[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
______
EXAMINING THE RISK: THE DANGERS
OF EV FIRES FOR FIRST RESPONDERS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
AND OVERSIGHT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE,
AND TECHNOLOGY
OF THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 29, 2024
__________
Serial No. 118-35
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT
Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
54-912 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. FRANK LUCAS, Oklahoma, Chairman
BILL POSEY, Florida ZOE LOFGREN, California, Ranking
RANDY WEBER, Texas Member
BRIAN BABIN, Texas SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
JIM BAIRD, Indiana HALEY STEVENS, Michigan
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York
MIKE GARCIA, California DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma ERIC SORENSEN, Illinois
JAY OBERNOLTE, California ANDREA SALINAS, Oregon
CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee VALERIE FOUSHEE, North Carolina
DARRELL ISSA, California KEVIN MULLIN, California
RICK CRAWFORD, Arkansas JEFF JACKSON, North Carolina
CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York EMILIA SYKES, Ohio
RYAN ZINKE, Montana MAXWELL FROST, Florida
SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida YADIRA CARAVEO, Colorado
DALE STRONG, Alabama SUMMER LEE, Pennsylvania
MAX MILLER, Ohio JENNIFER McCLELLAN, Virginia
RICH McCORMICK, Georgia GABE AMO, Rhode Island
MIKE COLLINS, Georgia SEAN CASTEN, Illinois,
BRANDON WILLIAMS, New York Vice Ranking Member
TOM KEAN, New Jersey PAUL TONKO, New York
VACANCY
------
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight
HON. JAY OBERNOLTE, California, Chairman
BRIAN BABIN, Texas VALERIE FOUSHEE, North Carolina,
MAX MILLER, Ohio Ranking Member
RICH McCORMICK, Georgia KEVIN MULLIN, California
VACANCY JEFF JACKSON, North Carolina
C O N T E N T S
February 29, 2024
Page
Hearing Charter.................................................. 2
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Jay Obernolte, Chairman, Subcommittee
on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on Science, Space,
and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.................. 12
Written Statement............................................ 13
Statement by Representative Valerie Foushee, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on
Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.. 14
Written Statement............................................ 15
Statement by Representative Zoe Lofgren, Ranking Member,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
Representatives................................................ 16
Written Statement............................................ 17
Witnesses:
Mr. Dan Munsey, Fire Chief, San Bernardino County Fire Department
Oral Statement............................................... 18
Written Statement............................................ 21
Dr. Judy Jeevarajan, Vice President and Executive Director,
Electrochemical Safety Research Institute at UL Research
Institutes
Oral Statement............................................... 28
Written Statement............................................ 30
Discussion....................................................... 33
Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Mr. Dan Munsey, Fire Chief, San Bernardino County Fire Department 44
Dr. Judy Jeevarajan, Vice President and Executive Director,
Electrochemical Safety Research Institute at UL Research
Institutes..................................................... 49
Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record
Statement submitted by Representative Max Miller, Committee on
Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives
Albert Gore, Executive Director, Zero Emission Transportation
Association (ZETA)......................................... 52
EXAMINING THE RISK: THE DANGERS
OF EV FIRES FOR FIRST RESPONDERS
----------
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 29, 2024
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:31 a.m., in
room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jay
Obernolte [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT
Chairman Obernolte. The Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is
authorized to declare a recess of this hearing at any time.
Welcome to today's hearing entitled ``Examining the Risk:
The Dangers of EV Fires for First Responders.'' I now recognize
myself for 5 minutes for an opening statement.
I'd like to thank everyone and to Ranking Member Foushee
and the other Members of our Committee for being here this
morning. Today's hearing will examine the growing dangers that
electric vehicle (EV) fires pose to the American public and the
lack of guidance and resources provided to first responders
across the country.
For over 100 years, our highways have been dominated by
internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. Throughout this
time, we've invested resources and expertise to learn the best
practices for extinguishing internal combustion engine vehicle
fires. However, within the last two decades, we've seen a large
increase in the number of electric vehicles on the road. The
Federal Government has pushed for a transition to EVs,
incentivizing their development through tax credits and
charging station infrastructure grants. Worldwide, there are
now roughly 3.1 million EVs in operation today. Many experts in
the auto industry anticipate that by 2030, there will be nearly
130 million vehicles in operation. As the presence of these
vehicles continues to grow on our roads, so does the threat and
danger of the fires they can produce.
EV fires are fundamentally different from traditional
internal combustion engine fires, and they present new dangers
that our first responders need to be prepared for. EV fires
burn at temperatures far hotter than regular vehicle fires.
They produce copious amounts of toxic chemical gases, expose
firefighters to the risk of electrocution, and are often
inextinguishable for hours or even days with a constant threat
of reignition due to thermal runaway. When an EV either
experiences an incident due to a manufacturing defect or is
damaged in an accident, the battery that powers that vehicle
often has a remaining charge. This stranded energy provides the
fuel to keep a battery burning for hours, regardless of how
much water is poured on it in an attempt to extinguish it.
Unfortunately, the Federal Government has been deficient in
providing guidance and resources to our firefighters in dealing
with this threat. There's currently no uniform guidance on how
to address EV fires or protect firefighters from the unique
hazards they present, leaving many fire departments to
formulate ad hoc solutions. For example, firefighters in
Wakefield, Massachusetts, had to dump 2-20,000 gallons of water
over 2 hours to put out an EV fire. Firefighters in Sacramento
were forced to submerge an EV in a makeshift pond because the
vehicle kept reigniting.
Vehicle manufacturers themselves have not provided uniform
solutions to this problem, with some manufacturers recommending
that EVs be removed from the road and left to burn themselves
out. As you can imagine, in my home State of California where
wildfires are an ever-present danger, letting an EV just burn
itself out is not an option.
Today's hearing is about ensuring the safety of our
firefighters and first responders. This hearing also seeks to
raise awareness of the dangers of EV battery fires and ensure
that those who help protect and serve our communities are
provided with the resources they need to do their jobs. This
requires that we understand the threats of EV fires and the
substantial differences between EVs and ICE vehicles to develop
new best practices and uniform guidance.
I'm looking forward to the hearing today. That concludes my
opening statement.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Obernolte follows:]
Good morning. Thank you to Ranking Member Foushee and the
other members of our committee for being here.
Today's hearing will examine the growing dangers that
electric vehicle fires pose to the American public and the lack
of guidance and resources provided to first responders across
the country.
For over 100 years, our highways have been dominated by
internal combustion engine vehicles. Throughout this time, we
have invested resources and expertise to learn the best
practices for extinguishing internal combustion engine vehicle
fires.
However, within the last two decades we have seen a large
increase in the number of EV's on the road. The federal
government has pushed for a transition to electric vehicles,
incentivizing their development through tax credits and
charging station infrastructure grants.
