Just how safe are EVs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 174758
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 174758

Much as I like the concept, EVs are currently not much good for any business which need to go more than about 100 miles in a day, or carry/tow any sort of loaded trailer, either. I worked for one firm who leased an electric van two years ago - it was a bit of a nightmare in terms of the range never being anywhere near the manufacturer's specs and left people stranded with zero charge a few times due to no phone signal, broken chargers, etc but the problems with it were as much due to over optimistic readouts on the dash as anything else. So mark me as a sceptic about EVs for now (even though I would like a 2CV electric)

But I also don't think I'm alone in having concerns about the lithium compounds used in the batteries of current EVs. Never mind how rare an occurrence it is, just how do you put a lithium fire out? Use water and you are supplying the fire with the oxygen it needs. Cut off the air and the intense heat tends to break down other compounds in the battery, releasing sufficient oxygen for the conflagration to continue, as the current fire on board MV Freemantle Highway seems to demonstrate.(It is now stated that there are 500 EVs on board, not the 25 then 200 odd earlier quoted) Given that the conventional way to limit or control a fire on board ships, to close the ventilation dampers in order to starve the fire of air, just isn't working, what else can be done? And what would happen if such a fire occurred in an underground car park with several hundred EVs parked in there (in the future)? All I know is you should stay well upwind of a lithium battery fire because there are some highly toxic chemicals given off in that smoke, such as cobalt compounds which are readily absorbed through the skin and can be lethal. So I think we also need to be looking for a safer alternative to lithium in order to avoid such low probability/high consequence events as the Freemantle Highway happening in our towns and cities in the future

I now await the usual comments from the EV zealots...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
...maybe, looking to the future, we can harness zealotry to generate and store energy...?
 
StephenStephen said:
Or the usual comments from the anti EV zealots?
Click to expand...
I am neither anti nor pro, but I am concerned about the safety of lithium batteries, and until a safer technology, such as, for example graphene, comes along I think that is a valid concern. It seems that every time anyone questions the current direction of EVs the EV bigots want to have a go at anyone questioning their particular hobby horse. Is that you? It is easy to act like a tw@t and not discuss a serious issue - I see managers doing it all the time. Why not be better than that?

FYI I took the decision more than 20 years ago to stop flying for business or pleasure on environmental grounds. A decusion qhich cost me a career I had begun go regard as unsustainable. In 2014 I further took the decision to only drive to jobs if absolutely unavoidable, to stop using the car for much if my personal travel, and instead to use public transport (and BTW I am a tradesman, so it hasn't been easy). What have you done about reducing your carbon footprint, traffic congestion and pollution, then?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I work for a National Highways area team and I was formerly a Fireman. I would say that the likelihood of an EV catching fire are significantly less (probable 20 fold less at least) than a conventionally fueled car but the fire, should it occur is exponentially more difficult to deal with due to its rapid onset and its violent nature and because it is virtually impossible to extinguish. The role of the fire service in the case of an EV fire is to protect the surroundings more than to fight the fire assuming the fire relates to the battery pack (which many actually don't. they suffer electrical fires at the same rate as conventional cars).
I'd say it would be sensible not to place chargers inside buildings but that any other measures might well be an over reaction.
 
i think the problem with any story we need all the information from all sources to form a reasonable, fairly accurate conclusion
by selective use off information, grenfel was safe as was a trip to veiw the titanic---- morals cost money so often deliberately ignored
we need to remember most sources are very selective as "shocking " ---"stirring it up "--- "instilling vitriol and hatred" regardless off what evil it causes in society is preffered over full facts just to sell and get hits as they can be turned into an asset where as being helpful and caring has no monetary value :unsure: o_O
 
StephenStephen said:
Or the usual comments from the anti EV zealots?
Click to expand...
I am a anti-battery zealot. Anything that causes me inconvenience p****s me off. Half way through the job, they usually are out of charge. When you need a quickie, there is usually no charge.
 
ericmark said:
Should EV's be banned from channel tunnel? If they were, that would likely seal their fate.
Click to expand...
Unlikely to be banned I would think, seeing as Le Shuttle has EV charging points at both ends of the tunnel :rolleyes:

(that's not to be taken as a vote for EV's on my part, just a fact)
 
ericmark said:
Since the whole train is electric powered why not charge them en route?
Click to expand...
would think that would only ever work if by induction coil as the drive in car model requires car passengers to remain in vehicle
can you see 50 cars arriving at destination individually disconnecting and moving off even iff at the same time would add say 10 mins to off load time ??
 
If one can do long trips by driving your car onto a train and being charged en route then all the problems of range would vanish, there is a natural order of electrifying trains first, then small road vehicles, larger ones better using gas or liquid fuels, which can be synthesised so does not need to be fossil fuels.

The other method is hire cars, or replaceable batteries, so you swap the battery rather than charge it as with the Bedford CF van.

Even doing a simple task like cutting hedge or trimming lawn, I do not recharge the battery on the tool, but remove it to charge and have a spare set so one set is being charged while other set is being used.

Now we are it seems going to have a 20 MPH speed limit, maybe the Ami quad is the way to go with a top speed I think of 26 MPH, the electric car unlike petrol and diesel is happy at low speeds, the MPG with the petrol and diesel cars of today drops off if going too slow, they are not designed to go slow, but the sweet speed with electric is much lower.

I will be interested in September to see the new bus time tables as clearly going slower it will take longer.
 
the average speed off a bus will be quite low when you include load off laod times
reduce the maximum speed by perhaps 20 % will only add perhaps 5% to journey times as average speeds will already be sub say 25mph so dropping to 20 will make little difference
actually thinking about it most busses are already nearer to perhaps 10 miles an hour on town and city routes
even local trains can be sub 30mph
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top