Norwegian shipping company bans electric cars on board classic ferry route(ctif.org)
ctif.org
Norwegian shipping company bans electric cars on board classic ferry route
https://ctif.org/news/norwegian-shipping-company-bans-electric-cars-board-classic-ferry-route
175 comments
"Toxic gases" aside, I think this part is more relevant to their ultimate decision:
> The decision was made after an external risk analysis was made on behalf of the company. What the risk analysis found was that fires in electric cars are considered more difficult to extinguish than fires in cars powered by petrol and diesel.
In other words: the problem is that they can't easily extinguish these fires on their ships. Or, perhaps, doing so isn't worth whatever the corresponding insurance burden is.
> The decision was made after an external risk analysis was made on behalf of the company. What the risk analysis found was that fires in electric cars are considered more difficult to extinguish than fires in cars powered by petrol and diesel.
In other words: the problem is that they can't easily extinguish these fires on their ships. Or, perhaps, doing so isn't worth whatever the corresponding insurance burden is.
We seem to have regular fires in NYC now caused by folk daisy chaining Ebike and Escooter batteries to charge them.
They seem to spread super quickly, be hard to extinguish, and release a lot of toxic smoke.
0 - Four dead at ebike store 1 - Leveled a supermarket and laundromat. Firefighter quoted "something we've never seen before, in terms of going from small to big in a matter of a few minutes" 2 - Over three dozen injured
[0] - https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/20/us/nyc-ebike-store-fire-lithi... [1] - https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/lithium-ion-battery-bla... [2] - https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2022-11-06/nyc-probe...
It just goes on and on like this with a simple search for "battery fire NYC".
They seem to spread super quickly, be hard to extinguish, and release a lot of toxic smoke.
0 - Four dead at ebike store 1 - Leveled a supermarket and laundromat. Firefighter quoted "something we've never seen before, in terms of going from small to big in a matter of a few minutes" 2 - Over three dozen injured
[0] - https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/20/us/nyc-ebike-store-fire-lithi... [1] - https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/lithium-ion-battery-bla... [2] - https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2022-11-06/nyc-probe...
It just goes on and on like this with a simple search for "battery fire NYC".
Yep. The city has begun offering subsidies to delivery drivers to get them to switch to known safer e-bike models[1]. However, the prices are high even with the subsidies; the fires will likely continue (and continue to be very deadly) until the city takes registration and regulation of repair shops more seriously.
[1]: https://nyrideclean.org/
[1]: https://nyrideclean.org/
It's not the same situation: 1. People won't be charging EVs on board. 2. BEVs have proper battery management system with temperature monitoring and active cooling, not some DIY hack.
But lithium fires, if they start, can be nasty, so I'm not surprised the insurance doesn't like it.
But lithium fires, if they start, can be nasty, so I'm not surprised the insurance doesn't like it.
Ya, those are fair points. It would be neat to charge the EVs on the ferry ride but that'd probably be a bunch of energy or weight in order to implement.
So firefighters are lacking in technology to deal with this problem.
I wonder how hard it would be to engulf a vehicle with something like a fire retardant expanding foam to contain it?
I guess we could practice on our dead mobile phones for a scaled mock up of the problem? At least that would also help deal with the e-waste problem and is something any individual could do in their own garden shed!
I wonder how hard it would be to engulf a vehicle with something like a fire retardant expanding foam to contain it?
I guess we could practice on our dead mobile phones for a scaled mock up of the problem? At least that would also help deal with the e-waste problem and is something any individual could do in their own garden shed!
This isn't a technology problem but a physics one: How do you sink a lot of heat energy from a chunk of material that responds to water by reacting and generating a lot of heat?
Gasoline carries much more energy than a lithium battery, but spraying it with regular water (I don't know if this is actually common) could disperse the fuel and sap the heat easily, killing two parts of the fire triangle.
You just can't do that with a lithium battery. Other fluids which can soak up massive amounts of energy have other problems, like being very toxic.
You can't disperse the fuel either, because lithium will react with water anywhere it finds it. There's not that much lithium in a battery, but it's enough to keep re-igniting the rest of the battery.
Gasoline carries much more energy than a lithium battery, but spraying it with regular water (I don't know if this is actually common) could disperse the fuel and sap the heat easily, killing two parts of the fire triangle.
You just can't do that with a lithium battery. Other fluids which can soak up massive amounts of energy have other problems, like being very toxic.
You can't disperse the fuel either, because lithium will react with water anywhere it finds it. There's not that much lithium in a battery, but it's enough to keep re-igniting the rest of the battery.
CO2 or a carbonate seems to be key.
Lithium ion batteries are like semtex or rocket fuel, their weakness is they cant be dispersed easily due to their solid compact nature unlike petrol or diesel or gas vapours which can all be dispersed easily, typically with water, and to transfer heat.
A hose that produces a fine mist of water has water droplets with greater surface area with less volume of water which then enables the heat to be absorbed by the water.
So the problem seems to be dispersing or containing the reaction to limit damage.
Lithium ion batteries are like semtex or rocket fuel, their weakness is they cant be dispersed easily due to their solid compact nature unlike petrol or diesel or gas vapours which can all be dispersed easily, typically with water, and to transfer heat.
A hose that produces a fine mist of water has water droplets with greater surface area with less volume of water which then enables the heat to be absorbed by the water.
So the problem seems to be dispersing or containing the reaction to limit damage.
There are special chemical fire extinguishers to deal specifically with this. I'd bet dollars to donuts this came out of an insurance exercise where it wasn't necessarily the scale of the risk, but rather the uncertainty around the risk (because of its novelty). Insurance companies are very cautious about uncertainty, even if the risk seems low.
They don't necessarily stop the reactions that started the fires though. If intense heat starts the fire, you likely need to cool it down and continue cooling to prevent reignition, while allowing the reaction to run its course.
It's basically a hypergolic fuel once the cells are ruptured.
It's basically a hypergolic fuel once the cells are ruptured.
Look into groundwater poisoning around us air force bases due to firefighting foam practice. Swamping a car with it every time a car battery is punctured would be really bad.
Years ago, when Tesla was a sports car, my uncle had a friend who was called by fire departments to help when a Tesla crashed. They would not touch the vehicle or anyone inside until he came and did his work. He got several 55 gallon drums and filled them with water. Then he gets a heating element and hooks it to the battery. He drops the element in the water. The water starts to boil within seconds. Once it is at boiling point he takes the hearing element and puts it in another 55 gallon drum. He repeats this until the battery is drained.
It sounds like fire fighters are still scared today. Perhaps it is because there is not only a risk of fire, but also electrocution.
It sounds like fire fighters are still scared today. Perhaps it is because there is not only a risk of fire, but also electrocution.
> It sounds like fire fighters are still scared today. Perhaps it is because there is not only a risk of fire, but also electrocution.
Yes, as mentioned there's not enough training happening. Every firefighter should be trained for handling fires in electrical installations.
If you can't shut it off, there are safety distances you'll have to maintain, these are even defined in industrial standards.
For "low voltage" (up to 1.500 V DC) the safety distance is 1 meter for a wide beam of water and 5 meters for a narrow beam of water. This can be well kept (don't lay down in the water, though) with appropriate tactics.
Yes, as mentioned there's not enough training happening. Every firefighter should be trained for handling fires in electrical installations.
If you can't shut it off, there are safety distances you'll have to maintain, these are even defined in industrial standards.
For "low voltage" (up to 1.500 V DC) the safety distance is 1 meter for a wide beam of water and 5 meters for a narrow beam of water. This can be well kept (don't lay down in the water, though) with appropriate tactics.
I wonder if that could be built into new fire trucks. For a fire truck with 1500 gallons of room temperature water (20℃ or 68℉) the energy from a full charged Tesla would raise that to 35℃ or 95℉ which is not so hot that it would be dangerous when used to put out the fire.