Worldwide there are roughly 3.1 million EVs in operation
today. Many experts in the auto industry anticipate that by
2030 there will be nearly 130 million in operation. As the
presence of these vehicles continue to grow on our roads, so
does the threat and danger of the fires they can produce.
EV fires are fundamentally different from traditional
internal combustion engine fires, and they present new dangers
that our first responders need to be prepared for. EV fires
burn at temperatures far hotter than regular vehicle fires;
they produce copious amounts of toxic chemical gases, expose
firefighters to the risk of electrocution, and are often
inextinguishable for hours or days with the threat of
reignition due to thermal runaway.
When an EV either experiences an incident due to a
manufacturing defect or is damaged in an accident, the battery
that powers the vehicle often has a remaining charge. This
stranded energy provides the fuel to keep a battery burning for
hours regardless of how much water is poured on it in an
attempt to extinguish it.
Unfortunately, the federal government has been deficient in
providing guidance and resources to our firefighters and first
responders in dealing with this threat. There is currently no
uniform guidance on how to address EV fires or protect
firefighters from the unique hazards they present, leaving many
fire departments to formulate ad hoc solutions.
For example, firefighters in Wakefield, Massachusetts had
to dump 20,000 gallons of water over two hours to put out an EV
fire. Firefighters in Sacramento, California were forced to
submerge an EV in a makeshift pond because the vehicle kept
reigniting.
Vehicle manufacturers themselves have not provided uniform
solutions to this problem, with some manufacturers recommending
that EVs be removed from the road and left to burn themselves
out. As you can imagine, in my home state of California, where
wildfires are always an ever-present danger, letting an EV just
burn itself out is not an option.
Today's hearing is about ensuring the safety of our
firefighters and first responders. The hearing also seeks to
raise awareness of the dangers of EV battery fires and to
ensure that those who help protect and serve our communities
are provided with the resources they need to do their jobs.
This requires that we understand the threats of EV fires and
the substantial differences between EVs and ICE vehicles to
develop new best practices and uniform guidance.
Our first witness is Mr. Dan Munsey, Fire Chief of the San
Bernardino County Fire Department. Chief Munsey is a
constituent and friend. He works diligently for the citizens of
San Bernardino County and is uniquely positioned through his
leadership role with the International Association of Fire
Chiefs to speak to the challenges firefighters face on the
ground when confronted with an EV fire. Chief Munsey, we are
looking forward to hearing your experiences to better
understand how we can address this issue in the future.
Also testifying today is Dr. Judy Jeevarajan, the Vice
President and Executive Director of the Electrochemical Safety
Research Institute at UL Research Institutes. UL is one of the
leading research organizations on EVs and lithium-ion battery
fires. Dr. Jeevarajan is an expert on battery technology, and
we look forward to hearing from you today.
We hope both of your testimonies will provide solutions to
the Committee's concerns with these vehicle fires, and also
supply steps that can be taken to provide resources and
guidance to first responders.
Thank you for your willingness to be here. I now recognize
Ranking Member Foushee for her opening statement.
Chairman Obernolte. I'll now recognize the Ranking Member
of the Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee, the
gentlewoman from North Carolina, Mrs. Foushee, for her opening
statement.
Mrs. Foushee. Thank you, Chairman Obernolte, for holding
today's hearing on this important topic.
The issue of firefighter safety is very near and dear to
me. My husband Stan served as a firefighter and fire marshal
for the town of Carrboro, North Carolina, for more than 30
years before his retirement. I witnessed firsthand the bravery
and dedication that he and his firefighting comrades brought to
the job, as well as the sacrifices that firefighters and their
families are required to make. I am incredibly grateful for
their service and we should all be grateful for the service of
firefighters around the Nation. We must do everything possible
to support them and keep them safe the way they keep us safe
every single day.
Today's hearing is focused on electric vehicles and the
distinct safety risks that electric vehicles pose for
firefighters and first responders. A key task when considering
any emerging technology is to understand the novel challenges
posed by the technology and then learn how to mitigate those
risks so that society can enjoy its full benefits. Electric
vehicles are no different. It is important to note that EVs are
a critical piece of America's clean energy transition, and that
the rapid adoption of EVs is essential to achieving President
Biden's ambitious goal to make the United States a net-zero
emitter of greenhouse gases by 2050.
I am proud to say that my home State of North Carolina has
become a leader in the development and the deployment of EVs
here in the U.S. Furthermore, based on currently available
data, there is no reason to believe that EVs are any more
likely to catch fire than traditional vehicles powered by
internal combustion engines. Nevertheless, EV battery fires are
different from internal combustion engine fires, and therefore,
pose a distinctive risk in terms of firefighter and first
responder safety. I appreciate that today's discussion will be
rooted in science because we cannot understand the safety risks
of EVs without understanding the scientific basis that
underlies them.
Today's EVs are mostly powered by lithium-ion batteries,
which offer great benefits when it comes to energy efficiency,
but can suffer extensive damage from high-speed crashes. The
sources of EV safety risks that we all--that we will discuss
rather, such as electric shocks, stranded energy, thermal
runaway, reignition, and toxic chemical release are primarily
associated with the properties and characteristics of lithium-
ion batteries when those batteries are damaged.
I believe there are tremendous opportunities for scientific
research to reduce these risks by advancing our understanding
of why lithium-ion batteries react in these ways, how the
design of lithium-ion batteries can be improved to lessen the
risk of fires, and what innovative tools and techniques can be
developed to aid firefighters and first responders as they
respond to EV fires in real time.
I hope to learn more today about the latest research
developments surrounding lithium-ion battery safety, the
research gaps that currently exist, and the most promising
research pathways toward batteries that are less prone to fire
hazards.
I want to extend my sincere gratitude to both of our
witnesses for your testimony at today's hearing. We are
fortunate to hear from both of you for your perspectives as
leaders in the firefighting community and a leader in the field
of battery safety research. It is crucial to bring these worlds
together to ensure that firefighters and first responders
possess the knowledge and the technical capabilities that they
need to respond to EV fires safely and effectively.
And, Chief Munsey, thank you for your service.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Foushee follows:]
Thank you, Chairman Obernolte, and thank you for holding
today's hearing on this important topic.
The issue of firefighter safety is very near and dear to
me: my husband, Stanley, was a firefighter for over 30 years
and served as the Fire Marshal for the town of Carrboro, North
Carolina before his retirement. I witnessed firsthand the
bravery and dedication that my husband and his firefighting
comrades brought to the job, as well as the sacrifices that
firefighters and their families are required to make. I am
incredibly grateful for their service, and we should all be
grateful for the service of firefighters around the nation. We
must do everything possible to support them and keep them safe,
the way they keep us safe every single day.
Today's hearing is focused on electric vehicles, and the
distinct safety risks that electric vehicles pose for
firefighters and first responders. A key task when considering
any emerging technology is to understand the novel challenges
posed by the technology and then learn how to mitigate those
risks so that society can enjoy its full benefits. Electric
vehicles are no different.
