Slashdot Mirror


TSA Limits Lithium Batteries on Airplanes

yali writes "The U.S. Transportation and Security Administration has issued new rules limiting travel with lithium batteries. As of January 1, no spare lithium batteries are allowed in checked luggage. Batteries carried in the cabin are subject to limitations on per-battery and total lithium content, and spare batteries must have the terminals covered. If you're returning home from the holidays with new toys, be sure to check out the new restrictions before you pack."

32 of 595 comments (clear)

  1. awww jeez, not this $#!^ again by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And as usual, there is no explanation as to *why* lithium batteries are now illegal to carry. I assume this is to reduce the possibility of a lithium battery shorting out, but if the batteries are contained in their shipping packages, they should be no more dangerous than many other items that you can carry on planes. This of course means a whole new hassle for those folks that use lithium batteries for their work such as photographers who need to travel by air to many of their assignments among many other folks and carry with them batteries to sometimes remote locations. What is the rationale? Have they examined the potential impact before coming up with yet another new restriction on travel? Are they worried about this as a terrorist act? Because, look, if someone really wants to bring down a plane, there are many ways to do it even without using lithium batteries. Think sodium metal or any explosive really, that is keister stashed until the terrorist gets to the lavatory. Think any common item on a plane that can be used as a weapon including newspaper, components of the interior finish and cabin materials,

    Every time I come back into my own country after spending time abroad, I am frustrated and depressed over how bad things are getting here. I talked about some of it including the marketing problem we are manufacturing for ourselves here after my last trip to Japan.

    It also makes one wonder how much all this is costing the US in terms of lost business, lost productivity, airline delays, increased cost burdens on airlines and passengers and more... And this is all being done in the name of safety and terrorism, but you know... it's funny because I remember flying back in the 70's and 80's where people routinely carried firearms on planes. The restriction was that they had to be long guns and unloaded. I even remember one Texan getting on a plane and commenting to his friend that he would never check his shotgun because it might get damaged by the baggage handlers. I also routinely used to carry a pocket knife with me wherever I went even up to a few years ago on planes before they were outlawed... which leads me to wonder if the per capita risk of hijacking is any different now versus what it was back then.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:awww jeez, not this $#!^ again by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Funny

      And as usual, there is no explanation as to *why* lithium batteries are now illegal to carry.

      Obviously, they don't want terrorists buying black market Sony batteries that will explode during the flight.

    2. Re:awww jeez, not this $#!^ again by 4D6963 · · Score: 4, Funny

      which leads me to wonder if the per capita risk of hijacking is any different now versus what it was back then.

      And that makes me wonder what the risk of hijacking would be if carrying guns was allowed (even encouraged?) on airplanes. I'd love to see a terrorist managing to take control of a plane for more than 5 minutes if other passengers had guns.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    3. Re:awww jeez, not this $#!^ again by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Can we put some restrictions on the ammo that you can carry? It is ok with me if you kill a hijacker, but I don't want you putting holes in the plane.

    4. Re:awww jeez, not this $#!^ again by Roogna · · Score: 5, Informative

      Figures the one time I don't have mod points is the one time I see a post by someone who obviously didn't read the actual links. Lithium batteries are NOT "now illegal to carry". There's just some rules being put in place for when they can be in checked baggage or must be carried on, and how they must be stored. Looking at the actual page on the subject, it looks like they went to great lengths to make sure it won't directly impact most travelers with regards to the batteries people tend to travel with. On that note I see nothing anywhere suggesting that this has anything to do with terrorism. And as you say if it's "to reduce the possibility of a lithium battery shorting out" then they can be in their shipping packages and be "no more dangerous than many other items that you can carry on planes". Which is exactly what they suggest for storing spare batteries.

      I'm all for government conspiracy theories and thinking most of this stuff is completely idiotic. But nothing is going to improve if we go around making grossly inaccurate statements about what a rule actually is.

    5. Re:awww jeez, not this $#!^ again by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I recall a rather nasty home-defense weapon that a friend of mine had for his wife to use ( they were in a rather rural area with slow police response ). It was a short-barrel .44 revolver - light, easy to use, won't jam - with a load that looked like a miniature shotgun shell. It had a bunch of pellets about 1 mm in diameter. He said that it could rip a person apart at close range, but could not penetrate 2 sheets of drywall.

