The future is dense, walkable cities.

[ll74]

I am sure I do far better than you since I spent 40 years as a firefighter with a degree in Fire Protection.

I'm sure you will claim I am lying. Who the fuck cares whether you believe me or not?

Lol.

What is the chance that a battery will catch fire in an accident, firefighter, specifically?

And what is the risk of an EV over a regular automobile?

 

[TrailerHitch]

A good % of the population are as wedded to their cars as much as their guns. Improvements and progressive new energy/transport systems need to be developed and their efficacy clearly demonstrated.

Replacing personally owned ICE vehicles with electric vehicles only works in tightly packed, high density, urban areas. The technology isn't even close for electric vehicles to replace tractors, combines, or semis that operate sometimes around the clock for weeks on end. Those of us that live in the rural understand the trade off of extended travel to shop and more. We accept it as part of a life that doesn't include crowding, noise, and rampant crime.

 

[stxjimmy]

Replacing personally owned ICE vehicles with electric vehicles only works in tightly packed, high density, urban areas. The technology isn't even close for electric vehicles to replace tractors, combines, or semis that operate sometimes around the clock for weeks on end. Those of us that live in the rural understand the trade off of extended travel to shop and more. We accept it as part of a life that doesn't include crowding, noise, and rampant crime.

Some of that may be true, but it’s the investigation of new alternative systems and technologies that is the future. And a large part of that is the acceptance of the need to change.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Replacing personally owned ICE vehicles with electric vehicles only works in tightly packed, high density, urban areas.

Not true. I looked at a Lighting, prior to getting the Rav Hybrid. My brother in law did get a Lighting. It has a 600Km range. He to lives in the country.

The technology isn't even close for electric vehicles to replace tractors, combines, or semis that operate sometimes around the clock for weeks on end.

There is no need to convert them, IMHO. The best bang for the buck is to swap out the "four wheelers" for EV's. Or better to Hydrogen.

Those of us that live in the rural understand the trade off of extended travel to shop and more. We accept it as part of a life that doesn't include crowding, noise, and rampant crime.

I live way more rural than you, and not for any of the reasons you promote. I have Hybrids and they full fill my needs as well as an ICE does.
I also didn't move to one to save the environment, but to reduce the need buy a product that has a limited supply.

 

[TrailerHitch]

Lol.

What is the chance that a battery will catch fire in an accident, firefighter, specifically?

And what is the risk of an EV over a regular automobile?

This proves how little you know. The average ICE car fire can be extinguished with less than 500 gallons of water. The average EV takes between 4000 and 10,000 gallons of water. A lithium battery fire creates its own oxygen so once it ignites it is self sustaining. The batteries are encased and under the vehicle making it virtually impossible to attack the fire directly. Others have asked me about using a Dry Powder extinguisher for metals fires, great idea IF you could actually access the battery fire. There have been cases of EVs being totally submerged for hours and when removed from the water they reignited. Add to that the increased toxicity of the smoke and the increased toxicity of the runoff from firefighting. Honestly the better idea is to let the car burn up. But that is not deemed acceptable, especially if there are exposures that may also burn.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

This proves how little you know. The average ICE car fire can be extinguished with less than 500 gallons of water. The average EV takes between 4000 and 10,000 gallons of water. A lithium battery fire creates its own oxygen so once it ignites it is self sustaining. The batteries are encased and under the vehicle making it virtually impossible to attack the fire directly. Others have asked me about using a Dry Powder extinguisher for metals fires, great idea IF you could actually access the battery fire. There have been cases of EVs being totally submerged for hours and when removed from the water they reignited. Add to that the increased toxicity of the smoke and the increased toxicity of the runoff from firefighting. Honestly the better idea is to let the car burn up. But that is not deemed acceptable, especially if there are exposures that may also burn.

That is why you use a "blanket" not water for a chemical fire on a vehicle.

 

[ll74]

This proves how little you know. The average ICE car fire can be extinguished with less than 500 gallons of water. The average EV takes between 4000 and 10,000 gallons of water. A lithium battery fire creates its own oxygen so once it ignites it is self sustaining. The batteries are encased and under the vehicle making it virtually impossible to attack the fire directly. Others have asked me about using a Dry Powder extinguisher for metals fires, great idea IF you could actually access the battery fire. There have been cases of EVs being totally submerged for hours and when removed from the water they reignited. Add to that the increased toxicity of the smoke and the increased toxicity of the runoff from firefighting. Honestly the better idea is to let the car burn up. But that is not deemed acceptable, especially if there are exposures that may also burn.

Shocker
.....you didn't answer the questions.

 

[TrailerHitch]

Some of that may be true, but it’s the investigation of new alternative systems and technologies that is the future. And a large part of that is the acceptance of the need to change.

As soon as they can create an EV that can operate at the same capacity, mileage or continuous hours usage of an ICE, then I may be interested. Until then ICE powered vehicles and machinery aren't going anywhere.