It is important to note that EVs are a critical piece of
America's clean energy transition, and that the rapid adoption
of EVs is essential to achieving President Biden's ambitious
goal to make the United States a net-zero emitter of greenhouse
gases by 2050. I am proud to say that my home state of North
Carolina has become a leader in the development and deployment
of EVs here in the U.S.
Furthermore, based on currently available data, there is no
reason to believe that EVs are any more likely to catch fire
than traditional vehicles powered by internal combustion
engines. Nevertheless, EV battery fires are different from
internal combustion engine fires, and therefore pose a
distinctive risk in terms of firefighter and first responder
safety.
I appreciate that today's discussion will be rooted in
science, because we cannot understand the safety risks of EVs
without understanding the scientific basis that underlies them.
Today's EVs are mostly powered by lithium-ion batteries, which
offer great benefits when it comes to energy efficiency but can
suffer extensive damage from high-speed crashes.
The sources of EV safety risk that we will discuss, such as
electric shock, stranded energy, thermal runaway, reignition,
and toxic chemical release, are primarily associated with the
properties and characteristics of lithium-ion batteries when
those batteries are damaged. I believe there are tremendous
opportunities for scientific research to reduce these risks by
advancing our understanding of why lithium-ion batteries react
in these ways, how the design of lithium-ion batteries can be
improved to lessen the risk of fires, and what innovative tools
and techniques can be developed to aid firefighters and first
responders as they respond to EV fires in real time.
I hope to learn more today about the latest research
developments surrounding lithium-ion battery safety, the
research gaps that currently exist, and the most promising
research pathways towards batteries that are less prone to fire
hazards.
I want to extend my sincere gratitude to both of our
witnesses for your testimony at today's hearing. We are
fortunate to hear both of your perspectives, as a leader in the
firefighting community and a leader in the field of battery
safety research. It is crucial to bring these worlds together
to ensure that firefighters and first responders possess the
knowledge and the technical capabilities that they need to
respond to EV fires safely and effectively.
And Chief Munsey, thank you for your service. Mr. Chairman,
I yield back.
Chairman Obernolte. Thank you, Mrs. Foushee.
I'll now recognize the Ranking Member of the full
Committee, Ms. Lofgren, for an opening statement.
Ms. Lofgren. Well, thank you, Chairman Obernolte and
Ranking Member Foushee, for this hearing today.
As you've mentioned, electric vehicles make up an
increasing share of cars on the road, and that's really good
news. That reduces emission from the transportation sector,
which is crucial in our fight against climate change. But as
with any emerging technology, we need to make sure we
understand and adapt to the unique challenges that arise from
its widespread adoption. That doesn't mean EVs are any more
dangerous than gas-powered vehicles. We simply don't have the
data to suggest that. But the data and research on EVs has to
increase along with the market for them.
Over the decades, we've developed best practices to
extinguish internal combustion engine fires as safely and as
quickly as possible. Now, we need to give that level of
attention and support to research into electric vehicles and
specifically, as the Chair and Ranking Member have mentioned,
lithium-ion batteries that power them.
A 2020 safety report published by the National
Transportation Safety Board noted that fires arising from
lithium-ion batteries and electric vehicles can present special
challenges for firefighters and first responders, along with
risks that differ from the risks presented by fires in
traditional vehicles. In the years since that report was
published, EV sales have ballooned to 1.3 million in 2023. In
fact, when I'm home, it looks like every other car on the road
is an EV.
Fire departments across the country, many staffed by
volunteers, don't have the resources to track the EV fires they
extinguish. And as we know in the Science Committee, data is
absolutely essential. If the data isn't available to indicate
that EVs are more dangerous than the internal combustion
engine, we need to research that, and we need to have
meaningful efforts to deal with the new challenges.
I'm happy to join my Chair and Ranking Member in welcoming
these two wonderful witnesses. We need to support research into
safety mechanisms that can be incorporated into the battery
itself so reignition is less of a risk. And we need to develop
technology that provides insight into the health of lithium-ion
batteries to detect damaged batteries after a crash and keep
them off the road and out of waste facilities before they
ignite.
In the meantime, we need to ensure that first responders
are prepared to address the risk present when current
generation lithium-ion batteries ignite. Is the personal
protective equipment used by firefighters still safe after it's
been exposed to battery fumes? How can we ensure that first
responders have easy access to safety information that differs
from manufacturer to manufacturer? So long as we lack
industrywide standards and science to anchor them, responses to
EV fires will be hampered, placing first responders and
consumers at risk.
I look forward to hearing from the experts here today. We
know science is important in addressing this issue. Support of
zero emissions in our future requires a clear-eyed look at the
new challenges introduced by emerging clean technologies. As
someone who happily drives a Volt at home, I want to make sure
that we know everything that we need to know about lithium-ion
batteries so that we can go on reducing our climate change risk
but also safely.
And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Lofgren follows:]
Thank you, Chairman Obernolte and Ranking Member Foushee,
for leading this hearing today. Electric vehicles make up an
increasing share of the cars on the road. This is great news -
reducing emissions from the transportation sector is crucial in
our fight against climate change. And as with any emerging
technology, we need to make sure we understand and adapt to the
unique challenges that arise from its widespread adoption. This
does not mean EVs are any more dangerous than gas- powered
vehicles--we simply don't have data to suggest that. But the
data and research on EVs must increase along with the market
for them. Over many decades, we've developed best practices to
extinguish internal combustion engine fires as safely and
quickly as possible. Now, we need to give that level of
attention and support to research into electric vehicles, and
specifically into the lithium- ion batteries that power them.
A 2020 safety report published by the National
Transportation Safety Board noted that fires arising from the
lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles can ``present
special challenges'' for firefighters and first responders,
along with ``risks that differ'' from the risks presented by
fires in traditional vehicles. In the years since that report
was published, EV sales have ballooned, from 300,000 in 2020 to
1.3 million in 2023. However, the data available on EV fires
hasn't increased proportionally. Fire departments across the
country--many staffed by volunteers--lack the resources to
track the EV fires they extinguish. The data that is available
doesn't indicate EVs are any more dangerous than internal
combustion engines, but as we know on the Science Committee, we
can't meaningfully address new risks without the data to
underpin our research questions.
I'm happy to join my colleagues in welcoming our witnesses
today, who will help us understand these questions from two
important angles. As electric vehicles become increasingly
popular, practical, and affordable, their lithium-ion batteries
must evolve to improve the safety of riders and first
responders. We need to support research into safety mechanisms
that can be incorporated into the battery itself, so re-
ignition is less of a risk. We need to develop technology that
provides insight into the health of lithium-ion batteries, to
detect damaged batteries after a crash and keep them off the
road and out of waste facilities before they ignite.
