[wakawaka28]

That's very funny. If you have ever seen these EV fires you'll know that they are no joke. Have a look at this: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13005001/london-bus... Have you EVER heard of even one petrol-powered bus catching fire, much less multiple in a few weeks in one city?

Insurance companies are drastically raising rates on EVs as more information comes in: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/sep/30/the-quotes-wer... There are many reasons for this, among them the fire hazard. The EVs cost more to fix, of course, but EV batteries can reignite weeks or months after being damaged or catching on fire. So they must also be stored very far apart while being repaired.

Ferries do not want EVs on board because of the fire hazard: https://www.autoevolution.com/news/norwegian-ferry-company-b...

This firefighting expert says why these fires are much worse than ICE fires in a thorough presentation at a conference. The audio sucks but the info is gold: https://youtube.com/watch?v=AIXTP-TgPEw

I can't say if this battery replacement costs more than the car because of fire hazards. But I think it was deemed in need of replacement because of possible fire hazards. You be the judge: https://www.autoevolution.com/news/yikes-the-60000-hyundai-i...

If you do a little actual research about lithium battery fires, all of what I'm saying will be very obvious. Idk where your slides came from but they sound very wrong.

[thebruce87m]

I have done research. You have basically hit all the EV bingo misinformation points in one post, and you’ve swallowed it all up apparently. You’re not even distinguishing between the different chemistries.

There are 100k vehicle fires every year in the UK yet the small amount of EV fires make headlines. The petrol and diesel fires are so common you don’t even hear about them.

The fact that you quote the daily mail is the cherry on top - remember when the diesel car burned down Luton airport? The daily mail commenters were calling for the banning of EVs over this.

One ferry company with two ferries banned EVs as an overreaction.

Insurance costs went up for lots of cars, but for EVs it was the high repair costs.

If you do even a little research you will see that EV fires are at least 20x less likely than ICE car fires. The spreaders of misinformation will have you believe that ICE cars are easier to put out - maybe, but why didn’t the TWO fire extinguishers put out the diesel car before it burned down the car park at Luton? What about the car park at Liverpool?

Even with the larger proportion of NMC batteries out there the fires are 20x less likely. LFP batteries are even less likely to go into thermal runaway and they are becoming more prevalent.

[wakawaka28]

Sorry but you're just wrong. We'll see how "safe" these batteries are when they're 10 to 20 years old and still on the road, banged up, subjected to extreme conditions for years, etc.

What exactly is misinformation about insurance rates going parabolic? Or the fact that these fires are self-oxidizing and much hotter than others? Or that ferries in progressive countries don't want to carry them? Or the videos and testimony of an expert at a fire safety conference showing that poison gasses rapidly escape from batteries as they enter the well-known process of thermal runaway? Or a replacement battery for the Hyundai Ioniq costing $60k, more than the MSRP of a brand new one?

>The spreaders of misinformation will have you believe that ICE cars are easier to put out - maybe, but why didn’t the TWO fire extinguishers put out the diesel car before it burned down the car park at Luton? What about the car park at Liverpool?

Many people believe that the media is lying about Luton, and that it was a hybrid battery that caught fire. Regardless of that, isn't it a huge problem if any EV catching fire can cause inextinguishable, toxic fires to spread through a whole car park full of them? I don't know about Liverpool off the top of my head. There are so many terrible parking garage fires now. I never heard of it happening in my whole life until recently, and I'm sure it's because EVs make it dramatically more likely to happen and more damaging.

You ought to consider the incentives behind the media push to assure people that EVs are safe. A large number of politicians behind mandating these death traps would be very embarrassed if the truth was recognized. Instead of waiting for the technology to develop and mature naturally, if that is even possible, they want to force it on us against our will. So forgive me for not giving two shits what any fake stats say on the issue. It will take much more time to settle the question of safety than these jokers are suggesting.

[thebruce87m]

Let’s analyse one of your articles to see the exact misinformation you are swallowing.

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/norwegian-ferry-company-b...

> Li-Ion batteries in electric vehicles pose a significant fire risk, which was further emphasized after the Felicity Ace cargo ship sank almost a year ago.

