happens when to gas vehicles crash too. see it happen TO ME. You do know gas vehicles exploded right? or are you that narrow minded. burning fuel truck take long time to put out and do MASSIVE damage.
I've responded to hundreds of vehicle-related incidents. ICE vehicles rarely catch fire after a crash, and vehicle fires never result in explosions. While they may explode in movies, real life is much different. In 2021, I was on the scene of a large fuel tanker fire. It was carrying 4,000 gallons of diesel and 6,000 gallons of gasoline. The fire was extinguished in two hours.
But ice fires can be extinguished with water unlike EVs water will cause a thermal runaway causing massive explosions and deadly gases which will take hours to extinguish if it doesn’t kill someone
Well, for the same autonomy an ice vehicle transports 4 times more energy than an electric - consequence of the difference of efficiencies - but it is true that what matters most is how the energy is release. Ice cars have many more decades of experience dealing with this problem
Batteries.. To be honest, when i imagined 21st century vehicles, i not once, imagined they would run on batteries... F*CKING PATHETIC... Wow, this World is such a Collection of Crippled...
@@allelectric1330 the batteries aren't inherently dangerous, I've never had a battery fire after owning 200 lithium devices, What is inherently dangerous is new companies that never mass manufactured products this complex all of the sudden trying to sell as many as possible. Tesla has the foresight to set a battery on fire in 2006 and become aware how dangerous it could be even at low volumes.
@@johnmccallum9106 re: "They maybe the owners of the truck..." indeed they are but their Carrier License (and thus their a$$) actually BELONGS TO THE FEDS so sucks to be them. this means once the NTSB is involved, the "lowly consumer level paradigms" we have regarding OWNERSHIP and POSSESSION no longer apply because post-crash PUBLIC SAFETY is what now takes priority... yeah, this is why in the Aviation sector the wreckage of Commercial Airliners (ref: the double 737 MAX fatalities killing 346) after a crash DO NOT go back to the Airlines or to Manufacturers like Boeing, Airbus, Dassault, Bombardier, etc, no at that point (since somebody f*%&ed up royally) the wreckage falls under the "care and control" of Federal Agencies like the NTSB and the FAA because a potentially year's long investigation to determine "Root Cause" of the accident with a subsequent filing of numerous reports must take place, and creating PAPER TRAILS is a "thing"... also ref: "Those who don't know History are DOOMED to repeat it..." - George Santayana (1963-1952)
Don't have to. You can get a pretty good idea what it'd be like looking at the freighters that've burned up, or the valet parking lot in Lisbon that went up just this week...or the ones in South Korea, for that matter.
Each incident involving thermal runaway on EV batteries ends up creating a huge mess. Currently EVs are a small part of the vehicles on our roads. Imagine if they were the majority...
@@Y2Kvids If South Korea is any example the stats might be against you. 1 EV recently took out 140 nearby vehicles, affected water and electricity supplies to 1600 homes and injured 23 people. That's a pretty impressive mess.
I live nearby and the interstate 80 was closed 16 hours and there were literally miles of other semi trucks backed up. This is fire country in fire season. Over 6,000 semi trucks backed up and 30,000 passenger cars delayed.
A truck fire in a tunnel is very bad no matter what, ev or ice won't make much difference when it starts going. What will be left is a melted mess either way.
There was a lithium ion battery fire at a local electronics recycling facility, Sunnking in Brockport, NY. I never thought much about lithium ion batteries in electronic devices but now I will be more diligent when charging, using and storing these devices. I find your channel to be a source of good information. Stay Safe and Stay Positive.
Just like everyone said about the first cars for years before the public finally accepted them. They will figure it all out as they did when cars were exploding and brakes failed and starting them broke many arms with the hand crank kickback etc. It took years of innovation with the public complaining and only the rich could afford them at first.....just like E'Vs will run a similar script.
@@cherokee180c0 The only reason Tesla sales have gone up is because they've lowered the price multiple times. A company laying off employees isn't a sign of potential growth.
@@christophercharles3169 they still make a higher profit per vehicle than any of their competitors, so tell me again how increasing sales of a higher profit vehicle is a bad thing.
This could be a prototype vehicle. If I were on the project, I'd want to be involved in the teardown. It would be different if there was a fatality or major injury.
@@kevinroberts8441If its a prototype it may have been sending extra data back in its last moments or have a black box type unit that survived long enough to send key info. That should be accessible outside Tesla, if it is on a public road the hardware and software ought to be available for scrutiny by investigators.
We had two semi truck fires last year in the Germany I was involved. One cought on fire in the Netherlands, there the firefighters had trouble to get enough water on the highway. Just 1200 Liter diesel and 360 Liter hydraulik fluid. The aluminium parts of these semis were just gone. These fires were caused by a worn out weel bearing.
re: "The aluminium parts of these semis were just gone." bingo which is the FIRST thing i noticed about this burnt Semi from the few pics of the first news reports (and now the Captain's video clip) as there's basically NOTHING left above the frame rails. the whole of the cab has effectively been IMMOLATED and (while not technically a "Sleeper") that's a big "Sleeper Style" cab, i mention this being one of the few to both SEE it in person and RIDE in a Tesla Semi back in Vegas (date: 5-22-2024).
@@SteveEddy-od7fb re: "are the mechanics for these trucks taking too many Bong hits???" hey, it's "Bong Hits For Jesus" am-mi-right...? when in Nor-Cal do as the "Nor-Callians" i say.
I believe a bigger problem is the huge number of cells in one vehicle. With thousands of cells in one car, it only takes one faulty manufactured cell to burn all the other good cells. There needs to be some sort of cell isolation design and fire suppression to prevent the heat and fire from one cell experiencing thermal runaway from propagating to all other cells limiting the fire to that one cell or small segment of cells.
Good idea. Good luck getting it to _happen,_ though. EVs are such a sacred cow, politically speaking, that nobody's gonna wanna slow down the "transition" by doing that. Not only would the design period slow down production of new EVs, the extra protection would make them more expensive than they already are--which is a _huge_ sticking point for a lot of folks and explains a lot of why adoption of the things has been so lackluster as it is. ...Which is saying nothing about the used car market. Who's gonna want to buy a used EV that could quite literally go up in flames like an old Pinto? And with less warning?
@@nightrunnerxm393 Other batteries take a higher temperature to actually cause thermal runaway and are thus much safer. It's analagous to how much more difficult diesel fuel is to ignite than gasoline. New batteries would simply be safer than lithium ion ones are.
Electric drive is great, but the power source is not with 1/50th the energy density of diesel and the dangers of the chemistry. A series diesel-electric drive with lead-acid golf cart batteries for emissionless driving around town would be much better. To deal with the problem, first halt production of Tesla vehicles and take them off the roads to be disposed of at Tesla's expense. Then dispossessed owners can sue bankrupt Tesla for selling them trash and get nothing. If they can afford a $100k virtue signal, they can afford to lose the false virtue they once possessed. Then we need to form a Tesla accountability commission, because we need a Tesla accountability commission to hold Tesla accountable, because a Tesla accountability commission could hold Tesla accountable. A Tesla Accountability Commission. ATAC.
@@snoozeflu well lucky I don't live in America so that's not a problem. Going to suck for Americans when they can not produce sufficient power for all this rubbish they doing
All that toxic air pollution and contaminated water runoff, this green energy push is really good at increasing the air quality and cleaner water table, doesn't it.. NOT!!!
@@deemo5245 And exactly what is used to recharge those batteries? Fairy Floss? Top tip: If these vehicles are being charged overnight, even in the state of California, burning fossil fuels is how they are recharged. These are remote combustion trucks, not no combustion.
