The Problem With EVs

[josephbloggs]

23 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

There's a very good reason an EV owner would not buy another ICE. It would shoot down their false virtue signalling in flames.

Pretty sure they wouldn't buy one because - by comparison - they are noisy, dirty, sluggish and smelly. That's certainly how my ICE car felt after using an EV version for three days.

[Lacessit]

11 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Pretty sure they wouldn't buy one because - by comparison - they are noisy, dirty, sluggish and smelly. That's certainly how my ICE car felt after using an EV version for three days.

Are you buying one? I would have thought an EV would be ideal for Bangkok.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

Got a mate back in Aust who owns a Tesla and he loves it - and it is awesome to drive. 

But - he also owns a petrol car - and he and the wife use that when they go on a holiday.

The reason is simple - charging the Tesla is very 'problematic' once you get outside the cities. 

Likewise, he once had a fault with the Tesla and it required 'specialist' technician to come and fix it (replace a part and reprogram the car).

He is, like myself, an old school guy who grew up fixing/building cars - but there aint anything he can do to the Tesla (can change tyre).

 

IMO right now EVs are only 'right' in the larger places where the infrastructure and technicians are provided.

Maybe in another 10 years - maybe.  But in Thailand? No way - if something happens while in Isaan you are f*****.

I will not even touch upon the EV batteries burning themselves and burning down carparks etc etc etc.

 

I am hoping Hydrogen fuel will become the norm - that seems to be far more practical and a way better for the environment.

8 Vehicle Manufacturers Working on Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars | FASTECH (fastechus.com)

 

 

 

[KhunLA]

22 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Pretty sure they wouldn't buy one because - by comparison - they are noisy, dirty, sluggish and smelly. That's certainly how my ICE car felt after using an EV version for three days.

Yea, what he said ... 

[KhunLA]

Mind boggling ...

... some of the posts and ignorance exhibited in this thread.  And from a couple folks I had a bit more 'respect' for.  Oh well  

 

Non EV owners discussing something they obviously are completely ignorant about.  Sad really.

 

Why would you not buy one in BKK ?  City is perfect place for one.

 

And enough with issues outside of TH, as the EV owners on the forum, are mostly, if not all, living in TH.  Nothing outside of TH is very relevant.  Like stating the UK will have a coup if Torries (whatever is the minority party) take over the next election ... pure silliness.

[sqwakvfr]

I would not be happy:  

 

[JBChiangRai]

52 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Got a mate back in Aust who owns a Tesla and he loves it - and it is awesome to drive. 

But - he also owns a petrol car - and he and the wife use that when they go on a holiday.

The reason is simple - charging the Tesla is very 'problematic' once you get outside the cities. 

Likewise, he once had a fault with the Tesla and it required 'specialist' technician to come and fix it (replace a part and reprogram the car).

He is, like myself, an old school guy who grew up fixing/building cars - but there aint anything he can do to the Tesla (can change tyre).

 

IMO right now EVs are only 'right' in the larger places where the infrastructure and technicians are provided.

Maybe in another 10 years - maybe.  But in Thailand? No way - if something happens while in Isaan you are f*****.

I will not even touch upon the EV batteries burning themselves and burning down carparks etc etc etc.

 

I am hoping Hydrogen fuel will become the norm - that seems to be far more practical and a way better for the environment.

8 Vehicle Manufacturers Working on Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars | FASTECH (fastechus.com)

 

 

 

There’s a problem with HFCV’s.

 

Hydrogen costs about 5 times more than electricity.

 

Wasn’t there another vehicle that was made out of carbon fiber and it disintegrated because it didn’t react well to changes in pressure? 

[KhunLA]

6 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

There’s a problem with HFCV’s.

 

Hydrogen costs about 5 times more than electricity.

 

Wasn’t there another vehicle that was made out of carbon fiber and it disintegrated because it didn’t react well to changes in pressure? 

I really don't see the practicality of H for personal cars.  Maybe long haul trucking to replace diesel till something better comes along, electric wise.

