAA?

[basroil @ Dec 28th 2007 4:20PM]

This will surely be protested by professionals around the United States, especially press photographers and videographers, since it is natural to carry as many as 4 such batteries (it's lighter than the chargers).

[kelley @ Dec 28th 2007 4:24PM]

The reason for the bag is that plastic is a great accelerant. It will help the battery to burn hotter and it lets off more smoke so that they can find it hidden in your underwear easier

[Taylor @ Dec 28th 2007 8:35PM]

LOST IN TRANSLATION:

Everyone should read the actual DOT press release and get better information. As I read it, the loose batteries have to be packed into your carry-on, max at 2. So that limits your total batteries (assuming one is on your electronic devise) to 3. Not cool.

[Ben @ Dec 29th 2007 1:25PM]

Incorrect. You are not limited to 2 unless they are very large.

[Taylor @ Dec 28th 2007 8:35PM]

LOST IN TRANSLATION:

Everyone should read the actual DOT press release and get better information. As I read it, the loose batteries have to be packed into your carry-on, max at 2. So that limits your total batteries (assuming one is on your electronic devise) to 3. Not cool.

[Matt @ Dec 28th 2007 4:32PM]

I think a higher-up at the TSA has stock in whoever makes Ziploc ;)

[4honor @ Dec 28th 2007 4:42PM]

It won't surprise me that they will soon decide which brand of bags we can use... geez...

[Ian @ Dec 28th 2007 4:30PM]

http://www.dot.gov/affairs/phmsa1107.htm
The FAA is involved with the TSA see their comments. My last line was a comment dircted at "organizations" which really means the FAA as a whole. The FAA has a leadership role in ALL aircraft safety issues. So my question is why they (FAA) address the relatively recent individual consumer battery "problem" B4 other larger problems which HAVE taken planes out of the sky. Remeber the Long ISland accident some years ago. It's considered a case of a fuel tank exploding.

[fred @ Dec 28th 2007 5:03PM]

Have they narrowed that crash down to the specific problem you describe? I'm not saying your concern isn't valid, I'm saying that railing on the TSA over it is stupid. And I think that the FAA is more than like one guy, right? I would imagine that they could probably work on a couple of things at the same time. Just because they enact a rule and it's not the one you think should be put in place right now doesn't lessen the need for the rule. I realize that it also doesn't lessen your irritation but, whatcha gonna do?

[indiecognition @ Dec 28th 2007 4:41PM]

Ok, Fred...

If the batteries are most prone to explosion when they're in the laptops (or charging as in the case of cell-phones), then the new regulations would do nothing to prevent them from blowing up on a passenger's lap within the cabin of an airplane. So how is this a good regulation?

And I did not say or imply it was a ban...but the government is choosing to manage this risk in the wrong way. If a plastic bag per battery eliminates the risk, why not just require all spare batteries to be individually wrapped and not limit the number of batteries people can bring? It would take no longer for a checkpoint officer to look at each battery that a passenger brings and allow them through if wrapped in plastic, than to see them all and then bar the passenger from bringing his/her third-or-more spare battery through.

Just because I question the logic of this policy does not mean I disagree with smart policies to protect us. It's just that this one goes too far, or at least in the wrong directions. And between the Patriot Act, Katrina, political rhetoric, and the general mismanagement and bungling of the Dept. of Homeland Security, I have to say that a general disapproval of the DHS is far from misguided. This is not a Democrat vs. Republican issue either...I just want a country that is run as openly as possible by people who are there to govern and serve the public from a truly moral standpoint, rather than like rats vying for power, money, career advancement, nepotism, and stratification of public opinion. Just look at the Blackwater Christmas card...oh, WWJD?!? http://www.boingboing.net/2007/12/28/blackwater-wishes-yo.html

[Fred @ Dec 28th 2007 4:52PM]

Others did imply that and that's what I was addressing. But comparing a valid safety concern with the Patriot Act is dangerous because it makes legitimate concerns about what our government is up to look stupid when people like you lump them together with things like this that make sense. You need to remember that even a broken clock is right twice a day, and that just because they are bunglers doesn't mean you have to try to voice your disapproval of everything they do.

[chuck @ Dec 28th 2007 5:56PM]

This story is not correct. The TSA has NOT banned Li-Ion batteries but rather non-rechargeable lithium metal batteries. Your laptop batteries are fine, as are any other Li-Ion rechargeable batteries. Assuming that they don't explode, of course.

[Cactus @ Dec 28th 2007 6:46PM]

Fail.

DOT itself, within their page linked above, says:
"(...) The rule limits individuals to bringing only two extended-life spare rechargeable lithium batteries."

This very much targets rechargable Li-Ion batteries.

Alsp, the writeup here missed the subtlety that the plastic-bag workaround works ONLY in carry-on luggage; can't have them in a baggy in your checked luggage, apparently.

