-
That statistic may be true, but it sounds like it needs to be clarified.
One thing I would ask about is just how big the fire events were. Perhaps I am wrong, but when a gas or diesel vehicle catches fire, it can be easily extinguished. I had a fire in my gas powered truck on a highway trip and was able to put it out with the small fire extinguisher that I carried. I even had time to pull over to the shoulder of the road, get out of the truck, open the hood, observe the fire, go into the trailer to get the extinguisher, return to the truck, and put the fire out. I did this myself, with a small extinguisher. And after it cooled down, I was able to drive the truck and trailer to the next exit where repairs were made.
You are giving an example which wouldn't even have been in the gas vehicle fire statistics, not the greatest example but OK.
Your concerns should be resolved by having the appropriate tools for the fire department, sprinklers or other systems inside car parks to mitigate fire spread where possible. As mentioned above, as LFP gets wider adoption, spread will be less of an issue if at all.QuoteIn work by Willstrand et al., heat release rates (HRR) from full-scale fire tests performed in recent years with modern vehicles, including both ICEVs and BEVs was summarised. The compiled data showed a minor difference in the total energy released during the fire (total heat release) between ICEVs and BEVs. The total heat release for ICEVs range between 3.3 to 10 GJ and for BEV between 4.7 to 8.5 GJ. No difference in peak heat release rate or effective heat of combustion could be seen for the compared vehicles (Willstrand et al., 2020).
https://lashfire.eu/media/2022/09/2022-08_Facts_and_Myths.pdfpeople need to try driving EV, their just better. gasoline is horse and buggy and feels like it! stretchy cars. I feel like its those people warning me against the first Lion power drills (mid 2000's makita), which ended up utterly kicking ass. In the early 2000's there was down right prosecution against my makita drill acquisiton.
Yeah but how many horse and buggy fires are there? Clearly the safest and more superior mode of transportation. -
Once all fire departments get injection spikes, extuingishing EV fires should be easy enough. Sprinklers will keep it under control regardless.
What are "injection spikes"? -
Once all fire departments get injection spikes, extuingishing EV fires should be easy enough. Sprinklers will keep it under control regardless.
What are "injection spikes"?
Sounds like this thing: https://ctif.org/news/new-revolutionary-method-extinguishes-lithium-ion-ev-fires-ten-minutes-minimal-water
"Cobra Ultra High Pressure Lance (UHPL) firefighting equipment – this equipment uses abrasive entrained in water to pierce and then water mist to suppress/extinguish. This is all applied using one continuous action. This uses water at 58 l/min."
There are also tools which are just blocks to direct the angle from under the car up toward the battery: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2021/11/new-firefighting-tool-delivers-water-directly-to-blazing-ev-batteries/ as a normal hose doesn't work that well. -
Water cooling to the cells. Interesting thought and it seems like a good idea.
But water boils and the steam escapes.
So the question then becomes, just how much water can a vehicle carry for battery emergencies? Even a large vehicle like a dump truck or a tractor for a semi? How much WOULD they carry when it will cost them dollars or euros or whatever currency for the extra battery charging for every kilo of water carried.
I would bet that it would not be long before that water tank is at the lowest possible level 100% of the time.
And a battery emergency occurs and the extra water starts flowing to that cell to keep it cool. A red light comes on in the cab. What does the driver do then? Stop on the side of the highway and call for help? Try to get to the next exit and hope there's facilities there? Just keep on trucking because he needs to be on schedule? Or what?Perhaps I am wrong, but when a gas or diesel vehicle catches fire, it can be easily extinguished.
Just google for gas tank rupture fire.
Once all fire departments get injection spikes, extuingishing EV fires should be easy enough. Sprinklers will keep it under control regardless.
I wonder though if with good design with water cooled batteries it would really be impossible to keep a shorting cell below ignition temperature. Maybe have a compartmentalized design and increase flow to a compartment if something goes wrong? Hell, that might already be best practice for all I know. -
Airport car park! Been there. They are one of the loneliest places in any city. I wonder just how many cars were either on fire or completely burned out BEFORE ANYONE even noticed there was a fire.
If I was setting the odds on a Las Vegas bet on that, I would set the percentage of already lost vehicles at about 50% for the 50/50 break point in the odds. In other words, I think it is an even bet that a full HALF of the cars there were destroyed before the alarm went in. And THEN the fire department had to actually get there, possibly in time to watch helplessly while the last 5% or 10% of the vehicles went up in flames.