The Felicity Ace sank and therefore no cause was found. How are they coming to these conclusions? And YOU talk about the media pushing a narrative?

> Statistics tell us that electric vehicles catch fire from time to time, although those fires are far less common than people imagine.

This part is at least true. I know you said you won’t believe the real stats since you’ve made up your mind based on a narrative you’ve been fed, but here they are: https://thedriven.io/2023/05/16/petrol-and-diesel-cars-20-ti...

> Only 23 fires were reported in electric vehicles in 2022 making up just 0.004% of Sweden’s fleet of 611,000 EVs.

> In contrast, over the same period, some 3,400 fires we reported in 2022 from Sweden’s 4.4 million petrol and diesel cars representing 0.08% of the fossil car fleet.

> This means that in 2022 a petrol or diesel car in Sweden was around 20 times more likely to catch fire than an electric vehicle.

> Furthermore, fires in electric cars are declining. The MSB says the number of fires in electric cars has been around 20 a year over the last three years, although the number of electric cars over that tie has almost doubled. Presumably, this is due to EV makers improving fire suppressing designs in newer models.

Back to your article:

> It’s unclear what started the fire, but the hundreds of electric cars onboard made it impossible to extinguish.

That’s what they said about The Fremantle Highway when it was on fire, let’s see what happened when they towed it back to port:

> However, between 900 and 1000 cars including the EVs appeared to be in good condition, the chief of salvage company Royal Boskalis Westminster NV, Peter Berdowski, told media last week.

Huh, that’s weird. Looks like the daily mail readers were wrong about that too (surprise!).

The Driven |https://thedriven.io › 2023/08/14Sorry EV haters, big ship fire probably wasn't caused by electric cars

Let’s look at Liverpool: Liverpool car park fire: Hundreds of burnt-out vehicles removed https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-46290095

1,000 cars burnt out in a car park fire in 2018. How many EVs do you think were in there 6 years ago? One? Two? It was 99% ICE vehicles along with the one that caused it. I’m sure no toxic fumes were produced as a result of the ICE cars burning lol.

> Many people believe that the media is lying about Luton

Many daily mail readers were saying it was an EV before the fire service even said anything. Here’s what they said:

> The fire service can confirm the initial vehicle involved in the fire was a diesel car.

https://www.bedsfire.gov.uk/news/major-incident-declared-lut...

Funnily enough this fits with the video of the vehicle showing the number plate: https://x.com/andysoullinux/status/1712232395049422942?s=46&...

The video gives an excellent view of those TWO fire extinguishers that failed to put out the fire too. Those ICE vehicles sure are easy to put out!

Facebook and YouTube algorithms are feeding people scary videos and the daily mail and its ilk will happily feed the narrative too. The stats and facts simply don’t back the level of FUD they are amplifying. It’s like refusing to fly over driving over safety fears after looking at a few plane crashes.

> You ought to consider the incentives behind the media push to assure people that EVs are safe.

You ought to do the same, who is pushing the anti-EV narrative? They tried to spread misinformation about range, battery replacement costs (bingo on your post), fires and so much more yet people are realising EVs are viable and cheaper to run. I run my EV for 3p/mile and certain people don’t like that. They are ramping these articles up since sales are still going up ( despite the headlines saying it’s “slowing”). It’s a shame so many people believe it without questioning it.

[wakawaka28]

>Sorry EV haters, big ship fire probably wasn't caused by electric cars

Even if it wasn't caused by EVs somehow, isn't it a huge problem that this cargo is so dangerous in the event of a fire? Ships are very expensive.

>Many daily mail readers were saying it [the Luton tinderbox] was an EV before the fire service even said anything.

Again, the car from Luton may have been a diesel hybrid. If the battery caused the fire or made it far worse, it counts as an EV fire. Here are some thorough discussions. https://youtube.com/watch?v=zk0MWDsueMY and https://youtube.com/watch?v=QZEku6lHfDM . But how dare anyone investigate independently based on video footage? Furthermore, will the same government that is mandating EV adoption be honest about this? Will the fire chief risk defamation and losing his job to say the right thing, knowing that the media will bury him?

