The all things EV chat thread

[Arthur Wedge]

The Luton fire will likely cost hundreds of millions when all is told. I'm sorry it's just more anti EV nonsnse.

Sorry what’s the Luton fire got to do with anything when it was multiple cars

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Sorry what’s the Luton fire got to do with anything when it was multiple cars

Are you joking ?

 

[Deleted member 21784]

Reading Hobbits point - I believe he is talking about the damage from an EV when there is a fire as opposed to the frequency


A lithium battery fire isn’t great at all and will cause a lot more damage than a standard ice engine fire

Which I never disputed.

EV carry around something that if it catches fire will cause more damage than if a tank of petrol catches fire. I'm not questioning or denying that

The fact remains that it's statistically less likely to catch fire in the first place

Hydrogen is even more dangerous than petrol but people don't worry about the idea of driving around in a car full of one .. it explodes further and has a lower ignition point.

I'll still drive a hydrogen car as the risks will be low .

Sorry what’s the Luton fire got to do with anything when it was multiple cars

The Luton fire is always brought up because it was wrongly said to have been caused by an EV but turned out to be an ice car

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Which I never disputed.

EV carry around something that if it catches fire will cause more damage than if a tank of petrol catches fire. I'm not questioning or denying that

The fact remains that it's statistically less likely to catch fire in the first place

Hydrogen is even more dangerous than petrol but people don't worry about the idea of driving around in a car full of one .. it explodes further and has a lower ignition point.

I'll still drive a hydrogen car as the risks will be low .



The Luton fire is always brought up because it was wrongly said to have been caused by an EV but turned out to be an ice car

Hundreds of millions of damage caused by a land rover diesel that caught fire.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

Hundreds of millions of damage caused by a land rover diesel that caught fire.

Fires happen, not here to argue with it all. Was simply pointing out whilst they are worse when they go they are much less likely to go in the first place

Can't be bothered with the whole debate , apparently in a bubble with tinted specs just for bringing facts to discussions.

But hey ho

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Are you joking ?

Why would I be ?

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Which I never disputed.

EV carry around something that if it catches fire will cause more damage than if a tank of petrol catches fire. I'm not questioning or denying that

The fact remains that it's statistically less likely to catch fire in the first place

Hydrogen is even more dangerous than petrol but people don't worry about the idea of driving around in a car full of one .. it explodes further and has a lower ignition point.

I'll still drive a hydrogen car as the risks will be low .



The Luton fire is always brought up because it was wrongly said to have been caused by an EV but turned out to be an ice car

That was I believe Hobbits point

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Hundreds of millions of damage caused by a land rover diesel that caught fire.

You are missing the point

Yes a lot of damage was caused due to “multiple” fires happening

If it was a single car fire the damage from a EV car fire would be worse

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Fires happen, not here to argue with it all. Was simply pointing out whilst they are worse when they go they are much less likely to go in the first place

Can't be bothered with the whole debate , apparently in a bubble with tinted specs just for bringing facts to discussions.

But hey ho

Indeed , easier listen "experts"

 

[Deleted member 35927]

You are missing the point

Yes a lot of damage was caused due to “multiple” fires happening

If it was a single car fire the damage from a EV car fire would be worse

No, you are.
You can't in one breath say a EV fire causes more damage but then dismiss a fire started by a diesel.
I understand you need to fit a narrative but the whole EV fire thing is just rubbish

 

[Arthur Wedge]

No, you are.
You can't in one breath say a EV fire causes more damage but then dismiss a fire started by a diesel.
I understand you need to fit a narrative but the whole EV fire thing is just rubbish

The fire at Luton would have caused significant no matter what the car was


The point was simple

A lithium battery fire is more dangerous than a standard ice engine fire - that doesn’t mean an EV car is more dangerous because as I said earlier the chance of the fire is less

 

[cliveb]

Hundreds of millions of damage caused by a land rover diesel that caught fire.