For a smaller fire trucks with only 1000 gallons that would raise to around 42℃ or 108℉ which might be too hot to use.
For fire trucks with only 500 gallons this approach it would definitely be too hot to use. The water would end up at around 65℃ or 150℉. That scalds people in under 2 seconds.
For a smaller fire trucks with only 1000 gallons that would raise to around 42℃ or 108℉ which might be too hot to use.
For fire trucks with only 500 gallons this approach it would definitely be too hot to use. The water would end up at around 65℃ or 150℉. That scalds people in under 2 seconds.
Could someone who took EE please remind me... how many drums of water could a fully-charged Tesla boil?
That's not EE, that's basic math/physics. The largest Telsa Model S battery is 100kWh, which is 360MJ. Boiling 1L of water from room temperature takes 330kJ. 55 US gallons is about 200L water. 200 * 330kJ = 66MJ to boil the whole drum.
360MJ per battery / 66MJ per drum = 5.46 drums of water.
360MJ per battery / 66MJ per drum = 5.46 drums of water.
That's how many drums it could take from room temperature (20℃) to 100℃, but it would not be boiling yet. You need to put in more energy at 100℃ to make it boil.
To go from 1 L @ 100℃ to steam at 100 ℃ would take in additional 2.26 MJ.
A 200 L drum of room temperature water then could be used to tank 200 x (2.26 + 0.33) MJ = 518 MJ. They would only need one such drum, and one fully charged Tesla battery would be able to boil away 70% of the water.
That actually works out nicely. Assuming a standard sized 55 gallon drum when the battery runs out juice there would still be about 25 cm of water in the drum. You want enough water to remain so that the heating element stay immersed because it is often bad for them to run in air.
To go from 1 L @ 100℃ to steam at 100 ℃ would take in additional 2.26 MJ.
A 200 L drum of room temperature water then could be used to tank 200 x (2.26 + 0.33) MJ = 518 MJ. They would only need one such drum, and one fully charged Tesla battery would be able to boil away 70% of the water.
That actually works out nicely. Assuming a standard sized 55 gallon drum when the battery runs out juice there would still be about 25 cm of water in the drum. You want enough water to remain so that the heating element stay immersed because it is often bad for them to run in air.
But which method would take longer? Heating five 55-gallon drums to 100C each, or boiling one barrel of water until the battery is dead?
Which is more efficient, time-wise?
Which is more efficient, time-wise?
My first guess is that heating multiple drums to 100℃ would be faster than boiling one drum. This is based on the rate of heat exchange by contact when two things of different temperature touch is proportional to the temperature difference.
When the water is at 100℃ the difference between it and the heating element should be less than when the water is colder and so it should be transferring heat slower.
By switching drums you are spending more time with the heating element in colder water so can transfer more energy.
However there may be other factors.
First, dH/dt = k ΔT, but k depends on the particular two things that are exchanging heat. I don't know if the k for the heating element and liquid water is the same as the k for the heating element and water that is undergoing a phase transition to steam. Someone who remembers their college thermodynamics a lot better than I do will be needed here.
Second, the battery is going to have some limit on how fast it can transfer energy. That may be low enough that whether you use one drum or multiple may not matter.
When the water is at 100℃ the difference between it and the heating element should be less than when the water is colder and so it should be transferring heat slower.
By switching drums you are spending more time with the heating element in colder water so can transfer more energy.
However there may be other factors.
First, dH/dt = k ΔT, but k depends on the particular two things that are exchanging heat. I don't know if the k for the heating element and liquid water is the same as the k for the heating element and water that is undergoing a phase transition to steam. Someone who remembers their college thermodynamics a lot better than I do will be needed here.
Second, the battery is going to have some limit on how fast it can transfer energy. That may be low enough that whether you use one drum or multiple may not matter.
If I didn't know the context, this would sound like a contrived example of how great SI units are.
Also, all teslas are fitted with the same batteries now, with a software limit. Don't know how charged the extra capacity is, or if it's spread out.
Also, all teslas are fitted with the same batteries now, with a software limit. Don't know how charged the extra capacity is, or if it's spread out.
How many cubic feet of water would a 5 BTU battery be able to bring to a boil?
Nice, that's a pretty manageable amount of water to imagine a firefighter having access to.
Are there better ways of discharging EV batteries?
Are there better ways of discharging EV batteries?
And no one considered how dangerous 55 gallons of boiling water is?
Have you found electric car fires as easy to put out as ICE car fires?
See my answer on another comment: It's a question of the right strategy. But that strategy is being trained regularly, there are preparations in place and in case I would encounter an EV fire with my local department, we would have a through ready in about half an hour and could dump it in there.
The discussion with EV fires now, we had 15 years ago with solar panels. People were panicking that firefighters would not be able to reach the burning roof under the solar panels, houses would burn down like nothing or that firefighters would die to electric shocks when taking care of those fires.
Reality is that some regulation was put in place (roof-mounted solar systems need an emergency breaker in Germany) and people found that the solar panels were most likely already gone in fully developed fires or that they could be rather easy and safely be ripped from the roof, when necessary.
The discussion with EV fires now, we had 15 years ago with solar panels. People were panicking that firefighters would not be able to reach the burning roof under the solar panels, houses would burn down like nothing or that firefighters would die to electric shocks when taking care of those fires.
Reality is that some regulation was put in place (roof-mounted solar systems need an emergency breaker in Germany) and people found that the solar panels were most likely already gone in fully developed fires or that they could be rather easy and safely be ripped from the roof, when necessary.
The exact issue you describe was a problem in a recent urban fire in the Netherlands though [1], the fire could not be properly extinguished under the embedded solar panels in the roof and spread further than it would have otherwise.
Having these corner case be an over-focus of an overall better technology is a bad human habit though [2]
[1] https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/nederland/artikel/5391449/zo...
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiYO1TObNz8
Having these corner case be an over-focus of an overall better technology is a bad human habit though [2]
[1] https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/nederland/artikel/5391449/zo...
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiYO1TObNz8
> The panels in Arnhem were not placed on roof tiles, but directly on the roof. The roofs of the entire block of houses are connected by solar panels.
This is not how normal solar panels are placed on roofs. In CA, for example, there are offset requirements where they have to be a certain distance from the edge of the roof, and on top of roof tiles/shingles. The only exception is uninhabited buildings, like a detached garage.
Sounds like Norway needs to adjust its safety regulations.
This is not how normal solar panels are placed on roofs. In CA, for example, there are offset requirements where they have to be a certain distance from the edge of the roof, and on top of roof tiles/shingles. The only exception is uninhabited buildings, like a detached garage.
Sounds like Norway needs to adjust its safety regulations.
But we are talking about a car on a boat. Will your fire department be able to put out a lithium fire on a boat?
I guess the ferry will have firefighters onboard. They should be trained on how to handle car fires in general.
They will then need some equipment to get EVs out of their parking position (forklift maybe?!?) and have some container ready to drop them into. It's a problem that can be solved with the right equipment.
They will then need some equipment to get EVs out of their parking position (forklift maybe?!?) and have some container ready to drop them into. It's a problem that can be solved with the right equipment.
Come on, be serious. Civilian ferries don't carry dedicated firefighters. The crew receive some cursory training in basic firefighting every once in a while. They depend mainly on fixed firefighting systems that dispense CO2, suppressants, or water.
It's impossible to operate a forklift on the tightly packed cargo deck of a ferry, especially while the space is filled with toxic smoke. Nor is there room onboard for a fire resistant container.
It's hilarious how a bunch of software developers who have never spent any time at sea think they have all the answers.
It's impossible to operate a forklift on the tightly packed cargo deck of a ferry, especially while the space is filled with toxic smoke. Nor is there room onboard for a fire resistant container.
It's hilarious how a bunch of software developers who have never spent any time at sea think they have all the answers.
