Kushal Mistri, P.E., Fire Protection Engineer
Daniel Blanch, Intern, Fire Protection
Nicole Dean, Intern, Fire Protection
Peter Choi, Intern, Fire Protection
Wyatt Carswell, Intern, Fire Protection
Solid-state batteries are often described as the next major step in battery technology, offering higher energy density, faster charging, longer service life, and improved resistance to certain abuse conditions for electric vehicles (EVs), portable electronics, and battery energy storage systems. By replacing the flammable liquid electrolyte used in conventional Lithium-Ion Batteries (LIB) with a solid or semi-solid electrolyte, they may reduce fire and short-circuit concerns that shape today’s battery safety practices. However, for Fire Protection Engineers, the key question is not only limited to whether Solid-State Batteries (SSB) are safer, but how they fail, how severe that failure can become, and what design features are needed to protect people, property, and emergency responders. Available research suggests that solid-state batteries may be safer in several respects, but they should not be treated as risk-free. Their behavior depends on chemistry, construction, state of charge, system configuration, and installation environment.
Read the White Paper
Solid-State Batteries & Fire Protection EngineeringConventional lithium-ion battery fires are challenging because they can involve thermal runaway, a self-sustaining reaction in which internal heat generation exceeds the cell’s ability to dissipate heat. Once initiated, thermal runaway can produce rapid temperature rise, flammable or toxic gas release, pressure buildup, flame, and explosion. Solid-state batteries change this risk profile but do not eliminate it. Because the liquid electrolyte is reduced or removed, certain ignition and vapor-generation mechanisms may be less likely, and some solid electrolytes provide higher thermal stability that can delay the onset of thermal runaway. At the same time, higher energy density can increase the amount of energy released if failure occurs, making careful hazard evaluation essential.
Safety performance is also highly chemistry dependent. Oxide-based systems may propagate more slowly than comparable lithium-ion cells under some conditions, while sulfide-based systems can introduce different hazards, including rapid gas-driven propagation, hot particle ejection, and sulfur-containing gases. As a result, solid-state battery safety cannot be generalized across all products or manufacturers. A facility using solid-state batteries may still require many protective strategies currently applied to lithium-ion battery systems, including early detection, thermal management, exhaust ventilation, gas monitoring, fire-rated separation, emergency shutdown procedures, water-based cooling or suppression, and coordination with the Authority Having Jurisdiction. Suppression should be evaluated not only for flame control, but also for cooling adjacent cells, limiting re-ignition, and preventing propagation through modules, racks, or containers.
International Codes and NFPA standards are still catching up for the battery industry. Current fire protection requirements for battery energy storage systems are primarily built around established lithium-ion technologies and installation experience. Standards such as NFPA 855 and the International Fire Code provide a framework for evaluating energy storage hazards, but dedicated solid-state battery requirements remain limited. Therefore, project-specific hazard mitigation analysis and performance-based design will remain essential for early deployments. Owners, developers, and design teams should not rely on broad claims of improved safety. Instead, they should request manufacturer-specific test data reflecting the actual battery chemistry, cell format, module arrangement, state of charge, ventilation pathway, thermal management system, and installation environment. Relevant data may include overcharge response, external heating behavior, mechanical abuse performance, gas composition, pressure development, thermal propagation, and suppression or cooling effectiveness.
The commercialization timeline also supports a cautious approach. Solid-state batteries are advancing rapidly in electric vehicle development, pilot production, and prototype testing, but broader use in stationary energy storage may take longer because cost, manufacturing yield, cycle life, system integration, and code acceptance must mature. In the near term, lithium-ion systems are expected to remain the dominant battery energy storage technology while solid-state systems move gradually from early adoption toward wider deployment.
For all the Fire Protection Engineers, the transition from LIB to SSB presents a challenge and responsibility rather than an opportunity. SSBs may reduce several hazards associated with traditional lithium-ion systems, but their safe integration will depend on disciplined engineering analysis, validated testing, and close coordination among manufacturers, designers, code officials, facility owners, and emergency responders. Fire protection engineers will play a critical role in translating laboratory promise into safe, resilient, real-world installations.
The central takeaway is that solid-state batteries offer meaningful safety and performance advantages, but they should be evaluated with the same disciplined, risk-informed approach applied to any emerging technology. Their benefits should be recognized, their uncertainties carefully assessed, and their implementation guided by conservative design principles until testing, standards development, and field experience support more refined solutions. This balanced approach will become increasingly important as solid-state battery technologies progress from research environments and pilot deployments toward broader commercial adoption.
As this transition continues, clients will increasingly rely on trusted engineering partners such as Michael Baker International to turn technical uncertainty into informed, defensible design decisions. Michael Baker’s fire protection engineering team helps owners, developers, manufacturers, and facility operators evaluate emerging battery risks, interpret evolving code requirements, and develop practical protection strategies that support safe project delivery and regulatory approval. Through code-based analysis, performance-based design, hazard mitigation planning, AHJ coordination, and multidisciplinary collaboration, Michael Baker helps clients identify critical failure modes, address emergency response considerations, and align facility protection objectives with operational needs. By supporting the review of manufacturer test data and implementing safeguards for detection, ventilation, suppression, separation, and operational readiness, Michael Baker enables clients to adopt emerging battery technologies with greater confidence while protecting people, property, business continuity, and long-term regulatory compliance.