The fault must not have been the car batteries. Most likely, there was a problem in one of the rear axles of the trailer. Either a bearing failed, or a brake jammed, or a dual tire broke….for any of these failures, there is a risk of a fire starting. That truck carries very little load (in tons)….in a truck loaded with 28 or 35 tons, on mountain roads with steep slopes….it is common to see that the brakes are at the limits of the fire….It all depends on the the way the driver drives….
Lithium-Ion batteries, EVs, and myth busting
- Thread starter Checkswrecks
- Start date
Madhatter
Well-Known Member
so I look at the truck whose trailer is ablaze ..... seems the source of the fire is coming from the trailer tandems ... as a commercial driver with 45 plus years of driving ,my experience says a tire, probably flat ,is the cause .really hot brakes are a possibility but not as likely . did one of the cars start the fire , I'm thinking not a chance . fire burns "up hill" . so if bottom car caught the flame would have got the car on top before the tandems caught. and it takes some doing to set a tire on fire .... driver did not check his tires , that could mean manually at a stop (hammer bump) or visually as he or she was driving ( smoke or smell ) not checking in his mirrors as he drives along . I wasn't there so who knows , but I have the experience to understand if it was the trailer it was a tire.
No.So... the electrical energy consumed by electric vehicles, if it produces pollution due to the combustion of fossil fuels to generate that energy... And with Euro7, hybrid vehicles would no longer pass it (the pollution of the atmospheric engine would be measured separately... no together with the electeic engine as it is now)…we are going to end up walking a lot..
Switzerland considers electric-car bans during electricity shortages
Electric vehicles could be parked or restricted as Switzerland considers power-saving measures.www.drive.com.au
As SilverBullet's article below describes, the EVs are always going to consume less energy than a car burning fuel.
These old arguments started 10+ years ago when everybody wanted a hybrid, because those combine all the elements of two drive systems into one vehicle.
As for the article about the Swiss, what the press does note which gets missed is that this is a layered response to them running out of energy due to the Ukraine war and loss of Russian gas to run power plants. Asking EV owners to not use electricity is a last level response if previous steps have not already cut enough from other users of electricity, so people don't freeze.
Good read
You're Being Lied to About Electric Cars
Sorry, that meme you just retweeted isn't correct.www.motortrend.com
Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk
Dirt_Dad
Well-Known Member
Founding Member
2011 Site Supporter
2013 Site Supporter
2014 Site Supporter
I have to admit this article taught me more about myself than about EVs. I was interested right up until The NY Times and Yale were mentioned as authoritative sources. Two sources in which I have zero faith in their ability to present factual, unbiased, objective information. At that point the article lost any credibility and I stopped reading. Maybe there was factual information there, maybe not. All I know is when the NYT or any university is the source, based on their performance record, credibility goes to negative for me.Good read
You're Being Lied to About Electric Cars
Sorry, that meme you just retweeted isn't correct.
Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk
Agreed. I'll add that the battery IS the bottom surface of the I-Pace immediately over the burning tires, adding to the idea it is a victim and not a cause.
I've been through enough presentations on this stuff that I could pick faults on some details but it's pretty close. I've also been mis-quoted enough that it wouldn't surprise me to learn those faults were errors created by the writer's understanding.
And the plot thickens: Suzuki Is Taking A Unique And Firm Stance On Electric Sports Bikes (msn.com)
thughes317
Well-Known Member
So......electrics are cool, what with all the HP/torque available right from zero RPM (talk about performance!) but range, recharge time, and battery lifecycle technology still isn't there yet for us guys that dig cross-country jaunts. I'm looking forward to what Suzuki and others will innovate with ICE's in the near future.
Eville Rich
Well-Known Member
It's always good to check sources, but this article is correct, in general. It's always possible to find an exception case, so I don't want to say it's correct in all cases. I work in the utility sector and, among other things, do these sorts of analyses. Analyzing utility loads, opportunities for load shifting, cross-fuel impacts of electrification, that sort of thing.
The supply chain questions are the most murky and subject to exceptions. But the basic energy or emissions balance of vehicle operations does favor electric. The great thing is that you can manage charging to times to optimize for electricity prices or other factors, unless you need a DC fast charger immediately.
My next cager will probably be electric or a plug-in hybrid with substantial battery range. I'd have one now, but I'm not far enough in my 10 year replacement cycle to make that happen, and the vehicle market has been absurd, so I'm happy to stay out of it. Also waiting to see the next wave of EVs and what changes come into the market. Heck, I like my S10, so clearly do not jump on the innovation bandwagon.
Eville Rich
2016 S10
I don't if y'all have heard about this one. It's a Tesla Model Y. On January 2nd of this year, the driver intentionally drove it off of a cliff in CA. He, his wife, and two children . . . . survived. He is to be charged with attempted murder. The cliff was 250' high. I've never seen any car, not even Volvo, allow a passenger to survive a fall from that height. I don't think the battery helped, but maybe a stronger frame to support the battery? @Checkswrecks . . . . this is your department. I've worked a bunch of crashes, but not to see if component failure was a factor. But damn, if the car can protect me in a crash like this? Definitely have to give them a second glance.
Last edited:
It's kinda the same as how VW Beetles would generally come to rest either on their side or upright, but almost never upside down. The rounded top and pancake engine tended to keep them off their tops.
My SAE Firefighter safety group been following the Tesla going off the cliff. The batteries in the Teslas are essentially a 1.5-2 TON flat sled that is rigid as heck and tightly bolted to the bottom of the body. So the car will naturally try to land upright and the battery case is going to take the impact in a fall. Plus, without a big car engine to come back under the dash, the front the bodies are incredibly well designed for frontal/rear crush impacts. The roof is supported by high strength steel and it wraps the central part of the passenger compartment, so that area is brick outhouse tuff.