A long time ago I was trained to be an officer on commercial oceangoing ships. In addition to regular classwork and practice with firefighting equipment, we were sent to Military Sealift Command Firefighting school to get experience fighting fires in actual shipboard conditions. It's a bit more than "cursory training." I'm not sure everyone came back with all their eyebrows intact :-)
Not an expert firefighter by any means, even back then. Just responding to this to add some data. Still, you make a good point: if you're not regularly fighting fires, that training atrophies like anything else. If fire like this breaks out anywhere but on the main deck, my guess is that they'd just flood the space with CO2.
Not an expert firefighter by any means, even back then. Just responding to this to add some data. Still, you make a good point: if you're not regularly fighting fires, that training atrophies like anything else. If fire like this breaks out anywhere but on the main deck, my guess is that they'd just flood the space with CO2.
> The crew receive some cursory training in basic firefighting every once in a while.
That is EXACTLY part of the problem. You put people with lots of flammable stuff under their asses on a ship in the middle of nowhere, with no help readily available, and hope that some sprinklers will be good enough to do the job.
Don't you see a problem with that, that should be tackled?
That is EXACTLY part of the problem. You put people with lots of flammable stuff under their asses on a ship in the middle of nowhere, with no help readily available, and hope that some sprinklers will be good enough to do the job.
Don't you see a problem with that, that should be tackled?
I see all sorts of marine safety problems that could be tackled with sufficient resources. If you're an expert in this area then I would encourage you to work through your national authorities to propose further SOLAS amendments. They come up with new ones on a regular basis.
https://www.dnv.com/news/what-s-new-with-solas-2024--227502
The thing is that ferries are generally a low margin business so imposing a bunch of extra firefighting requirements will make some of them at the margins no longer economically viable. And fires aren't necessarily even the biggest risk: they also have to worry about collisions, loss of power, storms, navigational errors, cargo shifting, etc.
Realistically I just don't think civilian crews can be expected to effectively fight major fires in 50KWh+ lithium battery packs. Instead they should focus on fast, safe evacuation; when there is significant loss of life due to shipboard fires it's usually because the crew waited too long to abandon ship and screwed up the lifeboat deployment. Once the people are off then just let the vessel burn, or perhaps let a skeleton crew try to put into a nearby harbor where fire boats with trained personnel can take over.
It may also be practical to do something on the prevention front such as a quick visual inspection of EVs for obvious battery pack damage and dashboard warning lights. Or require packs to be discharged below 20% or whatever before boarding (passengers will complain about this).
https://www.dnv.com/news/what-s-new-with-solas-2024--227502
The thing is that ferries are generally a low margin business so imposing a bunch of extra firefighting requirements will make some of them at the margins no longer economically viable. And fires aren't necessarily even the biggest risk: they also have to worry about collisions, loss of power, storms, navigational errors, cargo shifting, etc.
Realistically I just don't think civilian crews can be expected to effectively fight major fires in 50KWh+ lithium battery packs. Instead they should focus on fast, safe evacuation; when there is significant loss of life due to shipboard fires it's usually because the crew waited too long to abandon ship and screwed up the lifeboat deployment. Once the people are off then just let the vessel burn, or perhaps let a skeleton crew try to put into a nearby harbor where fire boats with trained personnel can take over.
It may also be practical to do something on the prevention front such as a quick visual inspection of EVs for obvious battery pack damage and dashboard warning lights. Or require packs to be discharged below 20% or whatever before boarding (passengers will complain about this).
So as far as you view it, there is no heightened risk with EV fires in closed quarters on a ship at sea? They're all packed in tight, with gasoline cars and other EVs.
Lol. I think you are overextending your hand here. You ever been on a ferry? You can't move the cars, they are completely packed like sardines.
I know. And I think that tight packing is a problem. But it's also a problem with extinguishing "normal" car fires already, as fire can easily spread from one car to another, through heat radiation alone. The underlying problem should be fixed.
I would wager a guess that ICE cars are not transported with any gasoline in their tanks, unlike electric cars.
On a ferry? Of course they are transported with gasoline. The owners drive them on, then drive them off at the other side.
It seems you don't understand the concept of a ferry. It is like a bridge which moves with you. You drive on, the ferry departs and moves to some other location (other side of the river, other side of a lake) and you drive off. You can see the operation in this randomly selected video for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkKTyf_RAzk )
ICE cars have gasoline in their tanks, because that is what they use to drive on the ferry and that is how they drive off the ferry.
ICE cars have gasoline in their tanks, because that is what they use to drive on the ferry and that is how they drive off the ferry.
itt: Tell me you've no clue how a ferry works without telling me you've no clue how a ferry works.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Will a fire department be able to put out a gasoline fire on a boat? A diesel fire on a boat?
Chance are, electrical fires are much more self contained than gasoline fires
Chance are, electrical fires are much more self contained than gasoline fires
also it's probably very hard to get to that individual car on the ship, unlike how it would be on a road
Bologna aside, isn’t there a legit issue re the difficulty in extinguishing an EV battery pack?
I can see how “just give it a few days to burn itself out isn’t a viable strategy on a boat.
I can see how “just give it a few days to burn itself out isn’t a viable strategy on a boat.
Hm, it's not that difficult in the end, at least on land.
First part is checking whether the battery pack is affected after all. Not all EV car fires lead to problems with the battery pack and sometimes you can just extinguish the fire like any other.
We check the battery by inspecting it with thermal cameras (remove any protection on the bottom of the car first - not easy). If the temperature of the pack rises after the initial fire has been put out, the battery pack seems to have a problem.
In that case, permanent cooling is the way to go. You will start doing this by sprinkling the battery with a hose to keep temperatures stable. At some point, you'll want to release the personell and need a more permanent solution.
That's where troughs come in to play. You will fill that up with water until you can completely submerge the battery pack in water. Either place the car in first or lift it in afterwards, that doesn't matter, it's just a handling thing. The car stays in there for several days until the chain reaction in the battery has stopped.
I can see how this might be somewhat more complicated on a ship in the middle of nowhere, but you wouldn't want to have a burnt-out non-EV car standing on your ship for an extended period of time, too. So you'll have to reach shore quickly anyway and get more help.
First part is checking whether the battery pack is affected after all. Not all EV car fires lead to problems with the battery pack and sometimes you can just extinguish the fire like any other.
We check the battery by inspecting it with thermal cameras (remove any protection on the bottom of the car first - not easy). If the temperature of the pack rises after the initial fire has been put out, the battery pack seems to have a problem.
In that case, permanent cooling is the way to go. You will start doing this by sprinkling the battery with a hose to keep temperatures stable. At some point, you'll want to release the personell and need a more permanent solution.
That's where troughs come in to play. You will fill that up with water until you can completely submerge the battery pack in water. Either place the car in first or lift it in afterwards, that doesn't matter, it's just a handling thing. The car stays in there for several days until the chain reaction in the battery has stopped.
I can see how this might be somewhat more complicated on a ship in the middle of nowhere, but you wouldn't want to have a burnt-out non-EV car standing on your ship for an extended period of time, too. So you'll have to reach shore quickly anyway and get more help.
Seems like a crane and dropping the car into the ocean is the solution then! /s
If all else fails, I'd consider that option.
But the problem seems to be more of how to get a burning car out of the pile of cars in your ferry. Doesn't matter if EV or not, you want to have it out of there at some point and that seems to be tricky.
But the problem seems to be more of how to get a burning car out of the pile of cars in your ferry. Doesn't matter if EV or not, you want to have it out of there at some point and that seems to be tricky.
How well can you manage the temperature of a "burning" lithium car battery with unlimited water supplies? Can you easily keep it cool enough to not damage the floor or deck of the boat it is on? If you can, it seems like the long term solution would be two seawater pumps, hoses, and a barrier so you can erect an impromptu kiddy pool around the burning vehicle, and just flow constant seawater around it until you get to port or it stops being a problem.
