Sadly, ignornace is winning.

[CyberGus]

Electric car driver turned away from hospital car park
Tom Singleton, Technology reporter

Signs in the car park confirmed the ban

A father who was taking his child to Alder Hey hospital in Liverpool says he was turned away from the car park because he was driving an electric vehicle (EV).

Paul Freeman-Powell said he was told to park next to nearby grass because his car "could explode."

The hospital says it has temporarily banned access to the car park while it improves its sprinkler system.

But industry figures have challenged the decision, pointing to research that indicates petrol cars are considerably more likely to catch fire than EVs.

Mr Freeman-Powell told the BBC he attempted to tell the security guard he spoke to that the hospital's policy did not make any sense.

But he said in the end he complied because he did not want his seven-year-old son to miss an appointment he had waited nearly five years for.

In a statement issued to the BBC, Alder Hey hospital said following advice from Merseyside Fire and Rescue it had "temporarily restricted the parking of electric vehicles in one of our smaller car parks while we upgrade its fire sprinkler system."

"Electric vehicles are still able to park in our main Hospital car park", it continued, pointing out it also had 14 spaces with EV charging points.

Merseyside Fire and Rescue has been contacted for comment.

'Misinfomation'
Mr Freeman-Powell shared a picture of a sign at the entrance to the car park which reads “no electric vehicles” on X, formerly Twitter.

Fair Charge, a campaign group for electric vehicles, described it as “misinformation erroneously shaping public policy”.

Its founder, the motoring journalist Quentin Wilson, said "for the NHS to restrict electric cars from coming into car parks dramatically conflicts with the clean air and health benefits from zero tailpipe emissions."

Colin Walker, head of transport at the research group the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, agreed that the evidence did not support the hospital's position.

“Data from EV FireSafe, which is backed by the Australian Government, indicates that petrol cars are over 80 times more likely to set on fire than EVs,” he told the BBC.

He also highlighted a report released last year from the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency which found that in 2022 there was an average of 3.8 fires per 100,000 electric and hybrid cars, and 68 fires per 100,000 cars of all fuel types, with these figures including arson.

“It’s important that drivers understand the relative risks", Mr Walker said,

He also pointed out that a recent car fire which closed Luton Airport was started by a vehicle running on diesel fuel, not electric as some initial reports claimed.

Electric car sales have slowed this year, comprising just 15% of new cars registered in the UK in March 2024, according to figures released by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT).

The US EV maker Tesla reported a drop in revenue for the first time since 2021, and has been laying off staff, with co-founder Elon Musk saying the firm had to be “absolutely hardcore” about cutting costs.


https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c90zjne2v0jo

 

[Kahpernicus]

In a statement issued to the BBC, Alder Hey hospital said following advice from Merseyside Fire and Rescue it had "temporarily restricted the parking of electric vehicles in one of our smaller car parks while we upgrade its fire sprinkler system."

This is something that, in europe at least, is being looked into heavily for carparks(garages) with the increase of electric vehicles.

It's pretty well known that if an electric vehicle catches fire/becomes compromised the risk of thermal runaway is high.

https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Pages/HWY19SP002.aspx

So looking past the "they hate evs" line. This is a proactive safety protection being implemented.

 

[WheresMyCybertruck]

Yeah I think this is more about having means to contain an EV fire than it is about EV vs ICE fire risks.

Considering it's a hospital, you'd think they'd have additional parking spots or some type of accomodation for EVs though...

 

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

So looking past the "they hate evs" line. This is a proactive safety protection being implemented.

Nice try!

Conspiracy theory believing cult and fan boiz will be ganging on you anyway.

They'll be showing themselves to have better knowledge of beautiful fires than the European firemen who have encountered those uncontrollable lithium battery fires.

 

[Crissa]

They'll be showing themselves to have better knowledge of beautiful fires than the European firemen who have encountered those uncontrollable lithium battery fires.

Merseyside Fire Department has probably never encountered one. They're not that common.

And a large luxury vehicle with one of those above-average tanks will have far more potential energy - and a higher chance of fires - than an EV.

-Crissa

 

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

Merseyside Fire Department has probably never encountered one. They're not that common.

And a large luxury vehicle with one of those above-average tanks will have far more potential energy - and a higher chance of fires - than an EV.

-Crissa

The difference is thst they know how to immediately put out a gas tank fire.

Lithium battery fire can't be suppressed until it burn itseld out and the bigger problem and risk in evacuating a hospital with non ambulatory and tethered-to-life-support patients.

They may not have experienced it themselves but knowledge-base may have been decimated from other countries and juridictions. I say thar a few of my management knowledge are from MBA case studies from other companies that I never experienced but were useful when I faced them myself.