I am not a doom's day guy. I really am not. I have watched that "doom's day clock" on the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists for over 50 years now and never really worried about nuclear war.
https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/
But this really, really has me concerned. And I fear that is far more likely than nuclear war breaking out. It is almost inevitable if nothing is done.
If a battery fire can destroy 1500 vehicles in an airport car park, think what it could do in the lower floors of a tall office building. One of the 9-11 aircraft was said to carry 20,000 gallons of jet fuel, which was the actual weapon used by the terrorists to bring those building down. With 90% of 1500 autos, each having a partial tank of gasoline you could easily have that same 20,000 gallons of fuel. And access to such an office building's parking area would be far, far more difficult for the fire department. I don't think you can glibly say that when all the fire departments get the correct tool, the problem is solved. They must get to that FIRST EV in time to actually use that device before the fire spreads out of control.
I just don't want to pick up the paper one morning or turn on the TV news and see another building that has collapsed into a heap of ashes. I just don't want to see that!More than 200 truck fires in NSW alone every year:
https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/newsletters/epa-connect-newsletter/september-2022/guide-to-help-prevent-truck-fires
Not even close to the Luton car park fire, 1500 cars burned in one go, caused by one battery hybrid car!
-
And ______ is going to pay the cost of replacing the dangerous lithium cells with these safer ones! On an expedited schedule, of course.
Please fill in the blank.That statistic may be true, but it sounds like it needs to be clarified.
One thing I would ask about is just how big the fire events were. Perhaps I am wrong, but when a gas or diesel vehicle catches fire, it can be easily extinguished. I had a fire in my gas powered truck on a highway trip and was able to put it out with the small fire extinguisher that I carried. I even had time to pull over to the shoulder of the road, get out of the truck, open the hood, observe the fire, go into the trailer to get the extinguisher, return to the truck, and put the fire out. I did this myself, with a small extinguisher. And after it cooled down, I was able to drive the truck and trailer to the next exit where repairs were made.
You are giving an example which wouldn't even have been in the gas vehicle fire statistics, not the greatest example but OK.
Your concerns should be resolved by having the appropriate tools for the fire department, sprinklers or other systems inside car parks to mitigate fire spread where possible. As mentioned above, as LFP gets wider adoption, spread will be less of an issue if at all.QuoteIn work by Willstrand et al., heat release rates (HRR) from full-scale fire tests performed in recent years with modern vehicles, including both ICEVs and BEVs was summarised. The compiled data showed a minor difference in the total energy released during the fire (total heat release) between ICEVs and BEVs. The total heat release for ICEVs range between 3.3 to 10 GJ and for BEV between 4.7 to 8.5 GJ. No difference in peak heat release rate or effective heat of combustion could be seen for the compared vehicles (Willstrand et al., 2020).
https://lashfire.eu/media/2022/09/2022-08_Facts_and_Myths.pdfpeople need to try driving EV, their just better. gasoline is horse and buggy and feels like it! stretchy cars. I feel like its those people warning me against the first Lion power drills (mid 2000's makita), which ended up utterly kicking ass. In the early 2000's there was down right prosecution against my makita drill acquisiton.
Yeah but how many horse and buggy fires are there? Clearly the safest and more superior mode of transportation. -
That statistic may be true, but it sounds like it needs to be clarified.
One thing I would ask about is just how big the fire events were. Perhaps I am wrong, but when a gas or diesel vehicle catches fire, it can be easily extinguished. I had a fire in my gas powered truck on a highway trip and was able to put it out with the small fire extinguisher that I carried. I even had time to pull over to the shoulder of the road, get out of the truck, open the hood, observe the fire, go into the trailer to get the extinguisher, return to the truck, and put the fire out. I did this myself, with a small extinguisher. And after it cooled down, I was able to drive the truck and trailer to the next exit where repairs were made.
You are giving an example which wouldn't even have been in the gas vehicle fire statistics, not the greatest example but OK.
