11 tons of water to put out tesla fire!

[xxo]

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/11-...-tesla-austria

[wweiss]

11 tons (actually 12.1 tons - water weighs 2.2LB/liter * 11,000 liters / 2000) to put out 7,000 burning 18650’s. So, 3.5 liters to put out one 18650. Interesting.

[StarHalo]

Water makes lithium burn worse, and most fire suppression materials don't do anything at all, as we've covered over in the Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 thread.

[usdiver]

Since lithium is a class B Fire is there a reason they used water?

[lightfooted]

Probably because they didn't know any better. It also kinda feels like it's a bit biased, inflammatory even. Don't sit too close to the tv or you'll damage your eyes!

[Str8stroke]

Since lithium is a class B Fire is there a reason they used water?

Somehow I remember reading that water was all they had available. Now, that could have been in the comment section of the story. If I remember a fire chief was noting that a large percentage of small/volunteer Fire Departments are not equipped to handle chemical fires of that kind. I don't know the validity of that statement but it does kinda make sense to me.

[lightfooted]

While it may indeed be the reality, what would they have done had it been a gasoline fire? A gas tanker fire would not have been any easier for them to deal with...just not likely for them to have to deal with that alone.

[idleprocess]

Cars catch fire every day and it doesn't even make the local news; one suspects that the incident rate for EV's catching fire is no greater than gasoline or diesel vehicles. And we've been down this fallacy of vivid remembrance trail before when hybrids first came out decades ago supposedly presenting special hazards to firefighters - only they didn't and automaker have standardized color-coding on high-voltage lines/components, have conducted well-documented joint training on new models with departments to spread the knowledge on how to handle these vehicles, and have distributed training materials to fire-rescue departments.

Insofar as the titular 11 tons of water - that looks like the mass necessary to fully immerse the wreckage in what looks like a skip bin so as to prevent internal flare-ups from spreading.

[alpg88]

Since lithium is a class B Fire is there a reason they used water?

It is a metal fire, class D. B is flammable liquids

[Kestrel]

[...] It also kinda feels like it's a bit biased, inflammatory even. Don't sit too close to the tv or you'll damage your eyes!

Perhaps because that "news" site is a political farce; I'm thinking you had noticed silly parts such as this:

The Tesla battery is mounted on the underside of the vehicle and contains acids and chemicals that can easily escape during a fire, placing the firefighters in danger.

(emphasis added)


I have read ZH articles wherein they reference other news sources; which when checked, reference back to ZH for their 'facts' - a definite no-no for any legitimate journalism.

-----

CPF also discourages posters from simply posting an external weblink without adding commentary or discussion; called "drive-bys", they can be an effective method for sparking discussion conflicts.

Relevant news from other sources are of natural interest, but the viewpoint of the original poster in bringing it to the group discussion is appreciated.

And thanks to idleprocess above for adding useful perspective to the topic at hand.

Best regards,

[Kestrel]

Cars catch fire every day and it doesn't even make the local news; one suspects that the incident rate for EV's catching fire is no greater than gasoline or diesel vehicles. And we've been down this fallacy of vivid remembrance trail before when hybrids first came out decades ago supposedly presenting special hazards to firefighters - only they didn't and automaker have standardized color-coding on high-voltage lines/components, have conducted well-documented joint training on new models with departments to spread the knowledge on how to handle these vehicles, and have distributed training materials to fire-rescue departments. [...]

From this ABC News link (which contains an imbedded video & audio advert, so maybe just trust me? )

[...] And this battery fire was rare for Santa Clara County Fire.
"This year I believe it's the only one we've responded to," said Capt. Bill Murphy. "We've responded to approximately 67 vehicle fires in 2018 so far."

[alpg88]

another aspect of lithium fire, that does not exist in gasoline car fires, to the same degree, toxic smoke.

Toxic fluoride gas emissions from lithium-ion battery fires.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5577247/

[usdiver]

It is a metal fire, class D. B is flammable liquids

Thanks, I appreciate your correction however just so not to mislead anyone, lithium ion rechargeables are in reality more of a b or a with b complications. Class d or delta is in fact combustible metals which is what lithium primaries areas the 2 can be easily confused.

[xxo]

I don't know anything about the politics of the source, this is the first time I saw the site and the only article of theirs I have read. I couldn't find a link to other sources in English, but here's the Austrian link:

https://tirol.orf.at/stories/3015765/

As best I can tell much of the text in the article I linked to was translated and lifted from the above link (along with the part about chemicals and acids as best as I can tell?).