I'm not opposed to the technology, I just don't believe, and yes, it is my opinion, that it is developed sufficiently yet.

 

[TrailerHitch]

That is why you use a "blanket" not water for a chemical fire on a vehicle.

It doesn't work because as soon as you remove the blanket it can re-ignite.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

It doesn't work because as soon as you remove the blanket it can re-ignite.

True, but the fire being delayed can allow for a chemical team response. Spraying water is not the recommended attack approach, except to protect other property.

The risk of a fire from lithium ion batteries is no greater than an ICE fuel tank rupturing and catching fire. The approaches to attacking and controlling either have their own specific SOP.

 

[TrailerHitch]

Lol.

What is the chance that a battery will catch fire in an accident, firefighter, specifically?

And what is the risk of an EV over a regular automobile?

The interesting part is most of these fires start either while being charged or while just driving down the road, not from accidents.

If you look solely at numbers right now it appears less. But since the number of EVs are highly outnumbered by ICEs of course ICE incidents will outnumber EV incidents. It remains to be scene if the battery technology will improve enough to make these battery fires a thing of the past.

 

[AlexBailey]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeking and developing clean sources and designs of energy production. In fact if it is sensibly brought forth as an option and it actually works and is cost effective bring it on.

What is wrong is politicizing an issue by both parties. One jamming it down our throats and the other attempting to slow or block it. Frankly we all knew there were issues with Lithium Ion batteries all the way back to battery operated power tools catching fire on the charger, the same with scooters and hover boards. Why didn't anyone think of that before unleashing electric cars on the road with 600 plus pounds of lithium batteries in them? The technology just isn't ready yet.

Before you continue incorrectly assuming that thermal runaway is intrinsic to all lithium ion batteries, let me educate you - they aren’t all the same.

Lithium ion batteries with Cobalt are dangerous, cobalt is toxic and Li batteries made with it are the ones known to ignite when they get overheated or overcharged.. They have been used for many applications because they have a higher energy density than most other lithium ion chemistries - meaning the same weight of battery can store and deliver more energy.

Lithium ferrous phosphate (LFP) or (LiFePO4) do not have the thermal runaway issues and they don’t contain any toxic substances but they are 15% heavier for the same storage capacity so they did not get the same initial attention by the industry.

Many manufacturers have switched to LFP and many more plan to. Tesla supposedly uses LFP in the European market for cars and home energy storage. They announced a while ago that they will be changing over in the US but that hasn’t happened yet - probably because they have so much invested in their current manufacturing process.

I do not use or sell systems that use Lithium Ion cobalt and neither do many other industry professionals.

Go forth with a better understanding now won’t you?

 

[TrailerHitch]

True, but the fire being delayed can allow for a chemical team response. Spraying water is not the recommended attack approach, except to protect other property.

The risk of a fire from lithium ion batteries is no greater than an ICE fuel tank rupturing and catching fire. The approaches to attacking and controlling either have their own specific SOP.

LOL! You are going to preach firefighting tactics and techniques to someone that was actually a firefighter? Unless you were a firefighter I am assuming you looked all this up on google. That hardly makes you an expert.

 

[TrailerHitch]

Before you continue incorrectly assuming that thermal runaway is intrinsic to all lithium ion batteries, let me educate you - they aren’t all the same.

Lithium ion batteries with Cobalt are dangerous, cobalt is toxic and Li batteries made with it are the ones known to ignite when they get overheated or overcharged.. They have been used for many applications because they have a higher energy density than most other lithium ion chemistries - meaning the same weight of battery can store and deliver more energy.

Lithium ferrous phosphate (LFP) or (LiFePO4) do not have the thermal runaway issues and they don’t contain any toxic substances but they are 15% heavier for the same storage capacity so they did not get the same initial attention by the industry.

Many manufacturers have switched to LFP and many more plan to. Tesla supposedly uses LFP in the European market for cars and home energy storage. They announced a while ago that they will be changing over in the US but that hasn’t happened yet - probably because they have so much invested in their current manufacturing process.

I do not use or sell systems that use Lithium Ion cobalt and neither do many other industry professionals.

Go forth with a better understanding now won’t you?

So essentially I am right about current EV batteries in the US. Thank you for clarifying that.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Replacing personally owned ICE vehicles with electric vehicles only works in tightly packed, high density, urban areas. The technology isn't even close for electric vehicles to replace tractors, combines, or semis that operate sometimes around the clock for weeks on end. Those of us that live in the rural understand the trade off of extended travel to shop and more. We accept it as part of a life that doesn't include crowding, noise, and rampant crime.

Electric cars are still cars, with all of their negative side effects--traffic, pedestrian fatalities, wasted space for storing them when they're not being driven. Trains and trolleys don't need batteries. Because they run on fixed routes they can be hooked up straight to the grid which is much more efficient.