That could indeed be a solution. Enough mass of water or enough flow of water will transfer the heat away fast enough.
The battery is done at that point anyway, but submerging it will stop flames and toxic fumes from forming from an "open" fire. The cells will "melt" and react with each other on and on until they're done, you can't really stop that.
The same thing is done with gas bottles. Once they have been subject to flames or enough heat, they are considered unsafe and will have reactions going on in the inside. You can measure those due to a rise in temperature on the outside, too.
Gas bottles are also put into containers full of water, for at least 24 hours, until the reactions on the inside are done.
Cooling them prevents them from heating up until they burst though. Same goes for EV battery packs.
The battery is done at that point anyway, but submerging it will stop flames and toxic fumes from forming from an "open" fire. The cells will "melt" and react with each other on and on until they're done, you can't really stop that.
The same thing is done with gas bottles. Once they have been subject to flames or enough heat, they are considered unsafe and will have reactions going on in the inside. You can measure those due to a rise in temperature on the outside, too.
Gas bottles are also put into containers full of water, for at least 24 hours, until the reactions on the inside are done.
Cooling them prevents them from heating up until they burst though. Same goes for EV battery packs.
Trapdoors, under each car. Put the captain in a big twirly seat and give him a red button and a white cat, because everything's better when you're cosplaying as a Bond villain.
(Ok, serious question about the portable-barrier-and-pump solution: could there be any chemical risk from using sea water, rather than fresh water?)
(Ok, serious question about the portable-barrier-and-pump solution: could there be any chemical risk from using sea water, rather than fresh water?)
I was just at the fire station in Netherlands last week for a tour and asked the very question.
Answer: Electric cars are different from ICE cars in that the fire must be put off differently. We are trained to handle an EV fire by using a “blanket” method wherein a boxy containment zone will be erected to completely enclose the burning EV limiting ability of that chemical reaction to break out in a larger way. We have the tools, and the necessary practice for it, and treat it no different than a regular petrol car.
Answer: Electric cars are different from ICE cars in that the fire must be put off differently. We are trained to handle an EV fire by using a “blanket” method wherein a boxy containment zone will be erected to completely enclose the burning EV limiting ability of that chemical reaction to break out in a larger way. We have the tools, and the necessary practice for it, and treat it no different than a regular petrol car.
Sure, but that doesn't work on a ship. Or in an enclosed parking garage on land.
I think this post was made because of this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66310280
From the article:
>Last year a cargo ship carrying 4,000 luxury cars caught fire and sank off the Azores. Lithium-ion batteries in the cars caught fire and firefighters needed specialist equipment to put out the fire.
From the article:
>Last year a cargo ship carrying 4,000 luxury cars caught fire and sank off the Azores. Lithium-ion batteries in the cars caught fire and firefighters needed specialist equipment to put out the fire.
There is a cargo ship right now in the NL that apparently has ~3,000 cars on it - and its on fire. I wonder if it has many EVs on it.
Ah 25 Evs on it...
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/one-dead-cargo-ship-fir...
Ah 25 Evs on it...
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/one-dead-cargo-ship-fir...
A small contingent of about 25 EVs take responsibility for the operation, destroying thousands of their ICE foes.
And the fact that the fire "started near the EVs" is a False Frag.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Since it's a ferry, a solution could be to just push if overboard. How often do fires on ferry happen?
Have you ever actually seen a bunch of cars tightly parked on a ferry? If not, google 'cars on a ferry' and click some images. Now, imagine a car somewhere in the middle of the bunch catching fire. Are you going to volunteer 'pushing it overboard'?
These are not open-deck ferries, the cars are in closed decks.
So it's easy to cut off the oxygen supply to the fire?
There are deck walls strong enough to prevent a vehicle falling out of the ship, but usually open at either end to ensure good ventilation.
There are hundreds of these ferries operating in Europe (and other places with large islands or short seas/lakes), from tiny ones that carry 2-4 cars, to large ones with multiple decks.
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/car-ferry.html?sortBy=rele...
Tiny (UK): https://www.alamy.com/the-dartmouth-to-kingswear-car-ferry-l...
Small (Germany): https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-car-ferry-harbour-friedric...
Medium (Brazil): https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-car-on-board-the-ferry-mak...
Large (UK/France): https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-the-vehicle-deck-of-a-cros...
Note these are public passenger ferries. You arrive at the port, buy a ticket, drive on and (usually) get out of the car for the journey.
There are hundreds of these ferries operating in Europe (and other places with large islands or short seas/lakes), from tiny ones that carry 2-4 cars, to large ones with multiple decks.
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/car-ferry.html?sortBy=rele...
Tiny (UK): https://www.alamy.com/the-dartmouth-to-kingswear-car-ferry-l...
Small (Germany): https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-car-ferry-harbour-friedric...
Medium (Brazil): https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-car-on-board-the-ferry-mak...
Large (UK/France): https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-the-vehicle-deck-of-a-cros...
Note these are public passenger ferries. You arrive at the port, buy a ticket, drive on and (usually) get out of the car for the journey.
Li-ion batteries supply their own oxygen when they burn, you can't smother the fire.
Sure - so long as you've spent the necessary $millions in advance, to build that feature into the ship. Plus crew training, safety certifications, insurance, etc. Imagine if a couple idiot kids or passed-out drunks were in the compartment which you de-oxygenated.
Not easy. The vehicle decks on ferries can't be tightly sealed off. Modern ferries often have CO2 fire extinguisher systems fitted but those have limited capacity and the fire can reflash quickly when the oxygen level rises again.
Ignoring the other impracticalities that sibling commenters have pointed out, are you going to be the one to reach inside and put the flaming car in neutral? 'cuz you ain't pushing shit if that thing's still in Park.
you can't push them when they are deep in a pack of cars
Cars on a ferry are locked in by other cars, and in large ferries like this one a ceiling as well.
You would have to push the entire column of cars before it overboard.
So make sure the electric cars are loaded last.
Probably still cheaper even paying for the recovery effort if they are not dumped too deep to replace those cars than to replace the ship, in terms of total cost if the ship is totalled.
How you push a column of cars around a raging fire is another problem. I don't know what I'd do.
How you push a column of cars around a raging fire is another problem. I don't know what I'd do.
I don't know a whole lot about electric vehicles, but I am already aware that fire departments struggle to put them out compared to say, an ICE vehicle fire. Often, fire departments have to just let the fire burn itself out. Fires on ships is extremely problematic, as I am sure you are aware.
likewise, the fumes released from the batteries are much more toxic than those released from gasoline. coper, cobalt, lead, and other toxic minerals are released into the air in much greater quantities. as you can imagine, this is also extremely problematic in enclosed spaces, like on a ship.
likewise, the fumes released from the batteries are much more toxic than those released from gasoline. coper, cobalt, lead, and other toxic minerals are released into the air in much greater quantities. as you can imagine, this is also extremely problematic in enclosed spaces, like on a ship.
[deleted]
I think it's in the light of this incident: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/one-dead-cargo-ship-fir...
What do you think of this story with one person dead?
https://news.sky.com/story/one-dead-and-several-injured-afte...
https://news.sky.com/story/one-dead-and-several-injured-afte...
I don't think much of it, too little information available at this point.
Reuters [1 or see comment above] says the fire started "near" an EV, Sky seems to know better and says an EV was the source of the fire. What's right now?
If an EV was the cause of the fire, the question would be, if the outcome would have been different if the car was a petrol car of some sort.
Also: Why did somebody die? Why did some people jump overboard while others were airlifted? What's with emergency boats and whatnot else?
More from the Reuters article: "It's a very hard fire to extinguish, possibly because of the cargo the ship was transporting". Is that because of the 25 EVs on board or because something else?
