The Disaster Caused by Overconfidence in Batteries

Battery-related accidents are occurring one after another. These incidents stem from a mindset that prioritizes the “use” of batteries over safety. Overconfidence in the belief that using batteries is inherently environmentally friendly has led to misguided regulations and support policies, while safety concerns have been pushed aside—ultimately resulting in serious accidents. If we truly prioritize safety, efficiency, and the environment while considering long-term sustainability, it is time to reconsider what constitutes sound policy.

A recent fire at the National Information Resources Service paralyzed government IT systems. The fire reportedly broke out when sparks flew during the separation of lithium-ion batteries in the data center. In other words, the battery caught fire. Although the blaze was extinguished after 21 hours and 45 minutes, all 740 pieces of IT equipment located on the same floor were completely destroyed.

When chemical reactions inside a lithium-ion battery escalate explosively, a phenomenon known as thermal runaway occurs, causing temperatures to rise continuously. In this case, the internal temperature of the data center reportedly reached as high as 160 degrees Celsius due to a chain reaction of explosions.

What is most alarming is that the distance between the lithium batteries and the servers was reportedly only 60 centimeters. Despite a series of prior battery-related accidents, servers were placed directly next to hazardous materials. The risks of batteries had already been highlighted in the 2022 fire at SK C&C’s Pangyo data center, which caused the nationwide “Kakao outage.” More recently, fires involving battery-powered vehicles in underground parking garages have escalated into major disasters.

Rapid technological progress should not be blindly trusted or overestimated. Batteries are not yet safe—especially older batteries, which pose even greater risks. Reusing or recycling aged batteries is an especially dangerous practice.

The prioritization of battery utilization over safety, efficiency, and environmental protection is largely the result of government battery support policies. Calls to expand battery use may be understandable from an environmental activism perspective. However, when the government institutionalizes such views through regulation and subsidies—effectively mandating battery use and financing it with public funds—both safety and genuine environmental concerns are sidelined.

The Ministry of Environment has spent vast amounts of taxpayer money to promote battery-powered vehicles. Even today, enormous budgets are allocated to purchase subsidies for electric vehicles. Consumers, however, have made a more rational choice: they most often select hybrid vehicles, taking into account their superior balance of environmental performance, efficiency, and safety. Yet only after wasting significant public funds did the government finally include hybrid vehicles in its list of eco-friendly cars.

The belief that the government knows best and must “educate” citizens on what to buy is an expression of arrogance. Policies that regulate consumer choices and steer purchases through subsidies should now come to an end. Support policies that fail to account for safety risks only increase the likelihood of accidents. They distort industries, generate inefficiencies, and ultimately harm the environment.

From this point forward, greater attention must be paid to enhancing safety throughout the entire lifecycle of battery use to prevent harm. Encouraging indiscriminate battery adoption based on the illusion that batteries are automatically environmentally friendly is profoundly irresponsible governance.

The former Ministry of Environment has now transformed into the Ministry of Climate, Energy, and Environment, expanding its authority over energy policy and becoming a bureaucratic “behemoth.” This recent accident should serve as a wake-up call. Policymaking must move away from the simplistic assumption that using a particular product is inherently eco-friendly.

Seung-no Choi
President, The Center for Free Enterprise

Korean version: https://www.cfe.org/bbs/bbsDetail.php?cid=press&pn=2&idx=28200