Cybertrucks or EV's in general are not automatically good for the environment. Because they are so heavy they are often more polluting than a small ICE car, even when charged with green power. I am a treehugger myself, I drive a tiny Kei-car for that reason. If I would have the money I would by something like a Twike, an ultra light EV from Switzerland. As an environmentalist I don't like Tesla at all, but the argument that all EV's are as bad or worse than most ICE cars is also complete coping nonsense. An IC engine is only about 40% thermally efficient.Electric engines are more than 80% efficient. That's a huge difference, even when using a gas powered electric plant as source, because those have a far greater efficiency as well. But with about 50% green energy on the grid in many places that becomes increasingly irrelevant. Yes EV's pollute, that's not a gotcha moment. The main problem is that people still drive way to much in way to big cars. Taking public transport when possible, using a small, light EV car when necessary and only ever using a large car or truck when commercially towing or transporting heavy stuff should be the norm. Cybertrucks can f... right of, there's no need for them, they are useless.
At some point we will be forced to admit that the current battery chemistries are not ideal for large applications. The bigger the battery the more susceptible they are to damage (these things are heavy!) AND the more likely a single cell will have a bad day.
re: "At some point we will be forced to admit that the current battery chemistries are not ideal for large applications. The bigger the battery the more susceptible they are to damage (these things are heavy!) AND the more likely a single cell will have a bad day."
@@zzoinks anything that’s more difficult to have an accident would be better. Even the uploader has pointed out that the other battery types take more heat to burn. There couldn’t be a more clear decision on this.
"Jeep has issued a recall that involves 154k plug-in-hybrid versions of the Wrangler and Grand Cherokee which could potentially catch fire. A fire can start while the Jeeps are driving or parked. For that reason, the automaker is advising customers to park outside and away from buildings until the problem is fixed. Owners are also advised not to charge their Jeeps until the issue is addressed, as the fire risk is reduced when the battery is depleted."
I'm guessing that it in a conventional semi-truck crash it would take a massive hazardous material spill to match that scale of road closure. Like you said, a truck with a diesel engine and fuel tanks might burn just as hot, but not nearly for so long and they're much easier for firefighters to deal with. It's more the nature of the freight that could be a problem than the truck. (Also collateral destruction.)
I've responded to trucks that have lost a saddle tank spilling diesel on the highway. They hold around 120 gallind. Typically, you can get it cleaned up within an hour, and there is rarely fire involved.
Thanks for the update! I’m often baffled by the number of road trains on our roads. Survivability on the open highway is a concern fora car and heaven forbid truck accident, so when you mentioned the 45 mph assessed safety speed for the EVs I think it’s worth investigating this further. Thank you.
Hmm... Rush the remains of the burned-out truck back to Tesla so they can (allegedly) download and edit the data recordings, wipe various failed memory modules (allegedly), doctor any camera footage (allegedly), deactivate the failed self-drive cruise-control system (allegedly), pressure the driver into signing a big fat NDA in exchange for a large sum of money (allegedly), and hastily install a small diesel engine which will be blamed for the crash and subsequent fire. Allegedly. They really do (allegedly) think we're stupid, don't they.
But they also have a reputation to address. They have every reason to make sure their product has its flaws addressed to reduce risk of further incidents.
re: "hastily install a small diesel engine which will be blamed for the crash and subsequent fire..." LMAO. re: "Allegedly." breaking news Eleanor, in our worst ORWELLIAN, 1984, DYSTOPIAN NIGHTMARE as reported on by both Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal the "tampering of data" by the CORRUPT AF Elon and Tesla Corp (as we all suspected) has in fact been discovered, and the date of this report is 8-1-2024. okay, so what this means going forward Eleanor is you no longer have to "pull your punches" any further by suffixing your statements with the word "allegedly" in parenthesis, enjoy. 😉
@@AdrianFahrenheitTepes re: "But they also have a reputation to address." SURVEY SAYS...!!! [*ding*] "NO" (best Richard Dawson Family Feud voice) re: "They have every reason to make sure their product has its flaws addressed to reduce risk of further incidents." unfortunately Adrian, you're NOT in possession of all the facts as the rest of us are here in 'Murica regarding Elon (in any other context you would be right though) however once you get the courage to face up to the reality of Elon, what logic dictates is any person who sits on stage in New York (the home of Wall Street btw) and tells Madison Avenue Advertisers of the Fortune 500 to "GFY...!!!" it means you're actually NOT dealing with a person who cares anything about "reputation" (personal or corporate), "product flaws", or "reducing risk", etc... sorry Adrian, but EVERYTHING YOU KNOW ABOUT ELON IS WRONG. for reference the date of Elon telling everybody to "GFY" was 11-29-2023.
Q: They really do (allegedly) think we're stupid, don't they(?) A: yes they do, but we must recognize the strategy of repeatedly "testing the waters" to see what they can get away with is literally how the "scam" works. sadly for the most part we are in fact now STUPID (ref: The Idiocracy 2006) and the way they know this (besides examining our attitudes and group behavior regarding batteries) is because they recognize the ACTIVE ROLE they've played in the "dumbing down" of society the last 50 years (never mind the last 9).
That a single vehicle fire consumed so many resources for so long is astonishing! Sixteen hours of hosing a single vehicle whilst water tankers operated in relay to keep up the supply of water for the Firefighters is time consuming, labour intensive and expensive. Even more expensive is the use of a multi engined fixed wing water bombing aircraft. That just one vehicle caused such inconvenience, tied up a huge amount of resources and was incredibly expensive should act as a warning call of what lies ahead...
re: "should act warning call of what lies ahead..." yes "should" act as warning call but unfortunately it won't (ref: would'a, should'a, could'a) for this "warning call" you speak of has already LONG GONE OUT with all the fire events that happened way back 3, 4, and 5 years ago (think Model S fires and think the GM/LG/Hyundai/Bolt/Kona "Total Recall" for battery packs) therein fast-forward this same 3, 4, and 5 years to the calendar date 2024, and "what lies ahead" represents is what's happening NOW (aw crap).
@@zzoinks Allowing an inferno to simply burn itself out isn't something that Firefighters can do! Uncontained fires need to be brought under control as soon as is possible. Simply allowing fires to burn out at their own pace would amount to criminal recklessness in many instances as the risk to other structures, vehicles or people would be too great. Water cools as well as extinguishes.
Here in Spain houses often use the ground floor as a garage --- I can´t imagine anyone keeping an EV there, and I think your neighbours would be very unhappy if you did. Your insurance company would also have an opinion, as would your shrink. Good video, thanks.
I don't think gasoline cars are much better. If you look there have been so many recalls on car fires from regular gasoline cars. You're pretty much taking a fire risk either way.
Tesla semi-truck fire, that closed the highway for 16 hours. Not only required a massive fire department response and water logistics, but the addition of a fire retardant bomber airplane. The impact accident required additional precautions above and beyond an impact accident with an ICE diesel semi-truck would have. The Fire Retardant Bomber was used to protect the forest around the burning Tesla semi-truck.
@@richardscathousebut in California you may really need to prevent the forest from getting any fire at all. Because past fires have been sparked by things like cigarettes, power lines, the recent forest fire was from a car fire in the brush. You can even start a fire accidentally by dragging chains behind your car so you're supposed to lift them off the ground if you have such a chain on truck or trailer
We need to charge the vehicle owner’s insurance for the full cost of these fires, and particularly the economic loss from 16 hours of interstate closure. That has to run into the millions of dollars. Once that happens, the insurance rates alone will ensure that these vehicles are made much safer with designs that allow much quicker fire extinguishing.
@@SevenCostanza Very unlikely. Insurance rates are based on risk and those vehicles that are riskier get much higher rates. Check insurance rates a little. The variation by vehicle is huge.
