[jmb12686]

Ok, let's exclude solar panels. WMT's business model doesn't include extreme capacity Li-ion chemical bombs traveling at highway speeds.

To be fair, I admire and hope one day to afford a Tesla. But the risks are clear. High capacity Li-ion batteries have high risks and incident rates of explosion.

[breser]

You do realize that all vehicles have risks of fire or explosion. In order to make a vehicle with sufficient energy density to be usable for transportation you have to take those risks.

While it's true that Tesla has had a relatively small number of vehicle fires with the Model S and X. To date there has not been a single fire with a Model 3. Even with the Model S and X fires they were far rarer than ICE vehicle fires. It's just that nobody bothers reporting on ICE vehicle fires because they happen all the time. The relative rarity of the Tesla fires is what made them news not a high incident rate.

[new_realist]

Model 3 fire and subsequent explosions: https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-fire-explosion-mosco...

Based on anecdotal evidence, Teslas seem more prone both to spontaneous combustion and fires from minor accidents than comparable luxury cars of similar age (that is, relatively new). The latter is why the NHSTA made them retrofit a titanium shield to the underbody early in the Model S lifecycle.

[alasdair_]

> the risks are clear. High capacity Li-ion batteries have high risks and incident rates of explosion.

The risks are clear: high-capacity gasoline fuel tanks have high risks and incident rates of explosion.

Except... the fire and explosion risks of an ICE fuel tank are seemingly far greater than a Li-ion battery pack.