Lithium Batteries

[EddieB]

I went to top up my supplies of lithium batteries for the cameras, only to find that my regular supplier (usual disclaimers) reports that they are now classed as "dangerous goods" and as such are prohibited by the Royal Mail.

 

http://www.7dayshop.com/lithium-batteries

 

Is this another instance of Health and Safety gone mad, given that consumer batteries are pretty safe.  Still, in the meantime, this means a paid courier delivery rather than the free delivery service normally offered.  How long before batteries are removed from cameras by airport security?  I shouldn't give them ideas).

[alfsboy]

I hope they will  still transport Dilithium crystals to Scotty on the Enterprise .Warp drive is essential to the safety of our galaxy and Fedex dont cover that area .

[Oldddudders]

I think there was a case of a lithium battery on a laptop catching fire on a plane somewhere on the planet. It would be interesting to know whether the Royal Mail ban was occcasioned by the management, or as a result of representations by those concerned with H&S of the workforce. For an organisation on the ropes - as are postal services worldwide in the era of the Internet - introducing new restrictions on top of higher prices sounds like a great way to sink even faster.

[Trainshed Terry]

I think there was a case of a lithium battery on a laptop catching fire on a plane somewhere on the planet. It would be interesting to know whether the Royal Mail ban was occcasioned by the management, or as a result of representations by those concerned with H&S of the workforce. For an organisation on the ropes - as are postal services worldwide in the era of the Internet - introducing new restrictions on top of higher prices sounds like a great way to sink even faster.

 

I shall have to check with the office about said batterers with Royal Mail Customer services.

 

Terry

[eastwestdivide]

Couple of links:

Restricted by Royal Mail

Prohibited by Royal Mail

 

and from the 2nd link:

Batteries that are classed as dangerous goods by the latest edition of the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) Technical Instructions are prohibited. This includes lithium ion/polymer/metal/alloy batteries sent in isolation, with or contained in electronic equipment such as mobile phones or digital cameras

 

So it's not just the Royal Mail being over-picky.

 

 

Edit: the quote specifically says "lithium-ion" - is that the same as the non-rechargeable lithiums in the OP's link?

[Gruffalo]

Boeing's Dreamliner has had a few issues with this type of battery I believe!

[Suzie]

In the olden days NiCd batteries were considered dangerous unless shipped with a discharge resistor connected across the terminals to ensure they were without energy.

 

Primary lithium batteries must be very rare now that they do not get a mention in the list, or are in the same category as Zinc carbon batteries perhaps and therefore OK to send.

[Oldddudders]

In the olden days NiCd batteries were considered dangerous unless shipped with a discharge resistor connected across the terminals to ensure they were without energy.

 

Primary lithium batteries must be very rare now that they do not get a mention in the list, or are in the same category as Zinc carbon batteries perhaps and therefore OK to send.

My impression is that Lithium-ion is the rechargeable sort in cameras and computers, while Lithium is the CR2032 and similar types. The former have issues.

 

 

 

Couple of links:

Restricted by Royal Mail

Prohibited by Royal Mail

 

and from the 2nd link:

 

So it's not just the Royal Mail being over-picky.

 

 

Edit: the quote specifically says "lithium-ion" - is that the same as the non-rechargeable lithiums in the OP's link?

When the list of prohibited goods includes "Lottery Tickets, other than UK Lottery Tickets", it is difficult to take anything seriously. The airline industry lost its entrepreneurial marbles years ago, so using their list is fatal. 9/11 continues to affect our daily lives, aided and abetted by company lawyers.

[EddieB]

When the list of prohibited goods includes "Lottery Tickets, other than UK Lottery Tickets", it is difficult to take anything seriously. The airline industry lost its entrepreneurial marbles years ago, so using their list is fatal. 9/11 continues to affect our daily lives, aided and abetted by company lawyers.

Yes, 9/11 was almost a godsend for airport security jobsworths, who were making life difficult long before.  I remember a run in with one at Heathrow in 1997 after politely requesting a handsearch of just a couple of rolls of 3200ASA film (for nocturnal wildlife, before you ask).  For my temerity, I was given a lecture in the explosive properties of film - obviously unaware that cellulose nitrate stock had long been superseded by "safety film".  Anyway said rolls of film went through the X-ray scanner - and straight into the bin (well, figuratively speaking, I didn't want to risk them evacuating the airport).

[Pacific231G]

I think there was a case of a lithium battery on a laptop catching fire on a plane somewhere on the planet. It would be interesting to know whether the Royal Mail ban was occcasioned by the management, or as a result of representations by those concerned with H&S of the workforce. For an organisation on the ropes - as are postal services worldwide in the era of the Internet - introducing new restrictions on top of higher prices sounds like a great way to sink even faster.

In 2010 a fire believed to be caused by Lithium Ion batteries caused the loss of a UPS 747 (N571UP) in Dubai along with its crew.  I believe it's that which led to the general restrictions on their carriage as air cargo including post and as checked baggage but some. There have been cases of consumer equipment fitted with Lithium batteries catching fire in passenger cabins but these have been dealt with. With aircraft the point is not so much  'how likely is it that will happen?’ as 'what are the consequences if it does?

Flying is inherently unsafe and has only become one of the safer modes of transport by the development of a very strict safety regime.

[Oldddudders]

 

Flying is inherently unsafe and has only become one of the safer modes of transport by the development of a very strict safety regime.

So just like railways before it, then. And what % of Royal Mail internal post travels by air?

[Gruffalo]

So just like railways before it, then. And what % of Royal Mail internal post travels by air?

Ours seems to be loaded onto a cart horse on Friday as nothing is generally delivered Saturday or Monday.Our Postie swaps the cart-horse for Wed-Fri as the service is much better. I note that HMRC letters get transferred from their (multitude of) offices by pony and trap to the HMRC Postal Centre - that is the only way I can explain letters taking 10 working days from their date to reach here!

[Pacific231G]

Oldddudders, on 08 May 2013 - 10:39, said:

 

"Pacific 231G said: Flying is inherently unsafe and has only become one of the safer modes of transport by the development of a very strict safety regime".

 

So just like railways before it, then. And what % of Royal Mail internal post travels by air?

Somewhat like railways in the development of an advanced safety culture that learns from its own failures but not just like railways as there's one fundamental difference. Railways were dangerous because of their speed and momentum but development of continuous brakes, signalling systems, and strict operating rules means that a railway can be in theory be made completely foolproof. It should always be possible to make a moving train safe simply by bringing it to a stop. That is simply not the case for an aircraft because once airborne it can only be made safe by completing a successful, controlled landing. That makes fire a particularly potent hazard because it can and tragically often has rendered aircraft unflyable or unsurvivable before they could be got back down on the ground.

Imagine being on an airliner half way across the Atlantic when the spare laptop battery someone bought from a dodgy supplier on ebay (or part of a bad batch from a perfectly respectable supplier) has caught fire in their checked baggage in the hold. Health and Safety gone mad? Maybe not.

 

I don't know what percentage of RM internal post travels by air but it's not insignificant and there's no distinction AFAIK between items that may or may not travel that way. There's also an assumption in mail delivery that no item should hazard the succesfull delivery of others.