Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

orrery

Magnitio said:

orrery said:

 They'll move towards a place where they are just another US-built car - and they have a generally poor reputation in the European marketplace.

Tesla currently build more vehicles in China and Germany than they do in USA.

The comment still applies - I'd guess that the vehicle will (essentially) be identical in each case and the quality is mainly constrained by the design. No-one in the UK quibbles about where their Nissan or Toyota is assembled - it's still a Japanese car, with the reputation for reliability.

Grumpy_chap

Latest news that EVs are bad for your health      
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c90zjne2v0jo

Or just the most amazing piece of FUD ever...
   

JKenH

Lies, damned lies and statistics

There are numerous sources of statistics which will support almost any argument one cares to make. 

I found this link which includes a variety of fire statistics for EVs and ICEVs - often contradictory. 

I was intrigued by these Tesla statistics (some of which as I mentioned above appear contradictory):

Tesla Car Fires 

• 218 Tesla car fires were confirmed from 2013 to February 2024. 
• The risk of a Tesla car catching fire in 2024 is 0.8%.
• 35 fire-related incidents involving a Tesla car were reported globally in 2023.
• 80 people lost their lives in Tesla car fire accidents. 
• From 2016 to 2019, only five Tesla cars caught fire per billion miles travelled. 
• One Tesla vehicle was involved in a fire accident per 210 miles travelled from 2011 to 2021.

And also quite surprised by these statistics for 5he UK:

EV fires vs ICE fires in the UK

• 735 EV car fires occurred in the UK between 2017 and 2022. 
• 18,991 road car fires occurred in the UK in 2022. Most incidents involved an ICE or a hybrid vehicle. 
• 239 EV fire incidents were reported in 2022, but the data includes passenger EVs, e-bikes, e-scooters, electric motorbikes, and other types of electric vehicles. 
• In 2020, the incident rate for plug-in vehicles in the UK was 0.1%, while the incident rate for gas and diesel ICE vehicles was 0.04%.

https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/the-latest-car-fire-statistics/

I’m not taking sides in this, merely pointing out that there are statistics supporting both sides of the argument and which one chooses to believe will most probably depend on one’s own particular bias. 

michaels

JKenH said:

Lies, damned lies and statistics

There are numerous sources of statistics which will support almost any argument one cares to make. 

I found this link which includes a variety of fire statistics for EVs and ICEVs - often contradictory. 

I was intrigued by these Tesla statistics (some of which as I mentioned above appear contradictory):

Tesla Car Fires 

• 218 Tesla car fires were confirmed from 2013 to February 2024. 
• The risk of a Tesla car catching fire in 2024 is 0.8%.
• 35 fire-related incidents involving a Tesla car were reported globally in 2023.
• 80 people lost their lives in Tesla car fire accidents. 
• From 2016 to 2019, only five Tesla cars caught fire per billion miles travelled. 

• One Tesla vehicle was involved in a fire accident per 210 miles travelled from 2011 to 2021.

And also quite surprised by these statistics for 5he UK:

EV fires vs ICE fires in the UK

• 735 EV car fires occurred in the UK between 2017 and 2022. 
• 18,991 road car fires occurred in the UK in 2022. Most incidents involved an ICE or a hybrid vehicle. 
• 239 EV fire incidents were reported in 2022, but the data includes passenger EVs, e-bikes, e-scooters, electric motorbikes, and other types of electric vehicles. 
• In 2020, the incident rate for plug-in vehicles in the UK was 0.1%, while the incident rate for gas and diesel ICE vehicles was 0.04%.

https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/the-latest-car-fire-statistics/

I’m not taking sides in this, merely pointing out that there are statistics supporting both sides of the argument and which one chooses to believe will most probably depend on one’s own particular bias. 

No wonder the insurance premiums are so high....

Magnitio

JKenH said:

Lies, damned lies and statistics

There are numerous sources of statistics which will support almost any argument one cares to make. 

I found this link which includes a variety of fire statistics for EVs and ICEVs - often contradictory. 

I was intrigued by these Tesla statistics (some of which as I mentioned above appear contradictory):

Tesla Car Fires 

• 218 Tesla car fires were confirmed from 2013 to February 2024. 
• The risk of a Tesla car catching fire in 2024 is 0.8%.
• 35 fire-related incidents involving a Tesla car were reported globally in 2023.
• 80 people lost their lives in Tesla car fire accidents. 
• From 2016 to 2019, only five Tesla cars caught fire per billion miles travelled. 
• One Tesla vehicle was involved in a fire accident per 210 miles travelled from 2011 to 2021.

