In reply to Keith Tanner :
My Director said his Tesla was overcharged. What does that mean?
In reply to Keith Tanner :
My Director said his Tesla was overcharged. What does that mean?
Not sure! Normally, you set their max charge to 80% for daily use for best battery life. But you can set it to 100% for road trips. Maybe that's what he meant?
Looks like there's another EV manufacturer warning people not to park their cars indoors because they might catch fire when they're turned off:
"Ford urges some of its SUVs to be parked outside over fire risks - ABC News"
Oh, those aren't EVs....
wae said:Looks like there's another EV manufacturer warning people not to park their cars indoors because they might catch fire when they're turned off:
"Ford urges some of its SUVs to be parked outside over fire risks - ABC News"
Oh, those aren't EVs....
WSJ says 16 fires out of 39K vehicles. The Bolt, if I remember correctly, before the battery recall, was 6 out of 80K.
Yup, I think I am going to be just fine.
Incidentally, Tunakid #2 just started a volunteer position at an aquarium in Hendersonville. It's not a super long drive, 90 miles round trip, but a 1300 foot elevation change. Tunawife takes him up there on Saturdays. She had to pay for parking anyway. There is a lot which charges a few dollars to park (same as all of the others) but has a free charger. She got home with ten fewer miles than she left, even though the Bolt doesn't have fast charging. Elevation works in our favor there.
racerfink said:The Pinto's problem was the gas tanks were punctured by the bumper when hit from the rear.
in every case of ICE cars being recalled for fires that I know of, it was electrical issues that caused them, not the gasoline.
As for fire departments and EV's, the problem lies in the MASSIVE amount of water it takes to put out a battery fire. About 28,000 gals compared to less than 500 for an ICE car. Also, if you get in a wreck in your EV, the fire department has to have special equipment to make sure your vehicle is not a shock hazard. So what happens when you either try to step out of your car, or a good samaritan approaches your car shortly after an accident?
I hear Tesla is using cheaper, shorter range batteries in some cars now because of the cost of Lithium.
All that water is going to total the vehicle regardless, why not just use sand and suffocate the fire? It's cheap, it's abundant, a dump truck is cheaper than a fire truck. Good enough for a magnesium or thermite fire which burn so hot they catch water on fire.
I do think that emergency response is going to be a bigger hurdle than charging, and probably deserves a lot more attention than its getting.
It would be interesting to hear Woody's comments on that. I know that Telsas have a pyrotechnic fuse to disable the high voltage battery in the event of an accident and there's a big labeled wire that you can cut to kill the car. Not sure what happens if the battery pack is compromised, though. Probably nothing good.
The only source I've seen it is in Sandy Munroe videos, but a teardown of the Plaid battery shows their current fire mitigation; they have these little pyro-plugs along the battery pack and are further insulating the individual packs from the others, so you'll have essentially a firewall between each line of boxes, that then are stacked side-to-side. The goal Sandy thought, was to mitigate and control potential fire by keeping oxygen from getting into compromised cells to allow them to oxidize. I think the plugs can open normally to let out moisture, then clamp shut when they see high (150F) temperatures?
Otherwise? They need literally tens of thousands of gallons of water to put out because no firetruck carries sand to strangle the oxidization process. Assuming EV really takes off, fire departments will need some kind of oxygen displacement system to accurately control these fires.
It's part of why I also hope that Lithium-iron Phosphates REALLY take off, far above even what China mandates. They aren't "fire-proof", but you really have to WORK to get the damn things to go up in a blaze because of that iron group; they also now, live over 2.5 times longer than lithium-ions (and when there are 2012 Model S's with over 600,000 miles on OG battery packs, that means you're coming out ahead in emissions massively) and their discharge rates are far higher; if it wasn't for that iron grouping adding weight, we'd probably see them on EV drag cars.
I believe one of the current methods of dealing with a burning EV is to simply drop it into a dumpster full of water.