>The video gives an excellent view of those TWO fire extinguishers that failed to put out the fire too. Those ICE vehicles sure are easy to put out!

Ok, there's something I have to clear up here. Car fires are not "easy" to put out because there is a lot of flammable stuff on board a car. But it can be put out relatively easily. On the other hand, an EV getting too wet can cause it to catch fire, and even being submerged will not put it out! https://youtube.com/watch?v=1zaV-JSwzzA

They can reignite months later. That never happens to ordinary ICE cars. https://www.evfiresafe.com/ev-fire-reignition That group is pro-EV and they are calling for caution.

Even the mainstream media admits the truth on rare occasion, mixed with lies like "don't worry, it's SUPER rare!" https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/29/electric-vehicle-fires-are-r... These cars need to be resilient against normal wear and tear, accidents, and also not cause amazingly bad situations in the event of arson.

>They tried to spread misinformation about range, battery replacement costs (bingo on your post), fires and so much more yet people are realising EVs are viable and cheaper to run.

NONE of this is misinformation. The batteries are notoriously expensive and difficult to diagonose. If even Hyundai won't replace its own battery at any dealer for less than the cost of the same car new, that sucks. There are people with an axe to grind for EVs but this is simply a reaction to evil media misinformation.

>Facebook and YouTube algorithms are feeding people scary videos and the daily mail and its ilk will happily feed the narrative too. The stats and facts simply don’t back the level of FUD they are amplifying. It’s like refusing to fly over driving over safety fears after looking at a few plane crashes.

No, I have to go out of my way to find information about this stuff. Youtube and Facebook are beholden to their advertisers and the governments of the world. If this information was easy to get, EV sales would be even more pathetic than they are.

>They are ramping these articles up since sales are still going up ( despite the headlines saying it’s “slowing”).

EV sales ARE slowing. More vehicles on the road increases awareness of problems that people can relate to. While some manufacturers are plowing ahead, others want out. The cope: https://abcnews.go.com/Business/electric-vehicle-sales-slowi...

Toyota knows EVs aren't right for everyone: https://fortune.com/2022/10/02/toyota-ceo-electric-vehicles-... and https://toyotatimes-jp.translate.goog/toyota_news/1055_1.htm...

>I run my EV for 3p/mile and certain people don’t like that.

I don't care if you manage to run it at 3p per mile. If that offsets the extra 10-20k£ and time wasted while charging, go for it. Just as long as I'm not subsidizing it, and your EV does not put me in danger, and nobody is forcing me to get one, and you pay for all the infrastructure that has to be fixed or upgraded due to increased EV usage. That includes: roads, parking garages made to carry double the weight of current ones, fire suppression systems, power plants, and power distribution systems.

[two_handfuls]

I can’t speak to the other things but I looked into the “sales slowing” thing and what’s happening is that we still sell more EV every year than the year before, but the rate of growth has slowed. Despite the misleading title, the article you linked supports this too.

So all this means is that the growth is slowing. Meaning, we’re not on a pure exponential curve but we’re on an s-curve. This is absolutely normal and expected of all new technologies.

Did a famously over-optimistic car company use a pure exponential in their predictions and thus fail to meet predictions? Yes. Are manufacturers of overpriced EVs blaming this instead of their own poor choices? Yes. Are the media trying to make everything much more dramatic than it really is? Also yes.

Point is, EVs are following the absolutely normal trajectory of new tech. They are running low on early adopters and must adapt to the desires of the mainstream buyers - or of they don’t, chinese makers will.

[wakawaka28]

>Point is, EVs are following the absolutely normal trajectory of new tech.

Except that whole mandate thing.

>They are running low on early adopters and must adapt to the desires of the mainstream buyers - or of they don’t, chinese makers will.

The Chinese hate their own EVs too! https://youtube.com/watch?v=DwhnArkZTu8 Unfortunately for them their government is basically forcing them to use those too.

[thebruce87m]

More bingo points, I’ll call them out for people following at home. Here is the card to mark them off: https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/dhd8kc/fu...