Instead of arguing about whether it was an EV or ICE car that started it (and/or how many cars were involved), shouldn't we be expressing our incredulity that a brand spanking new multi storey car park was built that had inadequate fire fighting systems?
It's a car park. Cars might catch fire. Such a circumstance should not completely destroy the entire structure.
Let's stop trying to blame any type of car, and instead blame the car park designers.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Instead of arguing about whether it was an EV or ICE car that started it (and/or how many cars were involved), shouldn't we be expressing our incredulity that a brand spanking new multi storey car park was built that had inadequate fire fighting systems?
It's a car park. Cars might catch fire. Such a circumstance should not completely destroy the entire structure.
Let's stop trying to blame any type of car, and instead blame the car park designers.

Yes the fire report was heavily critical of the car park - sprinkler system being one

 

[Deleted member 35927]

The fire at Luton would have caused significant no matter what the car was


The point was simple

A lithium battery fire is more dangerous than a standard ice engine fire - that doesn’t mean an EV car is more dangerous because as I said earlier the chance of the fire is less

hang on, it was all about the damage and inconvenience caused 5 mins ago, which for Luton was staggering. Now we are swapping to which burns more ?

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Instead of arguing about whether it was an EV or ICE car that started it (and/or how many cars were involved), shouldn't we be expressing our incredulity that a brand spanking new multi storey car park was built that had inadequate fire fighting systems?
It's a car park. Cars might catch fire. Such a circumstance should not completely destroy the entire structure.
Let's stop trying to blame any type of car, and instead blame the car park designers.

No arguements it's was a ice land rover , just responding to the EV fire nonsense that gets trotted out.
To be fair , this was a new on me .

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Electric car fires surge 77% amid growing concern over battery safety

Fires involving electric cars have surged by 77% in just two years, highlighting mounting safety concerns over the lithium-ion batteries.

www.am-online.com

Electric vehicle fires are not only becoming more frequent - they’re also far more intense,” said Adrian Simmonds, practice leader for Property Risk Solutions at QBE Insurance. “These fires burn hotter, spread faster and require ten times more water to extinguish than a typical combustion engine fire.”

The primary danger lies in the batteries themselves. When damaged, overcharged or exposed to extreme heat, lithium-ion cells can undergo “thermal runaway” - a rapid and uncontrollable rise in temperature that can lead to explosive fires.

 

[doublebogey7]

Had an interesting chat with a senior fire officer last evening. I know it been done previously in the thread, from all angles, but it was interesting to hear it first hand.

Basically, if an EV is on fire, and it is the battery that’s deemed to be compromised, their instruction is not to go anywhere near it and just let it burn itself out. The miracle solution, apparently, is to grab it and put it in a huge tank of water.

His view, i.e. that of an expert, is the disruption to traffic and damage to the infrastructure they cause is disproportionate when compared to ICE vehicles. He’s not for banning them, recognising the need for progress, but he does hope the insurance premiums reflect the disruption & damage.

Along with the rarity of it actually hapening compared to an ICE.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

No arguements it's was a ice land rover , just responding to the EV fire nonsense that gets trotted out.
To be fair , this was a new on me .

Why is it nonsense ?

Are EVs a fire risk? | Autocar

We look at why EV fires are so hard to extinguish, how fire services are handling it and how to minimise risks

www.autocar.co.uk

“
According to Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service, over 100 organic chemicals are generated in an electric vehicle fire. Some of the gases are seriously toxic, specifically hydrogen cyanide and carbon monoxide.

They also burn extremely hot and are difficult to cool. Australia-based EV Firesafe suggests it can take upwards of 10,000 litres of water to extinguish an EV fire.

Electric car fires are tough to extinguish because it's often difficult to access the battery and get cool water onto the problem cell. You think it’s out, and then it erupts again hours, days or even weeks later.”

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Along with the rarity of it actually hapening compared to an ICE.

I guess with more and more EV appearing then there will be more EV/hybrid fires ( still proportionally lower than ICe )

 

[JonnyGutteridge]

I work in Underwriting for a car insurance company that covers most EV’s and we’re generally on the ‘market leading’ side of EV’s in terms of amount of EV policies that we sell… soooo, if there’s any questions, happy to try and answer what I can.