Notices
992 2019-Present The Forum for the Non-Turbo 911
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Car Transport Ship Felicity Ace Catches Fire Mid Atlantic

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-21-2022, 08:40 AM
  #316  
westcoastj
Pro
 
westcoastj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Posts: 677
Received 288 Likes on 172 Posts
Default

Doesn't look promising, nothing left to burn
https://ca.yahoo.com/news/fire-dies-...103237400.html
westcoastj is offline  
The following users liked this post:
AlexCeres (02-21-2022)
Old 02-21-2022, 08:47 AM
  #317  
991.1 Guy
Three Wheelin'
 
991.1 Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 1,685
Received 919 Likes on 484 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by doug_999
Let's remember that one of the VW boats is no more. So even if they are able to re-make all these cars tomorrow, we have one less boat.
Very good point! Transportation has been a bottle neck for sure.
991.1 Guy is offline  
Old 02-21-2022, 09:02 AM
  #318  
mjsporsche
Rennlist Member
 
mjsporsche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: South Florida & Central NJ
Posts: 2,603
Received 141 Likes on 91 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by doug_999
Let's remember that one of the VW boats is no more. So even if they are able to re-make all these cars tomorrow, we have one less boat.
There are more than 7500 RoRo cargo ships in the world. I suspect a replacement can be secured by VW.
mjsporsche is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by mjsporsche:
981KMAN (02-24-2022), detansinn (02-21-2022)
Old 02-21-2022, 09:10 AM
  #319  
detansinn
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
 
detansinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Doylestown, PA
Posts: 5,658
Received 8,103 Likes on 2,997 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by cmjohnson
What are the chances that at some point in the future the decision will be made that EVs can't share the same cargo ship with gas and diesel powered vehicles?

I think we've already found out that the realistic fire hazards are greater for EVs than fossil fueled vehicles. And as energy density get higher in future battery designs, I don't expect that trend to reverse.

EVs have a long way to go to be truly competitive with the internal combustion engine anyway. Quick, what is the volume and mass of an EV vehicle battery that gives 300 miles range in a specific vehicle,
as compared to the size and weight of a full tank of gas that will give you the same range? Well, a Taycan battery is close to 1400 pounds. And that's taken it as far as 280 miles in testing.

Battery energy density has a LONG way to go before it becomes pound-for-pound comparable to fossil fuels. Plus gas tanks don't self ignite just because someone poked a hole in them.

And, a discharged Li-Ion battery is still flammable. It just won't self-ignite if damaged while fully discharged. It's the heat generated in the short circuit in a charged battery that starts the electrolyte on fire.

I honestly think these factors are going to ensure that the internal combustion engine will be around for a long time to come. Trying to make an energy storage system truly SAFE when its very design is intrinsically
prone to self-ignition when damaged is a very tough problem to solve.
While EV fires make news, gasoline powered cars are 100x more likely to catch on fire per a study done by the NTSB.
https://electrek.co/2022/01/12/gover...ires-than-evs/

The last VW/Porsche carrier that caught ablaze and sunk was in 2019, with no EVs on board. Given the potential that gasoline powered cars are responsible for two ship carrier fires in the past three years, perhaps, it might make sense to temporarily stop the transportation of gasoline powered VW cars until the problem can be studied further. 😜
detansinn is offline  
The following users liked this post:
aggie57 (02-21-2022)
Old 02-21-2022, 09:15 AM
  #320  
breny4104
Rennlist Member
 
breny4104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 904
Received 461 Likes on 286 Posts
Default

we've yet to hear about the maximum charge or energy content allowed in the EV batteries during shipment. There should be a limitation same as gas to reduce the effects I'd think.
breny4104 is offline  
Old 02-21-2022, 09:18 AM
  #321  
detansinn
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
 
detansinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Doylestown, PA
Posts: 5,658
Received 8,103 Likes on 2,997 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by breny4104
we've yet to hear about the maximum charge or energy content allowed in the EV batteries during shipment. There should be a limitation same as gas to reduce the effects I'd think.
If you set an EV on fire, the Lithium will burn regardless of the charge state.
Laptops, smartphones, and a host of other devices are shipped in massive quantities with the same type of batteries.
detansinn is offline  
Old 02-21-2022, 09:19 AM
  #322  
breny4104
Rennlist Member
 
breny4104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 904
Received 461 Likes on 286 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by detansinn
If you set an EV on fire, the Lithium will burn regardless of the charge state.
Laptops, smartphones, and a host of other devices are shipped in massive quantities with the same type of batteries.
right but I think the thermal runaway would be diminished.
breny4104 is offline  
Old 02-21-2022, 10:20 AM
  #323  
Drew46
Three Wheelin'
 
Drew46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Westchester NY
Posts: 1,986
Received 1,651 Likes on 780 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by detansinn
While EV fires make news, gasoline powered cars are 100x more likely to catch on fire per a study done by the NTSB.
https://electrek.co/2022/01/12/gover...ires-than-evs/

The last VW/Porsche carrier that caught ablaze and sunk was in 2019, with no EVs on board. Given the potential that gasoline powered cars are responsible for two ship carrier fires in the past three years, perhaps, it might make sense to temporarily stop the transportation of gasoline powered VW cars until the problem can be studied further. 😜

I agree with you on this assessment, but my concern is that these facts won't necessarily stop the typical hysteria and pendulum swing that often follows a "major" event. I would not be surprised to see new challenges to shipping EVs coming from the regulators, the shippers and the insurers. Even though EVs may not increase the chance of a fire, they do increase the challenges and complexities of extinguishing a fire when they are part of the "fuel source". I would not be surprised to see new requirements (coming from any or all of the three sources) around enhanced fire suppression or "fire breaks" on ships carrying EVs. To be clear, I don't think (without more info) that they would be beneficial or cost effective, but since when does logic and reason get in the way with emotional reaction and PR concerns?
Drew46 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
detansinn (02-21-2022)
Old 02-21-2022, 11:12 AM
  #324  
worf928
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
worf928's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gone. On the Open Road
Posts: 16,449
Received 1,614 Likes on 1,053 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by doug_999
Let's remember that one of the VW boats is no more. So even if they are able to re-make all these cars tomorrow, we have one less boat.
Clearly, they will need a bigger boat.
worf928 is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by worf928:
CodyBigdog (02-21-2022), doug_999 (02-21-2022)
Old 02-21-2022, 11:26 AM
  #325  
worf928
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
worf928's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gone. On the Open Road
Posts: 16,449
Received 1,614 Likes on 1,053 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by detansinn
While EV fires make news, gasoline powered cars are 100x more likely to catch on fire per a study done by the NTSB.
https://electrek.co/2022/01/12/gover...ires-than-evs/
That article presents data that is not normalized for fleet age. The NTSB study linked in the linked (yes, two levels of indirection) article doesn’t even present statistics normalized in terms of ‘per thousand vehicles.’

Lies. Damned lies. And statistics.

Every time - twice now - that I pull back a veil on the “100x” claim I find more evidence that the claim seems to be the result of statistics being used incorrectly, for a specific purpose and perpetrated on people that neither know nor care about the definition of a confounding variable.

worf928 is offline  
Old 02-21-2022, 11:28 AM
  #326  
doug_999
Rennlist Member
 
doug_999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,230
Received 840 Likes on 430 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mjsporsche
There are more than 7500 RoRo cargo ships in the world. I suspect a replacement can be secured by VW.
Doesn't happen overnight. One of the shipping schedules pointed out that it takes 8 weeks.
doug_999 is offline  
Old 02-21-2022, 11:44 AM
  #327  
malba2366
Three Wheelin'
 
malba2366's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,251
Received 751 Likes on 424 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by detansinn
EVs burning doesn’t mean that they were the source of the fire. There are EVs and PHEVs on boats, going across the ocean, literally every day.

There was literally another VW/Porsche carrier ship fire just three years ago, in 2019. No EVs on board. Still a total loss.

