Network operator Openreach took a few communications providers by surprise yesterday after they gave them just 48 hours to remove any lithium batteries from BT exchanges. The batteries are said to be prohibited by the operator’s building safety policy “due to the significant risks … [of] thermal runaway, fire and explosion“.
The move is interesting, as we’ve not previously been aware of any specific restriction being imposed against the use of a particular type of battery chemistry in Openreach’s rules, which usually adopt generalised language when discussing batteries. Some comms providers also told ISPreview that they were similarly uncertain about exactly where in Openreach’s docs this is expressed.
The official briefing, which isn’t available to the public, seems to refer specifically to the use of lithium batteries that exist within Colocation or Access Locate customer cabinets within BT’s exchanges. “Openreach mandates the use of lead acid batteries as the preferred and safest option for battery back up in CPs’ colocation or Access Locate customer cabinets,” said the briefing (a slight contradiction – using both “mandates” and then “preferred“).
Advertisement
The briefing also fails to make any distinction between regular LiPo (lithium polymer) and LiFePO4 (lithium iron phosphate) batteries. The latter, which are now used in many industrial and home storage energy applications, have a safety record that is similar or even better than sealed lead acid batteries; because their unique chemical composition is less prone to overheating and thermal runaway.
Not to mention that lead-acid batteries contain hazardous substances like lead (obviously) and sulphuric acid, while LiFePO4 batteries are constructed with more non-toxic materials that can be recycled. Suffice to say that the blanket restriction against “lithium” seems unusual, and it may have been more forward-thinking to express stricter requirements.
In any case, Openreach clearly has serious safety concerns after identifying that “lithium batteries” are in use in some of BT’s exchanges, and they’ve now given such providers just 48 hours to remove them (on the surface this seems like an unreasonably short notice). “This instruction is made and is issued in accordance with the existing Revised Agreement for Access Network Facilities Services (“RANF Agreement”) and Access Locate contract. The relevant Product Description(s) will be updated accordingly to capture this instruction,” said Openreach. Providers must also notify the operator about their use of such batteries..
We’ve requested a bit more information from Openreach and will report back later.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Look on the bright side, they’re still happy to have them in engineers vans parked outside their houses though.
Rather than having a large tank of combustible liquid under their seat?
Tanks of diesel don’t tend to spontaneously combust for no apparent reason, in fact most ICE vehicle fires start in the electrical system.
What will Openreach do if the batteries aren’t removed by the weekend? Start removing operator equipment?
They might try fining them, but that will open a can of worms regarding if operators were properly notified of the requirement originally. An argument that it sounds like Openreach will lose.
A 48-hour deadline and the failure to distinguish between regular LiPo and LiFePO4 suggests that this decision was made by someone who is non-technical illiterate.
A non-technically literate person in a (presumably senior) management role in BT/Openreach? I don’t believe it!
The other possibility is that their insurance provider has introduced new restrictions, and it’s not trickled down as quickly as it should.
I wonder if lithium coin cells used for CMOS batteries are also banned
What about Li-ion, as used in APC ups?
Having seen and smelled the mess created by an exploding Pb-S exchange battery, I would prefer the chemical splodge created by a failed LiFePO any day.
But the growing risk from ever more numerous lithium ion batteries, within access racks close to the heart of the exchange, is not new. And BT has known about it for well over a decade or two.
Forty eight hours is … cheeky.
I suspect it is a decision imposed by their insurers, which has just been passed on without anyone actually looking at the technical (or possibly even the commercial, given that Mark can’t find a contractual requirement) consequences.