> isn't it a huge problem that this cargo is so dangerous in the event of a fire

There are much more dangerous things shipped all the time? Do they need updated procedures? Maybe? But as we saw at Liverpool and the Fremantle any car fire is dangerous even when EVs are not involved.

> Again, the car from Luton may have been a diesel hybrid.

Again, Nope. Why do we need analysis? We have the fire brigade telling us it was diesel. We have the plate, and the DVLA says it was diesel. Or is this all part of a larger conspiracy?

> But how dare anyone investigate independently based on video footage?

JAQing off is a common tactic when distorting the truth, you should learn to identify it. Watch 2 mins of Tucker and it’s as clear as day.

> I don't care if you manage to run it at 3p per mile. If that offsets the extra 10-20k£ (bingo) and time wasted while charging (bingo), go for it.

I’m on a lease. No upfront cost. My time spent waiting to charge is 0 mins - I actually spend less time waiting than you wait filling up your ICE. It charges while I sleep. If you spend 5 minutes a week filling up that equates to 4 hours a year you are standing at a pump that I don’t have to.

> Just as long as I'm not subsidizing it

You wouldn’t like a world like that. We subsidise innovation all the time. And we would have to remove subsidies for fossil fuels too to be fair, which would be bad news all round since we still need it.

> your EV does not put me in danger, (bingo)

thoroughly debunked I think. No point in going over it again but it does appear on the bingo card.

> and nobody is forcing me to get one, and you pay for all the infrastructure that has to be fixed or upgraded due to increased EV usage. That includes: roads, parking garages made to carry double the weight of current ones(bingo),

Forced? Do what you like. Roads? Good news, they can use the same roads as normal cars!

Let’s look at weights to debunk your weight claim: https://www.admiral.com/magazine/guides/motor/electric-car-m...

> On average, an EV weighs 200-300kg more than a petrol car because of the weight of the battery and electric motors.

Let’s look at some car figures to compare: https://www.quora.com/Is-a-Tesla-heavier-than-an-ICE-car-of-... Tesla Model S - Curb weight 4,647 lbs Audi A8 - Curb weight 4,751 lbs BMW 7 series - Curb weight 4,244 - 4,848 lbs Tesla Model 3 - Curb weight 3,627 to 4,072 lbs Audi A4 - Curb weight 3,450 to 3,627 lbs BMW 3 series - 3,582 to 4,010 lbs

Looks like you’ll be banning German ICE vehicles from car parks too?

> EV sales would be even more pathetic… EV sales ARE slowing

Slowing… by still rising as expected? The pace of growth is slowing. Just because you are accelerating less doesn’t mean you are slowing. The headlines would have you believe sales are going down.

> LONDON, Jan 11 (Reuters) - Global sales of fully electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) rose 31% in 2023, down from 60% growth in 2022, according to market research firm Rho Motion.

> "The pace of growth is slowing, but that's what's expected in growing markets like this," Rho Motion data manager Charles Lester told Reuters. "You can't double every year."

> Lester said global EV sales last year were largely in line with the 30% growth Rho Motion had forecast. For 2024, the firm forecasts global EV sales growth of between 25% and 30%.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/global...

> fire suppression systems (bingo, duplicate), power plants (bingo), and power distribution systems(bingo).

The UK national grid got so fed up with people spreading nonsense about the grid it made a page about it:

https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/journey-to-net-zero/ele...

Key point:

> The highest peak electricity demand in the UK in recent years was 62GW in 2002. Since then, the nation’s peak demand has fallen by roughly 16% due to improvements in energy efficiency.

> Even if we all switched to EVs overnight, we estimate demand would only increase by around 10%. So we’d still be using less power as a nation than we did in 2002, and this is well within the range the grid can capably handle.

Not sure if I covered everything but it gets exhausting addressing every point knowing that you’ll just ignore them and pull out more of the bingo points.

I don’t think there is much point in continuing. There is a narrative that you want to believe and that’s that. YouTube has claimed another victim. It’s sad to see since it happened to a few of my friends with Covid misinformation and they are also eating up this EV stuff same as you. Same story playing out again, despite excess mortality proving them wrong about the covid stuff. The worst part is it’s not even the persons fault, they are just impressionable and the algorithms feed it.

