Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Model S Catches Fire: Is This Tesla's 'Toyota' Moment?
cartechboy writes "A Tesla Model S was involved in an accident in Washington state on Tuesday, and the car's battery pack caught fire (with some of it caught on video). The cause of the accident is pretty clear, and Tesla issued a statement that the vehicle hit 'a large metallic object in the middle of the road.' Whether that collision immediately set off a fire in the Model S's battery pack isn't known, but a report from the Regional Fire Authority of Kent, Washington went into detail on the battery pack fire saying the car's lithium-ion battery was on fire when firefighters arrived, and spraying water on it had little effect. Firefighters switched to a dry chemical extinguisher and had to puncture numerous holes into the battery pack to extinguish it completely. Aside from the details of how the battery fire happened and was handled, the big question is what effect it will have on how people view Teslas in the near and middle-term. Is this Tesla's version of 2010's high profile Prius recall issue where pundits and critics took the opportunity to stir fears of the cars new technology?"
obviously gasoline cars never catch on fire
News at 11.
Gasoline burns too. I don't really see many people avoiding the purchase of gasoline-powered cars since, like FOREVER.
Of course a gasoline-powered car has *never* caught on fire after a crash [/sarc]
No matter what mechanism we use for storing large amounts of energy in a small package, there is *always* the risk that it will be subject to an uncontrolled release if it suffers a physical insult.
Call me when a Tesla spontaneously explodes in flames... then it's time to get worried.
No. A single incident without a fatality is rarely a cause for such panic unless this is hyped by those opposed to electric cars.
With an Canyonero
Tesla Model S Catches Fire: Is This Tesla's 'Toyota' Moment?
Only when you consider Toyota's slogan is "Driving excitement". I can think of nothing more exciting than OH GOD OH GOD WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Of course water intensified the effect... it's an electrical fire!
Anyways... I didn't see anything in the article about it. Did the battery actually explode? If not, then there's an argument for increased safety over gasoline, isn't it?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I am going to stick with my gasoline fuelled car. It will never catch fire
I told you so!
Signed,
Edison
Tesla has been very brilliant thus far in their product strategy.
They have made expensive, high end products that are tailored to affluent enthusiasts. They have been working their way down from "least practical" to "most practical".
Enthusiasts and early adopters are much more willing to put up with teething problems in new technologies.
These are not disposable cars that you will see filled with McDonalds wrappers.
So the typical tesla customer isn't stupid white trash looking to cash in on a lawsuit with the help of an ambulance chasing lawyer (yet).
Furthermore, consider the competition: If you believe the party line, A Mercedes Benz can randomly eject its drivetrain and burn itself to a crisp, killing the occupants.
Everyone (including the test data and real-world data) agrees that MB makes exceptionally survivable vehicles. So freak things may happen.
What we saw in this case was that the Tesla hit something, nobody was hurt, the vehicle didn't lose control, and after the driver safely stopped and exited the car, the firefighters had to deal with a slightly new type of fire situation then they are used to.
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
This is restricted to the motor area. A gasoline fire engulfs the whole car and can kill everybody pretty fast. Looks like there would be plenty of time to get people out safely from a Tesla in comparison.
Face it: There is no really safe way of energy storage. But a well-made lithium battery is orders of magnitude more desirable than highly volatile and very toxic gasoline.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
First, this was a direct puncture by a piece of large metal debris. Not a design failure. The metal object likely caused a short and the resultant fire.
Second, from a number of articles and reports, Tesla's safety designs worked as planned. Numerous articles noted that the fire was contained in the front section of the vehicle where the impact occurred, and did not shift into the passenger compartment. This = GOOD!!!!
The firefighters pouring of water on a chemical fire likely exasperated the situation.
What Tesla should lean from this...
a) evaluate design to see if the front underguard can be further strengthened for greater resistance to impact and puncture with minimal affect on price and performance.
b) recognize the benefit of better trained fire departments, sell off some those stocks to found a non-profit with an endowment to help train nationally all fire departments in the handling of electric drive vehicle systems. Namely to utilize chemical extinguishers rather than water.
c) perhaps evaluate whether a small extinguishing system could be incorporated into the design. (BONUS POINTS)
a)
This is about the same as a large metal object ripping open your fuel tank and having the gasoline igniting save it's far more likely the fuel fire will consume the entire car quickly but on the reverse side it's probably easier to put out. The only real solution would be to not use lithium as a battery component which isn't possible at this time.