Your concerns should be resolved by having the appropriate tools for the fire department, sprinklers or other systems inside car parks to mitigate fire spread where possible. As mentioned above, as LFP gets wider adoption, spread will be less of an issue if at all.QuoteIn work by Willstrand et al., heat release rates (HRR) from full-scale fire tests performed in recent years with modern vehicles, including both ICEVs and BEVs was summarised. The compiled data showed a minor difference in the total energy released during the fire (total heat release) between ICEVs and BEVs. The total heat release for ICEVs range between 3.3 to 10 GJ and for BEV between 4.7 to 8.5 GJ. No difference in peak heat release rate or effective heat of combustion could be seen for the compared vehicles (Willstrand et al., 2020).
https://lashfire.eu/media/2022/09/2022-08_Facts_and_Myths.pdfpeople need to try driving EV, their just better. gasoline is horse and buggy and feels like it! stretchy cars. I feel like its those people warning me against the first Lion power drills (mid 2000's makita), which ended up utterly kicking ass. In the early 2000's there was down right prosecution against my makita drill acquisiton.
Yeah but how many horse and buggy fires are there? Clearly the safest and more superior mode of transportation.
Having been on the receiving end of very high-octane horse farts, I would definitely discourage anybody from lighting a cigarette while it is in full flow. -
Airport car park! Been there. They are one of the loneliest places in any city. I wonder just how many cars were either on fire or completely burned out BEFORE ANYONE even noticed there was a fire.
...
If a battery fire can destroy 1500 vehicles in an airport car park...
This one was spotted almost immediately (while it was just a single car), it's a busy car park. People tried to fight it with available fire extinguishers before being forced to retreat.
As previously detailed, it wasn't an EV, it was a Diesel. -
Airport car park! Been there. They are one of the loneliest places in any city. I wonder just how many cars were either on fire or completely burned out BEFORE ANYONE even noticed there was a fire.
...
If a battery fire can destroy 1500 vehicles in an airport car park...
This one was spotted almost immediately (while it was just a single car), it's a busy car park. People tried to fight it with available fire extinguishers before being forced to retreat.
As previously detailed, it wasn't an EV, it was a Diesel.
There are a lot of false reports purporting to be about fires caused by EVs, & even misstating where the fire happened.
There was a fire in a car storage yard here in Perth WA (with nary an EV in the yard) which appeared on the Internet as a whole lot of EVs on fire in China.
Most of these things can be checked on Snopes, and are almost always BS. -
If a battery fire can destroy 1500 vehicles in an airport car park, think what it could do in the lower floors of a tall office building. One of the 9-11 aircraft was said to carry 20,000 gallons of jet fuel, which was the actual weapon used by the terrorists to bring those building down. With 90% of 1500 autos, each having a partial tank of gasoline you could easily have that same 20,000 gallons of fuel. And access to such an office building's parking area would be far, far more difficult for the fire department. I don't think you can glibly say that when all the fire departments get the correct tool, the problem is solved. They must get to that FIRST EV in time to actually use that device before the fire spreads out of control.
Building designers aren't idiots. They know car park fires happen. They know that putting an office block on top of a car park that can burn presents additional risk. Depending on the use, the buildings are designed to withstand different fire durations.
In the UK, a regular car park only needs to withstand fire for 15 minutes. That is, the fire can have spread to the next floor within 15 minutes. That sounds crazy at first, but think about it: car parks are wide, open spaces. Evacuation is easy. We care about humans. Cars can be replaced, people can't be. The fire doors and evacuation stairs have to withstand the fire for far longer, usually 60-90 minutes, giving sufficient time for fire fighters to stage an attack and search for anyone who could be trapped. It's notable in the car park fire in Liverpool, UK, in 2018, the car park was totally gutted, but the fire escapes were relatively untouched. There was only a bit of smoke damage, the fire doors had otherwise completely withstood the entire car park going up [1].
For something like a shopping mall, where there might be a populous retail area attached to a multistorey car park, the car park area is designed to contain the fire for as long as possible, with double fire-door systems linking the two (when you next visit one, see how they design this). The populated areas of the shopping mall can be evacuated quickly; the plans are well established. Units that have a large number of people, like a cinema, are placed away from the car park area (and will have their own fire escapes), as these will naturally take longer to evacuate. Fire alarm systems will be linked. The fire won't spread to the retail units for some time, but again, economic cost if it does, no lives lost, no big deal.
Office blocks are more challenging, but usually a substantial concrete foundation barrier will exist between any underground car park and the busy office block. The office block itself will have normal evacuation procedures. If it's big enough it'll have things like backup generators to keep lifts going for evacuation.
