| Energy storage


Envision claims new benchmark for battery fire testing


Envision Energy of China has reported successful completion of what it calls a “groundbreaking” large-scale fire test for its Smart Energy Storage system, “raising the bar for safety, environmental responsibility, and system resilience.” Conducted under full on-site supervision by the Canadian Standards Association (CSA Group), strategic partners, and North American Fire Protection Engineers (FPEs), the test fully complied with the stringent CSA C800 standard – a consensus standard developed with input from insurers, regulators, and industry experts, providing one of the most authoritative international safety benchmarks for energy storage.


The test recreated real-world worst-case site conditions by placing four fully charged 5 MWh lithium-ion (LFP) Envision Smart Energy Storage containers (A, B, C, D) in an ultra-dense back-to-back, side-by-side configuration – just 5 centimeters apart, compared to the typical industry standard spacing of 3 to 5 meters. According to Envision, this setup represents the most energy-dense fire test layout ever attempted, significantly increasing the challenge due to heightened thermal coupling and limited airflow. Importantly, the burn was allowed to proceed with zero intervention.


The test “pushed the boundaries of the most stringent safety limits”, says Envision, “yet even under unprecedented thermal stress and energy


Envision’s 49-hour fire test underway. Photo: Envision


concentration, the system showed exceptional resilience and containment.” Container A burned for 49 hours and 32 minutes, reaching a peak temperature of 1297°C. Meanwhile, internal battery temperatures in the adjacent containers, B, C, and D, remained stable at just 35°C, 44°C, and 43°C respectively – well below Envision’s normal operational window.


Notably, container A maintained structural integrity throughout the burn, showing no deformation, no collapse, and intact sealing


GES and RINA collaborate on hydrogen battery


Italy based Green Energy Storage (GES) and RINA have signed a framework agreement with a view to developing a “groundbreaking hydrogen battery”, designed by GES. The first prototype is expected to be unveiled in December.


What is described as a “new generation of batteries” is based on a hybrid hydrogen/ liquid flow battery using a manganese- based liquid electrolyte. The cell integrates hydrogen production and reabsorption in a closed cycle, eliminating the need for external tanks, say the developers. Features of new battery technologyinclude: ‘Green’ chemistry: employs abundant materials (manganese), non-toxic, recyclable, and with a low environmental footprint;


Modularity and scalability: independent energy and power components, expandable up to the MW scale. The estimated lifecycle is expected to exceed 12 000 cycles – equivalent to around 15–20 years of use – thus ensuring “significant cost optimisation”


(in terms of levelised cost of storage), say the developers, and a reduction in the volume of materials required compared to conventional flow batteries.


The in-house production of membranes and catalysts will ensure direct control over quality and efficiency, say GES/RINA. The battery system design will include integration of AI-enabled sensors, machine learning algorithms, and an advanced battery management system, providing predictive diagnostics and achieving maximum operational safety.


The project has received funding under the EU’s IPCEI (“Important Projects of Common European Interest”) initiative to the tune of €61.5 million, covering approximately 98.5% of the total. The GES/RINA agreement can be seen as the start of a shift from laboratory-scale prototype to market-ready product, with RINA actively involved in several stages, including technology validation, engineering optimisation, go-to-market strategy, and commercialisation.


gaskets. “Even more impressively,” says Envision, there was zero fire spread or damage to neighbouring containers. Units B, C, and D remained unscathed inside and out, with post- test inspections confirming all internal modules were fully operational and undamaged. To simulate a worst-case ignition scenario, the fire was initiated by applying high-power, synchronised heating to four battery cells within a modified pack, from which the nano-level thermal insulation had been removed. The ignition source was strategically placed at the center of the container cluster – where fire spread risk is greatest in all directions. Under these extreme conditions, ignition took nearly three hours, offering a window for early detection and emergency response, notes Envision. Environmental protection was also a key focus throughout the test. All combustion gases from the burning container A were captured by overhead smoke hoods, analysed for composition, and fully neutralised using “advanced treatment.” The entire 49 hour test produced no odours, no emissions, and zero pollution, Envision says, “setting a new industry benchmark for clean and environmentally responsible fire testing in energy storage.” Envision’s Smart Energy Storage system employs proprietary high-safety battery cells within a three-layer safety architecture spanning cell, pack, and system levels. Coupled with AI-driven fire detection and active pack-level firefighting, the system isolates thermal events within a single container, says Envision. The fire test proves, says Envision, that even in highly unlikely fire scenarios, the company’s Smart Energy Storage technology can indeed fully contain risk within a single container. Furthermore, “the quantifiable safety results provide insurers with greater confidence to underwrite storage assets, paving the way for broader commercial adoption and accelerating the transition to safe, large-scale energy storage.”


www.modernpowersystems.com | September 2025 | 45


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55