| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 150976 | 2022-11-02 20:00:00 | More On E.V. Fires | zqwerty (97) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1489208 | 2022-11-04 23:40:00 | Thanks Helen, doesn't make one feel good about buying electric! Ken |
kenj (9738) | ||
| 1489209 | 2022-11-05 00:01:00 | With climates changing and more storms and floods likely, it doesn't give EVs a good look. I'd like to know why the battery packs are apparently not waterproof. On a car. A thing that often gets wet. |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 1489210 | 2022-11-05 07:49:00 | With climates changing and more storms and floods likely, it doesn't give EVs a good look. I'd like to know why the battery packs are apparently not waterproof. On a car. A thing that often gets wet. Responding to your query - "Why aren't petrol tanks fireproof. ?!!??" First- to quote (well, VERY roughly) a newspaper correspondent (LTTE) of the early 1900's in Takapuna stated; "A horse will strive to avoid persons; a motor car on the other hand delights in macerating pedestrians. Should a horse and cart run down a hill, the usual result would be a scared but largely unharmed horse, an unharmed driver and an - at worst - grazed wagon. Should an infernal motor car carrying perhaps 4 gallons!! of benzine run away down a hill with no horse to slow it, the resulting explosion would be worse than an exploding 25 Lb artillery shell." Or words to that effect. [His tests to establish this must have ripped the crap out of his front lawn.] Obviously, these horseless carriages have to be strictly controlled - urgently.;) Meanwhile, real alarm is being generated by the above reports of electro-mayhem on the nations highways and byways. Internal explosion vehicle advocates demand action - - PDQ ! Given that the ratio of EV fires to ICE fires is around 25 to 1,253.724 (see ratio of vehicle fires per 100,00 vehicle sales) it is obvious that extrapolating this accident rate out just a few years indicates at the very least we could expect a severely singed EV drivers' moustache before 2030. Maybe even earlier if we include males in the results. This solitary mother-in law with smouldering upper lip adornments could irresponsibly divert emergency crews from 15.324 (or more) of the carbonised dinosaur juice combusting CO2 generators. Given that possibly 257 of these internally (usually) combusting time bombs reach critical mass in any X-ish hour time frame, we need every available ambulance and fire appliance on hot readiness for the inevitable ICE infernos. Obviously, it is absolutely irresponsible to allow even a solitary EV to further stretch our hard pressed first responders to be diverted from their hydrocarbon illumination eventuality mitigation. Besides, there isn't yet a single Who-aye word for EV, so officially they don't woke'ly exist. BAN EM! PS: Any vehicle category that predominantly catches fire only when immersed in flood waters is obviously going to earn a "When will you others learn to do that?" admonition for non-conformists from the fire underwriters benevolent fund. If only EVs could swiftly,silently and invariably detonate cyclists, they'd be perfect. The odd spontaneously conflagrating politician in their wake would not harm the case for EVs either. Obviously in matters of of elimination, E-Cycles should be treated with absolute equality to sweat fired, lycra wrapped, cyclo-pests. The recovered parts however are obviously of some value, completely against old-style traditions of "Cyclists? - hosing 'em off the road is a waste of water, let the gulls shift 'em" policy that has served us so well for the last 12 decades or so. For those who think I detest most forms of transport, I should point out that I have no objection to emission-captured horses, except those with a biped or several aloft or astern. Ban those. ;) |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 1489211 | 2022-11-06 03:50:00 | Interesting. I'd previously seen videos of Teslas running (floating, but powered like a paddle steamer) through flood waters and coming out fine (although the longer term results were never known. I wonder if the less flamable LFP cells suffer as badly with salt? The cars in the video and images were the older models prior to Tesla using LFP (the silver window trim being the givaway. It's black trim on the newer models). |
Paul.Cov (425) | ||
| 1489212 | 2022-11-06 04:23:00 | I don't think cars in general are designed to survive submersion in salt water, it's not exactly the same as "getting wet". Bit of a worry when they catch fire though. | dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1489213 | 2022-11-06 05:27:00 | I don't think cars in general are designed to survive submersion in salt water, it's not exactly the same as "getting wet". Bit of a worry when they catch fire though. Maybe not, but they should probably be designed so that if they do, they don't go up in flames a month later. I would have thought the battery packs should be sealed against water ingress. In the case of driving through a deep puddle you could get water into the battery if it's not well sealed. This could happen in coastal areas too. So it should be a thing, especially if salt water causes them to spontaneously combust... |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 1489214 | 2022-11-08 05:59:00 | I've now got a vague recollection about seeing something a year or so ago about older Teslas with some sort of drain or condensation device running from some part of the car (maybe the passenger compartment) and venting onto the battery compartment lid, which in turn was causing spots of corrosion in the lid, and consequently water getting into the battery. It might have been a Gruber Motors vid on Youtube. They do lots of battery repairs on old Teslas, and have had their building burnt to the ground (along with millions of dollars worth of original, classic roadsters) on more than one occasion. Anyway, hopefully something they've long since addressed for their more recent products. |
Paul.Cov (425) | ||
| 1489215 | 2022-11-08 06:02:00 | If you are saying that their building was burnt down more than once by Tesla batteries, Then why on earth don't they have a separate building for battery repair!? |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 1489216 | 2022-11-09 01:54:00 | If you are saying that their building was burnt down more than once by Tesla batteries, Then why on earth don't they have a separate building for battery repair!? I've never heard of the true causes of the fires, but based on their videos they do a lot of repairs on the older Tesla batteries (repairs being electrically isolating any batteries with an internal drain (partial short)(ie snip away the wire to the positive terminal). The batteries are difficult to physically replace on an individual basis. I suspect battery repair is now their entire business. It would be hoped though that they quite literally have installed firewalls between vehicles that they have in storage. If not, then they and their insurers are slow learners. |
Paul.Cov (425) | ||
| 1489217 | 2022-11-09 03:06:00 | they do a lot of repairs on the older Tesla batteries (repairs being electrically isolating any batteries with an internal drain (partial short)(ie snip away the wire to the positive terminal). The batteries are difficult to physically replace on an individual basis. Ahh yes, those EV batteries that are so environmentally friendly you can't repair them. Just mine more lithium and get a new battery. We all know mining is really good for the environment. Nobody sees the problem here? |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||