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

I really don't see the practicality of H for personal cars.  Maybe long haul trucking to replace diesel till something better comes along, electric wise.

Nobody saw the practicality of EV's for a long time either, until battery technology advanced sufficiently.

Electric wise, heavy duty vehicles have some way to go.

 

 

[josephbloggs]

8 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Nobody saw the practicality of EV's for a long time either, until battery technology advanced sufficiently.

Electric wise, heavy duty vehicles have some way to go.

 

 

"The Prime Mincer is a d!ckhead with his woke referendum". Kind of makes it obvious which side he's coming from and what agenda he has. I didn't pay any attention after that.

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

"The Prime Mincer is a d!ckhead with his woke referendum". Kind of makes it obvious which side he's coming from and what agenda he has. I didn't pay any attention after that.

I can't argue with his math, two battery fires in truck EV's which works out as 250 times more likely to happen than with the ICE fleet, admittedly from a small EV population.

I focus on the facts and logic he puts into his videos, perhaps your attention span can't get that far.

 

[HighPriority]

6 hours ago, Lacessit said:

These EV's must be miraculous if they don't need brake fluid, wheel bearing maintenance, steering hydraulics, brake linings and tyres.

Yeah, every 3 months or 5000km… 🤣

 

You talk in here of self righteous ev drivers trying to justify their choices and pushing their opinions to make themselves feel better, then when someone gets undercharged for some grapes, the seek the correct charge and you reply thus:

 

 

• 
• Advanced Member
• •  22k
• Gender:Male
• Location:Chiang Rai and a village

Posted 12 hours ago

I would point out a pricing mistake irrespective of whether it is in my favor, or vice versa.

I don't buy grapes, loaded with sugar.

 

 

Do you feel better after pushing your un-asked agenda  ?
Go away and dream up an new hypothetical for not owning a car that is silent and doesn’t stink.

[Lacessit]

5 minutes ago, HighPriority said:

Yeah, every 3 months or 5000km… 🤣

 

You talk in here of self righteous ev drivers trying to justify their choices and pushing their opinions to make themselves feel better, then when someone gets undercharged for some grapes, the seek the correct charge and you reply thus:

 

 

 

• 
• Advanced Member
• •  22k
• Gender:Male
• Location:Chiang Rai and a village

 

Posted 12 hours ago

I would point out a pricing mistake irrespective of whether it is in my favor, or vice versa.

I don't buy grapes, loaded with sugar.

 

 

Do you feel better after pushing your un-asked agenda  ?
Go away and dream up an new hypothetical for not owning a car that is silent and doesn’t stink.

I fail to understand what your point is in posting one of my responses from an entirely different thread.

If you don't agree with what I post, put me on ignore. Easiest way to get me to go away.

[josephbloggs]

3 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I can't argue with his math, two battery fires in truck EV's which works out as 250 times more likely to happen than with the ICE fleet, admittedly from a small EV population.

I focus on the facts and logic he puts into his videos, perhaps your attention span can't get that far.

 

Sorry, when someone is calling the PM a Mincer - and woke -  for supporting a vote on indigenous populations' rights, he is obviously a right wing d!ckhead and his agenda is clear. Zero credibility from there on in.

I find it so hard to listen to him as he is so childish, repeatedly saying  "Jay Anus" for "Janus" - hilarious!! Facts and logic, of course.

 

But just for you I forced myself to listen to some more of his childish video (I couldn't make it to the end, sorry). The fire was real, the EV was an aftermarket conversion.  Plenty of dodgy aftermarket CNG fires, I don't see what is different.   https://www.firehouse.com/operations-training/article/21162767/close-calls-not-a-wastethe-tale-of-a-cng-garbage-truck-fire

A bit more research on the incident leads to this: 

The other interesting comment from the fire brigade was that they had been to 250 diesel truck fires in Victoria this year and this is the first EV truck fire they’ve had.  “It seems like we turn a bit of a blind eye when a diesel truck is on fire but when an EV is on fire, it’s a major issue.”

https://bigrigs.com.au/2023/12/18/why-electric-truck-caught-fire-on-the-west-gate-freeway/

If you want an EV, buy it from a reputable EV manufacturer. If you want a CNG vehicle buy it as a factory built vehicle. I don't see what this conversion has to do with the safety of EVs as there is plenty of evidence out there that EVs are much much less likely to catch fire than an ICEV. And it seems there are way more diesel truck fires than EVs.
 