BTW here a similar fire in Austria from back in 2017 with a video:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...el-S-fire.html

[Monocrom]

Someone keeps parking their Tesla next to my car, at work. Quite frankly, it's ticking me off. You want to ride around in a death-trap, that's your business. I don't appreciate having my property and possessions put in danger because some guy wants to feel cool or trendy, or pretend he's helping the environment by driving around in such a car. Meanwhile the technology is no where near perfected.

Apparently now City fire departments need more money allocated for special extinguishers for putting out Tesla fires. Isn't that lovely?

[idleprocess]

Someone keeps parking their Tesla next to my car, at work. Quite frankly, it's ticking me off. You want to ride around in a death-trap, that's your business. I don't appreciate having my property and possessions put in danger because some guy wants to feel cool or trendy, or pretend he's helping the environment by driving around in such a car. Meanwhile the technology is no where near perfected.

After several years and probably to a million or more EV's on the road, we know they're no more hazardous than liquid-fueled cars, which burn up all the time without fanfare because it's a perfectly ordinary fire incident.

Apparently now City fire departments need more money allocated for special extinguishers for putting out Tesla fires. Isn't that lovely?

They also need special extinguishers for dealing with industrial fires where there's apt to be more burning than just class A, B, C compounds.

[P_A_S_1]

Was looking at model 3 reviews the other day. Pricey, techy, and not very practical all things considered. Yet still cool. It's like the HDS of cars.

[wweiss]

Any new, world changing technologies- like battery storage efficiency and electric vehicles - are subject to suspicious derision and fear before it is eventually adopted by everyone.

[5S8Zh5]

Since lithium is a class B Fire is there a reason they used water?

Class Charlie is an electrical fire. Bravo is liquid fuels.

[usdiver]

Class Charlie is an electrical fire. Bravo is liquid fuels.

Correct but lithium ion rechargeables are not class c. A house electrical fire would be class c. Just like a lithium primary isn’t a class c either even though it’s electrical.... it’s class d.

In this case though it’s likely water is the best they had on hand but the agent needed to fight one of these is quite expensive and definitely something new since my days out at sea.

[alpg88]

it is a nasty fire, you got 300+ volt battery on fire, that is an electrical fire, you got combustible metal fire, and you got nasty toxic smoke, lots of it. maybe they need to fill the battery with fire suppressing powder at the factory.

[idleprocess]

Consumer Reports tends to avoid sensationalism and has an interesting piece on EV fires.

[StarHalo]

Aw nobody will want them 'lectric cars..

[snakebite]

worse yet the whole mess is in a big sealed can that prevents any meaningful amount of water from getting to the actual fire.
if these had a fire port where a hose could be fired into the enclosure one could cool it off and bring it under control.

it is a nasty fire, you got 300+ volt battery on fire, that is an electrical fire, you got combustible metal fire, and you got nasty toxic smoke, lots of it. maybe they need to fill the battery with fire suppressing powder at the factory.

[vadimax]

I guess you miss one point: in case of an ICE vehicle fire if you notice it starting you grab a fire extinguisher and eliminate the problem. In electric vehicle you better run for your life because you physically can do absolutely nothing to stop thermal runaway of a lithium battery.

The mentioned amount of water is needed not to stop the fire directly, but to cool the battery off so it stopped emitting flammable gases and OXIGEN.

[Monocrom]

After several years and probably to a million or more EV's on the road, we know they're no more hazardous than liquid-fueled cars, which burn up all the time without fanfare because it's a perfectly ordinary fire incident.

Let's be honest, EVs were never as popular before Teslas came along. GM completely scraped their Lease-Only model. Toyota mostly sold their early EV RAV4s to industrial plants, where they were a miserable failure. As I well know from personal experience. Nothing like charging one up literally all night, taking it out; and then having it completely die on you! Literally every part of the vehicle. I'll even name names. Giant Con-Ed complex in Astoria NY. Along with the much smaller New York Power Authority (NYPA), literally next door on the same huge plot of land.

There's a reason why they switched over to Toyota Prius hybrid sedans as company transportation vehicles. Much more reliable. Though I will give credit where its due, neither one of those EV models ever earned a well-known reputation for just.... well, it's CPF. Let's put it in terms we can all understand when it comes to certain types of rechargeable batteries. Those two usually didn't violently vent with flame, releasing toxic gases. And I'm sorry, but yes; there is a difference with gasoline-powered vehicles. You park one of those in good running condition, leave it alone, it's not going to spontaneously combust.

They also need special extinguishers for dealing with industrial fires where there's apt to be more burning than just class A, B, C compounds.

As a licensed Fire Guard, yes; there are already different types of extinguishers. All needed to put out different types of fires. Here's the thing though, industrial buildings are necessary. They create what society genuinely NEEDS. I just don't see the need to allocate more tax-payer dollars in order to greatly increase the supply of such extinguishers simply to put out death-traps driven by individuals with a horribly desperate need to look cool, trendy, or hip while at the same time pretending to show others that they care about the environment.