[Chris Taylor @ Dec 28th 2007 6:00PM]

Great so now what do I do. I carry upwards of a dozens batteries with my carry on because I can NOT leave them IN the devices since the morons at TSA like to TURN ON my stuff from my checked baggage and then LEAVE the damned things on to burn themselves up in my bag (had a laptop SO HOT in my baggage that it actually BURNED ME leaving a blister) Hopefully the tiny camera batteries won't cause problems as I only carry one laptop battery.

This is gonna get fun.....

[helloUser @ Dec 28th 2007 6:22PM]

Only in america.

[David Ponton @ Dec 29th 2007 10:25AM]

Li based batteries can ignite or explode when shorted. Battery designers are making the contacts more protedcted on these things because of this problem, and providing snap-on plastic covers. Placing a battery in a plastic bag reduces the chance of shorting against some metal object packed with the battery. Coins, cans, some pen clips, etc. are made with metal. I do not have data on how often this happens in everyday situations and cannot balance that against other fire hazards on aircraft, like cigarette lighters. But aircraft fires fires can impair the flight crew and then what happens? Passengers die in cabin fires even when they occur on the ground.

Re. the Long Island flight, associates of mine were called in to the TWA 800 crash investigation to examine debris for evidence of explosive detonation. One of them stood in my offfice and described the fuel tank damage. It was not exploded by high explosives, rather, it was explosively ruptured as if by ignition of fuel vapor. On the web, there is so much conspiracy theory stuff that it's hard to get the facts, but the tank was heated by some devices (AC units?) underneath it that operate when the plane is on the ground, and wires for the fuel gage penetrate the tank. A spark from these wires is suspected. This type of accident is on the list of Most Wanted NTSB transportation safety improvements [ http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/mostwanted/aviation_issues.htm] but fires from any cause are not listed. Note that cigarette lighters were banned from flights for awhile, then re allowed - "authorities found that a ban on the devices did little to make flying safer", the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) said. I suggest someone develop and market a special plastic box that is certified to prevent shorts, way better than a plastic bag, and then we can take our high performance batteries and fly safely.

[Russell @ Dec 28th 2007 10:12PM]

What douches... No wonder no one "wants" to fly anymore and will do almost anything to avoid it unless really impractical.

As a photographer, I have two 1 series Canon bodies each with 2 Lion batteries, the photo tank with 2 extra batteries and one installed, the laptop with the extra extended battery, the mp3 player with built in lion battery, the cell phone with 2 extra extended batteries etc. The flash units use NiMh and I have literally 32 nimh batteries and 8-at a time rapid charger.

I NEED all this stuff when I travel. Now TSA is going to shit a brick over my pile of batteries?

The problem is, you cannot always mail stuff ahead and KNOW you will have it, like with carry on. UPS can decide not to deliver your package to the hotel on time, the Hotel can lose/steal it, you don't have the stuff after you mail it off, and have a huge hassle of trying to get it and re-pack your bags once you arrive, then find another box and mail the shit back again.

What I really want is a courier service I can have pick my packed bags, all of them, up from my office on my schedule, right before I leave for the airport. I then want them to box them up and ship them same-day as-fast-as-fucking-possible to where I am flying, then have someone run them to me at the car rental terminal at the airport, and then the reverse when I fly back.

That's the only real way to know I can fly in and that afternoon go shoot.

[basroil @ Dec 29th 2007 1:16AM]

First of all, congrats on your two MKIII cameras ( since those two are the only ones with Li-ion batteries, mkii only use NiHydride batteries). If you are a member of a professional association, it would be nice to know their comments on this, as i know that NPAA still has yet to release a statement on the issue.

[Todd @ Dec 29th 2007 12:06AM]

I'm with Russel on this one...as professional photojournalist I HAVE to travel with all this stuff since my client pays me to hit the ground running and often times to a several cities in a few days and my equipment has to be ready to function.

I don't have time to go track down a package that I shipped the night before or hope I have some address that if can be shipped to.

This whole thing seems like such BS since most reports of Li-on batteries that I have read noted that it happened while the batteries were IN a laptop or were being charged (or even just sitting there attached to a power source)...someone made a good point that the contacts may touch, so just mandate that they be individually enclosed in a plastic bag.

As for our neo-cons that are here to defend the incompetence of this administration and it's cronies (and their desire to make government NOT function so they can drown it in a bath tub), then go back and read the report that Ian referenced...here is a snipet:

"The National Transportation Safety Board said evidence is conclusive that the explosion originated in the Boeing 747's center wing tank -- a 13,000-gallon capacity tank that was holding only 50 gallons at the time."

There is a need for public safety and finding logical solutions with input from the public is important, but the public's input hasn't even been sought on this...

Heck of a job Brownie...

[Bryan Siders @ Dec 29th 2007 12:09AM]

Holy frickin' cow! I guess I'm gonna have to buy a couple of old, dead cameras just so I can stuff my spare batteries in them! That way I can have two loose batteries (in plastic bags for safety), one in my good camera, and two more in dead cameras.

