Electronic Cigarette Battery Causes College Dorm Fire

Dec.09.2022
Electronic Cigarette Battery Causes College Dorm Fire
Fire caused by overheating e-cigarette battery at California polytechnic university on December 7th. Students evacuated.

On the evening of December 7th, firefighters in San Luis Obispo, California informed reporters that a fire had been ignited at the Muir Hall due to an overheating electronic cigarette battery.


The San Luis Obispo Fire Department and California Institute of Technology police are on site. There are a total of four firefighting teams on scene, with the campfire team leader being dispatched to the scene at around 9:18 PM and remaining there until about 10:30 PM.


The commander of the incident, Alec Flatos, stated that the point of ignition was mainly in the bed and bedding.


Students in the red brick building were evacuated for around an hour, with many wearing pajamas and blankets.


Someone witnessed a student involved in the incident talking to the resident advisor and firefighters outside Mueller Hall. The student declined to comment.


Flatos stated, "Personally, I haven't witnessed such an incident in the dorms where we experienced some kind of battery power explosion. But we've all heard stories about batteries overheating and exploding.


2FIRSTS will continue to cover this topic and provide updates on the "2FIRSTSAPP." Scan the QR code below to download the app.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

How Many Nicotine Pouch Factories Does Europe Need? 2Firsts Interviews AIRSCREAM on the OEM Market
How Many Nicotine Pouch Factories Does Europe Need? 2Firsts Interviews AIRSCREAM on the OEM Market
At InterTabac 2026, nicotine pouch growth was visible not only in brands but across equipment, raw materials and OEM manufacturing. 2Firsts interviewed AIRSCREAM commercial head Steve Moore on how many pouch factories Europe may ultimately need and where manufacturers can differentiate, from formulation and flavour to pouch materials, production consistency and customer service. The category continues to expand, but questions remain over future capacity, consolidation and the long-term structure of the supply chain.
Sep.18
Russia’s Vape Device Labeling Regime Enters Force: Registration Starts in September, Mandatory Coding in December
Russia’s Vape Device Labeling Regime Enters Force: Registration Starts in September, Mandatory Coding in December
Russia's digital labeling regime for reusable e-cigarettes and similar personal vaping devices entered its first mandatory phase in September 2026. From September 1, manufacturers, importers and other market participants must register with the national Chestny ZNAK tracking system. From December 1, newly manufactured and imported covered devices will be required to carry digital identification codes and be reported as entering circulation. Russia has also issued new operational guidance for imports, marking the transition from a voluntary pilot to phased mandatory implementation.
Sep.15
Product | PIXL Adds 6ml PIXL 5K in UK Alongside 12ml PIXL 8000 as Vape Duty Takes Effect
Product | PIXL Adds 6ml PIXL 5K in UK Alongside 12ml PIXL 8000 as Vape Duty Takes Effect
Vaping brand PIXL has introduced the PIXL 5K reusable prefilled pod device in the UK, featuring a 2ml prefilled pod and a 4ml refill container with a combined e-liquid capacity of 6ml. The device uses 20mg/ml nicotine salt e-liquid and is advertised to deliver up to approximately 5,000 puffs. Available through UK retailers by August 2026, the PIXL 5K sits alongside the existing 12ml PIXL 8000. The UK's Vaping Products Duty took effect on October 1 at £0.22 per millilitre, producing theoretical duty amounts of £1.32 and £2.64 for the two products' respective full refill sets.
product
Oct.10
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
Less than a week after JUUL2 received U.S. FDA marketing authorization on August 28, 2026, JUUL Labs was sued for patent infringement in federal court in Delaware. AJ Marketing LLC filed the complaint on September 3, alleging that both JUUL 1 and JUUL2 infringe U.S. Patent No. 8,851,068 B2. The patent covers aspects of programmable electronic vaporization devices, including controls over dose delivery, usage frequency and operating parameters. The plaintiff is seeking reasonable royalties and ongoing royalties tied to the remaining life of the patent. JUUL has not yet publicly responded to the case.
Sep.10
Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
According to Law360 on August 31, 2026, a federal judge in North Carolina ruled that a patent sublicense between R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co. and Juul Labs Inc. relieves Reynolds of its obligation to continue paying royalties to Altria Client Services LLC over Vuse Alto. A jury had previously found that Vuse Alto infringed three Altria patents and awarded approximately $95.2 million in past damages, after which Reynolds was ordered to pay an ongoing royalty equal to 5.25% of positive net sales. The new ruling finds that a valid sublicense can eliminate future infringement, potentially ending what Altria described as hundreds of millions of dollars in future royalties.
Sep.01
Special Report | From New York to Washington: How FDA’s Tobacco Center Is Reworking Product Review
Special Report | From New York to Washington: How FDA’s Tobacco Center Is Reworking Product Review
FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products is reshaping how it approaches tobacco product review. Based on 2Firsts’ on-site reporting in New York and Washington, this report traces CTP’s emerging direction: stronger links between PMTA and tobacco harm reduction, more category-specific review, greater emphasis on decision-relevant science, more predictable timelines and expanded use of sPMTA for product modifications. CTP also acknowledged major constraints, including just nine PMTA review teams, persistent backlogs and limits on hiring capacity.
Regulations
Oct.08