In the meantime, we need to ensure that first responders
are prepared to address the risks present when current-
generation lithium-ion batteries catch fire.
Is the personal protective equipment used by firefighters
still safe after it's been exposed to battery fumes? How can we
ensure our first responders have easy access to safety
information that differs from manufacturer to manufacturer? So
long as we lack industry-wide standards and science to anchor
them, responses to EV fires will be hampered, placing first
responders and consumers at risk.
I look forward to hearing expert perspectives on how the
Science Committee can help to close the research gaps related
to EV fires. Support of a zero-emissions future requires a
clear-eyed look at the new challenges introduced by emerging
clean technologies. Thank you to our witnesses for appearing
today. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Obernolte. Thank you, Ranking Member Lofgren.
We'll now move to witness testimony. Our first witness is
Dan Munsey, who is Fire Chief of the San Bernardino County Fire
Department. Chief Munsey is my constituent and friend. He works
diligently for the citizens of San Bernardino County and is
uniquely positioned through his leadership role with the
International Association of Fire Chiefs to speak to the
challenges that firefighters face on the ground when confronted
with an EV fire.
Chief Munsey, we are looking forward to hearing your
experiences and to better understanding how we can address this
issue in the future.
Also testifying today is Dr. Judy Jeevarajan, which, in
fairness, is no more difficult a last name than Obernolte. She
is the Vice President and Executive Director of the
Electrochemical Safety Research Institute at UL Research
Institutes. UL is one of the leading research organizations on
EVs and lithium-ion battery fires. Dr. Jeevarajan is an expert
on battery technology, and we are looking forward to hearing
from you today about how to confront this problem. We hope that
both of your testimonies will provide some solutions to the
Committee's concerns with these vehicle fires and also supply
steps that can be taken to provide these needed resources and
guidance to our first responders.
Chief Munsey, you are now recognized for 5 minutes to
present your testimony.
TESTIMONY OF MR. DAN MUNSEY, FIRE CHIEF,
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
Mr. Munsey. Chairman Obernolte, thank you for allowing me
to testify. Ranking Member Foushee, thank you for you and your
husband's service. And, Ms. Lofgren--thank you--Ranking Member
Lofgren, thank you--Lofgren, excuse me--thank you for your
testimony as well.
I have to ask you, Chair, did you use ChatGPT for your
remarks?
Chairman Obernolte. No, sir, I did not.
Mr. Munsey. I'm Dan Munsey. I'm the Fire Chief for the
county of San Bernardino. We happen to be the largest county in
the United States, over 20,000 square miles. For perspective,
you can take the four smallest States in the union and put it
within our borders. Of interest is almost 80 percent of our
area is State or Federal land. We have a large Federal
responsibility and work with the various fire--forest--forestry
agencies in our county.
I do sit on the International Association of Fire Chiefs as
a Tech Council President, have sat there for 4 years. I am on
the California Metro Chiefs as a Vice President that represents
the largest fire departments in California. And I also sit on
Firescope in which an Emerging Information Technology group has
spent a lot of time looking at lithium-ion batteries and EVs
and the hazards to firefighters.
I wrote a written testimony and it focused on prevention
because our first job in the fire service is to prevent bad
things from happening, and only when those things do occur,
then to have a response. I'm not going to go through everything
that I've written in my written testimony, but I will say that
it's incredibly important that we educate the public to ensure
that they understand how to safely charge their vehicles and
how to not modify them. It's important that we're enforcing the
rules and regulations, and there's certainly some rules and
regulations that could be adopted by State, local, and Federal
agencies to ensure that our electric vehicles are safe.
Third, we have to work with the manufacturers to ensure
that we are engineering lithium-ion batteries that can
withstand damage from crashes and also sustainability from
fire, and I have provided some thoughts in my written
testimony.
I'm going to call for a video to be played here shortly,
and when it's ready to be played, please bring it to the
screen. But I'd like to describe this video to you. Now, this
isn't a video that's going to show a large explosion or a gas
that's quickly burning, but it's going to show four things: the
effort required to suppress an emergency vehicle, the duration
of the amount of time that it takes to suppress that fire, the
amount of specialized equipment, and the cost.
As we're fighting electric vehicle fires, as has been
mentioned, there are some concerns. The first is the personal
protective equipment of the firefighters. Frankly, over my
career, I've seen way too many firefighters pass away and die
from cancer. Our cancer rate is higher than the civilian
population. Their--electric vehicle lithium-ion batteries pose
a challenge to firefighters' health. The personal protective
equipment, especially when it's exposed by lithium-ion gases in
a pressurized environment such as the garage you see in front
of you, then leads to extraordinary cleaning costs of around
$500 to $1,000. This personal protective equipment must be sent
offsite. There is no fire department that I have knowledge of
that possesses the cleaning. Generally, it's a CO2
compressed system to remove the gases.
Please play the video. OK. So we're waiting for that to
come up. Just go ahead and play it when you're ready.
[Video shown.]
Mr. Munsey. Equipment, you'll see in this video here
shortly that they're using a fire blanket. The fire blanket is
used to either suppress the fire. It's not putting the fire
out, but it's controlling the fire and the gases to prevent
spread. These blankets cost between $3,000 to $5,000. What you
see here is a single-family residence in the Denver metro area.
The firefighters had a garage. The first screen shows gases and
a smoke that--under a pressurized environment. They now have to
remove the car using specialized equipment. The blanket is in
the firefighter's hand. While the fire looks controlled, it is
not. There's still thermal runaway of that battery, and it can
ignite at any time. This blanket is used to keep that fire
under check.
They are now going to have to tow this vehicle to a tow
yard. When they arrive at a tow yard, they're going to do
things such as digging a pit, filling it with water, and
immersing this vehicle, or working to isolate that battery.
This car must be kept separate from humans and other cars so it
doesn't ignite or cause human health.
Training is also significant of about $2,500 per
firefighter just to understand the electrical concerns, how to
adequately fight these fires, how to use the specialized
nozzles.
Finally, to close the remarks, our plan in San Bernardino,
we're going to need to buy a heavy wrecker. The heavy wrecker
is about $1.2 million. We're going to use these to lift the
cars. We're going
to have to buy a trailer with a dip tank to place the cars in a
dip tank to fully extinguish these fires.
I'll look forward to your questions as they come up. Thank
you for the time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Munsey follows:]
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT
Chairman Obernolte. Thank you, Chief Munsey.
I now recognize Dr. Jeevarajan for 5 minutes to present her
testimony.
TESTIMONY OF DR. JUDY JEEVARAJAN,
VICE PRESIDENT AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
ELECTROCHEMICAL SAFETY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
AT UL RESEARCH INSTITUTES
Dr. Jeevarajan. Good morning, Chairman Obernolte, Ranking
Member Foushee, and Ranking Member Lofgren, and Members of the
Committee. Thank you for this opportunity to testify on
examining the risk and dangers of EV fires for first
responders, as this is indeed a very important and timely
topic. I'm the Vice President and Executive Director of UL
Research Institutes, as you already mentioned, and before
joining UL, I worked at NASA (National Aeronautics and Space
Administration) Johnson Space Center in Houston as a group lead
for battery safety and advanced technology.