    6. Re:awww jeez, not this $#!^ again by hughk · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Seen at London City airport in London by security - a vending machine selling pre-stamped mailers and a post collection point. Such a small thing to organise but how many passengers feel happier not having to 'lose' stuff at security.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    7. Re:awww jeez, not this $#!^ again by plague3106 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, if you had a gun, would you shoot anyone that annoys you? Perhaps you would just be annoyed, yet not murder anyone. If you wouldn't, there's a good chance other people won't either. Honestly, do you think that large numbers of people aren't murdered everyday simply because most aren't carrying? Or are most people just not going to kill someone over something stupid. Peole get mad, yes, but the person that would actually kill when pissed is rare.

    8. Re:awww jeez, not this $#!^ again by wattrlz · · Score: 4, Funny

      Think sodium metal or any explosive really, that is keister stashed until the terrorist gets to the lavatory. Keister stashed? Slashdot, you teach me something new every single day! Somehow the idea of a terrorist trying to keister stash a significant quantity of sodium metal (which is not explosive so much as pyrophoric... ) signifcantly brightened my day.
  2. Nicely clear rules, easy to follow...NOT! by DaRat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Given how well current TSA rules are implemented by the agents, I expect that there will be considerable confusion at the security checkpoints.

    Hell, I'm a geek, and I'm not sure how many grams of lithium metal are in my laptop's batteries. How should I expect a nontechnical person be able to size up a battery and tell which batteries should be allowed and which shouldn't?

    And, are they even going to count batteries in cellphones and iPods?

    I expect that many spare batteries will simply be seized and tossed in the trash.

    1. Re:Nicely clear rules, easy to follow...NOT! by Obyron · · Score: 4, Informative

      I expect that many spare batteries will simply be seized and tossed in the trash.

      Try sold on eBay instead. Seized property is typically sold by the states in Surplus Property auctions, where it can be bid on by the public at large, or in some cases the airports themselves sell the stuff in lots on eBay. The government is making a buck on the battery it confiscates from you.

      --
      --Obyron
    2. Re:Nicely clear rules, easy to follow...NOT! by whoever57 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Read the article - it clearly states that installed batteries are exempt.
      The AP article may state this, but the DOT page does not. Installed batteries are also subject to limits -- from the DOT page:

      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:
      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  3. Wait let me get this straight... by pwnies · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Spare batteries are more dangerous than installed batteries? Maybe it's just me, but the large majority of the lithium batteries that I've read about exploding were ones that were installed. I've yet to hear about a spare one going jihad on the luggage next to it.

  4. New rule by Etrias · · Score: 4, Funny

    There must be a contest at the TSA to come up with the most ridiculous ideas for restrictions. Winners get a tote bag, mug and an "I is stoppin' der terrarists" t-shirt.

  5. Can't tell from the link by Lookin4Trouble · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does this mean I can't bring the external 4-hour battery I bought for my laptop? My laptop's battery lasts ~2 hours, and I bought the external with the sole purpose of USING IT ON THE FREAKING PLANE for the additional four hours it takes to get from East Coast to West Coast...

  6. *sigh* by WizMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At this point, I don't care anymore. Really, is anyone actually bothered by this? Should've seen it comming though. This is a waste of my tax money. Hell, it would be worth it if they were transparent and we knew the reasons for all of these rules. This goes far below checking shoes for bombs and even not allowing nail clippers on board. Whatever. Hopefully the next administration would bring some sense (*HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA*) to the US government.

  7. Re:NOT Lithium-Ion, just Lithium by timster · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sorry, I don't think so. Check out the handy chart in TFA.

    --
    I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
  8. Stop allowing humans on flights by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Funny

    Because of the risk of an in-flight hazard, humans should no longer be allowed on aircraft. Airlines will, however, continue to fly your luggage anywhere you please, provided it contains no shoes, liquids, or lithium batteries.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  9. Lithium Ion too - just not as restrictive by El+Gigante+de+Justic · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the TSA webpage, it does apply to some Lithium-Ion batteries.
            Batteries up to 8-grams "equivalent lithium content" installed in devices or as spares are allowed. For Lithium-ion batteries between 8 and 25 grams aggregate lithium equivalent content are also allowed, but you can only have 2 total (both spare and installed).
            Lithium Metal batteries just have tighter restrictions.

    As for the reasons behind this (since some apparantly didn't read TFA)- it sounds like there was a cargo hold fire on one plane caused by lithium batteries and apparently the current fire control systems in planes can't handle lithium fires.

  10. Safety issue not terrorism by calidoscope · · Score: 4, Informative
    Restrictions on shipping lithium primary batteries by air cargo have been in place for over a year now and this also applied to equipment with lithium primary batteries. There are similar restriction for shipping large lithium secondary batteries.


    The news rules do make sense, a in-flight fire on an airliner is pretty serious, especially if there is no nearby place to land (e.g. halfway between California and Hawaii).