Here's an interesting report about vehicle fires. ICE vehicles are far, far more likely to set themselves on fire without an accident than as part of one. On page 9, it says that fires due to collision were only 5% of the total. A fuel fire starting underhood is a lot more likely. High pressure flammable fluid being pumped around in aging rubber lines is a problem.
https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v19i2.pdf
Tesla is putting the LFP batteries in about a quarter of their production right now, mostly in China but I think they're in "employee only" standard range 3s in the US. Their lower energy density is probably the biggest problem right now.
It would be interesting to know what the number of fires (per x cars) of Tesla's fleet is versus the national average. Tesla specifically because they're the only significant pure EV manufacturer, so you've got a decent sample size. They also haven't had a known defect like the LG batteries in the Bolts, which might skew the numbers.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
In my opinion the risk of fire is, can you get out? If so let it burn. Then get a new one. This is my Chevy Blazer. 
There's another point that Frenchy reminded me of- cars that have been on fire typically can't be saved without major structural repair, because said fuel fires go hot and fast so quickly they'll remove heat treatments. If that fire is consuming plastic and oil in the engine bay, even if it's controlled quickly it can be only 20-30 seconds before it warms the surrounding areas to their ignition point. It's been some time since my fire classes, but I remember most car fires are complete losses for that reason alone.
I would assume that any vehicle on fire is done unless it has on-board fire suppression. It's more the things in the vicinity of the fire that would concern me.
I'd love to see real numbers on the frequency of EV fires compared to ICE. I suspect they're no worse and possibly better.
In reply to preach (dudeist priest) :
CA Has An EV Grid Problem
That reminds me, it's more than just EV's. There is a big push to eliminate natural gas, which currently supplies a lot of our energy. Some cities are not allowing natural gas in new construction, with more to follow. That means the electrical grid will need to take up the slack.
I got involved in an interesting project this week. It's a micro grid, a small community within a city that is being disconnected from the grid and run off solar and battery. All of the gas appliances are being converted to electric. The service sizes are being doubled, and non critical loads are going to be fed with smart breakers that will shut circuits if the batteries are low.
GIRTHQUAKE said:There's another point that Frenchy reminded me of- cars that have been on fire typically can't be saved without major structural repair, because said fuel fires go hot and fast so quickly they'll remove heat treatments. If that fire is consuming plastic and oil in the engine bay, even if it's controlled quickly it can be only 20-30 seconds before it warms the surrounding areas to their ignition point. It's been some time since my fire classes, but I remember most car fires are complete losses for that reason alone.
Well I look for engine fires in Jaguars. Because the engine was running fine up to the point of fire. Then as long as the hood isn't lifted the fire will go out before damage is done to the engine. ( other than superficial ignition and fuel lines). Yeh the rest of the car may be scrap metal. But those can be purchased for less than scrap metal prices.
This may end up being the dump for preach's EV thoughts and info, but I am ok with that.
If you are going to post something as a comparison there should at least be some balance to it.
Notice they talk about daily depreciation of the Tesla but no such depreciation of price comparable ICE's such as Jaguar, BMW, Mercedes Benz?
They talk about battery replacement but no such discussion of the cost of engine or transmission replacement.
Well, just take that article with a grain of salt.
Here's the way I look at those things. I buy a new vehicle and maintain it by the dealer to the schedule. In return I get 20 years, 400,000 miles out of it and 100% depreciation.
Gas is more expensive than free sunshine or wind. Plus I can't own a well and refinery.
Everything with a grain of salt.
I have never had to replace an engine or transmission at 80-100k though.
Initial purchase price, quick charge at home, batteries, all else.
Fortunately we are still somewhat watching a fledgling as it grows.
This story came to me this am Seattle intstalling road side charging by request https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1135966_seattle-is-installing-curbside-ev-charging-by-request-for-those-without-off-street-parking
In reply to preach (dudeist priest) :
In all likelihood the original batteries will last the life of a EV car. Just like the engine and Trans will last the life of a ICE.
All bet's are off on used though either ICE or EV. When you buy used, you take the gamble on how the previous owner used and maintained it.