[alpg88]

yea, that is what people used to say about gasoline cars at first, in the end of steam cars era.

[archimedes]

Some drift in threads like these is inevitable, which is part of the reason why OP "link-only" posts are discouraged.

This thread is currently in the Batteries forum, however, so keeping discussion focused here on the technical aspects of battery fires would be appreciated.

If broader issues are of more interest instead, it could be moved to The Cafe, upon OP request. Thanks.

[P_A_S_1]

The problem with ev is the battery technology just isn't there yet. This is why they're all working on a better battery chemistry. Bundling more batteries into a smaller footprint to achieve greater range hits the wall quick and the incremental capacity improvements to the batteries themselves are insufficient. My phone can't make it the whole day without needing a charge so I'd be reluctant to have faith in a ev getting me anywhere far. The safety aspect is real but overblown imo, sitting on a tank of gasoline and zipping down the highway has its risks too but we're use to it. In the latter, years of safety protocols and engineering minimized the danger and ev will follow suit. Price aside I wouldn't consider buying a current ev and it's not the safety aspect of the battery. They just not ready for prime time, maybe tomorrow.

[idleprocess]

Let's be honest, EVs were never as popular before Teslas came along. GM completely scraped their Lease-Only model. Toyota mostly sold their early EV RAV4s to industrial plants, where they were a miserable failure. As I well know from personal experience. Nothing like charging one up literally all night, taking it out; and then having it completely die on you! Literally every part of the vehicle. I'll even name names. Giant Con-Ed complex in Astoria NY. Along with the much smaller New York Power Authority (NYPA), literally next door on the same huge plot of land.

Before Tesla, BEVs were compliance vehicles, grudgingly produced to meet a mandate that the industry's lobbyists worked overtime to steadily water down to the point that in many states they could give them to employees to drive or lease them to .gov agencies for a pittance. The fact that the first-generation RAV4EVs were sold at all once the leases ended was of itself surprising given their blah reception and the relatively short lifespans of their battery packs.

There's a reason why they switched over to Toyota Prius hybrid sedans as company transportation vehicles. Much more reliable.

As the experiments of ~20 years ago with lead-acid and then NiMH demonstrated, those chemistries lacked the energy density - and oftentimes the power density - to perform adequately. There wasn't much of a future in lead-acid or even NiMH-powered vehicles that struggled to hit daily commuting range plus normal contingencies with margin to spare for bad conditions or unusual contingencies. The more complete the discharge, the more of a cycle you get against cell lifetime than shallower discharges.

Hybrids on the other hand offered better economy by sizing the engine closer to average demand, buffering output to meet the brief peak demands of normal driving, something that NiMH was quite sufficient for without steep discharges to the point that NiMH hybrid packs routinely outlasted their warranties without degradation - some by multiples.

It's no coincidence overprovisioning Li-Ion battery packs in modern BEVs is likely why they're seeing far better lifespans with less degradation than lead-acid and NiMH packs ever did.

And I'm sorry, but yes; there is a difference with gasoline-powered vehicles. You park one of those in good running condition, leave it alone, it's not going to spontaneously combust.

Ah, but it happens. It is indeed rare. But unlike whenever a BEV does so it's not news since ICE vehicles aren't particularly novel.

industrial buildings are necessary

So is individual transportation, and with it the externalities imposed on society whenever there's an incident such as a vehicular accident causing property damage, injury, death, and anything else that necessitates the activation of emergency services. Suspect that dealing with BEV fires - and particular costs - is a drop in the bucket relative to the costs of responding to vehicle fires in general. If you really want to go into the weeds, I imagine that the increasing use of carbon fiber and aluminum in cars has also presented challenges and hazards to fire-rescue that we're not clutching pearls over.

to put out death-traps driven by individuals

[yawn] Cite something to back that assertion. I'd suggest that rather than pointing out that people have - died in electric vehicles, they have crashed, they have caught fire - you find verifiable data pointing to a higher incident rate than ICE vehicles. However, I suspect you're not going to find this information since storing li-ion cells in a pack managed by far better charging systems than even a high-grade hobby charger is only similarly dangerous to storing volatile liquid fuel in a vehicle's fuel tank.

with a horribly desperate need to look cool

Image drives the automobile market in nearly all segments to the point of near pathology - sports cars, trucks, crossovers, economy cars, even commercial vehicles. At some level behind a large percentage of automobile purchases is the thought what does this say about me? Our stereotypical self-described eco-conscious Tesla buyer is as much the poseur as someone weighing the purchase of a Camero, a Ram, a Flex, a base model Fit, or even a Metris.