Since entering the commercial market in the 1990's,
lithium-ion rechargeable batteries will continue to maintain
the rank for battery chemistry with the highest energy density
while also enjoying a long cycle life, lower level of self-
discharge, and high-rate capability. The many advantages that
is provided by this battery chemistry has made it the option of
choice in many sectors ranging from consumer devices to
electric vehicles and stationary grid energy storage systems.
Lithium-ion batteries are being used in the space sector
since the late 1990's, and more recently, have been deployed in
the marine sector, too. Associated with this high energy
density, though, is the potential for lithium-ion cells to
undergo catastrophic failures that can generate fire and toxic
gases when they fail to be designed, manufactured, charged, or
used correctly.
One major challenge is the suppression of fires, as you
just heard. Various difficulties arise. The first is the design
and location of the battery in an EV. Lithium-ion fires need a
suppressant that can efficiently cool down all the cells in the
battery pack in order to prevent reignition. However, the
physical location of the batteries in the EVs tends to be on
the underside of the vehicle, which means a rollover of the
vehicle may be required to manage access.
Additionally, the batteries are typically in a well-sealed
container required--that is specifically to prevent water
ingress in the event of a flood or if the vehicle is driven on
waterlogged roads. For ease of fire suppression, designs need
to be developed here in the event of a catastrophic failure.
Sensors allow the opening of a relief valve in the battery
pack, which would then be connected to an outlet that is
accessible from a convenient location. Another area that
requires research is finding methods to remediate possible
toxic chemical runoff--suppressant runoff.
An area of concern for first responders and firefighters
working with an EV that has undergone a catastrophic failure is
determining the presence and location of stranded energy.
Stranded energy is energy that remains in a partially damaged
battery, which can be quite significant. Based on the design of
the battery--lithium-ion batteries in EVs, it's possible after
a fire or other damage that some modules are fully compromised,
while others are not. And it's also possible to have some cells
in the modules that are not compromised. So the damaged modules
may include energetic cells that can also move around when you
move the vehicle while it's moved to a tow yard. This can cause
short circuits and possible reignition. So it's critical that
parts of the battery--to determine if parts of the battery are
still energized and provide a means to discharge the cells or
modules before moving the vehicles, and methods need to be
developed to remotely access the data to determine the
existence of locations where cells continue to be energized and
designs that bypass fully compromised modules and discharge the
energized modules should also be developed.
So I would like to go on to venting and thermal runaway and
the release of combustible and toxic gases. My statement has a
lot of information, which I'm not going to read every part of
it, but I just want to mention that toxic and corrosive gases
such as HF and hydrogen cyanide are released. And we have
found--we have heard from firefighters that even after washing
their suits, they do find traces of HF on their suits. We also
know that there are particulate emissions that are given off
that are in the sub-micron sizes, in orders of magnitude higher
than the limits established for safe human exposure. The type
of respirators used by first responders may also need to be
reevaluated for their suitability to be worn during EV fire
suppressions. And I also mentioned that the materials that are
used in the suits may also need to be researched and determine
if new types of materials need to be used.
Other things that I wanted to talk about are mechanical
impacts, talk about fast charging. That is a concern. We would
like to have more research that is done in the area of fast
charging.
And the last thing I also wanted to mention is
cybersecurity. With the ease of updating EV vehicles and
battery software remotely, it also makes it very attractive,
but there are cybersecurity concerns.
And lastly, regulations need to be in place, where one can
actually recognize a vehicle, that it is an EV or plugin--or
any type of an EV. And also the firefighters are given enough
information to work with the vehicle.
Again, thank you all for the opportunity to address the
House Science Committee. I look forward to addressing your
questions and comments.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Jeevarajan follows:]
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT
Chairman Obernolte. Well, thank you very much. And thank
you to both our witnesses for your testimony.
I'll now recognize myself for 5 minutes for questions.
Chief Munsey, thanks again for being here. Our county is
larger than most States, and that prevents--presents some
unique challenges in ignition--extinguishing fires. I was
struck by, in listening to your testimony, some of the vast
amounts of water that's required to put out EV fires. What do
you do if you're responding to a fire and you don't have a
hydrant readily available? Or what do you do when an incline is
so steep, as it is in many places in our district, when just
getting access to the EV is a challenge?
Mr. Munsey. These are challenges. I'll point out that the
15 freeway--if we shut down the 15 freeway, there's several
million dollars of commerce that's affected per hour. So an EV
fire on the freeway, it's best to extinguish it rather than let
it burn out. That would be option No. 1, the preferable method,
just let it burn.
On the 15 freeway in our desert areas or in our mountain
areas where we wouldn't have hydrants that are nearby, we
really don't have a lot of options except for using a fire
blanket that was demonstrated in the video to help control that
fire. Two would be to bring a dip tank to the site and fill it.
Other than that, there really is no other options. If we start
attacking these fires using tank water, meaning the water tank
on the fire engine, these are typically only 500 to 750 gallons
of water. You're quickly going to run out of water, and this
fire is going to flare up. This could ensnarl traffic, or it
could, in a bad scenario, start a wildland fire, and now we do
not have any water to suppress this wildland fire.
Chairman Obernolte. Thank you. It's a serious problem.
Dr. Jeevarajan, I was interested in the part of your
testimony where you were talking about how necessary it is to
know exactly where the battery cells are and to be able to get
access to them to be able to cool them all down to prevent
reignition. There's kind of a similar problem with aircraft and
with airport firefighters needing to know where the fuel is,
where the emergency exits are. And that's why there are
standard markings on aircraft to designate emergency exits. And
most airport firefighting--firefighters are provided with
manuals that have a page for each type of airplane that
operates at that airport commonly that shows where the
flammables are, the fuel and the hydraulics and the oxygen, so
that the firefighters are aware of that danger. Do you think
that something like that would reduce the risk in EVs and share
that knowledge about where these battery cells are located?
Dr. Jeevarajan. Sure. As you know, that cells are located--
all the batteries are located on the underside, below the
passenger compartment. And they pretty much are through the
entire bottom of the vehicle. That also helps with the center
of gravity. So one of the things that we are looking at, within
the SAE, is writing a standard that--I think it's called J3108,
which is going to be looking at putting some type of a symbol
on the registration plates that will tell people what type of
vehicle it is, whether it's a gasoline vehicle or electric
vehicle, and it could be pure battery electric vehicle or a
PHEV (plug-in hybrid electric vehicle) or a HEV (hybrid
electric vehicles). And I think that's still not in place yet,
but at some point when that comes in place, then people should
be able to just look at it and then go and figure out or
translate it to something like what I would call a QR code, but
it's really just going and looking for a manual that says where
the battery is or what type it is.