Because currently they are making them unsafe now because rates are low? Business owners will happily pay higher rates because they are safer? Like um..no. Assuming there is still a market I’m sure they will improve over time but the problem is inherent with current tech technology what’s gonna happen is the rates will go so high no one will be able to afford the vehicles or insurance. Remember, semi trucks often deliver goods for consumers so in the end we are paying we would be paying the higher rates on behalf of the business.
@@zanedzikonski4234 No, you are either ignorant or simply acting that way for effect. All products start out with a best guess insurance rate. As product claim statistics are collected over time, rates are adjusted based on the losses incurred. Safer products have lower loss rates and thus lower insurance rates. More dangerous products will have escalating insurance rates which, over time, will force product improvements or buyers will migrate to similar products that offer lower insurance rates. This really isn’t hard to understand. Nobody said products were intentionally made unsafe, but it is clear that the fire hazards of lithium chemistry batteries wasn’t well appreciated at the outset and is becoming better understood over time. I don’t think anyone envisioned that one EV could take out a parking garage or large building or parking lot of closely parked vehicles.
fyi... all adiabatic flame temperatures are about half the temp. of the surface of the sun. When you say they burn at regular temp...... half the temp. the surface of the sun is about right.
I always end up buying pickups that are the polar opposite of the cybertruk. Four years ago I died in an accident where I drove my pickup into a semi trailer that crossed in front of me at an intersection. I was so glad there was no Li ion fire, as I was crushed against the steering wheel for 2-3 hours, unable to move. Thank you Fire and EMS crews. And thank you God for bringing me back.
Drive by wire is dangerous and should be banned. It should never have been allowed on the road. The basic functions of a vehicle should be mechanical incase of a failure of the electric system.
Maybe EV's batteries should have ports and piping to pump liquid nitrogen as a fire suppression . The liquid nitrogen would cool and freeze the cells plus the nitrogen gas should put the flames out .
@@jamesphillips2285 the boiler was a bigger risk than the fire box. Solid state batteries do seem to be a better alternative. Something like that would work nice. I just want a EV battery that doesn't overwhelm fire suspension systems. Or at the very least take out my house from the neighbors driveway. Our HOA has banned EVs after 4 EVs caught fire taking out 7 houses and causing major damage to 12-13 more in a 3 month time span.
StacheD, be warned, I expect Ben Sullins to do a debunk video on this. By the way, Ben recently deleted my post on his "EVs are the future-Not everyone is buying it-or are they?". I'd merely countered his distorted interpretation of data with no foul language or personal attacks. QUOTE Ben Sullins: "Your comment has been removed due to violating community guidelines. Please try again and follow the rules of this forum otherwise you risk a permanent ban"
yeah i've been watching Ben's recent "response videos" to both Scotty Kilmer and Doug Demuro, and really these aren't so much "response videos" per say as what you're actually seeing are videos of a typical EV fanboy "struggling mightily" with their COGNITIVE DISSONANCE. you can see this behavior in username "there is some cool stuff's" responses to my posts in the good Captain's last upload regarding the Portugal Parking Fire. # WITH EACH FIRE FANBOYS ARE LOSING THEIR SH!T
@@phillyphil1513 I'm pretty sure Ben's got heaps of Tesla stock & those RUclipsrs are THE WORST. Since pimping Teslas, he's got a massive new home, several different brands of solar storage, a couple of solar water generators, & that's just off the top of my head. He's had 4 Teslas at a time, posting multiple costs of ownership updates & a Rivian. He also promotes the virtues of buying second-hand but gushes at times about their low depreciation. So what's it to be Benny? I'll look up some of your comments & have your back. Stay tuned. 👍
Wow ! all Those Toxic Gasses and Fumes released into the Atmosphere 😞 that was Enough fumes and toxic gases for a diesel truck to run a entire lifetime i bet... thats sad
So wouldn't it make more sense to use the water to contain the wildfire and let the semi burn? surely cooling the battery prolongs the incident and increases the risks associated with unburned flammable gasses
Higher speed crash (above 35-40mph), the battery bursts into flames due to damage. Very interesting. So the design criteria has to have a higher rate of speed, say 50-60mph.
Yeah the Park fire 🔥 that started in Chico progressed across 3 -4 different counties. Then this big boy blows up on areas that they Saved and was able to detur from moving up into that side of the forest. You can see why the airplane tanker came swooping in saying Hell no Tesla.
Another big problem is batteries really don’t like being wet, so dousing them with water is only making the problems worse when firefighters show up on scene. There needs to be a new method for snuffing out these fires before they go into thermal runaway, or at least have the batteries insulated in a way where they cannot cause a chain reaction, I know that seems obvious, but its also obvious that adding water to a battery fire is a bad idea, yet we’re still doing it.
Shows why we are not ready for large scale electric. Can you imagine that happened in a tunnel somewhere? How about kids strapped in child seats. Combine that with the fact that most people are afraid of running out, so they pretty much always are fully charged. I don't know if they will ever come up with a battery that won't burn, but we don't need the toxic nightmare these things are.
That's our SOP for EVs in my brigade. We don't have BA and yet we respond to 110km road crashes on the nearby highway. Even ICE vehicle fires we are staying upwind.
This is exactly why all of our assurances are going up. These Evie cars are a hazard, the toxic fumes that come off these batteries burning is far worse than the traditional car fire!
Hybrids did not have much fire issues, because they used NiMH to start with, which have zero thermal runaway potential. Unfortunately, they don't have a high energy density, which still worked fine in hybrids. The issue is, due to an oversight of thermal runaway in the event of an accident. Accidents are a definite probability in an automobile. However sophisticated the safety system may be, it is useless, when it comes to thermal runaway, due to direct puncture short of a battery cell in an accident. Also due to cooling requirements, there is hardly anything(a thermal barrier) in between to protect these cells from each other. Things are going to get worse in time, with all the aging EVs on the road with the NCM chemistry. Even LFP is not that immune, just that it has a higher temperature for spontaneous thermal runaway event. Expecting a more stringent battery safety test as part of annual inspection to ensure older EVs are roadworthy.
They need to pack some type of neutralization agent in these batteries so when they do rupture some chemistry magic will happen.. kinda like the sherman had wet storage for its ammo..
Good stuff - not clickbait. Thanks. 😎 (Irritating airhead comments, though). RE-EDIT: Interesting in the low attainment of scientific reasoning/education hopefully only in the US. .
Great reporting. Thanks. For the I-80 incident, one TV news report claimed the fire protection protocol is for an area of 1/2 mile to be cleared around the EV semi truck fire incident due to toxic smoke. Anyone know if that fire protection protocol is available on-line? Except for this report -- kudos -- there appears to be radio silence on the Cybertruck fire & fatality in Houston. To be kind, that is odd. Contrast that radio silence with intense interest in Cybertrucks generally ... evidenced, among other places, by the 21 million views of Whistlin' Diesel's Cybertruck / F150 test-comparison first video, released 3 weeks ago, and 4 million views already in only 24 hours for the follow up second video, third video likely in the works ... no budget, borderline / truly insane but brilliantly revealing product review content. This dude Cody of Whistlin' Diesel's over-the-top testing stringency is putting the NHTSA & IIHS on notice regards approved tow ratings of Elonmobiles. The Elon cult members attacked Cody for his first video, but he answered more than convincingly with his second video. Third video pending. Cringe moment for me in the first video (minute 12 : 46) when Cody mock pleas for help that he can't get out of the Cybertruck ... that, after a stunning Dukes of Hazard / monster truck 10 foot air launch & crash landing jump in that Cybertruck ... man, call me Nervous Nellie, but I was thinking battery-in-elevator moment. No for now. You gotta wonder. That Cybertruck's been back to Tesla for repairs and has been returned to Cody. Are we to believe it has the same post Dukes of Hazard launch battery?