    --
    A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
    1. Re:Safety issue not terrorism by ray-auch · · Score: 4, Funny

      No place to land, sure, but plenty of water to put out the fire!


      Umm... you want to put out a _lithium_ fire using _water_ ?

  11. How low... can you go?!!! by Nexus7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe they want to see what they can make us do. They said one time you couldn't carry water bottles on-board. Then you could carry them on as long as they were purchased after the security check. I don't know what it is now... then they said that cosmetics, shampoos, soaps, etc. containing liquids had to be less that 4 oz and all of them had to fit in a quart bag, my sizes might be off, but something like that. Why quart size? Maybe it's a carefully determined threshold, above which everyone is still resentful, but not so much that they'd protest. Or maybe they made it up, as long as they were making stuff up anyway. Or maybe the water-boarded guy said they had a plot to use 2 quart bags.. then they water-boarded him some more and he said one-and-a-half qt bags; so they decided they'd allow only 1 qt bags so that the evil ones did have anything to blow up. Now it's 1 spare battery (or whatever number). I suppose we hear that and go, hey, they allow a spare, and that's good around. I mean, who needs a hundred spares anyway? And so we accept one more thing, more or less unquestioningly.

    I know this sounds like a slippery slope argument, but this stuff is being made up as we go along. They got the idiot shoe guy trying to light a match, so they said we've got to take our shoes off and run them through the machines. I mean, this could go on ad infinitum.

  12. The TSA found the terrorist instruction manual by sm62704 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Page 37:

    To blow up an airplane
    1. obtain lithium battery
    2. board aircraft with battery
    3. Wait until airborn at 30,000 ft
    4. Short out terminals
    5. Hold under shoe
    6. ???????????
    7. 48 virgins are yours! Enjoy!
    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  13. Very vague information by amper · · Score: 4, Informative
    What really bothers me about this is that the info page from the TSA provides only very vague information concerning exactly what is or is not permitted, and the rules seem to be defined so poorly as to beg for inadvertent violation of the rules by passengers as well as violation of passengers' rights by overzealous security personnel.

    There is no distinction made between non-rechargeable and rechargeable batteries. This may be for a good reason, but the TSA page seems to refer primarily to rechargeable batteries.

    • 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!


    Note the specification of the word "aggregate" in the second item. That word doesn't appear in the first item. Does that mean I can bring *any number* of batteries that have an individual lithium content of less than 8-grams?

    Note the specification of "lithium metal battery" in the third and fourth items. This term does not appear in either of the first or second items. The first and second items refer to "lithium ion batteries". What is the distinction between a "lithium ion battery" and a "lithium metal battery"? Even worse, in the second item, the term "lithium ion battery" is only referred to as an example. The operative phrase only says "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".

    Can anyone cite the relevant regulations rather than this public info disaster?
  14. Need the TSA to explain it, Nutrition-Facts-style by Killer+Eye · · Score: 4, Funny

    Rulemakers like the TSA need to be forced to explain the rationales for every decision.

    But, before they're allowed to get all legalese on us, there should also be a brevity requirement. Like the Nutrition Facts on the side of your average can of soup, probably one of the best examples I can think of where a government requirement *didn't* turn into 4 paragraphs of fine print, but rather is presented in a way Joe Sixpack can understand.

    I'd like to see something like:
    TSA Security Facts
    --------------
    Restriction: No lithium batteries.
    Applies to Flights: International
    Rationale: We don't have a clue but we read something bad about them in Newsweek.
    Since: 2007
    Terrorist Plots Known to Use This Method: 0

    --
    "Microsoft killed my company, I hold a personal grudge. I don't use Microsoft products and neither should you."-JWZ
  15. Precedent by cgenman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Obviously they needed to be banned. Lithium batteries are much, much more dangerous than 3oz of water outside of a plastic baggie.

    And for that matter, people bleed to death of papercuts all the time. Paper must be banned from airlines. Similarly, Cheeseburgers, umbrellas during lightning storms, and those shoes with little wheels in them must be stopped. On airplanes.

    Other things that should never be brought on an airplane include: step ladders, Christmas lights, and Chuck Norris. Gambling is a very serious addiction, and as such fliers are hereby banned from setting foot inside of Las Vegas McCarron Airport.

    Thank you for your attention, and thank you for flying with the TSA. The TSA: Drawing on our imagination to creatively protect America from imagined harm.

  16. The TSA doesn't exist to stop terror by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It exists to

    1. convince the American sheeple think that the .gov is actually doing something about terrorism
    2. instill fear in the sheeple so they continue making poor risk assessments re: terrorism, and thus support wingnuttery like the TSA.