I'm sure some fire chiefs fret about fighting these fires, and sure, they're going to be a challenge, but battery-EVs don't make huge car park fires much worse. The majority of energy comes from the burning of the flammable interior and plastics, the battery might add fuel to the, er, fire, but it's really not that much energy compared to the rest of the car. Just on a fundamental physics level, a lithium-ion battery is nearly inert when fully discharged (this is why when transported, EVs are only charged to 10% or so). They can still burn, but much less ferociously. This tells us the energy released from a battery can't be much more than what it is charged up with. Maybe 0.5GJ worst case for some of the biggest SUV EVs.
[1] https://www.bafsa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/bsk-pdf-manager/2018/12/Merseyside-FRS-Car-Park-Report.pdf (page 41, 42, showing how good fire door design works) -
A conventional fire in a parked vehicle in such a building could be handled by a fire department. It may even be handled by a vehicle owner, as I did that day when my truck had a fire. But if an EV has a battery fire, what can anyone do except TRY to evacuate everyone to a safe distance?
Sure.
https://www.mylondon.news/news/south-london-news/gatwick-airport-fire-dramatic-video-26808164
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-46290095
I don't think we're ready for EVs yet (for various reasons but we will be) but those two horrific fires were caused by conventional IC engined vehicles so your argument seems spurious at best. -
Airport car park! Been there. They are one of the loneliest places in any city. I wonder just how many cars were either on fire or completely burned out BEFORE ANYONE even noticed there was a fire.
...
If a battery fire can destroy 1500 vehicles in an airport car park...
This one was spotted almost immediately (while it was just a single car), it's a busy car park. People tried to fight it with available fire extinguishers before being forced to retreat.
As previously detailed, it wasn't an EV, it was a Diesel.
And the Liverpool Arena fire a few years ago which destroyed 1400 cars and the building was also an ICE vehicle. -
If a battery fire can destroy 1500 vehicles in an airport car park, think what it could do in the lower floors of a tall office building. One of the 9-11 aircraft was said to carry 20,000 gallons of jet fuel, which was the actual weapon used by the terrorists to bring those building down. With 90% of 1500 autos, each having a partial tank of gasoline you could easily have that same 20,000 gallons of fuel. And access to such an office building's parking area would be far, far more difficult for the fire department. I don't think you can glibly say that when all the fire departments get the correct tool, the problem is solved. They must get to that FIRST EV in time to actually use that device before the fire spreads out of control.
Building designers aren't idiots. They know car park fires happen. They know that putting an office block on top of a car park that can burn presents additional risk. Depending on the use, the buildings are designed to withstand different fire durations.
In the UK, a regular car park only needs to withstand fire for 15 minutes. That is, the fire can have spread to the next floor within 15 minutes. That sounds crazy at first, but think about it: car parks are wide, open spaces. Evacuation is easy. We care about humans. Cars can be replaced, people can't be. The fire doors and evacuation stairs have to withstand the fire for far longer, usually 60-90 minutes, giving sufficient time for fire fighters to stage an attack and search for anyone who could be trapped. It's notable in the car park fire in Liverpool, UK, in 2018, the car park was totally gutted, but the fire escapes were relatively untouched. There was only a bit of smoke damage, the fire doors had otherwise completely withstood the entire car park going up [1].
For something like a shopping mall, where there might be a populous retail area attached to a multistorey car park, the car park area is designed to contain the fire for as long as possible, with double fire-door systems linking the two (when you next visit one, see how they design this). The populated areas of the shopping mall can be evacuated quickly; the plans are well established. Units that have a large number of people, like a cinema, are placed away from the car park area (and will have their own fire escapes), as these will naturally take longer to evacuate. Fire alarm systems will be linked. The fire won't spread to the retail units for some time, but again, economic cost if it does, no lives lost, no big deal.
My bunker undergrtound carpark (single level and rather small compared to my lab office building) has two huge fire doors. Not sure they are automatic, I've never really looked. Only ever seen one closed once. I always wondered why they bothered in such an otherwise small carpark complex. And this building is older than my lab building which has a far larger underground carpark, and like 5 times larger. -
Water cooling to the cells. Interesting thought and it seems like a good idea.
But water boils and the steam escapes.
But ignoring physical damage it's just one cell. That's not going to bring the cooling loop to boiling. Electronics are cheap and small, detecting individual cell temperature shouldn't really be an issue.
