Say goodbye (at least for now) to dropping by your local US post office and sending a smartphone or tablet to anyone overseas, including those with military post office boxes. If it has a lithium battery in it, you're going to have to a find another way of getting the box out as an international shipment.
The US Postal Service recently banned shipments of electronic products containing lithium batteries, citing risk of fire. Shipwire.com has a list of items that will be affected, with all the popular consumer electronic products mentioned: laptop computers, smartphones, tablets, cameras, MP3 players, Bluetooth headsets, GPS devices, portable DVD players, and even radio-controlled toys.
You can read more about the exact steps the USPS is taking by downloading this report, but the short version goes like this:
Effective May 16, 2012, the Postal Service will revise Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) section 601.10.20 to codify that primary lithium metal or lithium alloy (non-rechargeable) cells and batteries or secondary lithium-ion cells and batteries (rechargeable) are prohibited when mailed internationally or to and from an APO, FPO, or DPO location. However, this prohibition does not apply to lithium batteries authorized under DMM 601.10.20 when mailed within the United States or its territories.
International standards have recently been the subject of discussion by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the Universal Postal Union (UPU), and the Postal Service anticipates that on January 1, 2013, customers will be able to mail specific quantities of lithium batteries internationally (including to and from an APO, FPO, or DPO location) when the batteries are properly installed in the personal electronic devices they are intended to operate.
What's slightly odd about all this is that the USPS seems to be the only organization implementing the rule. Other major logistics companies and national postal offices, as far as I know, will still be shipping devices with lithium batteries.
Although the measure likely won't have a significant impact on volume shippers that typically route large quantities via other logistics companies, such as UPS or FedEx, or by air freight or boat cargo, it does drive home the fact that companies in the high-tech supply chain have to keep a constant eye on local shipping policies, or there could be havoc in the pipeline. It's also a good reminder of why many companies have various shipping warehouses scattered around the planet.
It looks as if end-consumers and those shipping repair units are likely to feel the brunt of the new USPS policy initially. Some small businesses might be hit, too, including online retailers that ship internationally. Will your business be hurt by this? How is your company dealing with the USPS lithium battery ban?
Of course it will. But if we think about it, and if there is a high risk of lithium batteries shipments causing fire, USPS can't ignore it, unless until a new packaging method is applied to prevent any possible risk.
This looks like nothing more than risk management by a company whose mission is in large part dedicated to cost-effective service. Private small-parcel carriers have hazardous material service available at a price.
Incidentally, there's been controversy over whether lithium batteries should be classified as hazardous materials. A yea or nay on either side of this issue would substantially impact companies like Apple and Samsung.
"I believe that with the right meausurements, change in packing, and carrying only a certain amount in each aircraft, it is possible to go back to shipping them."
It may depend on how the policy will affect USPS revenue streams. My question is what will happen if other companies start implementating the same restriction policy? How will that hurt the consumer electronic business?
How often had those "lithium-embedded devices" caught fire in the past. Do They have any statistics? Or it is just a prevention measure that doesn't rely on any valid data?
"Testing conducted by the FAA William J. Hughes Technical Center (FAA Tech Center) indicates that particular propagation characteristics are associated with lithium batteries. Overheating has the potential to create thermal runaway, a chain reaction leading to self-heating and release of a battery's stored energy.
In a fire situation, the air temperature in a cargo compartment fire may be above the auto-ignition temperature of lithium. For this reason, batteries that are not involved in an initial fire may ignite and propagate, thus creating a risk of a catastrophic event.
The existence and magnitude of the risk will depend on such factors as the total number and type of batteries on board an aircraft, the batteries' proximity to one another, and existing risk mitigation measures in place (including the type of fire suppression system on an aircraft, appropriate packaging and stowage of batteries, and compliance with existing requirements contained within both FAA and PHMSA regulations)."
I believe that with the right meausurements, change in packing, and carrying only a certain amount in each aircraft, it is possible to go back to shipping them.
Won't this be a loss of money for USPS? I do not see a clear why they do not want to ship any of these products overseas. Is it specifically due to fire accident risk or is there any other big risks?
I think all airlines follow this rule strictly. Any electronic item that goes into your baggage has to have its batteries( not just lithium but all types) removed. They check it during the x-ray inspection of the baggage.
As Barbara says , apart from the risk of fire there is also a risk that such devices can be used as explosives in disguise by the miscreants.
It also seems to me if companies start removing the batteries before shipment and declare them "battery-free" it might be a work-around. Of course, the next issue for consumers is getting the batteries, which means retail. And retail relies and parcel services as well. So we are back to Square 1.
A new report shows that most of the worrisome issues that the supply chain industry has been dealing with for years are not new, but there are some new concerns that need answers. Here’s a look at what keeps supply chain professionals up at night.
When it comes to shipping supplies from China to Europe, trains might be the most cost-effective way companies have available to them. DHL is looking to jump on that bandwagon.
For many dealing with the enormous task of tracking,
reporting, and resolving issues associated with
potential counterfeit parts, there is a collective
hope that 2013 will bring clearer guidance on what
needs to be done by whom and when.
A necessary foundation for moving efficiently at real-time speed, supply chain analytics is still very much at the beginning stages of development at many companies.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This