Okay, not really. I can't believe this has actually become a big enough problem that they had to make a rule about it.

@Russell: I like the idea of the courier service. It could be called Contraband, Inc.

[invictive @ Dec 29th 2007 12:33AM]

You have got to be kidding me...

So as I photographer who needs his batteries I am now supposed to either:

a: Buy more batteries wherever I travel (and throw them out when I'm done, cause I can't bring them home) greatly contributing to the environmental damage already caused by batteries.

b: Ship my batteries ahead of me (again greatly contributing to pollution and environmental damage)


This just makes me sick, I hate to say it, but I hope all of the idiots who came up with this idea are killed in a Li-on plane fire, they deserve it.

Just gives me one more reason not to travel through the god-awful country called the US of A.

And we all know that 4 batteries are much more likely to cause a fire than 3, thats just common sense afterall...

[rmcurtis @ Dec 29th 2007 12:43AM]

Looking at the language it's hard to tell if they are targeting Lithium-Ion or primary lithium (non-rechargeable like CR123s or Energizer Lithium AA). The TSA's website makes a distinction between the two, while none of the press releases do.

As a professional photog who flies about 20+ times a year, this is going to be a huge PIA for me and my colleagues.

[Jeff Lewis @ Dec 29th 2007 1:44AM]

I've just spent the better part of an hour trying to find a specific, detailed ruling on this and man - it's all over the place.

The gist of it seems to be that:

- LiON batteries kept in the devices for which they're meant is ok.
- LiON batteries not inside their devices should be either in the original packaging (like that's going to happen), in a baggie or have their terminals taped over.
- LiON batteries not in their devices cannot be packed into checked in luggage (although batteries INSIDE their devices can be).

Now, where it gets uncertain. The PHSMA alert is the ONLY place I can find any mention of the two battery limit.

The TSA website's page on lithium batteries lists all the same info - except a restriction on the number you can carry on.

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/batteries.shtm

However, I think this is the actual restriction:

http://safetravel.dot.gov/whats_new_batteries.html

The following quantity limits apply to both your spare and installed batteries. The limits are expressed in grams of “equivalent lithium content.” 8 grams of equivalent lithium content is approximately 100 watt-hours. 25 grams is approximately 300 watt-hours:

Under the new rules, you can bring batteries with up to 8-gram equivalent lithium content. All lithium ion batteries in cell phones are below 8 gram equivalent lithium content. Nearly all laptop computers also are below this quantity threshold.

You can also bring up to two spare batteries with an aggregate equivalent lithium content of up to 25 grams, in addition to any batteries that fall below the 8-gram threshold. Examples of two types of lithium ion batteries with equivalent lithium content over 8 grams but below 25 are shown below.

For a lithium metal battery, whether installed in a device or carried as a spare, the limit on lithium content is 2 grams of lithium metal per battery.
Almost all consumer-type lithium metal batteries are below 2 grams of lithium metal. But if you are unsure, contact the manufacturer!

I read this as 'you can carry on as many small LiON batteries as you want as along as they're in a baggie or taped, but if you're going to bring BIG batteries - like a battery brick or slate - then you're limited to two with a total of 25g of lithium'.

[Jeff Lewis @ Dec 29th 2007 1:54AM]

Actually - that IS the rule. Go to the second link and scroll all the way to the bottom and there's a chart that explains it very clearly.

That means that for the vast majority of people, other than sticking your spares in separate baggies or taping the contacts, which is a good idea anyway, this rule doesn't really change anything.

[daniel.dsoz @ Dec 29th 2007 12:05PM]

non rechargable Li-METAL batteries are being regulated, not The Li-Ion batteries you all are talking about.

[indiecognition @ Dec 29th 2007 3:14PM]

If people have to ship their extra spare batteries to their final destination, who's checking whether they're plastic-wrapped or docked in electronics when UPS or FedEx has them? The shipping companies use planes, too...and it's not much better to recreate the movie Castaway than to lose a passenger jet.

And why haven't Flamin' Hot Asteroids Cheetos been banned too? The diarrhea they cause is also highly explosive.

Sorry to any ultranationalists, but this is just more more BS security theatre.

[Mathurin @ Dec 29th 2007 7:24PM]

I wonder what impact this will have on my Mfuel battery pack

[Jetmech96 @ Dec 31st 2007 1:08PM]

The reason this all started was because UPS lost a plane to a fire started by lithium-ion batteries see the NTSB report. http://www.ntsb.gov/Events/2006/PhiladelphiaPA/iic_opening_text.htm
http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/15/ntsb-looks-to-laptop-batteries-as-possible-cause-of-plane-fire/
Please drop the TWA Flight 800 crap. If you knew what you where talking about, you would know it is way to difficult (expensive and heavy) to inert a jets fuel tanks. Besides considering the risk, one airplane vs. multple instnaces(if you read the NTSB report)