1/2 mile is from the old ERG, but that is for rail car related incidents. I think it's excessive. Personally, I would have staged 150 ft upwind, closed the impacted side of the highway, and protected the vegetation while letting it burn. There is no need to close both sides of the highway. I'm not knocking the departments decisions. There is very little guidance for fire departments right now.
Ironically cheap EV's aren't a fire risk. The expensive batteries are the ones where the have more enery in a smaller battery, and the battery is able to release that energy faster, that makes expensive EV's go really fast. There are EV batteries that are totally safe even if you hammer a nail through the battery. Sodium Ion is now beginning to be used instead of Lithium. Only two Chinese car models so far use Sodium Ion batteries, but they are being also being used in stationary storage a lot. Sodium Ion batteries are about 40% cheaper than a Lithium battery, they can't release energy very fast. Battery technology keeps changing. So in the future expect hundreds of millions of cheap, low performence EV's that are not a fire risk at all.
If they use fire blankets they would put out the fire in 30 to 90 minutes rather then hours. They can use a few hundred gallons or less of water rather then thousands if they would invest in the proper equipment for the new changing times.
The fire isn’t put out. The Oxygen being used in the combustion is inside the battery. However, the blankets are important for limiting the heat being given off by the fire, which is dangerous because the heat being given off can start additional fires, so yes the thermal blankets are really vital here, but not in the way many people think.
I have thought the same too RE: liquid nitrogen for EV fires. My guess is: a) it isn’t exactly easy to keep tankers full of cryogenic LN2 around ready to run to a fire at a moments notice, and b) safety to both firefighters and the public. LN2 is pretty dangerous stuff so spraying it all over the place (and especially on super hot surfaces) could be pretty dangerous for anyone around. Edit: also, now I think about it, spraying large amounts of LN2 around would be really bad for the surroundings too! It would kill any plants unlucky enough to be near the car and possibly even freeze the road / surrounding structure to much colder temperatures than what it was ever designed to withstand so it could maybe even cause the road / structure itself to fail (I dunno for sure, just a guess).
@@roybm3124 that is true! However, the way you deal with EV fires is by cooling the packs so the idea of using something to try to instantly freeze them makes sense to me (at least theoretically) 😊
@@bear4278 Good question for @StacheD Training. Water has a great vaporization energy number. Liquid nitrogen is quite impractical and only made on order in this form and quantaties I think. Plus added risks for the firemen and surrounding for cold burn risks and suffocation.
I would think a lot of toxic fumes but relatively little carbon dioxide is released. Because a lot of carbon dioxide is released from burning organic materials like wood or petroleum. All of them contains chemical energy, and turns it into heat energy when it combusts So I'm thinking there's not much organic materials from the EV battery so when it burns it won't release much carbon dioxide.
I believe the driver of the semi was not injured YET there is no record/statement from the driver of the Tesla semi? Why guess when he/she can state what happened? Charge Tesla for the costs associated with the damage to nature. The road was shut down for an entire day.
happens when to gas vehicles crash too. see it happen TO ME. You do know gas vehicles exploded right? or are you that narrow minded. burning fuel truck take long time to put out and do MASSIVE damage.
I've responded to hundreds of vehicle-related incidents. ICE vehicles rarely catch fire after a crash, and vehicle fires never result in explosions. While they may explode in movies, real life is much different. In 2021, I was on the scene of a large fuel tanker fire. It was carrying 4,000 gallons of diesel and 6,000 gallons of gasoline. The fire was extinguished in two hours.
But ice fires can be extinguished with water unlike EVs water will cause a thermal runaway causing massive explosions and deadly gases which will take hours to extinguish if it doesn’t kill someone
Pin of shame 📌
That's like comparing a bomb to a candle.
Well, for the same autonomy an ice vehicle transports 4 times more energy than an electric - consequence of the difference of efficiencies - but it is true that what matters most is how the energy is release. Ice cars have many more decades of experience dealing with this problem
Closing a major highway and tying up so many firefighting resources for that long raises its own set of questions.
Same thing would happen if a normal car burst into flames.
Batteries.. To be honest, when i imagined 21st century vehicles, i not once, imagined they would run on batteries... F*CKING PATHETIC... Wow, this World is such a Collection of Crippled...
@harrysmith8338 batteries are better then gas, your in the 21st century, gas isn't 50 cents a gallon anymore.
@@harrysmith8338 nobody would use battery powered cars in the US
Than*, not 'then'
You're*, not 'your'
So many EV fires because of very dangerous batteries , Rivian just had a huge fire at their Illinois plant over 50 Vehicles destroyed
I'm currently working on the details. Trying to confirm the number of vehicles.
@@allelectric1330 the batteries aren't inherently dangerous, I've never had a battery fire after owning 200 lithium devices,
What is inherently dangerous is new companies that never mass manufactured products this complex all of the sudden trying to sell as many as possible. Tesla has the foresight to set a battery on fire in 2006 and become aware how dangerous it could be even at low volumes.
The wreck should not have gone back to Tesla, this will get covered up now
They maybe the owners of the truck.
re: "The wreck should not have gone back to Tesla, this will get covered up now..." "oooh that's a bingo..." (best Christoph Waltz/Hans Landa accent)
@@johnmccallum9106 re: "They maybe the owners of the truck..." indeed they are but their Carrier License (and thus their a$$) actually BELONGS TO THE FEDS so sucks to be them. this means once the NTSB is involved, the "lowly consumer level paradigms" we have regarding OWNERSHIP and POSSESSION no longer apply because post-crash PUBLIC SAFETY is what now takes priority...
yeah, this is why in the Aviation sector the wreckage of Commercial Airliners (ref: the double 737 MAX fatalities killing 346) after a crash DO NOT go back to the Airlines or to Manufacturers like Boeing, Airbus, Dassault, Bombardier, etc, no at that point (since somebody f*%&ed up royally) the wreckage falls under the "care and control" of Federal Agencies like the NTSB and the FAA because a potentially year's long investigation to determine "Root Cause" of the accident with a subsequent filing of numerous reports must take place, and creating PAPER TRAILS is a "thing"...
also ref: "Those who don't know History are DOOMED to repeat it..." - George Santayana (1963-1952)
now imagine EV fire in bumper to bumper traffic
Don't have to. You can get a pretty good idea what it'd be like looking at the freighters that've burned up, or the valet parking lot in Lisbon that went up just this week...or the ones in South Korea, for that matter.
Or a tunnel.
In a tunnel, or an underground car park.
Also a lot less likely to happen in bumper to bumper traffic, since kinetic energy seems to be the major cause.
They're more fun in long tunnels. When gasoline gives them a chance . . . go check your IQ . . .
All that toxic crap looks very “green.”
Everything we have is toxic, especially gop/maga
White is the new Green.
Each incident involving thermal runaway on EV batteries ends up creating a huge mess. Currently EVs are a small part of the vehicles on our roads. Imagine if they were the majority...
imagine it happened during traffic jam in tunnel
Still less messy than ice fires because of less probability of fire
@@Y2Kvids If South Korea is any example the stats might be against you. 1 EV recently took out 140 nearby vehicles, affected water and electricity supplies to 1600 homes and injured 23 people. That's a pretty impressive mess.
@@george2916 sorry I thought taking control of ICE fires was Easy.
It's ez when u have water @@Y2Kvids
I live nearby and the interstate 80 was closed 16 hours and there were literally miles of other semi trucks backed up. This is fire country in fire season. Over 6,000 semi trucks backed up and 30,000 passenger cars delayed.
That forest has been a time bomb for decades, California's shite forest management 😢
@@richardscathousemost of the fires are from arson or humans stupidity not global warming hot air by itself doesn't start a fire 🔥
IMO, you're the best informative videos about EV's out here. Thank you and I really enjoy the videos you do.