This whole story is made up like the whole ship went "Boom!" and from one second to another the whole thing was up in flames.
[1]: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/one-dead-cargo-ship-fir...
Reuters [1 or see comment above] says the fire started "near" an EV, Sky seems to know better and says an EV was the source of the fire. What's right now?
If an EV was the cause of the fire, the question would be, if the outcome would have been different if the car was a petrol car of some sort.
Also: Why did somebody die? Why did some people jump overboard while others were airlifted? What's with emergency boats and whatnot else?
More from the Reuters article: "It's a very hard fire to extinguish, possibly because of the cargo the ship was transporting". Is that because of the 25 EVs on board or because something else?
This whole story is made up like the whole ship went "Boom!" and from one second to another the whole thing was up in flames.
[1]: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/one-dead-cargo-ship-fir...
I've read other people say some cargo ships have been refusing to take EVs, there have been a few of these incidents in the last few years. If so, this looks like an incident that could make banning EVs on boats more common.
Firstly, all large chunks of Lithium-based battery packs must be regulated/controlled, just like how airlines are doing.
Secondly, Hydrogen is dangerous indoors, because the gas gets trapped AND is odorless, and no one will notice until something goes boom.
Secondly, Hydrogen is dangerous indoors, because the gas gets trapped AND is odorless, and no one will notice until something goes boom.
Natural gas and propane are odorless too. They solved that problem by adding an odorant to it.
I don't think you can add an odor to an offgassing byproduct of a battery.
My comment is responding to the parents comment about hydrogen fuel.
https://www.hydrogenfuelnews.com/hydrogen-fuel-odorized/8550...
https://www.hydrogenfuelnews.com/hydrogen-fuel-odorized/8550...
It's harder than is obvious, the odorant must spread in the same way that the hydrogen does under wind and buoyancy.
Natural gas is a bit of a heavier molecule but hydrogen is very light and I suspect that the hydrogen and the smell would very rapidly separate.
A bigger problem is that hydrogen can leak through tiny cracks, and odorant can't.
Natural gas is a bit of a heavier molecule but hydrogen is very light and I suspect that the hydrogen and the smell would very rapidly separate.
A bigger problem is that hydrogen can leak through tiny cracks, and odorant can't.
As a firefighter you should know putting out lithium battery fire is very different. It burns much hotter, releases toxic gas. You can not use water to put it out, lithium reacts with water and releases more toxic gas. Water is like gasoline. Battery also reignites randomly, even after fire was stopped.
To completely stop lithium battery fire, you need to submerge it in liquid oil for several weeks, to make sure that thing is completely dead. In country of 10 million people, we only have two tanks, that can deal with electric car fire.
Electric car can self ignite randomly, even after being parked for several hours or days. We are lucky Tesla has good QA, but that will change as other brands (even Chinese) will flood market. And there will be DIY battery repairs... Ferry in Norway could have cars from Bulgaria or Serbia onboard. Even homemade electric bike is electric vehicle!
I am absolutely for banning electric cars from underground garages, ferries, long tunnels, and so on.
To completely stop lithium battery fire, you need to submerge it in liquid oil for several weeks, to make sure that thing is completely dead. In country of 10 million people, we only have two tanks, that can deal with electric car fire.
Electric car can self ignite randomly, even after being parked for several hours or days. We are lucky Tesla has good QA, but that will change as other brands (even Chinese) will flood market. And there will be DIY battery repairs... Ferry in Norway could have cars from Bulgaria or Serbia onboard. Even homemade electric bike is electric vehicle!
I am absolutely for banning electric cars from underground garages, ferries, long tunnels, and so on.
> In country of 10 million people, we only have two tanks, that can deal with electric car fire.
In a county of 160k people we have two troughs on standby for these cases. It's about being trained and prepared and things will lose its horror.
In a county of 160k people we have two troughs on standby for these cases. It's about being trained and prepared and things will lose its horror.
I'm a bit surprised that Norway would be so far behind your county, but regardless it seems like the shipping company is acting prudently given Norway's lack of readiness.
That is Czechia, not Norway.
Yeah I should have realized you couldn’t have been talking about Norway. Had I turned my brain on, I would have realized that a rich country with so much EV uptake couldn’t possibly be so far behind in EV fire suppression.
> I am absolutely for banning electric cars from underground garages, ferries, long tunnels, and so on.
I’m very glad you don’t write laws.
I’m very glad you don’t write laws.
>As a firefighter you should know putting out lithium battery fire is very different. It burns much hotter, releases toxic gas. You can not use water to put it out, lithium reacts with water and releases more toxic gas. Water is like gasoline.
Dunning-Kruger effect? You are explaining to a firefighter who is presumably trained in this stuff that water makes the problem worse … when a simple Google search shows you that using (a lot of) water is the standard recommended procedure for EV fires across the globe.
https://www.ctif.org/news/150-000-liters-water-needed-put-ou...
https://www.iafc.org/topics-and-tools/resources/resource/iaf...
https://www.phoenix.gov/firesite/Documents/074742.pdf
https://www.dekra-roadsafety.com/en/what-to-do-if-an-electri...
https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SR2001....
Dunning-Kruger effect? You are explaining to a firefighter who is presumably trained in this stuff that water makes the problem worse … when a simple Google search shows you that using (a lot of) water is the standard recommended procedure for EV fires across the globe.
https://www.ctif.org/news/150-000-liters-water-needed-put-ou...
https://www.iafc.org/topics-and-tools/resources/resource/iaf...
https://www.phoenix.gov/firesite/Documents/074742.pdf
https://www.dekra-roadsafety.com/en/what-to-do-if-an-electri...
https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SR2001....
Yes, they do recommend pouring water on burning EVs, but this does nothing to extinguish the fire, it just keeps it under control, keeps it from spreading, until it burns out on its own. That takes 40 times more water and more time than extinguishing ICE car fire - one of your own links explains it.
Actually, the most practical solution to transporting electric cars by ferry might be to dump them into the sea in case of fire :)
Actually, the most practical solution to transporting electric cars by ferry might be to dump them into the sea in case of fire :)
As someone else said, the amount of water needed is a non-issue on a ferry…
You mean like this?
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/one-dead-cargo-ship-fir...
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230726-deadly-fire-b...
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/one-dead-cargo-ship-fir...
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230726-deadly-fire-b...
What's your point? They are not running out of water.
There is a time limit on how long you can do that without sinking the ship, unless the whole thing is above deck and can drain off.
Fires on boats are terrifying. Second only to submarine fires, IMO.
Fires on boats are terrifying. Second only to submarine fires, IMO.
Do they usually extinguish fires by pumping ocean water?
Ships tend to have much, much more saltwater available than potable water, yes.
Technically I was talking about lithium battery fire, not entire EV.
But not using water on electric devices, is one of first things we learn in safety training. Even fire extinguishers are not based on H2O, but specialized chemicals! I worked at UPS backup batteries.
But not using water on electric devices, is one of first things we learn in safety training. Even fire extinguishers are not based on H2O, but specialized chemicals! I worked at UPS backup batteries.
Maybe time to upgrade your country's readiness to fight EV fires.
>In country of 10 million people, we only have two tanks, that can deal with electric car fire.
so.... build more?
if there are too few fire extinguishers in a building do you scrap the building or do you commission more?
so.... build more?
if there are too few fire extinguishers in a building do you scrap the building or do you commission more?
My thoughts also. I mean there was a time when there were no fire hydrants or fire trucks or extinguishers of any kind. It always takes a while to build up infrastructure and learn enough about risks to be able to train people.
We just have to accept that we’re only at the beginning and get to commissioning.
We just have to accept that we’re only at the beginning and get to commissioning.
FWIW this ship is much closer to a cruise ship than a ferry. It goes along the coast of Norway, taking 6 days to go from Bergen to Kirkenes, taking scenic detours along the way.