But I also think the bigger thing is like design that is
required. If you have an excess of production of gas, a rupture
valve or something opens up, that would allow the firefighters
to be able to connect to the inside of the battery because that
will also reduce the amount of water that is needed because at
this time, you know, you're really not able to get to the
cells. So just trying to cool the outside of the battery is
insufficient, which is why it takes a lot more water to put out
the fire. And of course, you're not really reaching the cell,
so you're not really putting out the entire problem. So I think
that there needs to be a little bit more research and design
and engineering that goes into this, and I think we can get to
that.
Chairman Obernolte. All right. Thank you.
Chief Munsey, part of your testimony that you touched on
just briefly involved the modification of electric vehicles and
how hazardous that could be because it creates unapparent and
unintended consequences in sometimes causing fires, but our
home State of California has a rich tradition of allowing
hobbyists to modify vehicles. So how do you balance those two
ideas? Because they seem to be in tension.
Mr. Munsey. I enjoy working on old cars and motorcycles
myself, and if I look at the quote from Alfred Lord Tennyson on
the wall about looking into the future, that is something we
need to do when it comes to electric vehicles. The fact is
lithium-ion batteries that are poorly made and do not meet
certification cause fires. My greatest fear is 20, 25 years
down the line, as these cars are aging, we will have the home
mechanics that are replacing batteries with poorly made,
cheaper batteries that could cause fires. This is a concern to
me. And while I believe that people should be able to work on
hobbies, we just need to make sure that we're giving them the
ability to purchase the correct batteries, to install them
correctly to maintain their vehicles.
Chairman Obernolte. All right. Thank you. Well, I see I am
out of time.
I'll now recognize the Ranking Member, Mrs. Foushee, for 5
minutes for questions.
Mrs. Foushee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Jeevarajan, I'll direct my initial question to you. I
think we've acknowledged that, as EVs become more popular, that
EV battery fires are going to become more common. As an expert
in lithium-ion battery safety, what do you believe are the
biggest research gaps in EV battery safety?
Dr. Jeevarajan. I think I've mentioned most of it in my
statement. I think the fire suppression methods need to be
optimized. Getting the suppressants in our vehicle designs, to
the cells in the battery pack, those need to be optimized.
Stranded energy, understanding stranded energy is something
that we need to work on. There should be remote ways to
actually access the data. There can be software platforms that
can be developed that can remotely understand what's going on
in the battery, which areas are energized and so on. And that
will give a better idea for the firefighters and first
responders to determine which modules need to be discharged.
And that requires some science also.
Back in the late 1900's, early 2000's at NASA I worked on a
project where we were looking at doing an upgrade to the APU
(auxiliary power unit) system. The APU at that time--or the APU
for the shuttle used hydrazine as a fuel. And we were looking
to convert it to an electric APU. So we looked at a large
battery. This was like more than 300-volt battery. And at that
time--it was lithium-ion. And the way we had designed it is, we
need to have two-failure tolerance, which means even if two
cells in the battery pack failed, we would need to still have
power because it is a critical part of the shuttle. So we were
designing bypass for cells that failed. And I think things--
designs like that can easily be done. I mean, I don't say easy
because these are high voltage systems, have a lot of cells in
them, but there are engineering and scientific methods to be
able to do those types of--have those types of designs
developed. And so then we can actually bypass--once we know
which modules have energy in them, they can be bypassed. And
the ones that are energized can still be discharged. I think it
just requires a lot more work.
I talked about cybersecurity. One of our sister
institutions is the Digital Safety Research Institute, and
they're worried about cybersecurity. And I think when you have
the ease of updating your software in vehicles so easily, there
is the possibility of people messing up with that also, so
there needs to be security, you know, plans developed, making
sure software used follows standards, and standards are used to
certify them, and so on.
So there are several areas again, looking at the different
chemistries, trying to understand if we need new materials for
firefighters, as well as trying to understand if we need better
respirators. There's a lot of scientific research that can be
carried out. And I think we will be working on several of
these. And we would certainly like to work on more of these
to--one of the goals for my institute is to advance safer
energy storage through science, and so we really would like to
be involved with carrying out such research and collaborating
with many agencies, academia and so on, to get to a point where
EVs are safer.
Mrs. Foushee. Thank you for that. So firefighters face
grave dangers on the job, and it is crucial that the protective
gear and equipment available to them is capable of keeping them
safe. I find it concerning that so little is known about the
effectiveness of traditional protective gear when firefighters
are exposed to battery smoke, which is very different from
traditional car fires.
Chief Munsey, can you describe your department's experience
with using conventional protective gear to protect firefighters
while responding to EV fires? You showed a little bit of that
in that video that we saw from another area, but I'd like to
hear from your experience.
Mr. Munsey. So we've only had a couple of EV fires in our
county, despite responding to 196,000 calls per year and
serving an almost 2.2 million population. Electric vehicle
fires are not common today. I'm worried about the future. Our
experience with personal protective equipment is we are
concerned about our firefighters' safety. As I mentioned,
cancer is at a higher rate in firefighters today. I've
personally been to five cancer funerals for our members in the
last 5 years. We're going to do everything we can to keep our
members safe. What this means is that we issue second sets of
full turnouts. These turnout gears are between $5-10,000 per
ensemble. We require that they laundry those between normal--
just normal combustible fires. But when you're talking about
electric vehicle fires and the gases, we need to take that full
ensemble out of service and send it to a manufacturer--or to a
specialized cleaning service to be cleaned. At that point,
about 4 percent of the personal protective equipment then fails
that cleaning service, requiring us to purchase new gear for
our firefighters.
Some of the information that Dr. Jeevarajan--did I say that
right--just gave is very concerning to me. HF is a very--
hydrogen fluorine is very concerning chemicals to firefighters.
It's very dangerous. I don't know that there's been enough
research here that the structure--protective equipment that we
wear truly is adequate for these types of fires, especially
when it's pressurized gas in a container like the garage video
that you saw.
Mrs. Foushee. Thank you for that.
Mr. Chairman, that's my time.
Chairman Obernolte. OK.
Mrs. Foushee. I yield back.
Chairman Obernolte. The gentlewoman yields back. We'll hear
next from my colleague from California. Mr. Garcia, you're
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the--both
the witnesses for this testimony, very eye-opening. As someone
who drives an electric vehicle, I know--I knew there were a lot
of unknowns, but seeing that video, I certainly will be parking
in the driveway from here on out.
I want to thank you for putting a bright light on these
issues around the potential fire dangers of EVs. Chief, thank
you for your service. Doctor, thank you for everything you do
for our great country.
When you look at the potential energy if you will of an
electric vehicle, lithium-ion, any sort of lithium-based
battery, it's substantial. But when you look at actual other
projects that we're looking at throughout the Nation relative
to electric storage, it makes an electric vehicle look tiny.