Australia’s Department of Defence funded EV FireSafe to look into the question. It found there was a 0.0012% chance of a passenger electric vehicle battery catching fire, compared with a 0.1% chance for internal combustion engine cars. (The Home Office said it was unable to provide data for the UK.)

Elon Musk’s Tesla is the world’s biggest maker of electric cars. It says the number of fires on US roads involving Teslas from 2012 to 2021 was 11 times lower per mile than the figure for all cars, the vast majority of which have petrol or diesel engines.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/20/do-electric-cars-pose-a-greater-fire-risk-than-petrol-or-diesel-vehicles

 

Please post credible links, not homophobic right wing idiots making childish videos. Jay Anus indeed!

Edited December 21, 2023 by josephbloggs

[josephbloggs]

15 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

A bit more research on the incident leads to this: 

The other interesting comment from the fire brigade was that they had been to 250 diesel truck fires in Victoria this year and this is the first EV truck fire they’ve had.  “It seems like we turn a bit of a blind eye when a diesel truck is on fire but when an EV is on fire, it’s a major issue.”

https://bigrigs.com.au/2023/12/18/why-electric-truck-caught-fire-on-the-west-gate-freeway/

 

Australia’s Department of Defence funded EV FireSafe to look into the question. It found there was a 0.0012% chance of a passenger electric vehicle battery catching fire, compared with a 0.1% chance for internal combustion engine cars. (The Home Office said it was unable to provide data for the UK.)

Elon Musk’s Tesla is the world’s biggest maker of electric cars. It says the number of fires on US roads involving Teslas from 2012 to 2021 was 11 times lower per mile than the figure for all cars, the vast majority of which have petrol or diesel engines.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/20/do-electric-cars-pose-a-greater-fire-risk-than-petrol-or-diesel-vehicles

 

@Lacessit obviously you don't have an agenda and you are simply consumed by the truth, so what does your research tell you about the above? 250 diesel truck fires in Victoria vs one EV fire. Obviously there are many more diesel trucks on the road than electric ones, so how does it measure up? Please exclude aftermarket conversions.

Or how do you disqualify any research (and there is a lot of it) that EVs have a significantly smaller chance of catching fire than ICEVs?  You hold the truth so dear that I am sure you have looked in to it. Or do you also believer the Australian PM is a "mincer" and a "D!ckhead" for letting the populace vote on indigenous rights and no further research is necessary?

Come on, oh seeker of truth.

[HighPriority]

11 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I fail to understand what your point is in posting one of my responses from an entirely different thread.

If you don't agree with what I post, put me on ignore. Easiest way to get me to go away.

You fail to understand your hypocrisy ?

🤣

[BritManToo]

9 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

@Lacessit obviously you don't have an agenda and you are simply consumed by the truth, so what does your research tell you about the above? 250 diesel truck fires in Victoria vs one EV fire. Obviously there are many more diesel trucks on the road than electric ones, so how does it measure up? Please exclude aftermarket conversions.

There are 165000 registered trucks, 24 of which are EVs.

Of those trucks 250 ICE have burnt in the past year, and 2 EVs in the past 6 months.

165000/250 = 1 in 660 ICE burns v 1 in 12 EV burns.

