LewTwo
1 MW
Worth noting another trend ...
This is from a low subscriber channel and the video itself has few views. The Luton fire was started by a diesel fuel car fire. There's actual video of it. It seems reasonable to assume that the non-EV cars in the Luton car park had a bit less than half a tank of fuel. That's mostly what was burning. Based on the evidence, this massive fire has nothing to do with EVs.Worth noting another trend ...
Putting it all together, it seems likely to me that this is a small channel trying to get attention via hyperbole. And when I look at the channel's thumbnails and headlines, what do I see?
Sure. Just the way the Luton fire was described was enough set of the BS detector. But the closer look also shows there's an agenda.I didn't have to check out the video or anything else to know it's horse puckey. All you have to know is that anyone wailing about EV fires without noting that gasoline cars are an orders of magnitude bigger problem, is lying to you.
Oh dear. You brought up the AutoInsuranceEZ-funded study, which is the only one out there with this statistic, and therefore gets cited in dozens of other "articles." That's like a bat signal for @Hillhater. Guess I'll have to keep an eye on this thread for when it gets out of hand...![]()
The fire rate of electric vehicles is 61 times lower than that of gasoline vehicles - VinFast Global Community
Only 25 out of 100,000 all-electric vehicles are likely to catch fire, compared to more than 1,500 gasoline vehicles and nearly 3,500 hybrid vehicles,community.vinfastauto.us
2011 Ford Ranger short wheel base about 17 gallons.Matt 23:24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
Y'all get back to me about this important issue when your stinking pickup trucks don't carry 40 gallons of gasoline with them. M'kay?
Full size EV batteries are just like e-bikes, but more cells, dude.What a disproportionately overblown propaganda video. It opens with the Luton airport fire which was determined to be caused by an electrical fault in a diesel vehicle. Doesn't stop the narrator from suggesting:
"Initially the fire that ravaged the car park was attributed to a diesel vehicle. However, as more evidence came to light, it became apparent that the real culprit might have been an electric vehicle. Video footage from the scene revealed signs that strongly suggest the fire originated from a battery, likely from an EV." Notice the narrator never flat out says it was definitely caused by an EV, just suggests it and lets the viewer come to the conclusion that the narrator wants them to.
Then moves to a fire at a golf club, caused by golf cart batteries, rather than full-sized EV batteries.
Then discusses one, only one hospital group in Australia asking employees not to charge their EVs on site. Despite still allowing it for EVs leased by their own company, according to two different sources.
The video is conveniently coming in right around the 10-minute mark, which is of course the cutoff for optimized YouTube monetization. What a coincidence.
I don't like the proliferation of massive EVs either, but that's cuz they're cars, which I think we should need less of in general, regardless of what powers them. Obviously biased propaganda like this shouldn't be given a wider audience.
Not sure what point you're trying to make/clarify?Full size EV batteries are just like e-bikes, but more cells, dude.
That's a lot of moving parts and weight.
Sure. But is this video evidence of that or just evidence of some people's strong bias against EVs?Clarification:
The reason that I posted this to be begin with was not the authors claims about the dangers of Lithium batteries but rather the trend of some places banning electric vehicles. That is something that we need to keep aware of.
Trend? The video mentioned one place, with exceptions for higher ups and their personal cars which were still allowed to be charged. If there is a trend of banning EV charging, I feel like that would indeed be worthy of a discussion. But one overblown video about one incident doesn't make a "trend."batteries but rather the trend of some places banning electric vehicles.
Tl;dr is that there's way too many variables to make a definitive claim about what kind of car catches fire more often than the other.
Can't argue with that logic!Not at all! The cars that catch on fire are 100% more likely to catch on fire than the cars that don't.
Have you ever met a politician ?Can't argue with that logic!
There's another source of logic (or lack thereof) that I can't argue withHave you ever met a politician ?