It has capacity for just a few cars, and with a maximum vehicle size that is quite limited - e.g. a Tesla Model X is too big.
What is noteworthy is that they are also restricting hybrids, so in practice it means they will only take on really old cars.
Their competitor "Hurtigruten" which travels the same distance is a lot less restrictive on car transport.
They way I read this, they are bound by the contract with the government to offer car transport, but they are putting up restrictions in the name of safety etc. that ensure less and less cars are actually transported.
It has capacity for just a few cars, and with a maximum vehicle size that is quite limited - e.g. a Tesla Model X is too big.
What is noteworthy is that they are also restricting hybrids, so in practice it means they will only take on really old cars.
Their competitor "Hurtigruten" which travels the same distance is a lot less restrictive on car transport.
They way I read this, they are bound by the contract with the government to offer car transport, but they are putting up restrictions in the name of safety etc. that ensure less and less cars are actually transported.
Thanks! That’s relevant context. I thought they were barring EVs from inland ferries because that would extend travel times!
Relevant news: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/one-dead-cargo-ship-fir...
Seems to me the problem currently is that while the probability of an electric car catching fire is very low, if it does so the fire itself is of the very nasty kind.
Seems to me the problem currently is that while the probability of an electric car catching fire is very low, if it does so the fire itself is of the very nasty kind.
The bathtub curve says electronics fail more often early on in life or at the end of their lifespan. Maybe one of the vehicles had a bad battery? Probably those EV's are charged at the factory for testing, transport and to prevent the battery from draining.
Possibly there's a way to prevent a fire in a single vehicle from spreading to the others. Maybe better compartmentalisation or starving the fire from oxygen. That will require a lot of retrofitting on those carriers though.
My initial thought was exactly the compartmentalization idea.
Also, as far as I understand Lithium-based battery tech you can't really have/ship a "flat battery", it has to have some charge in order not to break down on itself. If that's the case then yeah, the simplest option "ship it without fuel, like an ICE car" goes out the window.
Also, as far as I understand Lithium-based battery tech you can't really have/ship a "flat battery", it has to have some charge in order not to break down on itself. If that's the case then yeah, the simplest option "ship it without fuel, like an ICE car" goes out the window.
With the rate at which ICE cars randomly ignite, you'd think they would've banned electric cars already (self ignition for ICE engines is way higher than that of electric cars for some reason). Cars on boats, regardless of fuel type, is just incredibly risky.
That said, it's impossible to extinguish a lithium battery so I can't blame them. When a fire does eventually start, it'll burn for the entire duration of the trip and probably a while after as well.
Their take on hybrids (with much smaller batteries) and hydrogen cars (those are just weird, more complex ICE cars) is bad, though.
My guess is that there's more going on. Perhaps the extra weight of modern cars is causing them problems? They would have to ban ridiculous vehicles like SUVs as well if that were a concern, but it could explain why a shipping company is putting out such strict limitations.
That said, it's impossible to extinguish a lithium battery so I can't blame them. When a fire does eventually start, it'll burn for the entire duration of the trip and probably a while after as well.
Their take on hybrids (with much smaller batteries) and hydrogen cars (those are just weird, more complex ICE cars) is bad, though.
My guess is that there's more going on. Perhaps the extra weight of modern cars is causing them problems? They would have to ban ridiculous vehicles like SUVs as well if that were a concern, but it could explain why a shipping company is putting out such strict limitations.
> With the rate at which ICE cars randomly ignite, you'd think they would've banned electric cars already (self ignition for ICE engines is way higher than that of electric cars for some reason). Cars on boats, regardless of fuel type, is just incredibly risky.
ICE cars ignite randomly mostly when the engine is running, which is not the case on ferries. I'd bet self-ignition of ICE cars with stopped engine is more rare than self-ignition of stopped electric cars. And in most cases of ICE fires handheld fire extinguisher is enough to stop the flames...
ICE cars ignite randomly mostly when the engine is running, which is not the case on ferries. I'd bet self-ignition of ICE cars with stopped engine is more rare than self-ignition of stopped electric cars. And in most cases of ICE fires handheld fire extinguisher is enough to stop the flames...
And once you are done with ICE it almost always stays done. EVs more likely just keep burning for long time.
> self ignition for ICE engines is way higher than that of electric cars for some reason
They have flammable lubricants spread everywhere on the same environment as high-current electric circuits, high-powered attrition-based devices and a bare hot fuel burning engine. It's a wonder that fires are as rare as they are. (I mean, I must have seen some 5 ICE cars catching fire. Compared to how many I've seen in total, that's an incredibly low ratio; it's a scheduled aviation level of safety.)
I do expect electric cars to catch fire much less often, but that's because they are naturally not prone to it. But yes, if the decision was up to me, I would want to have some real numbers, and I don't think anybody has them yet, so expect things to be random.
They have flammable lubricants spread everywhere on the same environment as high-current electric circuits, high-powered attrition-based devices and a bare hot fuel burning engine. It's a wonder that fires are as rare as they are. (I mean, I must have seen some 5 ICE cars catching fire. Compared to how many I've seen in total, that's an incredibly low ratio; it's a scheduled aviation level of safety.)
I do expect electric cars to catch fire much less often, but that's because they are naturally not prone to it. But yes, if the decision was up to me, I would want to have some real numbers, and I don't think anybody has them yet, so expect things to be random.
Hydrogen cars in the most common version (correct me if i am wrong), are closer to hybrids right? Like the motor is electric and is powered by the hydrogen generator.
It depends on the exact engine, but as far as I understand them the hydrogen is turned into electricity and water and then exhausted out back.
They're not exactly ICE cars or hybrids because they don't ignite the hydrogen (they use fuel cells instead) but they are pumping fuel around and filled with combustible material.
I suppose in terms of fires, they're closer to hybrids because they'll charge an electric battery that can also be used with tech like regen braking for better fuel efficiency. Then again, if a hydrogen tank lights on fire, that'll probably cause a strong burst of flames (assuming explosion prevention mechanisms work) similar to bursts that escape from burning lithium cells.
They're really their own category, but there are so few hydrogen cars that I don't think it really matters to be honest.
They're not exactly ICE cars or hybrids because they don't ignite the hydrogen (they use fuel cells instead) but they are pumping fuel around and filled with combustible material.
I suppose in terms of fires, they're closer to hybrids because they'll charge an electric battery that can also be used with tech like regen braking for better fuel efficiency. Then again, if a hydrogen tank lights on fire, that'll probably cause a strong burst of flames (assuming explosion prevention mechanisms work) similar to bursts that escape from burning lithium cells.
They're really their own category, but there are so few hydrogen cars that I don't think it really matters to be honest.
Weight is not an issue. Vehicle weights are known and factored into vessel stability calculations. The maritime authorities in each country will typically set cargo weight limits for each deck.
It's common to carry heavy trucks weighing tens of tons on ro-ro ferries. So, spare us your uninformed nonsense about "ridiculous vehicles like SUVs".
It's common to carry heavy trucks weighing tens of tons on ro-ro ferries. So, spare us your uninformed nonsense about "ridiculous vehicles like SUVs".
According to this news article (GTranslate): https://www-nrk-no.translate.goog/nordland/slar-tilbake-mot-... the "ferry", which is more like a cruise ship with a cargo hold, can hold up to nine cars in total. When the new ships were announced, rumor had it that it couldn't even take cars at all.
If you manage to stuff ten tons trucks into that thing, I'm not so sure you'll be able to leave port at all.
If you manage to stuff ten tons trucks into that thing, I'm not so sure you'll be able to leave port at all.
> it's impossible to extinguish a lithium battery
Really?
Really?
Firefighters let electric cars burn out far away from other things that can be set on fire or they're temporarily cooled off long enough to be dunked into a shipping container full of water so they can be moved safely.
