Electric Car Explosion Risk Sees Them Quarantined in Spaces 50 Times Bigger Than Petrol Car
Electric cars that sustain minor bumps are being kept 15 metres apart in repair yards over fears they might explode, adding to insurance bills as they require 50 times more space than petrol cars. The Telegraph has more.
Government guidelines recommend electric vehicles with damaged batteries should be “quarantined” from other vehicles due to the risk of battery fires. Damaged batteries pose a risk of “thermal runaway” where the energy stored in the battery releases rapidly, creating temperatures of up to 400°C.
But the practice threatens to increase costs for the insurance industry by more than £600m, costs which ultimately could be passed onto drivers in increased premiums, according to a report by automotive risk firm Thatcham Research.
It said insurers would need to spend an additional £900m a year on quarantine facilities for damaged cars as a result of the safety measures by 2035, as more battery-powered vehicles take to the roads. The extra costs risk adding £20 a year onto all car insurance premiums, rising to £28 by 2050 when there are expected to be some 360,000 electric cars on the road network.
Just two damaged electric cars can fit into the same space that would otherwise fit 100 petrol or diesel cars, under current the DVLA and Transport Department guidelines.
Adrian Watson, of Thatcham Research, said: “I’ve seen salvage plants with quarantining compounds. Any EV goes straight in there and sits there for a week before they do anything with it.”
The placement of the battery within electric cars can make it more likely that it will be damaged and written off after a minor accident, according to experts who have previously pointed to common ‘skateboard’ designs. These place batteries underneath the car, leaving them susceptible to damage from minor accidents such as mounting the kerb.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I read that in the US the charge for towing/transporting EVs that are broken down is higher than ICE vehicles because of the fire risk.
The EV story and Net Zero just keeps getting better and better.
I’m not sure of the technical details, but often broken down EV’s can’t be towed because the drive mechanism seizes up without battery power, or something like that. They have to be put on the back of a pick up vehicle instead of a simple tow and this adds to the cost of recovery.
EV honeymoon is really until a huge fire happens somewhere
The use of the word ‘could’ in that sentence is superfluous, of course the extra costs will be passed on to customers, what alternative is there!
No, no. The insurance companies will get subsidies from the government to cover their costs and that way they won’t charge us any more in premiums. The government won’t raise taxes to pay for this, they will simply borrow a bit more and add it to our national debt to be paid off by our grandchildren – after all it’s really for their benefit, isn’t it?
Yeah, right.
It would be good if the costs incurred in giving insurance for these machines was actually paid by the owners.
It wouldn’t just be good, it would be amazing.
I would bet a pound to a pinch of shit that our GangGreen Insurance Companies will manage to load extra insurance EV costs onto ICE drivers.
Gotta save the Planet. Obviously.
And all customers no doubt, not just the numpties who are signed up to the ‘saving the planet’ nonsense
The Scottish ferries are getting twitchy about EVs too, last thing you want is a torching metal fire in the hold.
Exactly.. I use one overnight channel ferry quite a lot that’s used by relatively affluent people driving their EV’s. The thought of one of the wretched things catching fire on the car deck doesn’t bare thinking about..
In Copenhagen the ferries themselves are electric. An accident waiting to happen?
https://mypathtotravel.com/harbour-bus/
Salt water and salt laden moist air are hugely corrosive too, I guess (hope) the certification has considered all these aspects??
What isn’t being said is that Teslas account for the vast majority of BEV battery fires, even when you take into account the proportion of BEV models on the road today.
Check out why Martin Tripp tried desperately to blow the whistle on Tesla (and why Musk then tried to frame him as a terrorist, getting him arrested on trumped up charges of violent and threatening behaviour with a firearm). Shoddy manufacturing processes and the use of compromised cells, leading to apparently ‘spontaneous’ explosions in vehicles which have not been in any accident.
And that’s just the start.
And whilst I am a big fan of the electric motor, using it for cars is just stupid. Battery tech just isn’t up to the job, and I don’t think it ever will be.
I missed the part where it explains why other motorists must subsidise ev’s.
Yes Neil.. you can bet your boots that ‘other motorists’ driving their planet destroying machines will be picking up the extra insurance costs on their premiums too..
E-car is short for Eeeeek-car!
This fits in nicely with the Lawrence Fox article above where a silly coffee chain has pulled it’s ads from GB News because brainwashed climate activists got in a tizzy that the channel dared to question aspects of climate change dogma, which excuse me if I am wrong, but isn’t questioning things supposed to be what science is about? Which only goes to show that climate change has nothing to do with science and never did. Perhaps if any channel now dares to report this information about electric cars needing 50 times more space in case they go on fire they too will be subjected to the climate inquisition browbeating them into submission. ——Probably the only channel reporting this though will be GB News, still the only one with any guts to challenge the ECO Socialist pretend to save the planet people.
The weird thing is that there have been many articles outlining all the problems and issues with EVs but the question is will the Government policy change? As far as I can see TPTB are fixed on EVs, the car companies have been brow beaten into going EV, China is now the top producer of EVs and has no intention of backing down from an EV future.
And so where does this leave us? well it seems to leave us with a car-less future for most, a situation which may well suit the WEF but which will not suit many ordinary car driving people. Are they really going to ‘drive’ us to a no car future? cars are such an emotive and critical issue for so many people that it is hard to see people just giving up their cars, shrugging their shoulders and saying ‘oh well I guess it is for the good of the planet’. I have no idea how this will all play out but I do not think the transition to a no car future will go simply and easily.
Why not warn people where an EV is parked by having somebody stand by it waving a red flag. How’s that for sustainability- I’ve just recycled an old policy!
Imagine being in a major motorway pile up which includes a high proportion of EVs. And then think about the emergency services who will have to clear it up.
The consequences will be far, far worse than a pile up of ICE vehicles.
The Betamax of the automotive industry. A friend of mine was asked by a car salesman to tick a box to say he’d been asked about buying an EV although he hadn’t. He bought a beautiful reliable ICE model.
Why are they moaning so much about the white phosphorus cluster bombs- when they are all already on the streets?