UN Bans Passenger Planes From Carrying Lithium-Ion Batteries As Cargo

The UN had previously rejected similar restrictions in the past but is open to considering them now.

Due to the risk of fire, lithium-ion batteries can not be shipped as cargo on passenger planes.

Aviation groups in Washington pushed for the Federal Aviation Administration to enact a ban on lithium ion battery air shipments before the worldwide group announced its decision. Olumuyiwa Aliu, President, International Civil Aviation Organization’s 36-state governing council, said on Tuesday in NY that the prohibition would be in effect as of April 1.

While the majority of lithium-ion batteries are transported on cargo ships, about 30% are still delivered by air. The commission also explained that batteries packed insider equipments like laptops with batteries inside are exempted from the ban.

Some cargo-shipping airlines also oppose the ban, since many have contracts with passenger airlines to transport cargo to destinations they do not cover.

Safety concerns increased after Federal Aviation Administration tests showed gases emitted by overheated batteries can build up in cargo containers.

“As a result, they recommended moving forward on the first phase in a long-term plan that allows for the safe transport of lithium batteries”, he continued.

Airlines and pilot associations had requested the ban citing security reasons, the ICAO said. The cause of the fire was located in a tracking device carrying lithium batteries, the Guardian reported at the time. Representatives from the Netherlands and France on the unsafe goods panel voted last fall against a ban.

Advertisement

The decision to impose a global ban on their shipment was made by the International Civil Aviation Organization on Monday. Congress could take additional steps to protect the battery industry, but with current FAA reauthorization, to extend funding, apparently stalled in Congress, the law approved in 2012 would dictate FAA policy. Since most evidence in crashes is destroyed by fire, that’s virtually impossible to do, critics of the provision say.