Lithium batteries contain extremely strong oxidizers, which means starving the fire is near impossible. Cooling the reaction down is a way to make the flames go out, but damaged lithium batteries tend to let out hydrogen gas (very flammable, obviously) and the heat of one burning battery cell can damage the one(s) next to it.
You can't just extinguish them because they'll relight themselves later. In fact, several Teslas have lit on fire hours after a somewhat minor incident that the car could just drive away from.
Aside from dropping the burning wreck into the ocean, I don't know how you could possibly hope to really extinguish a burning electric car on a boat. When those things go, they go!
Electric cars are great, but electric car fires are terrible. That's not necessarily a problem; ICE cars go up in flames all the time too, but they're easier to put out. I'll gladly take the lower risk of self combustion for an EV parked in a garage over the risk of an ICE car parked in the same spot; how hard it is to put out a car fire isn't really relevant when you're lucky to get out of the house safely anyway.
Lithium batteries contain extremely strong oxidizers, which means starving the fire is near impossible. Cooling the reaction down is a way to make the flames go out, but damaged lithium batteries tend to let out hydrogen gas (very flammable, obviously) and the heat of one burning battery cell can damage the one(s) next to it.
You can't just extinguish them because they'll relight themselves later. In fact, several Teslas have lit on fire hours after a somewhat minor incident that the car could just drive away from.
Aside from dropping the burning wreck into the ocean, I don't know how you could possibly hope to really extinguish a burning electric car on a boat. When those things go, they go!
Electric cars are great, but electric car fires are terrible. That's not necessarily a problem; ICE cars go up in flames all the time too, but they're easier to put out. I'll gladly take the lower risk of self combustion for an EV parked in a garage over the risk of an ICE car parked in the same spot; how hard it is to put out a car fire isn't really relevant when you're lucky to get out of the house safely anyway.
The thing about batteries is that they include both components necessary for maintaining a fire. (Just like explosives, by the way, but less mixed.)
Do lead acids contain oxidizer and fuel too?
Yes, all batteries do. But both are much less reactive than on lithium batteries.
Why though? Are all batteries inherently two way redox reactions?
Yes, rechargeable batteries work by two way redox reactions.
I know EV fires are more difficult to put out, but apparently EVs are far far less likely to catch fire to begin with.
According to AutoinsuranceEZ study based on US government data, rates of fires per 100k cars:
According to AutoinsuranceEZ study based on US government data, rates of fires per 100k cars:
Hybrid 3474.5
ICE 1529.9
EV 25.1
But what's interesting here is how likely they are to catch fire while not running. I'm guessing those statistics look quite different.
Plenty of ICE vehicles catch fire unattended in a garage. The 12v electrics are plenty to ignite flammable residues everywhere, or even just plastics in the body.
I'm not saying it doesn't happen, and I'm not saying EVs are dangerous unattended, I'm just pointing out that the interesting statistics aren't those which cover probability of catching fire while running.
> However, as fire inspector Sigurd Folgerø Dalen at the Oslo Fire Department said to Faktisk.no, large amounts of water will be needed if an EV catches fire.
That shouldn't be too difficult to find on a ferry.
The Danish Institute of Fire Safety seems to think it's OK: https://brandogsikring.dk/en/news/2022/new-knowledge-about-b... / https://brandogsikring.dk/en/research-and-development/mariti...
That shouldn't be too difficult to find on a ferry.
The Danish Institute of Fire Safety seems to think it's OK: https://brandogsikring.dk/en/news/2022/new-knowledge-about-b... / https://brandogsikring.dk/en/research-and-development/mariti...
The problem with pumping large amounts of water into a ship is that a ship with large amounts of water on board will tend to have trouble staying afloat...
According to wikipedia their ships can only carry 5 cars. Also it seems their ships have a natural gas-electric hybrid power train with a 6.1Mwh lithium ion battery pack onboard. Thus, even if they carried the maximum of 5 EV's, and they were all Hummer's with 210kwh battery packs, the ships onboard battery pack would still dwarf them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havila_Kystruten
https://www.electrichybridmarinetechnology.com/news/rolls-ro...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havila_Kystruten
https://www.electrichybridmarinetechnology.com/news/rolls-ro...
This seems relevant. So assumedly they would have lithium ion fire fighting equipment on board as well as the appropriate training. At a max capacity of 6 vehicle that hardley seems like significantly more training or equipment. Maybe a couple extra CO2 fire extinguishers.
With these details it seems much Ado about nothing (click bait).
With these details it seems much Ado about nothing (click bait).
Probably upvoted due to the vehicle carrier that's currently on fire in the Netherlands?
https://www.dutchnews.nl/2023/07/putting-out-cargo-ship-fire...
Oh jesus, I had expected that to happen after today's fire of a car freighter.
Everyone is hating on BEVs, but the problem runs way deeper:
Most car ferries are old. Like, really goddamn old, many decades are the norm, not a rarity - unlike oil tankers, where the double-hull mandate has forced a lot of old ships into retirement years ago. These things are almost exclusively completely open decks from bow to stern, which means any fire has an easy time to spread through the entire deck and subsequently destabilize the ship. No doors, no intermediate walls, nothing to stand in the way of fire, heat and smoke.
At the same time, on-board firefighting equipment is designed to handle a burning car just fine... a gasoline car. Smother it in water, and the fire should at least stay contained. A lithium fire however needs the car to be submerged and even that's not a guarantee it will extinguish, but - remember the open decks - any water that gets sprayed onto it just flows away.
Given that BEVs will become the norm in the next decades, shippers absolutely need to buy new ships, designed to be able to withstand the very different load of a battery fire. But they won't do that because, surprise, ships are extremely expensive...
Everyone is hating on BEVs, but the problem runs way deeper:
Most car ferries are old. Like, really goddamn old, many decades are the norm, not a rarity - unlike oil tankers, where the double-hull mandate has forced a lot of old ships into retirement years ago. These things are almost exclusively completely open decks from bow to stern, which means any fire has an easy time to spread through the entire deck and subsequently destabilize the ship. No doors, no intermediate walls, nothing to stand in the way of fire, heat and smoke.
At the same time, on-board firefighting equipment is designed to handle a burning car just fine... a gasoline car. Smother it in water, and the fire should at least stay contained. A lithium fire however needs the car to be submerged and even that's not a guarantee it will extinguish, but - remember the open decks - any water that gets sprayed onto it just flows away.
Given that BEVs will become the norm in the next decades, shippers absolutely need to buy new ships, designed to be able to withstand the very different load of a battery fire. But they won't do that because, surprise, ships are extremely expensive...
I don't think it's true that most ro-ro car ferries are that old, at least in Europe. Most seem to be less than 30 years old, and there are plenty less than 10 years old.
Many decades old ones don't meet pollution standards, and are sold off to other countries. I've travelled on several ex-European ferries around the world, often still with the signs in Italian or French or whatever.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%26O_Ferries
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stena_Line
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFDS_Seaways
etc, etc.
Many decades old ones don't meet pollution standards, and are sold off to other countries. I've travelled on several ex-European ferries around the world, often still with the signs in Italian or French or whatever.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%26O_Ferries
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stena_Line
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFDS_Seaways
etc, etc.
Doesn't really matter. According to a representative of the German Insurer Alliance, most ship fire extinguisher designs are 50 years old, calculated on fire loads of cars common back then... so not respecting any developments since then, from ever heavier cars (more mass, more energy in a fire) over magnesium alloys/components to batteries [1].
[1] https://www.sueddeutsche.de/auto/elektroautos-autofaehren-br...
[1] https://www.sueddeutsche.de/auto/elektroautos-autofaehren-br...
Here's a ferry containing electric cars being on fire as we speak:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmfHC6ZeeNg
It will take additional days to extinguish the fire, and then several weeks of monitoring the lithium. You can't get to the batteries since they are specifically enclosed in a way to never get wet.