Once the industry matures I just can't see individual cell failure leading to any significant accidents. These are teething problems. -
Most truck fires are caused by brake binding on trailers or under inflated tyres and drivers who either don't care or are half asleep, I was driving a truck where a diesel pipe cracked and was spraying diesel directly onto the exhaust manifold, I noticed a great white cloud following me, I pulled over and that is when I discovered the problem, no fire, patched the fuel line and was on my way again. If diesel was as inflammable as some suggest aerobatic display teams like the red arrows would be trailing long flames not smoke, the smoke is made by injecting diesel and dye into the jets exhaust.
Most vehicle fires and for that matter most fire in general are down to electrical faults.
The Luton airport fire had two different vehicles shown as the cause of the fire by the media, in the first one the showed a range rover from the back with flames shooting out horizontally from behind the near side front wheel, the number plate was not readable due to smoke and glare the other video showed a front view with a readable number plate but the fire was not the same. The police have arrested one person in relation to this fire, no idea if it was the driver of the range rover who according to some reports left his smoking vehicle with the engine running telling check in that that his car was on fire and he had to catch a flight for an important meeting and could someone deal with it. -
EVs... lol.
More fires, more morons, more futurist obsessive nonsense. -
Gas vehicles are far more likely to catch fire than EVs, on the order of 7-40x more likely. Commercial trucks are disproportionally a larger percent of those fires.
https://www.warpnews.org/transportation/fewer-fires-in-electric-cars-compared-to-fossil-fueled-cars-in-the-worlds-country-with-the-highest-share-of-electric-cars/
https://rib.msb.se/filer/pdf/29438.pdf
https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/9671
"Far more likely" != ACTUALLY DO. EVs are constantly catching fire, it is a known issue.
Leave the futurist fantasists to their toy cars. -
"Far more likely" != ACTUALLY DO. EVs are constantly catching fire, it is a known issue.
Leave the futurist fantasists to their toy cars.
All the statistics available disagree with you, for instance here. Do you have a source for your extraordinary claim? -
"Far more likely" != ACTUALLY DO. EVs are constantly catching fire, it is a known issue.
Leave the futurist fantasists to their toy cars.
All the statistics available disagree with you, for instance here. Do you have a source for your extraordinary claim?
Excellent. Enjoy stat counting. -
"Far more likely" != ACTUALLY DO.
Yes it is, otherwise it wouldn't be more likely. -
EVs... lol.
More fires, more morons, more futurist obsessive nonsense.
I love my EV. No noise, no vibration, no local air pollution (we literally call our ICE car the "Stinky" car), almost no running costs because I use excess solar, never have to go to a petrol station.
Although they are expensive, but the tax payer gave me one for free.
Not for everyone of course, horses for courses. But definitely not LOL. -
EVs... lol.
More fires, more morons, more futurist obsessive nonsense.
I love my EV. No noise, no vibration, no local air pollution (we literally call our ICE car the "Stinky" car), almost no running costs because I use excess solar, never have to go to a petrol station.
Although they are expensive, but the tax payer gave me one for free.
Not for everyone of course, horses for courses. But definitely not LOL.
I feel like luddism has had a giant resurgence recently. It's as if they've finally adopted the internet just so they can oppose it. -
I’ll see you all in the distant future, when EVs will STILL not have “taken over”, and they’ll STILL be adamant it “will happen, it’s got to, it’s just a matter of time” 🤣
Live the dream chaps, that’s all it’s gonna be. -
Oh, it's unlokia again. That explains that.
-
Gas vehicles are far more likely to catch fire than EVs, on the order of 7-40x more likely. Commercial trucks are disproportionally a larger percent of those fires.
https://www.warpnews.org/transportation/fewer-fires-in-electric-cars-compared-to-fossil-fueled-cars-in-the-worlds-country-with-the-highest-share-of-electric-cars/
https://rib.msb.se/filer/pdf/29438.pdf
https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/9671
what makes hybrid cars safer than gasoline cars?
they have all the complexity of a gas, and electric.. in one?!
me thinks a simple failure of applying the number of vehicles in existence.. to generate salacious claim of 7-40 times more likely.
-there are how many hundreds of times more gas cars on the roads?
i can't even remember a news article mentioning a gasoline or diesel car fire.