 

Temp of diesel fire = 800c (can be extinguished)

Temp of EV fire = 2,700c (burns steel and concrete, outgassing deadly poisons cobalt, lithium)

 

2 Victoria firefighters have already been given permanent disability retirement after attending EV fires this year.

Edited December 22, 2023 by BritManToo

[KhunLA]

10 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

2 Victoria firefighters have already been given permanent disability retirement after attending EV fires this year.

That sucks, especially if linked to just the EV fire, as apposed to all the other toxic fires they've fought over the years.  Would think SCBAs would be standard equipment when getting an EV fire call.

 

Point taken, but hard to compare EV fire health hazards to the hazards of diesel exhaust over the decades of use, with direct link to respiratory diseases.  Would think diesel wins hands down on the health hazard scorecard.  

 

Thankfully EVs are moving away from using some of the more toxic chemicals.  Safer with added plus of being cheaper.

[Gweiloman]

20 hours ago, Lacessit said:

What's silly is the way EV owners defend their electric Jesus when deficiencies in the technology are pointed out, as if such comments are blasphemy.

 

Just calculate the probabilities of one EV owner encountering another EV owner, one who is equipped to transfer electrons, with the patience to wait several hours. Less than 8% of total vehicles in Thailand.

 

Even then, I doubt you can appreciate how abjectly dumb your post is.

What is abjectly dumb is your made up scenario. In over 40 years of motoring, I have never driven to a location so remote that there aren’t any petrol stations. Why then would I want to drive an EV there?

 

Here in CM, the technological centre of the universe, even market stall traders have QR codes for payment. If you choose to live in the back of beyond where only cash is accepted, that’s your choice. But I believe most current or potential EV owners would not be living in such isolation.

Edited December 22, 2023 by Gweiloman

[KhunLA]

1 hour ago, Gweiloman said:

What is abjectly dumb is your made up scenario. In over 40 years of motoring, I have never driven to a location so remote that there aren’t any petrol stations. Why then would I want to drive an EV there?

 

Here in CM, the technological centre of the universe, even market stall traders have QR codes for payment. If you choose to live in the back of beyond where only cash is accepted, that’s your choice. But I believe most current or potential EV owners would not be living in such isolation.

I gave up reading his EV drivel  What if ... what if ... what if

... what if ... he just STFU 

 

Guessing he's the kind of guy that runs out of petrol once or twice a year ... 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

18 hours ago, JBChiangRai said:

There’s a problem with HFCV’s.

Hydrogen costs about 5 times more than electricity.

Wasn’t there another vehicle that was made out of carbon fiber and it disintegrated because it didn’t react well to changes in pressure? 

True - but HFCVs are in their very early days - like LNG was 30 years ago.

More and more manufacturers are developing HFCVs and as that develops they will become better and more reliable.

Hopefully over time they will overtake EVs as the best alternative to Petrol cars and Diesel trucks.

[KhunLA]

28 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

True - but HFCVs are in their very early days - like LNG was 30 years ago.

More and more manufacturers are developing HFCVs and as that develops they will become better and more reliable.

Hopefully over time they will overtake EVs as the best alternative to Petrol cars and Diesel trucks.

Been pushing H for at least 17 years, and doesn't seem to be getting much traction.    Remember the 'Who Killed the Electric Car" documentary (2006), and H being pushed in that as an alternative.

 

Funny part of that documentary, one of the guys driving around as part of the promo, stated It's a ridiculous alternative.  Seems he was right, as 17 yrs later, and still not a viable alternative.

 

On the surface, without the tech side of H, it has the inherent issues petrol & diesel have.   The cost and energy used to produce, transport & store it. 

 

Really need to get away from producing energy for the profit, and simply harness the 'local, natural' energy available, that's being ignored & wasted; solar, hydro, thermal, wind.

 

These countries seem to have moved away from fossil fuel for energy, and not even in the sunny tropics:

 

Even states in the USA, again, not even in the tropic:

Edited December 22, 2023 by KhunLA

[TroubleandGrumpy]

9 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Been pushing H for at least 17 years, and doesn't seem to be getting much traction.    Remember the 'Who Killed the Electric Car" documentary (2006), and H being pushed in that as an alternative.