"Californians Told Not to Charge Electric Cars Days After Gas Car Sales Ban
Californians may need to take measures to conserve energy, including by avoiding charging electric vehicles, to prevent strain to the state's power grid over the Labor Day weekend, officials said"
Just hit the news on newsweek and elsewhere.
Not linking the article because it gets political.
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
What circuits are considered non critical and who decides?
After the problems with TX grid in the last couple years, me and the wife are trying to be as self sufficient as we can. Gas company said they can turn my gas off, electric company says they can turn my electricity off, and water company says they can turn my water off.
I can't make my own gas, but i can get my own water and electricity
In reply to Opti :
"The California Independent System Operator said it issued an order restricting maintenance operations from August 31 through September 6 to ensure that all generators and transmission lines are in service.
In a news release, the California ISO said it expects that it will issue calls for voluntary conservation of electricity through Flex alerts over the long weekend."
The biggest reason seems to be a heat wave this week. ACs, the large amount of EVs out there, etc.
PG&E, the gas and electric company out there has been fined for their overloaded power lines starting rather large fires. Brownouts as well.
Edited: Forgot half of the quote.
The power grid is at least 30 years or more neglected and the current plan is to amputate more plants and put band aids on the resulting wound. I'm getting popcorn and beer ready to watch. I will be out of the energy and power industry soon enough. By the time I retire, it'll be far worse. No one is actually serious about fixing this issue. And the decision makers couldn't turn a pile of wood, lighter fluid and matches into a fire.
It's supposed to be rather hot here until Monday. There are continual calls to reduce power use during the day (when you use the AC, which is the biggest draw). There is a state wide Flex Alert currently. Essentially the same as above, reduce use between 4pm and 9pm.
The governor has already gone against the master plan by re-upping the Diablo canyon nuke plant for 7 more years (it was supposed to be shut down) and extended the life of natural gas plants (those are supposed to be shut down also eventually). It's seems the "all renewable" plan goes entirely against reality, at least for now. Which doesn't exactly inspire confidence in their planning a ability.
https://www.independent.com/2022/07/13/diablo-canyons-new-lease-on-life/
Giving the 40-year-old reactors a new lease has been a concerted push by a notably bipartisan mix of national energy experts and politicians who contend the loss of Diablo Canyon — which produces 9 percent of California’s energy supply — will inflict even greater energy reliability questions for a state already plagued by rolling brownouts and blackouts. In addition, they’ve noted, Diablo Canyon provides carbon-free energy to no fewer than three million people.
Even with a raft of heavy-hitting renewable projects now in the pipeline, state energy experts are projecting a major gap in reliable supply by the year 2025. The size of that gap, not coincidentally, is roughly identical to the amount of energy produced at Diablo Canyon. Given the immediacy of the threat posed by climate change, they argue, the carbon-free energy produced by Diablo Canyon can no longer be discarded. When those renewable energy projects come online, they say, Diablo Canyon can then be shut down.
https://www.eenews.net/articles/calif-gives-new-life-to-gas-plants-in-emergency-overhaul/
California Gov. () signed a controversial measure yesterday that would delay the closure of natural gas plants and expedite energy generation projects in an effort to avoid blackouts over the next five summers.
Of course, even the grand plan is likely to run into some pretty typical CA issues
While the group wants to see renewable energy projects built, such projects can significantly impact the local environment and endangered species, Brendan Cummings, CBD’s conservation director, said in an interview.
In reply to Opti :
What circuits are considered non critical and who decides?
After the problems with TX grid in the last couple years, me and the wife are trying to be as self sufficient as we can. Gas company said they can turn my gas off, electric company says they can turn my electricity off, and water company says they can turn my water off.
I can't make my own gas, but i can get my own water and electricity
I haven't seen any plans, but I'm assuming they will keep refrigerators and lighting and a dedicated receptacle or two powered and everything else is fair game. I used this as an example of the difficulties/sacrifices that may be required to move away from traditional power sources.
You'll need to log in to post.