Cars are rural transportation. Even after we eliminate the need for them in cities, they will be used for decades out in the countryside.

 

[RandyRebecca]

Car suburbs were a failed experiment from the last century. Forcing people to drive everywhere was great for the oil and car industries, but private cars turned out to be an ecological disaster, not to mention the fact that many American cities were gutted to build car infrastructure. Entire neighborhoods were razed to build highways and parking lots.

The way forward is to redirect public spending on car infrastructure to buses and trains. Convert lanes that are currently used for on-street parking into dedicated bus and bike routes. Bring back streetcars. Impose heavy penalties on careless drivers who kill pedestrians.

It will take decades to undo the damage that the private car has done to American cities, but European and Japanese cities can be used as models for how we can get rid of traffic and make our cities easier to get around in.

I agree about the trains and buses, but do people who live in big cities realize how alarmed people in suburbs and rural areas get when they hear talk of getting rid of cars? In the big cities, all the stuff that matters isn't that far away and there's always good transport. It's a very different story in rural areas where there can be very little for miles. Large parts of America you couldn't survive without a car.

There should be a huge nationalized, federal drive for public railways across the whole country. Only when that sort of railway travel becomes big, especially in smaller cities, towns, suburbs and rural areas (not just the big cities), can there really be serious talk of getting rid of cars.

 

[TrailerHitch]

Not true. I looked at a Lighting, prior to getting the Rav Hybrid. My brother in law did get a Lighting. It has a 600Km range. He to lives in the country.

372 miles doesn't work for me. It would mean stopping twice to charge on a trip back to Wisconsin. Now I stop once for gas. As as soon as an EV can match my Subaru mile for mile full tank to full charge I may think about an EV.

There is no need to convert them, IMHO. The best bang for the buck is to swap out the "four wheelers" for EV's. Or better to Hydrogen.

I'm actually more in favor of hydrogen EVs than battery EVs.

So you support maintaining oil based fuel for specialty vehicles. Compromise?

I live way more rural than you, and not for any of the reasons you promote. I have Hybrids and they full fill my needs as well as an ICE does.
I also didn't move to one to save the environment, but to reduce the need buy a product that has a limited supply.

Good for you, and Yay! They don't work for me and many others.

Synthetic diesel is a reality and so is ethanol based fuels have been used elsewhere successfully. Brazil is an example of where ethanol based fuel is used for automobiles and small trucks.

 

[coati]

I live in a remote area that gets lots of sun. I plan to cover one of my buildings with photovoltaics to charge my EV when it is just sitting there for days at a time.

By 2040, internal combustion engines on cars will seem like a money pit in the desert Southwest.

 

[Paul_Chance]

I have a fair amount of stuff within a fifteen minute walk (probably a dozen plus restaurants, liquor store, convenience store, a donut shop and a small Mercado (Mexican Supermarket). Speaking specifically about my environment, one of the major challenges would be a redistribution of grocery stores. My closest good grocery is about an hours walk away (and not really feasible because you have to go in the opposite direction to get across the expressway).

 

[AlexBailey]

So essentially I am right about current EV batteries in the US. Thank you for clarifying that.

You are accurate about some batteries, mostly Tesla at this point.

The industry is adapting, always will be. The better technology is available, capitalism just needs to catch up.

Investing in green technology as a nation is a way to “promote the general welfare”.

 

[RandyRebecca]

capitalism just needs to catch up.

LOL

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

I agree about the trains and buses, but do people who live in big cities realize how alarmed people in suburbs and rural areas get when they hear talk of getting rid of cars? In the big cities, all the stuff that matters isn't that far away and there's always good transport. It's a very different story in rural areas where there can be very little for miles. Large parts of America you couldn't survive without a car.

There should be a huge nationalized, federal drive for public railways across the whole country. Only when that sort of railway travel becomes big, especially in smaller cities, towns, suburbs and rural areas (not just the big cities), can there really be serious talk of getting rid of cars.

Cars are fine for moving people around in rural areas. We just need to keep them out of cities where they cause nothing but trouble.

 

[ll74]

The interesting part is most of these fires start either while being charged or while just driving down the road, not from accidents.

If you look solely at numbers right now it appears less. But since the number of EVs are highly outnumbered by ICEs of course ICE incidents will outnumber EV incidents. It remains to be scene if the battery technology will improve enough to make these battery fires a thing of the past.

You still didn't answer the questions

 

[coati]

The R&D will be moving in new directions when the government can't subsidize anything. Without subsidy dumpsters, what actually works will be more apparent as the rest falls away.

The holy-and-invisible-hand of the free market is focused on 3rd quarter profits, not on "what actually works" in the long term. And, there will always be lobbyists clamoring for subsidies.

Goverment has an important role in considering future generations by reducing greenhouse gas pollution and by investing in R&D that supports this objective.

 

[JohnnySavage]

I'm all for herding people into the cities. Means less retards wandering around in my woods.