 

Funny part of that documentary, one of the guys driving around as part of the promo, stated It's a ridiculous alternative.  Seems he was right, as 17 yrs later, and still not a viable alternative.

 

On the surface, without the tech side of H, it has the inherent issues petrol & diesel have.   The cost and energy used to produce, transport & store it. 

 

Really need to get away from producing energy for the profit, and simply harness the 'local, natural' energy available, that's being ignored & wasted; solar, hydro, thermal, wind.

 

These countries seem to have moved away from fossil fuel for energy, and not even in the sunny tropics:

 

Even states in the USA, again, not even in the tropic:

 

That Toyota has just developed a Hydrogen powered car, and other manufacturers are doing the same, means to me that it has been 'resurrected' as such  - I certainly hope so anyway. 

 

'Renewable Energy' - that is a can of worms and a political minefield of vested interests.  The solution IMO is obvious - build nuclear power stations and where possible hydro power stations for the main grid, and use solar farms/panels for the Regions and Locals backed up by the main grid when needed.   I recently saw that the 'environmentalists' were taking the 'greenpeacers' to Court in Europe because the environmentalists think nuclear is the best immediate solution, and the greenpeacers hate nuclear and want them all shut down. 

[KhunLA]

11 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

 

That Toyota has just developed a Hydrogen powered car, and other manufacturers are doing the same, means to me that it has been 'resurrected' as such  - I certainly hope so anyway. 

 

'Renewable Energy' - that is a can of worms and a political minefield of vested interests.  The solution IMO is obvious - build nuclear power stations and where possible hydro power stations for the main grid, and use solar farms/panels for the Regions and Locals backed up by the main grid when needed.   I recently saw that the 'environmentalists' were taking the 'greenpeacers' to Court in Europe because the environmentalists think nuclear is the best immediate solution, and the greenpeacers hate nuclear and want them all shut down. 

Yes ... that is the problem ... profits over common sense

 

Not a big fan of nuclear myself, as no matter what they tell us, they still haven't figured a way to safely get rid of spent fuel rods.  May come back to haunt future generations.   Nukes are just a bit better than fossil fuels.

 

 

Edited December 22, 2023 by KhunLA

[josephbloggs]

3 hours ago, BritManToo said:

There are 165000 registered trucks, 24 of which are EVs.

Of those trucks 250 ICE have burnt in the past year, and 2 EVs in the past 6 months.

165000/250 = 1 in 660 ICE burns v 1 in 12 EV burns.

 

Temp of diesel fire = 800c (can be extinguished)

Temp of EV fire = 2,700c (burns steel and concrete, outgassing deadly poisons cobalt, lithium)

 

2 Victoria firefighters have already been given permanent disability retirement after attending EV fires this year.

Yes, those stats for that company are not good, but let's not forget they are aftermarket conversions - I wouldn't recommend doing that for any energy source. How many fires have we seen here from dodgy CNG or LNG conversions?

Overall the stats are that EVs are much less likely to catch fire than a diesel or petrol vehicle. When they do go off they are very dangerous, but they are less likely to catch fire in the first place.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

5 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Yes ... that is the problem ... profits over common sense

 

Not a big fan of nuclear myself, as no matter what they tell us, they still haven't figured a way to safely get rid of spent fuel rods.  May come back to haunt future generations.   Nukes are just a bit better than fossil fuels.

 

True about spent rods/waste - but they have figured out how to safely store them. 

Nuclear is far better than fossil - clean, safe and abundant - they are costly, but if it is that important then just do it.

They could replace all existing coal/gas/fossil powered power plants within 15-20 years - net result is zero CO2 NO2 and other emmissions.

After 40-50 years they will replace all the nuclear plants with whatever technology is developed that can guarantee 100% power output to the main grid and can cope with peak power demands 24x7x365 (no renewable is there yet).  If nothing is able to step up to that mark, then nuclear stays until they do.  And of course there is nuclear fusion - the holy grail of power generation. 