Next door to you in L.A. County where I represent, southern
California, north L.A. County, Acton/Agua Dulce area, they are
installing something that is called a battery electric storage
system, which is a huge facility full of lithium battery
capacitors, capacity basically being kept there while their
sources of electric energy are being, you know, pushed to that
site.
And so, Chief, you're the Fire Chief of San Bernardino
County. I know you don't work in L.A. County, but we're
neighbors, and sometimes our sparks turn into your flames and
vice versa. So this is an issue that may actually reach out and
touch you. But I want to play a quick game of good idea/bad
idea. And these aren't trick questions by the way. This isn't
the Oversight--the other Oversight Committee. But--and I'll go
first.
Is it a good idea to have large battery facilities--large
battery storage facilities for the purpose of making sure that
the grid can handle some of the demands that we have? I would
say that's a good idea. I think we need to have electric
storage facilities. I think long term when we look at a
holistic approach, we've got to have all types of energy coming
to especially southern California. So I would say that is a
good idea. Go ahead.
Mr. Munsey. So you mean a battery storage facility as
properly engineered to prevent fire?
Mr. Garcia. Correct. Yes, that's what--and, yes, there a
lot of assumptions that go into that. And this is where the
good idea/bad idea to you comes from. Would you consider it a
good idea or a bad idea to put a facility like that next to
either the I-15 in your case or, in my case, the 14 freeway,
which is the major choke point, biggest freeway--one of the
biggest freeways in southern California? Is that a good idea or
a bad idea, literally, you know, 200 yards off the freeway?
Mr. Munsey. That's a local policy decision. If--as a Fire
Chief, I would say that if that is a well-engineered, well-
maintained, well-monitored system, then there's going to be a
low risk and a low frequency. If there was an ignition, though,
that is going to be an extremely hard fire to suppress in a
short amount of time.
Mr. Garcia. Understood.
Mr. Munsey. And that could cause some economic damage to
the city.
Mr. Garcia. Yes, and like you said, major commerce corridor
for southern California. Same kind of good idea/bad idea, if in
between that freeway and this battery storage facility there's
actually a railroad, which is one of the corridors being looked
at for high-speed rail as well, would you put that in the good
idea or bad idea bucket with the same caveats that you don't
work there, you don't, you know, work in L.A. County, it's
well-engineered? But is it a good idea or bad idea?
Mr. Munsey. We get these questions, too, from our cities
that are looking at putting these battery systems near
infrastructure, critical infrastructure, near schools, near
residential neighborhoods, near freeways. And as we look at
population density and the density in our communities, it's
going to be necessary to put these systems somewhere in the
near future. Again, I'll go back it needs--must be well-
maintained, it must be well-engineered, it must be well-
monitored. And if that's the case, you're going to have a low
risk, low frequency. But if any of those are violated, you're
going to have a higher risk and a higher frequency for
ignition.
Mr. Garcia. Potentially catastrophic results as a result of
that--those things.
For the sake of time, I'll condense the last few, but I
want to just make a point to my colleagues. And I'm not
speaking to our two witnesses here. But in L.A. County, they
have decided to put one of these BESS facilities, battery
electronic storage system facilities, massive facilities next
to the 14 with a railroad going by it within a couple miles of
a large water reservoir that feeds about a--or that hydrates
about a quarter-million folks. It already has existing large-
gauge transmission wires overhead so that if something happens
below them, they are going to be compromised. And it's
surrounded by some of the largest wildlands that have--in Acton
and Agua Dulce in terms of the amount of BTUs in those
wildlands right now, probably the highest potential energy of
fuel.
And so, you know, I guess my message is--I appreciate what
you guys have highlighted today, the risks, the concerns of an
electric vehicle. And to my colleagues in L.A. County, this
BESS facility being discussed in Acton is, in my opinion,
setting us up for failure. And if it--anything goes wrong, we
are going to recognize one of the biggest catastrophic losses
of life and resources. And hopefully, they can reconsider--to
the points that you made, Chief--everything that we've
discussed around this.
So with that, I yield back. Thank you.
Chairman Obernolte. The gentleman yields back.
We'll hear next from the Ranking Member of the full
Committee. Congresswoman Lofgren, you're recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. Lofgren. Well, thank you very much. And thanks to our
two witnesses.
Chief, you've identified something important, which is the
need to--for more research on protective gear and how it
relates to EV fires.
So, Doctor, are we actually on a path to get that research
done? What further work needs to be addressed by this Committee
to make sure that the Chief's identified need is met?
Dr. Jeevarajan. We actually haven't started any research in
that specific area. Our area of research is now looking at
different battery chemistries and what gases come out of it. HF
is really difficult to detect. We know it is there because if
we heat up our pipes, the lines that go into an FTIR (Fourier
Transform Infrared Spectroscopy), we are able to see the
signals for HF although noisy. We recognize the presence of HF,
but we're not able to get a quantitative measurement. So we're
really working on getting better estimates of that. But that
would be one of the areas I think I would certainly look into
talking to the materials people to see if they can do some work
on getting new materials that would be tolerant to HF.
Ms. Lofgren. Mr. Chairman, this is an important hearing,
and I'm hoping that after the hearing, we can have a discussion
about what we need to do as a Science Committee to make sure
that these identified needs are actually addressed because,
Chief, we're so grateful to you and all the firefighters in the
country for keeping us safe. But the more we can do to reduce
your risks and the risks of your men and women, that's
something--it's really a sacred obligation for us to do.
The fact that we're not really addressing the need that
you've identified, I guess, makes me wonder whether you think
the firefighting community has clear lines of communication to
researchers and manufacturers so that the needs you're
identifying, and not just this one, are actually being
researched. Do you think that exists now?
Mr. Munsey. Well, I'm a strong supporter of the
International Association of Fire Chiefs and other like
associations. There are some fire service members that are not,
and they are cutting off their own lines of communications.
It's important that we're speaking with one voice, that we're
doing that through our associations and the U.S. Fire
Administrator, Dr. Lori Moore-Merrell. These are important
things for us to work closely with research and for us to
understand how to keep our firefighters safe. But just as
important, we need your help in this. We need to ensure that we
are enacting legislation that the manufacturer of these
electric vehicles prevent fires from happening.
Ms. Lofgren. Yes.
Mr. Munsey. We need to make sure that we have access to
funds to properly equip and train and buy the equipment--the
tools and equipment that are needed to suppress these fires
without putting our communities in danger.
Ms. Lofgren. I totally agree with all of that, but we also
have, you know, a very large number of EVs out on the road
today, and we need to make sure if there--it's apparently a low
risk, but it is a risk. And when it happens, we need to make
sure that the men and women who respond are as safe as
possible. And so that's why I want to hone in on these--the
need to research further, the protective gear.