Imagine if this fire had happened in a tunnel. 💀
😮
Hyperloop
Imagine if it happened traveling on the way to Mars ☠️
@@thebeacon2 😆
A truck fire in a tunnel is very bad no matter what, ev or ice won't make much difference when it starts going. What will be left is a melted mess either way.
Cybertrucks are banned in the UK.
Did they say why?
There was a lithium ion battery fire at a local electronics recycling facility, Sunnking in Brockport, NY. I never thought much about lithium ion batteries in electronic devices but now I will be more diligent when charging, using and storing these devices. I find your channel to be a source of good information. Stay Safe and Stay Positive.
Just more proof of why people don't want them.
Just like everyone said about the first cars for years before the public finally accepted them. They will figure it all out as they did when cars were exploding and brakes failed and starting them broke many arms with the hand crank kickback etc. It took years of innovation with the public complaining and only the rich could afford them at first.....just like E'Vs will run a similar script.
Why morons don't want them, 150 gas cars will catch fire today in the US and not once will you question their safety since you are use to the danger.
@@christophercharles3169 I love how you classify a car category with 40% YOY sales growth and the number 1 selling car in the world as unpopular.
@@cherokee180c0 The only reason Tesla sales have gone up is because they've lowered the price multiple times. A company laying off employees isn't a sign of potential growth.
@@christophercharles3169 they still make a higher profit per vehicle than any of their competitors, so tell me again how increasing sales of a higher profit vehicle is a bad thing.
So Tesla investigates a Tesla accident. Oh, there's no appearance of impropriety there.
This could be a prototype vehicle. If I were on the project, I'd want to be involved in the teardown. It would be different if there was a fatality or major injury.
@@StacheDTraining what can you learn from a big thing of melted metal those types of fires leaves nothing
Others, yes. Tesla, hmm, I think they will investigate properly.
@@kevinroberts8441If its a prototype it may have been sending extra data back in its last moments or have a black box type unit that survived long enough to send key info.
That should be accessible outside Tesla, if it is on a public road the hardware and software ought to be available for scrutiny by investigators.
I thought the driver ded? @@StacheDTraining
So good for the environment, right?
Just ask the kids in the mines in Africa, they'll all agree.
😂😂
Of Course :(
We had two semi truck fires last year in the Germany I was involved. One cought on fire in the Netherlands, there the firefighters had trouble to get enough water on the highway. Just 1200 Liter diesel and 360 Liter hydraulik fluid. The aluminium parts of these semis were just gone. These fires were caused by a worn out weel bearing.
re: "The aluminium parts of these semis were just gone." bingo which is the FIRST thing i noticed about this burnt Semi from the few pics of the first news reports (and now the Captain's video clip) as there's basically NOTHING left above the frame rails. the whole of the cab has effectively been IMMOLATED and (while not technically a "Sleeper") that's a big "Sleeper Style" cab, i mention this being one of the few to both SEE it in person and RIDE in a Tesla Semi back in Vegas (date: 5-22-2024).
re: "These fires were caused by a worn out (wheel) bearing." oh yeah "we've seen that movie..." 🤙
Hmmm are the mechanics for these trucks taking too many Bong hits???😂
@@SteveEddy-od7fb re: "are the mechanics for these trucks taking too many Bong hits???" hey, it's "Bong Hits For Jesus" am-mi-right...? when in Nor-Cal do as the "Nor-Callians" i say.
Tesla will say it was the Cheetos burning.
😂 LOL, Cheetos don't burn. Hell, they hardly digest if you eat them,😂😂😂😂
@@richardscathouse 😂
Oh I get it they were trying a new recipe for the really HOT Cheetos better than the flaming ones????😂😂😂😂😂
@@richardscathousehow about the flaming hot Cheetos at the store?😂
I believe a bigger problem is the huge number of cells in one vehicle. With thousands of cells in one car, it only takes one faulty manufactured cell to burn all the other good cells.
There needs to be some sort of cell isolation design and fire suppression to prevent the heat and fire from one cell experiencing thermal runaway from propagating to all other cells limiting the fire to that one cell or small segment of cells.
Good idea. Good luck getting it to _happen,_ though. EVs are such a sacred cow, politically speaking, that nobody's gonna wanna slow down the "transition" by doing that. Not only would the design period slow down production of new EVs, the extra protection would make them more expensive than they already are--which is a _huge_ sticking point for a lot of folks and explains a lot of why adoption of the things has been so lackluster as it is. ...Which is saying nothing about the used car market. Who's gonna want to buy a used EV that could quite literally go up in flames like an old Pinto? And with less warning?
They do this already, problem is that with a big enough accident there not much you can you do
@@nightrunnerxm393 Other batteries take a higher temperature to actually cause thermal runaway and are thus much safer. It's analagous to how much more difficult diesel fuel is to ignite than gasoline. New batteries would simply be safer than lithium ion ones are.
Just wait until these vehicles are older than new.
Electric drive is great, but the power source is not with 1/50th the energy density of diesel and the dangers of the chemistry.
A series diesel-electric drive with lead-acid golf cart batteries for emissionless driving around town would be much better.
To deal with the problem, first halt production of Tesla vehicles and take them off the roads to be disposed of at Tesla's expense. Then dispossessed owners can sue bankrupt Tesla for selling them trash and get nothing. If they can afford a $100k virtue signal, they can afford to lose the false virtue they once possessed.
Then we need to form a Tesla accountability commission, because we need a Tesla accountability commission to hold Tesla accountable, because a Tesla accountability commission could hold Tesla accountable.
A Tesla Accountability Commission. ATAC.
Ridiculous look at how much resources had to be wasted for an electric truck what a pointless creation
Well, buckle up because Gavin Newsom mandates that ALL trucks will be EV in California by 2034.
@@snoozeflu well lucky I don't live in America so that's not a problem. Going to suck for Americans when they can not produce sufficient power for all this rubbish they doing
You should see how much resources need to be wasted every time a fuel truck gets into an accident and catches on fire. They take down entire bridges.
There are already lots of snob californians in Baja California with those kind of legislations all of them are going to be here.
Oh come on out rich handsome genius wonder boy and Trump's buddy make a mistake???🤔😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
That's a freaking massive grenade.
All that toxic air pollution and contaminated water runoff, this green energy push is really good at increasing the air quality and cleaner water table, doesn't it.. NOT!!!
Are you serious?
Ok, now make a comment about rednecks with diesel pipes
@@deemo5245 And exactly what is used to recharge those batteries? Fairy Floss? Top tip: If these vehicles are being charged overnight, even in the state of California, burning fossil fuels is how they are recharged. These are remote combustion trucks, not no combustion.
@@davidbrayshaw3529 yes of course someone had to say this.
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Cybertrucks or EV's in general are not automatically good for the environment. Because they are so heavy they are often more polluting than a small ICE car, even when charged with green power. I am a treehugger myself, I drive a tiny Kei-car for that reason. If I would have the money I would by something like a Twike, an ultra light EV from Switzerland. As an environmentalist I don't like Tesla at all, but the argument that all EV's are as bad or worse than most ICE cars is also complete coping nonsense. An IC engine is only about 40% thermally efficient.Electric engines are more than 80% efficient. That's a huge difference, even when using a gas powered electric plant as source, because those have a far greater efficiency as well. But with about 50% green energy on the grid in many places that becomes increasingly irrelevant. Yes EV's pollute, that's not a gotcha moment. The main problem is that people still drive way to much in way to big cars. Taking public transport when possible, using a small, light EV car when necessary and only ever using a large car or truck when commercially towing or transporting heavy stuff should be the norm. Cybertrucks can f... right of, there's no need for them, they are useless.
@@deemo5245 Modern diesels are clean.
