• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The plain truth about EVs. Hope you have fire insurance.

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Imagine that happening in a parking garage where people work or worse, live at.

Fires burning for days.

Evs are safety hazards.
The fire burning for days was the cargo ship itself, not the car. There were lots of things on the ship that caught fire. That's what's burning for days. It wouldn't matter what the source of the fire was.

They suspect that that car may have started fire because it was damaged during the loading process onto the ship. That's what he said in the video. I'm not sure EVs are going to be loaded with a crane into parking garages. Besides, any vehicle at all that is damaged can start fires. Let's say it has a leak in the gas tank, and someone tosses their cigarette but on the ground next to it.

EVs are no more safely hazards than anything else as far as anyone can tell. Why do you conclude otherwise? Based upon what? So no, this is not the "plain truth" about EVs or anything at all.
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Population underlies everything.
Yes and no. Population alone does not make for a sixth mass extinction caused by humans. What enabled human population to exceed the usual carrying capacity safeguards?

Technology.

And what exacerbates the impact technology has?

Affluence.

But we don't like talking about either of those things. It is part of why EVs are not the final solution. The final solution is a combination of less humans, less stuff, less tech. Which will definitely mean abandoning personalized motor transportation.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
A few years ago, I was on a Permaculture Design course given by the late Patrick Whitefield. One evening we were relaxing and a conversation on the state of our environment began. For most of it, Patrick was just listening, offering the odd correction or confirmation. Then one woman asked him directly, "what should we do." He paused and then quietly said, "to be honest, I think it is too late." I will never forget the silence and the chill that descended on the room as we digested what this incredibly knowledgeable man had just said.
"Incredibly knowledgeable man"? He was just a farmer, basically, wasn't he? What was he basing his judgement on?
 

rocala

Well-Known Member
"Incredibly knowledgeable man"? He was just a farmer, basically, wasn't he? What was he basing his judgement on?
I don't have a cv for him, I know that he graduated from an agricultural college when young. Having spent two weeks with him, I do believe that he lived and breathed the natural world and the relationship of humanity with it. The group its self had knowledgeable people and I am sure they would all agree with my assessment, as would others in the field that I have discussed him with. I can only suggest you read his books, the Earthcare Manual and The Living Landscape, they I think, justify my comment.


He was just a farmer
Did you mean that as badly as it reads.
 
Last edited:

exchemist

Veteran Member
The fire burning for days was the cargo ship itself, not the car. There were lots of things on the ship that caught fire. That's what's burning for days. It wouldn't matter what the source of the fire was.

They suspect that that car may have started fire because it was damaged during the loading process onto the ship. That's what he said in the video. I'm not sure EVs are going to be loaded with a crane into parking garages. Besides, any vehicle at all that is damaged can start fires. Let's say it has a leak in the gas tank, and someone tosses their cigarette but on the ground next to it.

EVs are no more safely hazards than anything else as far as anyone can tell. Why do you conclude otherwise? Based upon what? So no, this is not the "plain truth" about EVs or anything at all.
In fairness it is true to say that fires in Li-ion battery assemblies are harder to put out and can even re-ignite. For this reason, current advice to fire crews is to let a battery fire burn itself out and just focus on stopping the fire from spreading. In the case of EVs this does not matter much, since almost any vehicle fire results in the vehicle being written off. But the crew does have to stay around for longer.

On board a car carrier, or ferry, though, there can be detection systems that can stop an overheating battery pack reaching the stage of bursting into flames and systems that can douse it before it gets to the point at which fire crews typically turn up to an already burning vehicle on the road, which is often too late to stop the process.
 
Last edited:

exchemist

Veteran Member
The fires will become more common as batteries age and charging stations get stronger and faster. They may have to come up with charging standards based on adapters for each generation battery and station.

A Lithium fire, once started, cannot be put out with water, since the water and the lithium will react to make hydrogen, and cause the fire to get worse.

Below is a link to a YouTube video

Putting a lithium battery in water
This is wrong. There is no lithium metal involved in a Li-ion battery.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
I don't have a cv for him, I know that he graduated from an agricultural college when young. Having spent two weeks with him, I do believe that he lived and breathed the natural world and the relationship of humanity with it. The group its self had knowledgeable people and I am sure they would all agree with my assessment, as would others in the field that I have discussed him with. I can only suggest you read his books, the Earthcare Manual and The Living Landscape I think, justify my comment.



Did you mean that as badly as it reads.
Yes, I meant it. To address the question of whether the earth can find a balance that supports mankind sustainably would require a detailed knowledge of worldwide population trends, nutritional capacity of global agriculture, a host of environmental impacts, climate change scenarios, and God knows what else. Almost impossible for anyone to answer credibly, however well-informed.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
The reality is that all modern cars/trucks have batteries.
My V10 engine 1999 F350 spontaneously caught fire
because of a short circuit (likely a cruise control defect).
So all you IC engine car owners need fire insurance too.