    The TSA hasn't done jack shit to prevent terrorism. Terrorism is defeated by police work and good intelligence, not invading far off countries. Terrorism is not defeated militarily. It is defeated politically and socially: politically through a practice of non-intervention and socially through a process of co-operative engagement. To put it in more common terms: respect others and trade with them. Don't invade and steal resources. Present yourself as something to emulate. Over time, people will leave you the hell alone, because you leave them the hell alone.

    The TSA is a crime of an agency, and should be disbanded. Airport security is one thing. Tin horn fascist fear mongering is another.

    RS

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  17. This sucks! by AaronW · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I may not carry a laptop, but I do travel with a few cameras. I have my dSLR with one spare lithium battery, a small point-and-shoot camera with a bunch of spares, and a video camera. I need a bunch of spares for my old P&S camera since it eats them like there's no tomorrow and if I use that camera much I'll easily go through 3-4 batteries before I can get back and have a chance to charge them. Granted, the batteries are quite small but I don't feel like replacing it just yet.

    Being limited to one spare battery for everything absolutely sucks and is unacceptable. I could see carrying one spare for a laptop, but this will really suck for photographers.

    --
    This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  18. Screw air travel by nsayer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Airport security has become a ridiculous game of "Simon Says," only in this case Simon has a taser and the ability to ruin your vacation plans. Every congress-critter from any tourism-oriented state should be holding daily hearings with the head of the TSA asking for cost:benefit analyses on all of these stupid rules.

  19. Actually that Is in the request... by howlatthemoon · · Score: 4, Informative

    that you not travel with recalled batteries. http://safetravel.dot.gov/remember.html

    Other things that you can find are why they are doing this e.g. flight crews can better monitor safety conditions to prevent an incident, and can access fire extinguishers, if an incident does happen -- http://safetravel.dot.gov/tips.html

    YOU CAN TRAVEL WITH MOST LI-ION CONSUMER BATTERIES assuming the TSA agents follow the rules as stated

    For the lazy people not willing to look at the actual page, nor the willingness to get through the TSA's obtuse writing here is the punch line:
    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. -- My Macbook Pro battery is 60 watt hours or about 5.5 grams of lithium
    * 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 ( the picture shows a pro-camcoder extended use battery and an external extended use laptop battery).

    I usually travel with 10 or more Li-ion batteries of various sizes and this language does not lead me to believe that I will have any trouble because I never check my batteries.I am still concerned as enforcement of these new rules is left up to poorly trained agents, so I worry about losing very expensive batteries because one idiot see lithium on the label and chucks it.

  20. Unsafe at any speed by EdIII · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know some of these policies make sense, even if not implemented correctly. The limit itself is ridiculous. They should just enforce proper packaging during transit.

    Flying in this country is going to get to the point where EVERYTHING will be packed according to a 1000+ point policy and checked. Carry-ons will be banned entirely. Ohhh, and you will have ditch all of your clothes, submit yourself to the "high colonic" security scanner, and travel in a one size does not fit all jumpsuit. I just hope when safety and terrorism inevitably bring us there that I can at least choose the color of my jumpsuit.

    The sad fact is that with the corruption of the airlines and FAA still allowing critical design flaws to exist, that the military itself corrected over 20 years ago, you will be flying very safely in a progressively unsafe plane. Makes perfect sense.

    I got an idea... Why not just go back to the way it was before? Where we accepted a certain level of risk to travel. People do stupid stuff all the time like drinking too much and smoking. I don't see how far fetched it is to get a little excitement riding in a plane that may explode due to a design flaw from the airplane manufacturers, Sony, or some fucked in the head terrorist :)

    P.S - We had a close family friend die on Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie. My position has always been that the airlines themselves do not do enough to protect us. There was technology back then, and still exists today, that could have stopped that. It would cost a couple hundred thousand dollars but would essentially retrofit the cargo compartments with blast proof material. The containers themselves would also be fitted with it. Had that existed on Flight 103, they would probably not even have noticed that blast till they landed. So without trying to sound like a troll, I do believe these TSA policies are just window dressing and that they don't ever intend to focus on real security solutions that could be effective.

  21. IAAP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I am a commercial pilot. I've had a large battery go into thermal runaway in flight. It scared the hell out of me. The flight crew put it in a metal trashcan (so the firefighting gloves are a good idea) and I had depresurized and was going to toss it out over Kansas when it stopped venting and pulsing. I didn't see it; I was on oxygen up front, but my crew really wanted to throw it out even though it stopped pulsing.

    So yeah, this is an annoyance, but, in retrospect, I think it's a good idea, and thinking about the spare laptop battery showed into a pocket with some random AV cables, it could light off the overhead compartment before anyone notices.