As for the battery not catching fire, this was a Model Y and not one of the older (NCA with cobalt) chemistry Model S or X models. The chemistries in the Y and some Model 3s are pretty resistant to fire.
In any case, this family was super lucky, a statistical anomaly, and the Good Lord clearly wasn't ready for them yet.
My SAE Firefighter safety group been following the Tesla going off the cliff. The batteries in the Teslas are essentially a 1.5-2 TON flat sled that is rigid as heck and tightly bolted to the bottom of the body. So the car will naturally try to land upright and the battery case is going to take the impact in a fall. Plus, without a big car engine to come back under the dash, the front the bodies are incredibly well designed for frontal/rear crush impacts. The roof is supported by high strength steel and it wraps the central part of the passenger compartment, so that area is brick outhouse tuff.
As for the battery not catching fire, this was a Model Y and not one of the older (NCA with cobalt) chemistry Model S or X models. The chemistries in the Y and some Model 3s are pretty resistant to fire.
In any case, this family was super lucky, a statistical anomaly, and the Good Lord clearly wasn't ready for them yet.
Must have been following the share price.
Another recent accident making a big media splash, this time with the battery actually separating from an Audi eTron trying to run a light. Well no wonder when at the very start of the video as the camera comes around the corner you can see what looks like a pretty substantial concrete culvert that the right undercarriage of the Audi rammed, launching the car before it got to the crossing traffic. The battery case coming to hit the culvert was why the front right corner of the battery is ripped open and smoking. Between what the aftward shear force would have done to the right side fasteners and the G force of the launch and spin, separating the battery as a unit is definitely startling but shouldn't be much of a surprise. A gas car wouldn't have fared much different.
www.youtube.com
Dumb ass driver
Audi E-Tron ejects it's battery after big crash
Audi E-Tron runs a red light hitting a Toyota corolla and ejects it's battery
www.youtube.com
Dumb ass driver
Not long ago there was controversy about Hertz downsizing their EV fleet by selling off Teslas. The talk was that they have gotten so burned they are dumping everything. Turns out that's pretty far from the business decisions that are really going on.
Now that they've been renting EVs for a few years they have figured out how much of their fleet to make electric vs ICE. The EVs they are selling off are mostly high mileage Teslas because those cars with 50,000-100,000 miles were their first EVs. They are also selling some Bolts, Kias, and others. But the point is that they aren't getting out of the game, they are just re-balancing.
"Hertz Global Chief Executive Officer Stephen Scherr said Hertz is still “committed” to buying 100,000 cars from Tesla and 175,000 EVs from GM, but is not on target to have EVs represent a quarter of its fleet by the end of 2024 any more as previously hoped."
As at least a few here are aware, EVs don't have the high mileage engine concerns that ICE vehicles do and Teslas come with a 120,000 mile battery warranty. Plus, Hertz gives a bumper-bumper 12,000 mile one year warranty because front ends and other parts still do wear like in ICE vehicles. Plus, there's a used EV tax incentive of up to $4,000. That means it's possible to get an 80,000 mile Tesla 3 in Springfield VA that's had corporate maintenance for $16,800 with a warranty! Heck, they have a Fugly BMW i3 (totally carbon fiber body so never will rust) for $16,595 which with the tax credit would be $12,595!
Thought I'd post it since this might be an opportunity if anybody else is interested.
https://www.hertzcarsales.com/used-...adius=0&geoZip=60601&sortBy=internetPrice asc
Now that they've been renting EVs for a few years they have figured out how much of their fleet to make electric vs ICE. The EVs they are selling off are mostly high mileage Teslas because those cars with 50,000-100,000 miles were their first EVs. They are also selling some Bolts, Kias, and others. But the point is that they aren't getting out of the game, they are just re-balancing.
"Hertz Global Chief Executive Officer Stephen Scherr said Hertz is still “committed” to buying 100,000 cars from Tesla and 175,000 EVs from GM, but is not on target to have EVs represent a quarter of its fleet by the end of 2024 any more as previously hoped."
As at least a few here are aware, EVs don't have the high mileage engine concerns that ICE vehicles do and Teslas come with a 120,000 mile battery warranty. Plus, Hertz gives a bumper-bumper 12,000 mile one year warranty because front ends and other parts still do wear like in ICE vehicles. Plus, there's a used EV tax incentive of up to $4,000. That means it's possible to get an 80,000 mile Tesla 3 in Springfield VA that's had corporate maintenance for $16,800 with a warranty! Heck, they have a Fugly BMW i3 (totally carbon fiber body so never will rust) for $16,595 which with the tax credit would be $12,595!
Thought I'd post it since this might be an opportunity if anybody else is interested.
https://www.hertzcarsales.com/used-...adius=0&geoZip=60601&sortBy=internetPrice asc
I'm not to sure on the validity of the articles, but I've also heard that auto insurance companies are raising premium on EVs, if the insure them at all. Apparently, the articles claim that there is no repairing batteries that have been damaged in a crash. That they must be replaced. I haven't spoken with my insurance lady to see if this is true.
Cycledude
Well-Known Member
I don’t imagine they repair any gas tanks either
Don't get me wrong, they have their places and are very useful. But the average person/family is still going to need an ICEV in addition to the EV. Short trips and in high population urban settings? Perfect. Even commuting as long as you had a charging station capable of recharging completely overnight. But longer trips and commutes? Range anxiety kicks in. Someday they might perfect them. But at their current prices and with their current shortcomings, they're gonna be a hard sell. I personally don't believe there should be a mandate to switch. Let those who want one get one, and those who don't . . . . dont.