At some point we will be forced to admit that the current battery chemistries are not ideal for large applications. The bigger the battery the more susceptible they are to damage (these things are heavy!) AND the more likely a single cell will have a bad day.
I wish we had large scale capacitors because hypothetically those wouldn't have a fire risk.
re: "At some point we will be forced to admit that the current battery chemistries are not ideal for large applications. The bigger the battery the more susceptible they are to damage (these things are heavy!) AND the more likely a single cell will have a bad day."
Solid state batteries may be the future and a lot safer
@@zzoinks anything that’s more difficult to have an accident would be better. Even the uploader has pointed out that the other battery types take more heat to burn. There couldn’t be a more clear decision on this.
"Jeep has issued a recall that involves 154k plug-in-hybrid versions of the Wrangler and Grand Cherokee which could potentially catch fire. A fire can start while the Jeeps are driving or parked. For that reason, the automaker is advising customers to park outside and away from buildings until the problem is fixed. Owners are also advised not to charge their Jeeps until the issue is addressed, as the fire risk is reduced when the battery is depleted."
Why isn’t the burnt out vehicle sent to an independent investigator for investigation?
I'm guessing that it in a conventional semi-truck crash it would take a massive hazardous material spill to match that scale of road closure. Like you said, a truck with a diesel engine and fuel tanks might burn just as hot, but not nearly for so long and they're much easier for firefighters to deal with. It's more the nature of the freight that could be a problem than the truck. (Also collateral destruction.)
I've responded to trucks that have lost a saddle tank spilling diesel on the highway. They hold around 120 gallind. Typically, you can get it cleaned up within an hour, and there is rarely fire involved.
Diesel does not catch fire.
@@johnniblueeyes2786It does if the asphalt is hot enough.
@@johnniblueeyes2786Diesel isn't as flammable as petrol however I assure you it will catch fire.
After all it is a combustible liquid. 😂
Thanks for the update! I’m often baffled by the number of road trains on our roads. Survivability on the open highway is a concern fora car and heaven forbid truck accident, so when you mentioned the 45 mph assessed safety speed for the EVs I think it’s worth investigating this further. Thank you.
How could you possibly be baffled by that. It's literally integral to this society.
Hmm... Rush the remains of the burned-out truck back to Tesla so they can (allegedly) download and edit the data recordings, wipe various failed memory modules (allegedly), doctor any camera footage (allegedly), deactivate the failed self-drive cruise-control system (allegedly), pressure the driver into signing a big fat NDA in exchange for a large sum of money (allegedly), and hastily install a small diesel engine which will be blamed for the crash and subsequent fire. Allegedly.
They really do (allegedly) think we're stupid, don't they.
But they also have a reputation to address. They have every reason to make sure their product has its flaws addressed to reduce risk of further incidents.
re: "hastily install a small diesel engine which will be blamed for the crash and subsequent fire..." LMAO. re: "Allegedly." breaking news Eleanor, in our worst ORWELLIAN, 1984, DYSTOPIAN NIGHTMARE as reported on by both Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal the "tampering of data" by the CORRUPT AF Elon and Tesla Corp (as we all suspected) has in fact been discovered, and the date of this report is 8-1-2024. okay, so what this means going forward Eleanor is you no longer have to "pull your punches" any further by suffixing your statements with the word "allegedly" in parenthesis, enjoy. 😉
@@AdrianFahrenheitTepes re: "But they also have a reputation to address." SURVEY SAYS...!!! [*ding*] "NO" (best Richard Dawson Family Feud voice)
re: "They have every reason to make sure their product has its flaws addressed to reduce risk of further incidents." unfortunately Adrian, you're NOT in possession of all the facts as the rest of us are here in 'Murica regarding Elon (in any other context you would be right though) however once you get the courage to face up to the reality of Elon, what logic dictates is any person who sits on stage in New York (the home of Wall Street btw) and tells Madison Avenue Advertisers of the Fortune 500 to "GFY...!!!" it means you're actually NOT dealing with a person who cares anything about "reputation" (personal or corporate), "product flaws", or "reducing risk", etc...
sorry Adrian, but EVERYTHING YOU KNOW ABOUT ELON IS WRONG. for reference the date of Elon telling everybody to "GFY" was 11-29-2023.
Q: They really do (allegedly) think we're stupid, don't they(?) A: yes they do, but we must recognize the strategy of repeatedly "testing the waters" to see what they can get away with is literally how the "scam" works. sadly for the most part we are in fact now STUPID (ref: The Idiocracy 2006) and the way they know this (besides examining our attitudes and group behavior regarding batteries) is because they recognize the ACTIVE ROLE they've played in the "dumbing down" of society the last 50 years (never mind the last 9).
That a single vehicle fire consumed so many resources for so long is astonishing!
Sixteen hours of hosing a single vehicle whilst water tankers operated in relay to keep up the supply of water for the Firefighters is time consuming, labour intensive and expensive.
Even more expensive is the use of a multi engined fixed wing water bombing aircraft.
That just one vehicle caused such inconvenience, tied up a huge amount of resources and was incredibly expensive should act as a warning call of what lies ahead...
1:21 That 747 tanker didn't drop water.
re: "should act warning call of what lies ahead..." yes "should" act as warning call but unfortunately it won't (ref: would'a, should'a, could'a) for this "warning call" you speak of has already LONG GONE OUT with all the fire events that happened way back 3, 4, and 5 years ago (think Model S fires and think the GM/LG/Hyundai/Bolt/Kona "Total Recall" for battery packs) therein fast-forward this same 3, 4, and 5 years to the calendar date 2024, and "what lies ahead" represents is what's happening NOW (aw crap).
I've heard that it's better just to let the fire burn out which will take hours. Putting water on it will do nothing
@@zzoinks Allowing an inferno to simply burn itself out isn't something that Firefighters can do!
Uncontained fires need to be brought under control as soon as is possible.
Simply allowing fires to burn out at their own pace would amount to criminal recklessness in many instances as the risk to other structures, vehicles or people would be too great.
Water cools as well as extinguishes.
Would these incidents have anything to do with self drive mode?
Here in Spain houses often use the ground floor as a garage --- I can´t imagine anyone keeping an EV there, and I think your neighbours would be very unhappy if you did. Your insurance company would also have an opinion, as would your shrink. Good video, thanks.
I don't think gasoline cars are much better. If you look there have been so many recalls on car fires from regular gasoline cars. You're pretty much taking a fire risk either way.
@@zzoinks
If your ICE car catches fire, you can get out.
If your EV catches fire, you can´t.
Tesla semi-truck fire, that closed the highway for 16 hours. Not only required a massive fire department response and water logistics, but the addition of a fire retardant bomber airplane. The impact accident required additional precautions above and beyond an impact accident with an ICE diesel semi-truck would have. The Fire Retardant Bomber was used to protect the forest around the burning Tesla semi-truck.
That's California, spill a cup of coffee they'll call the superfund emergency squad 😢
@@richardscathousebut in California you may really need to prevent the forest from getting any fire at all. Because past fires have been sparked by things like cigarettes, power lines, the recent forest fire was from a car fire in the brush. You can even start a fire accidentally by dragging chains behind your car so you're supposed to lift them off the ground if you have such a chain on truck or trailer
We need to charge the vehicle owner’s insurance for the full cost of these fires, and particularly the economic loss from 16 hours of interstate closure. That has to run into the millions of dollars. Once that happens, the insurance rates alone will ensure that these vehicles are made much safer with designs that allow much quicker fire extinguishing.
That's means all insurance including youres will go up 5 fold in price.
@@SevenCostanza Very unlikely. Insurance rates are based on risk and those vehicles that are riskier get much higher rates. Check insurance rates a little. The variation by vehicle is huge.