 

[Crissa]

The difference is thst they know how to immediately put out a gas tank fire.

Lithium battery fire can't be suppressed until it burn itseld out and the bigger problem and risk in evacuating a hospital with non ambulatory and tethered-to-life-support patients.

This isn't true.

Relative risk of 40x less likely to be on fire generally means you could have a 40x worse fire and have the same, relative risk. But a lithium fire isn't 40x worse, and no, it's not impossible to reduce.



Lithium fires are also much slower growing, so not only are the people nearby more likely to survive and have time to call the fire department, they're more likely to be able to stop them before they grow.

Unlike a gasoline or grease fire, which spreads everywhere when firefighters try to attack it, a lithium fire is contained to the battery pack, and cooling water can be focused on the underside of a vehicle to remove that heat.

Basically, it can be defeated with a sprinkler hose in the right place. This is an EV forum, no reason for myths to be perpetuated here.

-Crissa

PS, this is one of the problems with expertise: Just because a narrow band of expertise is there doesn't mean to goes outside that band. Firefighters are just normal people and without concerted effort, not going to know more about EV fires than the average person. ...Just because EV penetration is so low.

 

[M0unt41nm4n]

This isn't true.

Relative risk of 40x less likely to be on fire generally means you could have a 40x worse fire and have the same, relative risk. But a lithium fire isn't 40x worse, and no, it's not impossible to reduce.



Lithium fires are also much slower growing, so not only are the people nearby more likely to survive and have time to call the fire department, they're more likely to be able to stop them before they grow.



Unlike a gasoline or grease fire, which spreads everywhere when firefighters try to attack it, a lithium fire is contained to the battery pack, and cooling water can be focused on the underside of a vehicle to remove that heat.

Basically, it can be defeated with a sprinkler hose in the right place. This is an EV forum, no reason for myths to be perpetuated here.

-Crissa

This is TOTALLY incorrect. I was a Firefighter for 16 years and we did fire fighting techniques specifically for EVs and used Teslas and our training vehicles.

Slow growing? Not if there is a short in it... that thing will go super fast. What causes that short? Mechanism of the accident.

The fire is NOT contained to the lithium pack. Once it gets hot enough for vehicle ignition, the vehicle goes up... the entire vehicle goes. For most car fires, its not the gasoline that is the major fire, its the seats, tires and other combustibles. Since Teslas use Magnesium alloys, you want to see something burn white hot? Like literally? Watch the magnesium parts light up. Gasoline becomes a problem if there is tank impingement and it additionally becomes a hazmat issue when that occurs. Gasoline doesn't blow up like in the movies.

The battery will not go out internally until it is significantly cooled with copious amounts of water to prevent thermal runaway. There are 2 big issues with these... 1 - The fire itself, and 2 - The potential for electric shock due to stranded energy.

A sprinkler hose? ? You need at least 1 3/4" lines with 3000-8000 gallons for that. Good luck doing that with your "sprinkler hose".

The only part you got right was attacking it from below (considering if the battery pack is underneath).

@Crissa Next time you want to share "fire fighting" information, don't do it from some 2-bit politically charged Youtube channel filled with FUD. Go to the source: International Association of Fire Chiefs.

https://www.iafc.org/topics-and-too...t-response-to-electric-vehicle-fires-bulletin

 

[M0unt41nm4n]

Lithium battery fire can't be suppressed until it burn itseld out and the bigger problem and risk in evacuating a hospital with non ambulatory and tethered-to-life-support patients.

This is 100% correct.

 

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

This isn't true.

Relative risk of 40x less likely to be on fire generally means you could have a 40x worse fire and have the same, relative risk. But a lithium fire isn't 40x worse, and no, it's not impossible to reduce.



Lithium fires are also much slower growing, so not only are the people nearby more likely to survive and have time to call the fire department, they're more likely to be able to stop them before they grow.

Unlike a gasoline or grease fire, which spreads everywhere when firefighters try to attack it, a lithium fire is contained to the battery pack, and cooling water can be focused on the underside of a vehicle to remove that heat.

Basically, it can be defeated with a sprinkler hose in the right place. This is an EV forum, no reason for myths to be perpetuated here.

-Crissa

PS, this is one of the problems with expertise: Just because a narrow band of expertise is there doesn't mean to goes outside that band. Firefighters are just normal people and without concerted effort, not going to know more about EV fires than the average person. ...Just because EV penetration is so low.

I don't know really. I can't pretend to be an expert.

Just my fireman nephew's comment on my daughter's Tesla X.

