Politics Forum
|
List All Forums | About |
![]() ![]() Section 4: President & Congress Subject: Elec truck & car fire fires Msg# 1192642
|
||||||
OK, here is your reply...
If I have to ask for it that suggests to me that you are not too confident in your response. I have been trying to have gentlemanly debates with you and not just rag on your posts, which one might think deserved some recognition, but here I am getting no response to my comments. Only after noting that do you deign to respond. It's disappointing. But let me respond back. So, fuzzy math, huh? Maybe if vehicles were a constant you could count on your stats being carved in stone, but you can't. Once on the road, EVs will age, and with aging and wear come more issues, such as Thermal Runaway, as mentioned in your article. And frankly, do we even know how EVs will behave after decades of use? Then too, as ICE vehicles are forced off the road, you will have fewer ICE vehicle fires. That is not fuzzy math, it's just reality, and percentage per 1000 will have less meaning because you'll have many thousands fewer ICE vehicles. And as EVs increase on the road, you will have more fires--regardless of the percentages you have glommed onto simply due to more EVs on the road. That is also not fuzzy math. Percentage of fires per 1000 is somewhat irrelevant here. Why do I keep saying that? Because your article tells us that EV fires are more dangerous and harder to put out than other vehicle fires. We've all seen pictures of the results of EV fires. Cars burned to ashes--garages completely gutted. This is an EV phenomenon, not an ICE phenomenon. P.S. I would appreciate it if you would not put parts of quotes from my messages in bold if they were not originally in bold. Or Italics, etc. I know you were were trying to pull out part of a message to emphasize in order to respond to it specifcally, but in that case, just post that line or lines. If you change someone else's message it may well give a false impression of what that person said, or were trying to say, especially if another reader did not see the original message. Thank-you. |
||||||
|
||||||
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: OK, here is your reply... You wrote: Consider that as the number of EVs on the road increase, due to government forced adoption, the number of EVs involved in crashes will increase, and the number of ICE vehicles involved in crashes will decrease. This is a simple mathematical reality. The numbers you quoted as to how many of what type of vehicles catch fire per 1000 will change significantly as more EVs are on the road. Again, it's a math problem. And because EVs will burn when they crash, and because EV fires are more difficult and dangerous to put out, it stands to reason that EVs are not as safe as ICE vehicle. What it is, Mark, is fuzzy math. For the sake of conversation, lets say there are 400,000 EVs on the road. At 0.25 fires per 1000 that would be 100 fires. If the number of EVs increases ten-fold to 4,000,000 one would expect the number of EV fires to increase to 1000, all things being equal. That is still 0.25 per 1000. The number of fires per thousand would not increase, just the total number of fires. As time passes, I would expect that safety improvements will be made to reduce the number of fires in EVs. |