@@SevenCostanza The way it is right now all of us are paying for these EV insurance payouts. They need to be in their own insurance pool.
Because currently they are making them unsafe now because rates are low? Business owners will happily pay higher rates because they are safer? Like um..no. Assuming there is still a market I’m sure they will improve over time but the problem is inherent with current tech technology what’s gonna happen is the rates will go so high no one will be able to afford the vehicles or insurance. Remember, semi trucks often deliver goods for consumers so in the end we are paying we would be paying the higher rates on behalf of the business.
@@zanedzikonski4234 No, you are either ignorant or simply acting that way for effect. All products start out with a best guess insurance rate. As product claim statistics are collected over time, rates are adjusted based on the losses incurred. Safer products have lower loss rates and thus lower insurance rates. More dangerous products will have escalating insurance rates which, over time, will force product improvements or buyers will migrate to similar products that offer lower insurance rates. This really isn’t hard to understand. Nobody said products were intentionally made unsafe, but it is clear that the fire hazards of lithium chemistry batteries wasn’t well appreciated at the outset and is becoming better understood over time. I don’t think anyone envisioned that one EV could take out a parking garage or large building or parking lot of closely parked vehicles.
Great information
I would like to know how the Tesla semi ended up beside the road. Don't they have some assistance cruise control?
fyi... all adiabatic flame temperatures are about half the temp. of the surface of the sun. When you say they burn at regular temp...... half the temp. the surface of the sun is about right.
This is great content.
Thank you, Sir! And, nice 'stache!
Thanks!
I always end up buying pickups that are the polar opposite of the cybertruk. Four years ago I died in an accident where I drove my pickup into a semi trailer that crossed in front of me at an intersection. I was so glad there was no Li ion fire, as I was crushed against the steering wheel for 2-3 hours, unable to move. Thank you Fire and EMS crews. And thank you God for bringing me back.
Drive by wire is dangerous and should be banned. It should never have been allowed on the road. The basic functions of a vehicle should be mechanical incase of a failure of the electric system.
Great work.. thanks
Welcome 👍
Maybe EV's batteries should have ports and piping to pump liquid nitrogen as a fire suppression . The liquid nitrogen would cool and freeze the cells plus the nitrogen gas should put the flames out .
Wonderfully presented, thank you very much for creating and sharing.
That slope of 80 is pretty gnarly
When does reality kick in and some one says we can not afford these ev batteries?
King's new clothes?
We need to put a stop on these vehicles being sold until we fix the fire hazard.
you can't when they start burning they basically have to burn out
You cannot fix stupid!! Its was a disaster in the making!!
What do you suggest instead?
Steam vehicles are explosion hazards!
Any vehicle using a flammable fuel is an even greater fire hazard.
@@jamesphillips2285 the boiler was a bigger risk than the fire box. Solid state batteries do seem to be a better alternative. Something like that would work nice. I just want a EV battery that doesn't overwhelm fire suspension systems. Or at the very least take out my house from the neighbors driveway. Our HOA has banned EVs after 4 EVs caught fire taking out 7 houses and causing major damage to 12-13 more in a 3 month time span.
@@jmsether How worn out are the electrical outlets?
I replaced mine before plugging my EV in. No fire yet.
This is part of why a lot of money is going into new battery R&D.
StacheD, be warned, I expect Ben Sullins to do a debunk video on this.
By the way, Ben recently deleted my post on his "EVs are the future-Not everyone is buying it-or are they?". I'd merely countered his distorted interpretation of data with no foul language or personal attacks.
QUOTE Ben Sullins: "Your comment has been removed due to violating community guidelines. Please try again and follow the rules of this forum otherwise you risk a permanent ban"
yeah i've been watching Ben's recent "response videos" to both Scotty Kilmer and Doug Demuro, and really these aren't so much "response videos" per say as what you're actually seeing are videos of a typical EV fanboy "struggling mightily" with their COGNITIVE DISSONANCE. you can see this behavior in username "there is some cool stuff's" responses to my posts in the good Captain's last upload regarding the Portugal Parking Fire. # WITH EACH FIRE FANBOYS ARE LOSING THEIR SH!T
re: "I expect Ben Sullins to do a debunk video on this..." "GFY BEN SULLINS...!!!" (my voice)
@@phillyphil1513 I'm pretty sure Ben's got heaps of Tesla stock & those RUclipsrs are THE WORST.
Since pimping Teslas, he's got a massive new home, several different brands of solar storage, a couple of solar water generators, & that's just off the top of my head.
He's had 4 Teslas at a time, posting multiple costs of ownership updates & a Rivian.
He also promotes the virtues of buying second-hand but gushes at times about their low depreciation. So what's it to be Benny?
I'll look up some of your comments & have your back.
Stay tuned. 👍
Wow ! all Those Toxic Gasses and Fumes released into the Atmosphere 😞 that was Enough fumes and toxic gases for a diesel truck to run a entire lifetime i bet... thats sad
So wouldn't it make more sense to use the water to contain the wildfire and let the semi burn? surely cooling the battery prolongs the incident and increases the risks associated with unburned flammable gasses
Why doesn't California sue Tesla for damages? Ditto Texas!
This is WHY goods need to be transported by train to reach decarbonisation goals in preference to big battery semis. This is a horrifying fire.
Decarbonization goals won't be reached, regardless of strategies.
"decarbonisation goals" - try not to fall for politically motivated pseudoscientific hoaxes.
EVs are an ecological disaster.
I'll stick with my ICE ride.
Environmentally friendly. EVs emit no tailpipe pollutants,😅
Good reviewer
Higher speed crash (above 35-40mph), the battery bursts into flames due to damage.
Very interesting.
So the design criteria has to have a higher rate of speed, say 50-60mph.
you know so much about battery chemistry
In other words, don't drink and drive or drink while driving when operating a battery-powered car.
Does anyone know how long Tesla highway rigs have been on the road? 2 weeks or 3 weeks maybe?
Can’t wait for solid state batteries. Twice the range and half the weight and fires will be a thing of the past.
Yeah the Park fire 🔥 that started in Chico progressed across 3 -4 different counties. Then this big boy blows up on areas that they Saved and was able to detur from moving up into that side of the forest. You can see why the airplane tanker came swooping in saying Hell no Tesla.
Another big problem is batteries really don’t like being wet, so dousing them with water is only making the problems worse when firefighters show up on scene. There needs to be a new method for snuffing out these fires before they go into thermal runaway, or at least have the batteries insulated in a way where they cannot cause a chain reaction, I know that seems obvious, but its also obvious that adding water to a battery fire is a bad idea, yet we’re still doing it.
Surely water is the worst thing to spray on a runaway lithium (chemical) fire? Chemical fires are meant to be fought with neutral foam or powders?
There is speed, acceleration and deceleration. What is a high rate of speed?
Imagine an EV fire in a tunnel!😮😮😮
Already happened twice in Korean Parking Garages
Shows why we are not ready for large scale electric. Can you imagine that happened in a tunnel somewhere? How about kids strapped in child seats. Combine that with the fact that most people are afraid of running out, so they pretty much always are fully charged. I don't know if they will ever come up with a battery that won't burn, but we don't need the toxic nightmare these things are.
should use BYD blade battery, it wouldn't burn
They may better off protecting exposures and let the batteries burn out.
That's our SOP for EVs in my brigade. We don't have BA and yet we respond to 110km road crashes on the nearby highway.
Even ICE vehicle fires we are staying upwind.
This is exactly why all of our assurances are going up. These Evie cars are a hazard, the toxic fumes that come off these batteries burning is far worse than the traditional car fire!