And also quite surprised by these statistics for 5he UK:

EV fires vs ICE fires in the UK

• 735 EV car fires occurred in the UK between 2017 and 2022. 
• 18,991 road car fires occurred in the UK in 2022. Most incidents involved an ICE or a hybrid vehicle. 
• 239 EV fire incidents were reported in 2022, but the data includes passenger EVs, e-bikes, e-scooters, electric motorbikes, and other types of electric vehicles. 
• In 2020, the incident rate for plug-in vehicles in the UK was 0.1%, while the incident rate for gas and diesel ICE vehicles was 0.04%.

https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/the-latest-car-fire-statistics/

I’m not taking sides in this, merely pointing out that there are statistics supporting both sides of the argument and which one chooses to believe will most probably depend on one’s own particular bias. 

When you say that some of the statistics appear contradictory, then why quote them? It looks like a mix of real statistics with made-up data.

If the risk of a Tesla catching fire in 2024 is 0.8%, then with about 5 million Teslas that would equate to about 40,000 fires. If that was the case, I could understand them being recalled/banned.

"One Tesla vehicle was involved in a fire accident per 210 miles travelled from 2011 to 2021." Really? What is this supposed to mean?

Then it quotes figures for UK that involve scooters and bikes. This will include those cheap imported scooters that do catch fire on a regular basis.

Were you trying to make the point that there are lots of useless and misleading statistics on the internet?

For more useful EV fire data look at https://www.evfiresafe.com/

JKenH

Magnitio said:

JKenH said:

Lies, damned lies and statistics

There are numerous sources of statistics which will support almost any argument one cares to make. 

I found this link which includes a variety of fire statistics for EVs and ICEVs - often contradictory. 

I was intrigued by these Tesla statistics (some of which as I mentioned above appear contradictory):

Tesla Car Fires 

• 218 Tesla car fires were confirmed from 2013 to February 2024. 
• The risk of a Tesla car catching fire in 2024 is 0.8%.
• 35 fire-related incidents involving a Tesla car were reported globally in 2023.
• 80 people lost their lives in Tesla car fire accidents. 
• From 2016 to 2019, only five Tesla cars caught fire per billion miles travelled. 
• One Tesla vehicle was involved in a fire accident per 210 miles travelled from 2011 to 2021.

And also quite surprised by these statistics for 5he UK:

EV fires vs ICE fires in the UK

• 735 EV car fires occurred in the UK between 2017 and 2022. 
• 18,991 road car fires occurred in the UK in 2022. Most incidents involved an ICE or a hybrid vehicle. 
• 239 EV fire incidents were reported in 2022, but the data includes passenger EVs, e-bikes, e-scooters, electric motorbikes, and other types of electric vehicles. 
• In 2020, the incident rate for plug-in vehicles in the UK was 0.1%, while the incident rate for gas and diesel ICE vehicles was 0.04%.

https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/the-latest-car-fire-statistics/

I’m not taking sides in this, merely pointing out that there are statistics supporting both sides of the argument and which one chooses to believe will most probably depend on one’s own particular bias. 

You say that you are not taking sides and then only post some of the statistics from this web page. For example, on the same page from honestjohn was the following:

"According to the SAE International paper, a fossil fuel vehicle catches fire every 26 million miles travelled, while the same report indicates that EVs catch fire after 120 million miles travelled."

Also, some of the data inclues e-bikes and e-scooters which have had fire issues with some cheap, unregulated imports.

So, pretty meaningless. More useful data here:

https://www.evfiresafe.com/_files/ugd/8b9ad1_01aa449ee5074086a55cb42aa7603f40.pdf

I have not suggested that EV fires are either less or more likely than ICE fires - I posted an article with a variety of sources and statistics to demonstrate that there is much uncertainty about EV fires. Anyone responsible for safety needs to look at all arguments. The statistics overall tend to indicate across the car fleet that fires are more likely to occur in an ICEV than an EV.

If you want to believe your “more useful data” that between 2010 and 2023 there have only been 488 EV fires globally then that’s fine by me. Your preference for the statistics in that particular report don’t impact me or anyone else. Others charged with safety and risk assessments will no doubt want to take on board reports and statistics from a wider range of sources - and err on the side of caution.