[wakawaka28]

Just to be clear, I did not back down from this argument even after we both said we will not continue. You said several things I disagree with and misrepresented my points again. I think you are arguing in bad faith in this whole thread, just to troll me. I would have replied to your final wall of text but there is no reply button under the message. I guess we hit the reply limit. Just as well since we both kinda wanted to stop anyway.

[wakawaka28]

>More bingo points, I’ll call them out for people following at home.

You know, you being so pretentious is wearing thin on my patience. You don't know better than me about any of this. You merely believe what the media says, and don't accept that the corporate interests behind it have their own designs for you. And worst of all you think that makes you a genius. I am humble enough to admit I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt it.

>JAQing off is a common tactic when distorting the truth, you should learn to identify it. Watch 2 mins of Tucker and it’s as clear as day.

Tucker has his faults but it's clear he has 1000% more integrity than the average journalist in the MSM.

>I’m on a lease. No upfront cost. My time spent waiting to charge is 0 mins - I actually spend less time waiting than you wait filling up your ICE. It charges while I sleep. If you spend 5 minutes a week filling up that equates to 4 hours a year you are standing at a pump that I don’t have to.

I spend more time on the toilet than filling up my tank, and I read in both cases. I can also rapidly refill my tank over and over until I get where I'm going with no anxiety at all. But hey, if the EV works for you and you feel it's worth the price, have at it. Just don't tell me it's for everyone, because it's obviously too inconvenient for that.

On the subject of roads, EVs wear roads down quicker due to increased weight and torque specifications, and regenerative braking. They are not currently being taxed at all to pay for the roads in most places. Gas cars pay for this via gas tax, typically. So you should have to pay too.

>Let’s look at some car figures to compare: https://www.quora.com/Is-a-Tesla-heavier-than-an-ICE-car-of-... Tesla Model S - Curb weight 4,647 lbs Audi A8 - Curb weight 4,751 lbs BMW 7 series - Curb weight 4,244 - 4,848 lbs Tesla Model 3 - Curb weight 3,627 to 4,072 lbs Audi A4 - Curb weight 3,450 to 3,627 lbs BMW 3 series - 3,582 to 4,010 lbs

The difference is EVERY EV is heavy. If you load up a garage full of maximal German cars or EVs, you will likely be exceeding its specifications. If someone comes out with a German car mandate I might be on your side here.

>The headlines would have you believe sales are going down.

Because they are. Dealers don't want to carry them. The mandates are killing them: https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/3000-auto-dealers-sign-...

>The UK national grid got so fed up with people spreading nonsense about the grid it made a page about it

More government propaganda. If you do the calculations you'll quickly realize that 100% EV adoption would drastically outstrip production in every country it's been considered. Furthermore, the electricity used by EVs is often produced by dead dinosaur juice. So they aren't even green.

>Not sure if I covered everything but it gets exhausting addressing every point knowing that you’ll just ignore them and pull out more of the bingo points.

You didn't actually cover anything except maybe sales. You ignored most of what I said and said "nah uh" to the rest, didn't watch the videos, and came at me with this bingo shit. I could have said the same about every single thing you said but I have the basic common sense to know that insulting a person's intelligence is not a good way to argue.

>I don’t think there is much point in continuing. There is a narrative that you want to believe and that’s that. YouTube has claimed another victim. It’s sad to see since it happened to a few of my friends with Covid misinformation and they are also eating up this EV stuff same as you. Same story playing out again, despite excess mortality proving them wrong about the covid stuff. The worst part is it’s not even the persons fault, they are just impressionable and the algorithms feed it.

I too don't think there's any point continuing. You believe your propaganda so fervently that you will not entertain the possibility that the government and media have their own dishonest motivations, and that is essential to reach any kind of understanding on this issue. If you take anything from this, it should be a sense of humility. You're not the genius you think you are, just because you believe what the TV tells you. God help us if "geniuses" like you get the authority to tell us what we can and can't say.