He said, don't even know if it's true or he is just joking, that they will just let it burn out if it's out in the open and just prevent contagion though they have special chemical mix for it.

And it's just pure conjecture on my reason for Europe fire codes and regs.

 

[Crissa]

Like I said, it's a problem with narrow knowledge. Firefighters aren't really experts on things they don't know.

To stop a battery fire, it's about lowering the temperature, which has different methods, but they all basically try to flood or spray the bottom of the pack and bring the temperature down. Targeted water.

His station's policy may be to let it burn, but that's policy, not what's best for managing risk.

-Crissa

 

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

Again I concede may lack of knowledge leading to my conjectures.

But I bet I am laughing (sadly too) that the fab boiz here are easy to call ignorant when their tender feelings are hurt and their paranoia and persecution complex are triggered by perceived slight to their vehicle.

To the point of wanting to substitute their self proclaimed expertise, which I surmised came from simply owning an EV, to the expertise of firefighters in the city and the hospital administrator whose responsibilities are over many lives and their patients well being.

And I argue no more and rest my case.

 

[CyberGus]

Of course, we’re not talking about high-speed vehicle collisions here. This is a parking garage. There is little risk of an undamaged EV sitting idly catching fire.

Should the hospital also prohibit aircraft from flying directly overhead? Those things do crash, you know. Think of the children…

 

[Platinumsmith]

Electric car driver turned away from hospital car park
Tom Singleton, Technology reporter

Signs in the car park confirmed the ban

A father who was taking his child to Alder Hey hospital in Liverpool says he was turned away from the car park because he was driving an electric vehicle (EV).

Paul Freeman-Powell said he was told to park next to nearby grass because his car "could explode."

The hospital says it has temporarily banned access to the car park while it improves its sprinkler system.

But industry figures have challenged the decision, pointing to research that indicates petrol cars are considerably more likely to catch fire than EVs.

Mr Freeman-Powell told the BBC he attempted to tell the security guard he spoke to that the hospital's policy did not make any sense.

But he said in the end he complied because he did not want his seven-year-old son to miss an appointment he had waited nearly five years for.

In a statement issued to the BBC, Alder Hey hospital said following advice from Merseyside Fire and Rescue it had "temporarily restricted the parking of electric vehicles in one of our smaller car parks while we upgrade its fire sprinkler system."

"Electric vehicles are still able to park in our main Hospital car park", it continued, pointing out it also had 14 spaces with EV charging points.

Merseyside Fire and Rescue has been contacted for comment.

'Misinfomation'
Mr Freeman-Powell shared a picture of a sign at the entrance to the car park which reads “no electric vehicles” on X, formerly Twitter.

Fair Charge, a campaign group for electric vehicles, described it as “misinformation erroneously shaping public policy”.

Its founder, the motoring journalist Quentin Wilson, said "for the NHS to restrict electric cars from coming into car parks dramatically conflicts with the clean air and health benefits from zero tailpipe emissions."

Colin Walker, head of transport at the research group the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, agreed that the evidence did not support the hospital's position.

“Data from EV FireSafe, which is backed by the Australian Government, indicates that petrol cars are over 80 times more likely to set on fire than EVs,” he told the BBC.

He also highlighted a report released last year from the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency which found that in 2022 there was an average of 3.8 fires per 100,000 electric and hybrid cars, and 68 fires per 100,000 cars of all fuel types, with these figures including arson.

“It’s important that drivers understand the relative risks", Mr Walker said,

He also pointed out that a recent car fire which closed Luton Airport was started by a vehicle running on diesel fuel, not electric as some initial reports claimed.

Electric car sales have slowed this year, comprising just 15% of new cars registered in the UK in March 2024, according to figures released by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT).

The US EV maker Tesla reported a drop in revenue for the first time since 2021, and has been laying off staff, with co-founder Elon Musk saying the firm had to be “absolutely hardcore” about cutting costs.


https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c90zjne2v0jo

Shhhhhh

 

[M0unt41nm4n]

Like I said, it's a problem with narrow knowledge. Firefighters aren't really experts on things they don't know.

To stop a battery fire, it's about lowering the temperature, which has different methods, but they all basically try to flood or spray the bottom of the pack and bring the temperature down. Targeted water.

His station's policy may be to let it burn, but that's policy, not what's best for managing risk.

-Crissa

Wow. Coming from a true firefighter who knows about firefighting. ?

Like I said, it's a problem with narrow knowledge. Firefighters aren't really experts on things they don't know.

LOLLLLLL... yeah Firefighters aren't experts about fighting fires.... narrow knowledge...