There are many considerations for assessing fire safety and risk beyond the raw statistics. Any car can catch fire so to be safe why not ban all cars from car parks? That would be disproportionate but why single out EVs when some statistics suggest they are less likely to catch fire?

Perhaps, EVs are more likely to catch fire when unattended, particularly when charging? Is an EV fire more intense? Is the risk of fire spreading increased when an EV catches fire (even if the fire doesn’t start in the EV)? Can an EV fire be as easily extinguished as a petrol fire? Would a sprinkler system control the spread of fire?

There certainly appears to be a perception among fire fighters that the nature of EV fires presents particular risks and challenges and there may actually be a genuine reason why insurers and risk managers choose to discriminate against them - not just because they read the Daily Mail. So, perhaps we might see more widespread bans on EVs parking in, say, enclosed car parks coming into force in the future.

Magnitio

JKenH said:

If you want to believe your “more useful data” that between 2010 and 2023 there have only been 488 EV fires globally then that’s fine by me. Your preference for the statistics in that particular report don’t impact me or anyone else. Others charged with safety and risk assessments will no doubt want to take on board reports and statistics from a wider range of sources - and err on the side of caution.

I provided a link to an organisation whose sole responsibility is to research EV fires. You might find more useful information on their website than some random data on honestjohn that even by your own admission can be contradictory.

JKenH

I agree there is a lot of useful information on their website but that does not make them experts on global EV fire statistics. I may be proved wrong but only 488 EV fires globally over a period of 14 years seems a bit unlikely. They may be experts on fighting fires, just as Tesla may be expert at building cars that catch fire, but neither is uniquely qualified to pronounce on worldwide statistics. 

The HonestJohn article provided a wide range of statistics, many contradictory as we have established, demonstrating that there is little certainty about the incidence of EV fires, one way or the other. A lot more research needs to be done by organisations that don’t have a vested interest in promoting one technology or another - such as the fire services. 

EVFireSafe on their website also look to be keen to promote EVs as well as advise organisations how to fight fires that, in their words, rarely occur. 

Transport using internal combustion engines (ICE) accounts for more than 25% of global greenhouse gas emissions, making personal & commercial travel a major contributor to global warming. 

Electric vehicles have a lower carbon footprint, are easy to charge at home, simple to drive, require less servicing & have no tailpipe emissions. This is particularly important for cleaner air in our communities & places where children live, learn & play.

https://www.evfiresafe.com/electric-vehicles

In essence, EV FireSafe’s approach is to grow their business by promoting the environmental merits of EVs as opposed to ICE vehicles and playing down the risk of EVs catching fire but when they do we can show you how to deal with it. It’s not that different to if the  private medical industry were to understate the risks of smoking then offer their services when you get ill.

Grumpy_chap

Magnitio said:

"One Tesla vehicle was involved in a fire accident per 210 miles travelled from 2011 to 2021." Really? What is this supposed to mean?

Clearly, that issue has been resolved since 2021.
This week, I did the normal commute to the office at the start of the week, 100 miles round-trip.
Then I travelled away for work and back, 300 miles round trip and did not catch fire once.
Then, I did a 180- mile round trip the following day and, again, still did not catch fire.

JKenH

Grumpy_chap said:

Magnitio said:

"One Tesla vehicle was involved in a fire accident per 210 miles travelled from 2011 to 2021." Really? What is this supposed to mean?

Clearly, that issue has been resolved since 2021.
This week, I did the normal commute to the office at the start of the week, 100 miles round-trip.
Then I travelled away for work and back, 300 miles round trip and did not catch fire once.
Then, I did a 180- mile round trip the following day and, again, still did not catch fire.

I think the problem here is you are choosing to dwell on one (an extreme one) out of the many statistics quoted in the Honest John article when the whole point of me linking the article was to demonstrate the wide range of statistics quoted both pro and anti EV. You are then applying your personal experience to make the argument that as it hasn’t happened to you that statistic must be rubbish. I could just as easily make the argument that my grandad smoked 20 cigarettes a day and lived to be 80 so any report that says smoking causes cancer must be rubbish.

The problem for authorities assessing the risk of EV fires is not their incidence but the problems they pose in extinguishment. Look at it that way and there may be some merit in playing it safe. I’m not sure if this has happened yet but I think some regulations are coming out that domestic batteries should not be fitted in certain areas. Is this scaremongering as well?

edit: I am guessing your comment was tongue in cheek