Now for my next post....
Water contaminated with dihydrogen oxide can kill you!
I almost had a bad fire because my dryer was full of lint - let's get rid of those dangerous dryers and go back to air drying.

I had a UPS overheat badly and be close to catching on fire because of a defect. Let's get rid of all electronics that can cause fire.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I almost had a bad fire because my dryer was full of lint - let's get rid of those dangerous dryers and go back to air drying.

I had a UPS overheat badly and be close to catching on fire because of a defect. Let's get rid of all electronics that can cause fire.
No, we only need to get rid of devices that are associated with sensible policies supported by Democrats. Then we'll be okay. I'm pretty sure that's what this thread is really about. :)
 

rocala

Well-Known Member
Yes, I meant it. To address the question of whether the earth can find a balance that supports mankind sustainably would require a detailed knowledge of worldwide population trends, nutritional capacity of global agriculture, a host of environmental impacts, climate change scenarios, and God knows what else. Almost impossible for anyone to answer credibly, however well-informed.
I guess the key to my post was that Patrick said "I think" and he did so in an informal conversation. I dare say many other people have too.
I can only add that it was a sobering moment and was a good antidote for the remarkable optimism expressed by some present.
I am sorry that my post has somehow irked you, but it is what it is.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Thanks for everything you do oppose mitigating climate change. It's only equaled by all you do to keep Republicans in power. In the end, we all want to make a difference.
No. It's to show EVs are not as safe and clean as people make it out to be .

Plus they are just as environmentally dirty and hazardous as any fossil fuel hazard. Not just by spontaneously exploding and putting toxic smoke into the atmosphere for days, but by the same accusation that fossil is accused of, the mining of materials used in its production that destroys land and environments.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I almost had a bad fire because my dryer was full of lint - let's get rid of those dangerous dryers and go back to air drying.

I had a UPS overheat badly and be close to catching on fire because of a defect. Let's get rid of all electronics that can cause fire.
Ban them all. Isn't that the 'solution' of the left?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Well there is always old-fashioned non-green cars. So much safer.

An estimated 212,500 vehicle fires caused 560 civilian deaths,
1,500 civilian injuries; and $1.9 billion in direct property damage in
the US during 2018

Source - https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/...nd-reports/US-Fire-Problem/osvehiclefires.pdf
And that is with modern cars. I wonder what the rate, not the number was, of fires with ICE automobiles in their first twenty years of production.

Yes, there will be some minor growing pains. There always is with new technology.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
No. It's to show EVs are not as safe and clean as people make it out to be .

Plus they are just as environmentally dirty and hazardous as any fossil fuel hazard. Not just by spontaneously exploding and putting toxic smoke into the atmosphere for days, but by the same accusation that fossil is accused of, the mining of materials used in its production that destroys land and environments.
Supposed facts presented without any evidence can be dismissed with a handwave. No one claims that they are one hundred percent green. They just claim that they are far greener than ICE's. Perfect is impossible, better allows people to keep their cars.

When you have a choice of no car or an EV, which one will you choose?
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It's to show EVs are not as safe and clean as people make it out to be .
I don't believe that that is what motivated you to start this thread. You've stared enough threads to understand what they have in common - to promulgate climate change resistance and Republican politics. I've seen other opinions from you, on religion, for example, but you don't start threads about anything but these two to my knowledge.
Ban them all. Isn't that the 'solution' of the left?
This is what I mean by your continual tendentious, agenda-driven posting. Right now, America's problem is conservative banning of abortion, LGTBQ+ education, and actual black history.

And I'm sure that the Republicans will continue to banish clean energy as best they can, but fortunately, that's a non-starter for many if not most these days. From Where Did the Carter White House's Solar Panels Go?

"By 1986, the Reagan administration had gutted the research and development budgets for renewable energy at the then-fledgling U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) and eliminated tax breaks for the deployment of wind turbines and solar technologies—recommitting the nation to reliance on cheap but polluting fossil fuels, often from foreign suppliers ... And in 1986 the Reagan administration quietly dismantled the White House solar panel installation while resurfacing the roof."
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
No. It's to show EVs are not as safe and clean as people make it out to be .

Plus they are just as environmentally dirty and hazardous as any fossil fuel hazard. Not just by spontaneously exploding and putting toxic smoke into the atmosphere for days, but by the same accusation that fossil is accused of, the mining of materials used in its production that destroys land and environments.
The difference is they contribute far less to atmospheric CO2. That is by far the most important consideration.

Trying to mix that up with environmental pollution issues is a typical ploy by climate change deniers.
 
Top