It doesn't matter what caused the fire there are many things that can cause a fire at sea, the problem is that once a Lithium Ion battery catches fire it is very difficult to put out. There are more and more sources pointing to this as a contributing factor in the severity of this particular fire. If that becomes very clear the shippers/insurers will limit the shipping to EVs until proper fire suppression techniques can be instituted

Gasoline cars may catch on fire more often, but the fires are usually put out quickly once firefighters are on the scene, EV fires are very hard to put out and they often reignite due to thermal runaway in the batteries once damaged.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/burning...an-11645385571

Last edited by malba2366; 02-21-2022 at 11:52 AM.
malba2366 is offline  
Old 02-21-2022, 11:48 AM
  #328  
aggie57
Rennlist Member
 
aggie57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Newport Beach, CA and Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,290
Received 2,845 Likes on 1,494 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by cmjohnson
What are the chances that at some point in the future the decision will be made that EVs can't share the same cargo ship with gas and diesel powered vehicles?

I think we've already found out that the realistic fire hazards are greater for EVs than fossil fueled vehicles. And as energy density get higher in future battery designs, I don't expect that trend to reverse.

EVs have a long way to go to be truly competitive with the internal combustion engine anyway. Quick, what is the volume and mass of an EV vehicle battery that gives 300 miles range in a specific vehicle,
as compared to the size and weight of a full tank of gas that will give you the same range? Well, a Taycan battery is close to 1400 pounds. And that's taken it as far as 280 miles in testing.

Battery energy density has a LONG way to go before it becomes pound-for-pound comparable to fossil fuels. Plus gas tanks don't self ignite just because someone poked a hole in them.

And, a discharged Li-Ion battery is still flammable. It just won't self-ignite if damaged while fully discharged. It's the heat generated in the short circuit in a charged battery that starts the electrolyte on fire.

I honestly think these factors are going to ensure that the internal combustion engine will be around for a long time to come. Trying to make an energy storage system truly SAFE when its very design is intrinsically
prone to self-ignition when damaged is a very tough problem to solve.
ICE vehicles are on the way out, simple as that. It's happening as we speak, in a few years you'll be hard pressed to buy a pure ICE vehicle.
aggie57 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
detansinn (02-21-2022)
Old 02-21-2022, 02:41 PM
  #329  
unclemat
Pro
 
unclemat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 639
Received 371 Likes on 211 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by aggie57
ICE vehicles are on the way out, simple as that. It's happening as we speak, in a few years you'll be hard pressed to buy a pure ICE vehicle.
Nope. Maybe in Eurokolkhoz, not in Murica!
unclemat is offline  
The following users liked this post:
981KMAN (02-24-2022)
Old 02-21-2022, 02:52 PM
  #330  
politeperson
Racer
 
politeperson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Boston
Posts: 262
Received 475 Likes on 145 Posts
Default

All all those lovely cars just gone. Terrible. The Bentley Lambos and Porsches would have been treasured for years, what a waste.

I am the biggest supporter of new technology you will ever meet and I have driven over 140,000 miles in electric cars.

Bring on V-TOL and hydrogen power, all fine by me.

The idea of driving a diesel or petrol engine car in a city is terrible for air quality. We all know that. It has been terrible for years.

However, if you you were just to replace all the 289,000,000 ICE cars in the USA with lithium powered electric cars overnight, or even a few years, would be an environmental disaster. Imagine the energy required to do that.

I think it might take a while.

Dont forget, plenty of electricity is generated by burning fossil fuels, just saying. Maybe 60% in 2020?

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3

Not to mention which, plenty of electricity is lost in transmission through the grid and transformers by the time it gets to your wheels.

So it is not as clear cut as some new Model 3 owners have been eulogizing to me recently. The electricity has to come from somewhere.

Last edited by politeperson; 02-21-2022 at 02:54 PM.
politeperson is offline  


Quick Reply: Car Transport Ship Felicity Ace Catches Fire Mid Atlantic



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 09:23 PM.