Rethinking Lithium-Ion
in Material Handling
Has the Forklift Industry Traded a Maintenance Problem for an Even Greater Workplace Risk?
Lithium-ion batteries are being aggressively offered to the material-handling industry for understandable reasons.
Primarily, they eliminate routine battery watering and its associated maintenance costs and, most importantly, employee exposure to sulfuric-acid electrolyte during watering.
However, scrutiny surrounding lithium-ion safety is increasing. At the same time, advances in lead-acid charging, electronic battery monitoring and now Battery IV's fully automatic watering system are changing the equation increasingly in lead-acid's favor.
OSHA has identified lithium-ion batteries as presenting potential workplace safety and health risks, including fires, explosions and employee exposure to harmful chemicals.[1] Property-risk organizations are also devoting increased attention to lithium-ion thermal runaway, charging, storage and loss-control practices.[2]
Battery IV Changes the Comparison
For more than a century, flooded lead-acid batteries have required one unavoidable maintenance procedure: Someone has to water the battery. And to protect maximum battery life, it has to be done correctly and on time.
Single-point watering systems reduced employee exposure, but none eliminated the fundamental requirement: an employee still has to go to the battery and perform the watering procedure at the right time. Battery IV changes that.
Battery IV eliminates scheduled battery watering and removes the employee from the routine battery-watering process.
The equipment operator simply maintains the water supply in the BIV Reservoir. Battery IV maintains the battery.
Battery IV and lithium-ion now reach the same result for routine watering-related employee contact.
| Forklift Battery System | Scheduled Watering |
Employee Goes to Battery |
Connects Watering Equipment |
Routine Watering- Related Contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manual Watering | YES | YES | — | YES |
| Watering Gun | YES | YES | YES | YES |
| Single-Point Watering | YES | YES | YES | YES |
| Battery IV | NO | NO | NO | NO |
| Lithium-Ion | NO | NO | NO | NO |
The Battery No Longer Waits for the Schedule
Traditional watering depends upon someone remembering when it needs to be done and doing it correctly. Single-point watering made the procedure faster and reduced direct electrolyte exposure. It did not eliminate the schedule or the employee. Battery IV does.
Water is continuously available from the BIV Reservoir, and the system is designed to supply the battery without a scheduled watering event.[3]
100 batteries watered weekly can represent about 5,200 scheduled watering events every year.
The employee maintains the water supply. Battery IV maintains the cells. This changes both the maintenance and employee-exposure model of the flooded lead-acid battery.
OSHA Has Already Recognized the Principle
OSHA has specifically addressed automatic battery filling and stated that if an auto-filling system completely eliminates employee exposure to corrosive battery acid, the quick-drench requirement tied to that exposure would not apply.[4]
OSHA does not endorse Battery IV or other commercial products. The importance is the safety principle: eliminate the routine employee exposure rather than merely manage it.
Lead-Acid Has Changed
The traditional lithium-versus-lead-acid comparison increasingly relies on an outdated picture of lead-acid operation. Modern charging and electronic monitoring have improved the platform, and Battery IV addresses one of its oldest maintenance requirements: scheduled employee watering.
Battery IV Also Changes the Lithium ROI
The lithium decision extends beyond battery price. Toyota notes that lithium batteries cost more than lead-acid, are not necessarily the right solution for every operation, and generally make their strongest economic case in higher-utilization applications.[5] Toyota also describes transition requirements that can include new charging practices, site surveys, facility-layout changes and operator retraining.[5]
Charging infrastructure can matter as well. California's forklift analysis assumes charging infrastructure installation as a distinct cost and notes typical lithium-ion forklift charging power of roughly 10-40 kW, compared with lead-acid charging levels up to about 10 kW.[6]
Battery IV addresses scheduled watering within that existing lead-acid platform. It does not require a fleet to replace its battery chemistry simply to eliminate the watering procedure.
That means Battery IV doesn't just change the safety comparison. It changes the lithium ROI calculation.
The Question Has Changed
Lithium-ion can offer legitimate advantages, particularly in intensive multi-shift applications. But eliminating watering is no longer, by itself, a reason to abandon lead-acid.
Battery IV doesn't simply improve battery watering. It eliminates scheduled watering as a battery-maintenance procedure.
References
[1] OSHA, Taking Charge of Safety: Lithium-ion Batteries, Jan. 30, 2026.
[2] FM / FM Boiler Re, Lithium-ion Battery Resources.
[3] Battery IV Systems, product information, batteryiv.com.
[4] OSHA, Controlling Employee Exposure To Caustic Battery Acid In Battery Charging Areas, Mar. 4, 2013.
[5] Toyota Material Handling, Lithium-Ion Technology: The Next Generation of Forklift Efficiency; The Transition to Lithium-Ion Technology Requires a Culture Change; What to Expect When You're Transitioning from Lead Acid to Lithium-ion Forklift Batteries.
[6] California Air Resources Board, Zero-Emission Forklift rulemaking and charging-infrastructure analysis.