Hybrids did not have much fire issues, because they used NiMH to start with, which have zero thermal runaway potential. Unfortunately, they don't have a high energy density, which still worked fine in hybrids. The issue is, due to an oversight of thermal runaway in the event of an accident. Accidents are a definite probability in an automobile. However sophisticated the safety system may be, it is useless, when it comes to thermal runaway, due to direct puncture short of a battery cell in an accident. Also due to cooling requirements, there is hardly anything(a thermal barrier) in between to protect these cells from each other. Things are going to get worse in time, with all the aging EVs on the road with the NCM chemistry. Even LFP is not that immune, just that it has a higher temperature for spontaneous thermal runaway event. Expecting a more stringent battery safety test as part of annual inspection to ensure older EVs are roadworthy.
Will older batteries be dangerous like you said?
All that water they squirted it on the batteries is toxic, now it contaminated the streams.
EVs burn far hotter than a petrol car fire.
4:30 4:33 4:39
We need magnetic propulsion. Same as ufos😂
Huh but isn't that what electric motor is?
Where did all the contaminated water go?
Nature
They need to pack some type of neutralization agent in these batteries so when they do rupture some chemistry magic will happen.. kinda like the sherman had wet storage for its ammo..
900kwh? Woah baby
So what I hear is if a EV is near you stay far away from it.. Let’s just get these things off our roads.
So now fire brigades will need full water tanker trucks….got it.
Don't forget, they are slowly starting to "transition" to EV trucks, I have seen 🤔.
But then it does have a diesel engine to run the pumps 🤣.
Wait, news reports of the I80 closure stated toxic gases as the reason for the delay- not fire 🔥
It was initially a fire, but eventually transitioned to the battery off gassing.
Did it really "BURST into flames"?
wow you will find used cyber trucks sold in mass then just like mercedez EV in Korea
I shudder to imagine a multi-vehicle pile-up involving several EVs... It's bad enough with conventional ICEs!
Good stuff - not clickbait. Thanks. 😎 (Irritating airhead comments, though). RE-EDIT: Interesting in the low attainment of scientific reasoning/education hopefully only in the US. .
Great reporting. Thanks.
For the I-80 incident, one TV news report claimed the fire protection protocol is for an area of 1/2 mile to be cleared around the EV semi truck fire incident due to toxic smoke.
Anyone know if that fire protection protocol is available on-line?
Except for this report -- kudos -- there appears to be radio silence on the Cybertruck fire & fatality in Houston.
To be kind, that is odd.
Contrast that radio silence with intense interest in Cybertrucks generally ... evidenced, among other places, by the 21 million views of Whistlin' Diesel's Cybertruck / F150 test-comparison first video, released 3 weeks ago, and 4 million views already in only 24 hours for the follow up second video, third video likely in the works ... no budget, borderline / truly insane but brilliantly revealing product review content.
This dude Cody of Whistlin' Diesel's over-the-top testing stringency is putting the NHTSA & IIHS on notice regards approved tow ratings of Elonmobiles.
The Elon cult members attacked Cody for his first video, but he answered more than convincingly with his second video. Third video pending.
Cringe moment for me in the first video (minute 12 : 46) when Cody mock pleas for help that he can't get out of the Cybertruck ... that, after a stunning Dukes of Hazard / monster truck 10 foot air launch & crash landing jump in that Cybertruck ... man, call me Nervous Nellie, but I was thinking battery-in-elevator moment. No for now. You gotta wonder.
That Cybertruck's been back to Tesla for repairs and has been returned to Cody.
Are we to believe it has the same post Dukes of Hazard launch battery?
1/2 mile is from the old ERG, but that is for rail car related incidents. I think it's excessive. Personally, I would have staged 150 ft upwind, closed the impacted side of the highway, and protected the vegetation while letting it burn. There is no need to close both sides of the highway.
I'm not knocking the departments decisions. There is very little guidance for fire departments right now.
What happened to the Tesla Semi Driver or Drivers???
Any info on that??
The driver walked away from the crash and was taken to a hospital.
@@softwarephil1709
Oh, thanks
If Lithium don't play well with water, why do you keep using water to put it out. Isn't that counterproductive?😮
A high speed collision with a concrete structure sounds more like suicide than an accident.
Maybe they fell asleep and drifted off the road
That bulletproof glass makes it really easy to get out of a vehicle with buckled doors.
If you live near an interstate highway, you soon learn diesel trucks burn to the ground on a monthly basis
Im not wearing my spex at the moment but that sign behind you.......are you sponsered by DUREX ?
Ironically cheap EV's aren't a fire risk.
The expensive batteries are the ones where the have more enery in a smaller battery, and the battery is able to release that energy faster, that makes expensive EV's go really fast.
There are EV batteries that are totally safe even if you hammer a nail through the battery.
Sodium Ion is now beginning to be used instead of Lithium. Only two Chinese car models so far use Sodium Ion batteries, but they are being also being used in stationary storage a lot. Sodium Ion batteries are about 40% cheaper than a Lithium battery, they can't release energy very fast.
Battery technology keeps changing. So in the future expect hundreds of millions of cheap, low performence EV's that are not a fire risk at all.
No. Lithium Ion Batteries burn at 1,100C and not at 600C like combustion engine cars.
We also need to stop using electrical door releases as well and go back to mechanical.
If they use fire blankets they would put out the fire in 30 to 90 minutes rather then hours.
They can use a few hundred gallons or less of water rather then thousands if they would invest in the proper equipment for the new changing times.
The fire isn’t put out. The Oxygen being used in the combustion is inside the battery. However, the blankets are important for limiting the heat being given off by the fire, which is dangerous because the heat being given off can start additional fires, so yes the thermal blankets are really vital here, but not in the way many people think.
A gasoline fire burns at 1500 degrees. Not the same as a lithium battery.
Huh you're right if my search results are accurate
A Wildfire caused by an EV car is absurd x'D
no seriously, why not liquid nitrogen? I don't see crush zones on the cyberjunk
I have thought the same too RE: liquid nitrogen for EV fires.
My guess is: a) it isn’t exactly easy to keep tankers full of cryogenic LN2 around ready to run to a fire at a moments notice, and b) safety to both firefighters and the public. LN2 is pretty dangerous stuff so spraying it all over the place (and especially on super hot surfaces) could be pretty dangerous for anyone around.
Edit: also, now I think about it, spraying large amounts of LN2 around would be really bad for the surroundings too! It would kill any plants unlucky enough to be near the car and possibly even freeze the road / surrounding structure to much colder temperatures than what it was ever designed to withstand so it could maybe even cause the road / structure itself to fail (I dunno for sure, just a guess).
Because these type of battery fires are self containing. Don’t need oxygen from the air.
@@roybm3124 that is true! However, the way you deal with EV fires is by cooling the packs so the idea of using something to try to instantly freeze them makes sense to me (at least theoretically) 😊
@@bear4278 Good question for @StacheD Training. Water has a great vaporization energy number. Liquid nitrogen is quite impractical and only made on order in this form and quantaties I think. Plus added risks for the firemen and surrounding for cold burn risks and suffocation.
How much carbons or toxic fumes and smoke released into the air? Hmmmm
I would think a lot of toxic fumes but relatively little carbon dioxide is released.
Because a lot of carbon dioxide is released from burning organic materials like wood or petroleum.
All of them contains chemical energy, and turns it into heat energy when it combusts
So I'm thinking there's not much organic materials from the EV battery so when it burns it won't release much carbon dioxide.
I believe the driver of the semi was not injured YET there is no record/statement from the driver of the Tesla semi? Why guess when he/she can state what happened? Charge Tesla for the costs associated with the damage to nature. The road was shut down for an entire day.
It certainly seems odd that we haven’t heard from the driver. I suggest that Tesla told him to clam up.
Cybertruck Sure Looks " SAFE "
NOT
Especially when the trailer hitch breaks off at the frame.
blame the battery not the driver who run the truck off the road