So, this battery may go nuts and burn up the entire vehicle extremely fast, but you don't know when this will happen. All this while, the entire area is unsafe and unusable.
If tossing them in the sea is not the sustainable option, the only other way is to submerge them in a specialized container to submerge them into. Which needs to be brought to the ship. In this instance, for 25 vehicles. In the future, about every vehicle.
It will take additional days to extinguish the fire, and then several weeks of monitoring the lithium. You can't get to the batteries since they are specifically enclosed in a way to never get wet.
So, this battery may go nuts and burn up the entire vehicle extremely fast, but you don't know when this will happen. All this while, the entire area is unsafe and unusable.
If tossing them in the sea is not the sustainable option, the only other way is to submerge them in a specialized container to submerge them into. Which needs to be brought to the ship. In this instance, for 25 vehicles. In the future, about every vehicle.
Well, Teslas and other EVs have been coming to the US from China and to Europe and the middle east aboard freight ships. Other large Li-ion batteries have moved around the world too. If it was a serious concern, wouldn't the risk equally affect all these freight ships?
I wouldn't be surprised if they're way more likely to catch fire after having been abused and poorly maintained by an end user for a decade than when they're fresh off the factory.
This is not surprising
There have been a lot of reporting on Lithium batteries catching fire on airplanes.
Also, a lot of reports on eBikes and escooters that catch on fire. (So to be consistent the company should ban those as well)
Having a huge fire breakout on a ferry is not my idea of a good time. I dont know what the chance is for the fire to spread to other vehicles in the hold but given they are packed like sardines. It would not take much.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/4-injured-after-battery-caught-fir... https://www.ctif.org/news/passenger-airplane-made-emergency-... https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2023/03/03....
There have been a lot of reporting on Lithium batteries catching fire on airplanes.
Also, a lot of reports on eBikes and escooters that catch on fire. (So to be consistent the company should ban those as well)
Having a huge fire breakout on a ferry is not my idea of a good time. I dont know what the chance is for the fire to spread to other vehicles in the hold but given they are packed like sardines. It would not take much.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/4-injured-after-battery-caught-fir... https://www.ctif.org/news/passenger-airplane-made-emergency-... https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2023/03/03....
I understand where they are coming from, but in a market with a lot of EV's it seems it'll just drive customers to the competition.
No-one wants a fire on a ship, and lithium batteries in a fire aren't fun, but if you want to transport cars then I guess you'll need to figure something out to stay in business...
No-one wants a fire on a ship, and lithium batteries in a fire aren't fun, but if you want to transport cars then I guess you'll need to figure something out to stay in business...
> if you want to transport cars
My best guess is that no, they don't really want to transport cars, they seem to be doing so almost begrudgingly.
I looked around their pretty touristic cruises, they can accommodate hundreds of passengers, and _9_ cars. My guess would be they could stop allowing passenger cars altogether it wouldn't make a dent in their business model.
https://www.havilavoyages.com/the-ships/travel-with-a-car
My best guess is that no, they don't really want to transport cars, they seem to be doing so almost begrudgingly.
I looked around their pretty touristic cruises, they can accommodate hundreds of passengers, and _9_ cars. My guess would be they could stop allowing passenger cars altogether it wouldn't make a dent in their business model.
https://www.havilavoyages.com/the-ships/travel-with-a-car
Solution would be to provide a place at the dock to store your battery ;)
Sounds like you might as well store your car at the dock then too. An EV is pretty worthless without a battery.
It seems that hydrogen based cars are the way to go.
Electric car fires are nasty in garages too.
Electric car fires are nasty in garages too.
Out of all the places in the world, I would assume Norway would be the last to do so.
Does it make sense? Will they revert the decision after complaints? Hard to tell if this ferry is used by locals or is it only some touristy thing (for rented cars).
Does it make sense? Will they revert the decision after complaints? Hard to tell if this ferry is used by locals or is it only some touristy thing (for rented cars).
This is not the only company servicing this route, this is a new company added to this route a few years ago, and the older company are still allowing electric cars according to the linked origin article at NRK. The route is also not a local one, running along most of the coast of the whole country, between the very north and pretty far south, so I don't really know if there is that much traffic only travelling a stop or two. Definitely a bunch of tourist traffic though.
> Hard to tell if this ferry is used by locals or is it only some touristy thing (for rented cars).
Both, it's the coastal norwegian route. However they're not car ferries, they're passenger ferries which can carry a few cars on the bottom deck. The standard payload is a few dozen cars but several hundred passengers.
The entire trip from end to end takes 6 days, but there are around 30 stops.
Both, it's the coastal norwegian route. However they're not car ferries, they're passenger ferries which can carry a few cars on the bottom deck. The standard payload is a few dozen cars but several hundred passengers.
The entire trip from end to end takes 6 days, but there are around 30 stops.
A freighter carrying nearly 3,000 cars catches fire in the North Sea and a crew member is killed
"the vessel was carrying 2,857 cars, including 25 electric cars, making fighting the flames more difficult. "
https://apnews.com/article/cargo-ship-fire-netherlands-envir...
"the vessel was carrying 2,857 cars, including 25 electric cars, making fighting the flames more difficult. "
https://apnews.com/article/cargo-ship-fire-netherlands-envir...
This seems like a problem they'll have to solve eventually, and they're just putting it off for now. Fair enough. I wish services like this were more proactive and willing to invest in updating their safety practices and equipment, but sometimes I guess it seems easier to push things out. It's a private company, isn't it? So, they'll feel the pressure, or they won't.
I guess this is related to: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/one-dead-cargo-ship-fir...
edit: The linked article is from February, the fire happened today.
edit: The linked article is from February, the fire happened today.
The article seems to be from today:
> Ship carrying 3,000 cars ablaze off Dutch coast, crew member dead
> July 26, 2023 3:04 PM UTC Updated 5 min ago
Edit: Oops. I see what you mean now. The article linked to HN is from February. The fire on the ship is from today.
> Ship carrying 3,000 cars ablaze off Dutch coast, crew member dead
> July 26, 2023 3:04 PM UTC Updated 5 min ago
Edit: Oops. I see what you mean now. The article linked to HN is from February. The fire on the ship is from today.
If they cannot get insurance at a reasonable rate they have to react this way.
Insurance companies are in the business of knowing risk, and they are pretty good at it.
Sometimes. Other times when they aren't confident in their estimate of the risk, they respond extremely conservatively.
I wonder if these types of bans will become more wide-spread - I can imagine them being quite dangerous on underground railways like the Eurotunnel.
A low risk, low reward business model is a terrible business model. Looks like the competition will happily transport this forbidden cargo.
Tell that to the insurance industry.
What's the risk from hybrid and mild hybrid cars to a car ferry? I wonder.
More reasons why the batteries should be removeable
Even if lithium-ion battery-powered cars were as safe as gasoline powered ones, I can imagine the significant weight of electric cars is a major issue still.
I can't imagine it makes absolutely any difference to a car ferry. And also it's not like all EVs weigh more than ICE cars - we have an EV that weighs 1200kg and a normal ICE car that weighs 2200kg - why is the first one forbidden but the other one isn't?
Norwegian coastal ferries transport just a few dozen cars, alongside 600+ passengers in coastal mode, with 1100 tonnes DWT. The car weight is not really material. If it was, they'd put a weight limit on the service not a nature limit.
A solution looking for a problem.
> An electric car fire gets very hot, and there may be a risk of explosion where toxic gases will be released
You know what? That's the case with _every_ car fire in enclosed spaces.
Explosions in car fires are very rare (tires will regularly pop), but every fire will release toxic gases. Especially car fires with lots of highly refined materials in the interior. That's why we wear heavy protective equipment when dealing with fires.
> electric cars, hybrid cars and also hydrogen cars will not be allowed on board
Well, the future does not look bright for this shipping company.