You know, one of the questions I had, Doctor, is you
mentioned cybersecurity. I don't know whether we need to be
concerned about whether cyber attacks could actually instigate
a failure or an ignition of a battery, or whether just failure
of code itself could do that. Can you discuss that and whether
we need to be taking steps in that area?
Dr. Jeevarajan. Sure. So one of the things that a battery
has is a battery management system, and it also has an energy
management system. And it's actually talking to the charger.
It's talking to the loads and so on. And as you know, there are
very easy ways to update software today. And given that, the
battery needs really very stringent safety controls, if
something is messed up and someone does it on purpose actually,
then they could mess up the safety controls and you could have
a catastrophic failure with your battery. Because today, the
way the manufacturers design the battery and how it's used is
they do not use the entire voltage range of the battery. They
use a very small range because that not only ensures safety,
but it also extends the life of the battery. But if you have
that changed in some manner, you can easily have a catastrophic
failure induced.
Ms. Lofgren. Well, thank you for that. And thank you for
both. And that's another issue, Mr. Chairman, I hope we can
discuss further. I don't think most of the manufacturers have
really addressed cybersecurity, and it's something we might ask
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) to
identify and provide some standards.
So, Chief and Doctor, you've--you're serving your country
well. Thank you very much, and I yield back.
Chairman Obernolte. The gentlewoman yields back.
We'll hear next from my colleague from Georgia. Mr.
McCormick, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. McCormick. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'll get right to the point because we have a lot to cover.
Just last year, the Biden Administration announced a mandate of
having 50 percent of all new vehicle sales in the United States
to be electric by 2030. According to the NFPA (National Fire
Protection Association), approximately 130 million EVs are
projected to be in operation worldwide by 2030, not very far in
the future. There are an estimated 283 million registered
vehicles here in the United States. Now, if we're about to add
half of that, it'd be well over 100 million vehicles in the
United States with the same hazards that we've been talking
about today. Although the number of battery fires we've had in
the United States is small, it won't be. That's a fact.
Chief, as Fire Chief of San Bernardino County, do you
believe your fire department is fully prepared to handle the
challenges that come with rapid rise of EV ownership in your
area of expertise?
Mr. Munsey. No, nor do I believe that the fire service is
ready as a whole.
Mr. McCormick. Great. According to the National Volunteer
Fire Council, there are approximately 29,452 fire departments
in the country--that's a lot--with 24,208 fire departments that
are either entirely or mostly made up of volunteer
firefighters. Given that volunteer, do you think that there's
any way to prepare these guys for the future challenges of
fighting EV fires?
Mr. Munsey. Yes, given time and sufficient funding.
Mr. McCormick. Time and efficient--sufficient funding. We
have approximately--less--about 5 years' time. And the funding,
which we know we have a problem with our funding on everything
right now, do you think that's a realistic timeline to be ready
for that sort of influx of EV fires?
Mr. Munsey. To add on to your statistics, there's 1.1
million firefighters. I gave you a price of $2,500 training per
firefighter. I would estimate that that's about a 16-hour
class. That's about a $3 billion problem just in training
itself. I mentioned that we're going to get a heavier wrecker
and a dip tank. Not every organization is going to be able to
do that. That needs to be a regional asset. Those that--about
$2 million for that ensemble starts adding up.
You mentioned there's close to 30,000 fire agencies, and
you are correct. Each fire agency probably on average has three
fire apparatus. And if you were to fully equip these fire
apparatus, you're looking at, again, hundreds of millions of
dollars, billions of dollars.
Mr. McCormick. And then you add to that the development,
dissemination, and training of new assets, which is to add
another chemical to the repertoire, but I'll leave it to the
scientists on my next question.
Doctor, do you believe that we have adequate technology and
training today that is easily accessible for all fire
departments to use in this regard?
Dr. Jeevarajan. There are some things that have been put
out because we're still in the research stage for some of the--
--
Mr. McCormick. Some things, but we're not adequately
prepared across the board, correct?
Dr. Jeevarajan. We are----
Mr. McCormick. We'd all agree on that?
Dr. Jeevarajan. Yes, we would.
Mr. McCormick. OK. Do you think it's legitimate that we
could develop, disseminate, and afford these chemicals that we
find--and, by the way, I'm a marine--that we have just recently
addressed in Camp Lejeune the chemicals that we use to fight
other chemicals and fires that have leached into the water
system that have caused cancer and other harm to people, that
we haven't even studied those side effects, but yet, in 5
years, we're supposed to have not only the means, but also the
studies to support that we're not going to harm people more
than the carbon emissions that we have right now. Do you think
this is a realistic goal?
Dr. Jeevarajan. It depends on how much funding is----
Mr. McCormick. Yes, it depends on funding. So it comes back
to if we spend a trillion dollars on this, we might be able to
be somewhat safe. But let me kind of summarize this because I
think this is what this is all about. This whole movement, this
green movement is about saving people, I hope, by making sure
we take care of the environment. So I want to point out that in
this whole ridiculous idea that we're going to spend a trillion
dollars to eliminate .00017 percent at most of the car--of the
atmospheric content, in other words, that carbon emissions that
we produce by 100 percent of our carbon imprint of vehicles.
And I'm telling you, I could do the math for you later, but its
infinitesimal. It is negligible if we eliminate all the cars in
the United States. That's how much impact we'll have on the
overall content of the atmosphere.
We're going to spend a trillion dollars, we're going to
create chemicals, we're going to create fires, we're going to
create hazards. If you don't care about the $17,000 per average
car vehicle that the poor person has to afford, if you don't
care that there's going to be exposure to people who are trying
to fight fires and that this is going to leach into the
system--the very environment you're trying to save, chemicals
that leach into the environment, chemicals that get into
people's bodies trying to fight these fires.
If we're talking about the environment, I really don't
think we're having an honest conversation. I think that's where
we need to start this. And this idea that we're saving the
atmosphere by creating chemicals and creating hazards to people
that we're trying to save is ludicrous.
And with that, I yield.
Chairman Obernolte. The gentleman yields back.
That concludes our questions. I'd like to thank the
witnesses for your very valuable testimony and your appearance
here today before the Committee.
It's very clear, I think, two things have come out of this
hearing. One, I very much agree with Ranking Member Lofgren
that more research is necessary to make sure that we're making
informed decisions around dealing with this problem. And I also
very much agree with Chief Munsey that it's clear more
resources and more training are going to be necessary to keep
our firefighters and first responders safe. So we're going to
continue having this discussion and hopefully be able to take
steps toward solutions to this as more and more of the vehicles
on our roads become EVs.
The record will remain open for 10 days for additional
comments and written questions from our Members.
With that, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:23 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix I
----------
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Responses by Mr. Dan Munsey
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT
Responses by Dr. Judy Jeevarajan
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT
Appendix II
----------
Additional Material for the Record
Statement submitted by Representative Max Miller
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT