Lithium Positive and Negative Insurers

[aqua_sax]

I’ve been digging into this subject a bit and it’s fair to say the marine insurance industry is in a state of utter confusion about lithium batteries.

A sound assessment and one of the reasons I started this thread - to get some sort of coherence. It's not complicated, the marine insurance just want to play it that way. Or just can't be bothered, working on the principle that there is no such thing as a bad exclusion.

It's too easy to issue meaningless statements like lithium batteries must be professionally installed when in reality no one really knows how to define a professional installation. It also totally ignores the fact that a competent DIY installation can be every bit as good as a 'professional' installation. As I said before, it doesn't matter one jot who does the installation, what matters is that it is done well. A self documented DIY design and install can satisfactorily achieve that.

I also do not like the 'insurers can do what they like, if you don't like it walk away (where to one might ask)' approach. On an absolute level it is of course true, but in the real world it is defeatist, and gives all the power to the insurers. At the end of the day, marine insurance is a contract between two parties, and if one party bullies and harasses the other party, then soon or later things will get ugly. Jaw jaw is better than war war.

 

[Seven Spades]

I don't think that they have been any incidents of house batteries of LiFePO4 catching fire on boats. The risk is that an unqualified person has used undersized cables when changing from lead acid, so an electrical fire is a risk (Has this happened?).

Toys, scooters, pumps etc etc are typically using the more energy dense batteries that catch fire and these are high riosk. The chalen=ge is to get the insurers to get to grip with this significant difference. I have Litihium batteries on my boat and do not lose any sleep over it, but much as I woudl like one I won't buy one of those lithium battery driven pumps top pump up my dinghy.

Before I fitted Lithium betteries I asked my insurer (Admiral) if this was going to increase myremium and they said thatthey had noissue with them so I made the change. Insurance is about risk and there will be tens of thousands of boats and many new boat now leave the factories with LiFePO4 fitted as standard. Unless they are inundated with claims they should not have a problem. My concern is that they will be lumped in with the toys which are very much in the high risk category.

 

[Refueler]

There are 5 chemistries in regular use. Toys and tenders often utilise volatile chemistries. 90 superyacht fires in 18 months attributed to toys suggests its a sensible clause. It may be a blanket approach but at least they are not targeting domestic lifepo4 batteries installed in small yachts

I accept the Toys bit ... drones and similar are usually powered by LiPo's ...

But Tenders ?? if E-Motor - then its either LA or LiFEPo4 ... why would anyone use different ?

 

[geem]

I’ve been digging into this subject a bit and it’s fair to say the marine insurance industry is in a state of utter confusion about lithium batteries.

Something has clearly spooked them into action (I guess a series of fires) but their response is currently incoherent.

I think most of the problem is that there are not really any available standards for the installation of lithium batteries, nor are there any qualifications for people working in boat electrical systems.

It gets even more complicated when you start asking the insurance companies what their stance is if the batteries were installed by a previous owner and you don’t know the providence of the installer who did the work.

One interesting thing that does seem to have come up is that “if it’s not in your policy wording, it doesn’t exist”.

My current insurer told me that lfp batteries would need to be professionally installed. I asked where that statement was in my policy. They then retracted it and said it would only apply at my renewal and currently there are no restrictions on my policy.

I subsequently asked what happens at renewal if I have fitted lfp under my current policy, and they now seem to be hiding under a rock unable to answer.

There are standards for installation. ABYC and ISO. All insurance companies need to do is specify that the installation must meet one of these standards

 

[geem]

I accept the Toys bit ... drones and similar are usually powered by LiPo's ...

But Tenders ?? if E-Motor - then its either LA or LiFEPo4 ... why would anyone use different ?

Are you certain? Early adopters of lithium often took tesla battery packs and fitted those as that was all that was available.

 

[Refueler]

Toys, scooters, pumps etc etc are typically using the more energy dense batteries that catch fire and these are high riosk. The chalen=ge is to get the insurers to get to grip with this significant difference. I have Litihium batteries on my boat and do not lose any sleep over it, but much as I woudl like one I won't buy one of those lithium battery driven pumps top pump up my dinghy.

Sorry but that's a very poor assessment of Li use.

Most items such as pumps / lamps use similar to the 18650 LiIon ...... near as safe as your LiFePo4. If you move onto Drones and normally only the non supermarket proper jobs like DJi etc - use BMS equipped LiPo's.
The cheapo Supermarket stuff often uses NiMh or LiIon as they are very poor flyers etc.

 

[RunAgroundHard]

Torqueedo’s Power 24-3500 battery is Li-NCA and they state that their Power 48-5000 has a higher energy density that LiFePO4, without actually stating the chemistry.

 

[Refueler]

Are you certain? Early adopters of lithium often took tesla battery packs and fitted those as that was all that was available.

THAT is asking for trouble. But Tesla do not use LiPo .... so what's your point ?

 

[geem]

Sorry but that's a very poor assessment of Li use.

Most items such as pumps / lamps use similar to the 18650 LiIon ...... near as safe as your LiFePo4. If you move onto Drones and normally only the non supermarket proper jobs like DJi etc - use BMS equipped LiPo's.
The cheapo Supermarket stuff often uses NiMh or LiIon as they are very poor flyers etc.

I am talking high end superyachts toys not Aldis specials on the centre isle. The CEO of the IIMS, told me that it was these toys that had caused 90 fires.

 

[lustyd]

There are standards for installation. ABYC and ISO. All insurance companies need to do is specify that the installation must meet one of these standards

Agree and that’s what we need to be asking for, although US standards are no good in the UK.
In the case of GJW we need to be asking what specifically is a lithium extinguisher.

Although ideally we shouldn’t have gone down this road. Previously any reasonable alteration was fine, then people atarted asking questions about lithium and here we are

 

[aqua_sax]

I don't think that they have been any incidents of house batteries of LiFePO4 catching fire on boats. The risk is that an unqualified person has used undersized cables when changing from lead acid, so an electrical fire is a risk (Has this happened?).

I don't think there have been any documented cases of LiFePO4 batteries catching fire on boats. I've looked pretty hard, and the closest one seems to be the alleged LiFePO4 involvement in the recent canal boat fire, but at least two likely LiFePO4 batteries survived that fire relatively unscathed, though there is a third unidentified battery that now has a Medusa's head of what looks like burnt cable on top. In any event, direct LiFePO4 fires appear to be so rare as to be almost non-existent.

although US standards are no good in the UK

And often differ. Take LPG installations for example. Which is 'correct'? Regulations and standards can be restricting as well as 'liberating'. Because:

Previously any reasonable alteration was fine, then people atarted asking questions about lithium and here we are

Any reasonable alteration - exactly. As long as it is reasonable and justifiable, then it is OK. The reason why people started asking questions about insurance for lithium batteries on boats is not because they wanted to shoot themselves in the foot, it is because insurers have started sneaking clauses into policies that don't make any sense. As Basil Fawlty might have said, it wasn't us who started it, it was them.

 

[lustyd]

The reason why people started asking questions about insurance for lithium batteries on boats is not because they wanted to shoot themselves in the foot, it is because insurers have started sneaking clauses into policies that don't make any sense. As Basil Fawlty might have said, it wasn't us who started it, it was them.

Having watched the threads over the years, it certainly wasn’t the insurers who started it.

 

[aqua_sax]

Having watched the threads over the years, it certainly wasn’t the insurers who started it.

Perhaps, but we are where we are now, clauses popping up in the small print. In the HKJ renewal invitation there was an attached document named PC_NTPH with some numbers around it that contained the following:

NOTICE TO POLICYHOLDERS

We are writing to let You know about changes to Your Policy with effect from Your renewal date.
Your Policy wording has not changed other than as detailed below.

...

Section 5 – General Policy Conditions – Page 26 – the following condition has been included:

5.7 If Your Craft , tender or toys are fitted with Lithium Ion batteries they must be charged within daylight
hours , must not be left unattended whilst being charged and they must be used in accordance with the
manufacturers’ recommendations/instructions.

They have notified the change, but at the same time it is rather in the small print.

I didn't ask them to include that clause.

They also 'included' a requirement that a LiFePO4 installation must be professionally installed, but that only came to light when I asked them directly. I suspect they would have relied on general clauses (maintain in a seaworthy condition etc) or this catch all clause:

5.1 Your duty of care
5.1.1 Information Your Insurers need to know.
You must take reasonable care to provide complete and accurate answers to the questions Your
Insurance Adviser or Your Insurers ask when You take out, make changes to or renew Your
Policy. Your Policy may not be valid or may not cover You fully if the information provided by
You is not complete and accurate or if You do not tell Your Insurance Adviser about any changes.

[Emphasis added] Unfortunately, 'any changes' is not explicitly defined. Perhaps changing the clock on the main bulkhead is just such a change, who knows (it stopped, you missed the tide and ended up on the rocks). I'm pretty sure, however, that most insurers will take the view that replacing a lead acid house battery with a LiFePO4 battery matches 'any change', and thus clause 5.1.1, including its dire effects, applies.

 

[PaulRainbow]

Banging on and on and on and on and on seems pointless to me. If your insurance has clauses you don't like, move to a company that does have satisfactory clauses.

Simples, surely ?

Oh, make sure you tell your current insurer why you are leaving them.

 

[aqua_sax]

Banging on and on and on and on and on seems pointless to me. If your insurance has clauses you don't like, move to a company that does have satisfactory clauses.

Which as you know is what I did. Please do try to keep up, it's not that hard. What I am trying to do with the banging on as you call it, is to highlight to current absurdities. I don't like absurd behaviours (which is my choice, not anyone else's). The absurdities also shrink the market. If half the insurers have absurd clauses and/or requirements, then I have half as many potential insurers available to me.

And, I have to say, banging on and on about me banging on and on seems rather pointless to me...

 

[Refueler]

I am talking high end superyachts toys not Aldis specials on the centre isle. The CEO of the IIMS, told me that it was these toys that had caused 90 fires.

Read my post again ...

The Li batterys that have a history are the EXPENSIVE drones and toys - where they use LiPo's ...

The 'Aldi's specials' as you call them normally use NiMh or small LiIon ...

As a person who uses various forms of Li battery - LiPo, Life and its sister LiFePo4, LiCo, LiIon are just a few examples ... I might have an idea about it ...

 

[jakew009]

Banging on and on and on and on and on seems pointless to me. If your insurance has clauses you don't like, move to a company that does have satisfactory clauses.

Simples, surely ?

Oh, make sure you tell your current insurer why you are leaving them.

The problem is there are not very many options it would seem for certain types of boat.

Even your beloved Porthcawl have quoted me a policy with lithium exclusions in it.

 

[jakew009]

There are standards for installation. ABYC and ISO. All insurance companies need to do is specify that the installation must meet one of these standards

A USA standard isn’t much use in the UK (and would open a whole new can of worms because that standard ain’t exactly great when it comes to lithium and it has all sorts of other requirements we don’t currently follow).

Care to point me to the ISO standard that applies to lifepo4 in leisure boats?

 

[jakew009]

Having watched the threads over the years, it certainly wasn’t the insurers who started it.

The point is Pandora’s box has now been well and truly opened so it’s too late to go back.

Hopefully if enough people moan / leave their current insurers, they will start to see sense.

 

[Sea Change]

A question to any EV owners on here:
Does your insurance have any ridiculous clauses about unattended charging?

Maybe a burning car is less dangerous than a burning boat, but they tend to have far larger batteries, be closer to other people and their property, and a good proportion of them use NMC, which is a more volatile chemistry than LFP.