[Lacessit]

3 hours ago, BritManToo said:

There are 165000 registered trucks, 24 of which are EVs.

Of those trucks 250 ICE have burnt in the past year, and 2 EVs in the past 6 months.

165000/250 = 1 in 660 ICE burns v 1 in 12 EV burns.

 

Temp of diesel fire = 800c (can be extinguished)

Temp of EV fire = 2,700c (burns steel and concrete, outgassing deadly poisons cobalt, lithium)

 

2 Victoria firefighters have already been given permanent disability retirement after attending EV fires this year.

Thank you for saving me the trouble of explaining to one of the resident d!ckheads what John Cadogan was on about.

 

EV trucks don't make any sense. The average diesel engine in a truck weighs 200 kg. To match that output, a battery pack for an truck needs to be 2000 kg. Why would any truck operator sacrifice 20% of their carrying capacity, except when subsidized by taxpayers, and facilitated by woke politicians?

[TroubleandGrumpy]

18 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Overall the stats are that EVs are much less likely to catch fire than a diesel or petrol vehicle. When they do go off they are very dangerous, but they are less likely to catch fire in the first place.

 

That is the current issue right there and it might be what stops EVs dead in their tracks. When a LPG or Petrol car catches fire, the fire can be extinguished and it very 'containable'. When an EV combusts (thermal overload) it cannot be put out and it is not containable.

 

If there is a massive fire caused by an EV that kills many people (ship at sea, carpark in basement of tall building or a large mall, etc.) they will be sued out of existence.  EVs have already destroyed a ship and a carpark and mutliple other cars and buildings. Right now they are 'problemmatic' but if/when a tragedy occurs, they will be 'dodo bird'. 

 

Nuclear is IMO the answer to power genration that will reduce CO2 etc. but because of a couple of tragedies and their danger, they are not accepted by many people as the right solution.  EVs are inherently more dangerous than any other form of vehicle - because of the damage they can and will do if they combust due to a thermal overload. 

[Lacessit]

51 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

 

True about spent rods/waste - but they have figured out how to safely store them. 

Nuclear is far better than fossil - clean, safe and abundant - they are costly, but if it is that important then just do it.

They could replace all existing coal/gas/fossil powered power plants within 15-20 years - net result is zero CO2 NO2 and other emmissions.

After 40-50 years they will replace all the nuclear plants with whatever technology is developed that can guarantee 100% power output to the main grid and can cope with peak power demands 24x7x365 (no renewable is there yet).  If nothing is able to step up to that mark, then nuclear stays until they do.  And of course there is nuclear fusion - the holy grail of power generation. 

There is one aspect of nuclear power which seems to be ignored by its proponents.

A fossil fuel plant can be decommissioned and demolished, the land may be put to other uses.

Nuclear power plants irradiate the steel and other materials of their construction. Consequently, the only thing that can be done with a nuclear facility which has reached the end of its service life is to seal it up in concrete, just as if it was a failed reactor. Then wait a few thousand years.

Edited December 22, 2023 by Lacessit

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, josephbloggs said:

Yes, those stats for that company are not good, but let's not forget they are aftermarket conversions - I wouldn't recommend doing that for any energy source. How many fires have we seen here from dodgy CNG or LNG conversions?

Overall the stats are that EVs are much less likely to catch fire than a diesel or petrol vehicle. When they do go off they are very dangerous, but they are less likely to catch fire in the first place.

Let's not forget those aftermarket conversions had taxpayer funding and political blessing either.

 

The West Gate Bridge is a 10 lane carriageway, five lanes either way.

I have yet to hear of an ICE truck fire that has closed that bridge for several hours. I haven't heard of an ICE fire on a cargo ship capable of sinking said ship either.

It will probably take an EV fire in the Mullum Mullum or Melba tunnels, for people to wake up to the fact while passenger EV's may be safe enough, EV trucks are cruising time bombs.