It's a thing to note, in the sense that fire departments/first responder types need to behave differently around a light metal fire than they do around a hydrocarbon fire (this is one of the reasons why hazardous materials storage/reporting regulations have involved the local fire department for decades in many locations: if Warehouse B catches fire, will spraying it with water stop the fire, or cause the place to explode?); but we aren't talking markedly different overall amounts of stored energy here. Even if Teslas were magically impossible to extinguish, the 'stand at a safe distance and watch' strategy works.
The driver hit something in the road; the vehicle detected the damage, realized it was going to catch on fire, and politely asked the driver to pull over and exit the vehicle. Once the driver had exited, the battery compartment started merrily burning, but the design kept the fire contained within the front compartment. At no point did the fire enter the passenger compartment, which would have been perfectly safe for the driver. Frankly, I can only dream of owning such a safe vehicle.
Tesla's battery packs are large multiple-battery units, with a crunchy plastic shell. If the fire is on the wiring in the shell, the proper way to extinguish it is to puncture the shell and apply a chemical extinguisher. That seems to be exactly what they did.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
Seems to me that Elon Musk may have some egg on his face since he so boldly offered to help out Boeing redesign their battery system on the 787 not to long ago
There is a huge difference between catching fire due to (apparently) catastrophic damage from flying debris and catching fire due under expected use conditions. So the answer is no, he does not have any egg on his face.
It seems that Tesla's Li-ion batteries are just as likely to catch on fire!
Any Li-ion battery can become flammable under the right conditions.
Or Tesla spins it as "We're incorporating a built-in fire-suppression system, the same as all race cars have had for the last 20 years or so. Why our competitors haven't done so by now,... you'll have to ask them, they're the ones who've been fielding the racing teams using this technology.".
Fuck oil and electricity. I want a *nuclear* powered engine. Now THAT will be an accident!
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
Firefighters get constant updates on all sorts of technologies. Two months ago, the monthly VFD meeting was all about LiOn batteries - from camcorders to cars. There was a slick video with all sorts of cool GoPro shots. Next month it's carbon composite airplanes like the 787. Those are supposed to be quite entertaining.
You will notice, in the brief FA video, the firefighter standing there and looking at the scene. They're not rushing around with hoses. It looks like they understand what they're dealing with and acting accordingly.
And some of us remember the magnesium transmission cases in Volkswagen bugs. Now, those were a PITA to extinguish. The world is full of all sorts of potentially dangerous things, emergency personnel get frequent instruction on how to safely deal with them.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Is this Tesla's version of 2010's high profile Prius recall issue where pundits and critics took the opportunity to stir fears of the cars new technology?
One thing is clear: Meta-pundits will use this opportunity to stir fears about what pundits will do.
Boeing 787: Multiple fires out of 83 deployed vehicles. All fires happened without collision, one happened while vehicle was parked.
Tesla Model S: One fire out of ~14,000 deployed vehicles. The fire happened due to a collision.
Yeah, I think Tesla's doing pretty well relative to Boeing here...
Reading the article, it appears that they did spray water on it first - makes sense, it's not like it's all that easy to ID a burning car. Then they noticed odd behavior, the fire got worse - OK, we know how to deal with that - stop the water, grab the dry chemical extinguisher.
Then they had to puzzle through how to put the fire out completely given they were out in the middle of the road. Seems like they did a pretty good job. A few motorists were inconvenienced, no one was hurt. People learned things. Probably will be the talk of the department for weeks.
I'll bet it was the highlight of their day (the FD folks, perhaps the owner, but in a different sense).
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Fuck oil and electricity. I want a *nuclear* powered engine. Now THAT will be an accident!
I'm sure that in 2043, plutonium is available in every corner drugstore, but in 2013, it's a little hard to come by.
Dark Reflection
More insightful than funny. Edison did electrocute elephants with electricity in public to "prove" that Tesla's AC current was more dangerous than his DC current. Tesla won that round - AC is easier to transmit over long distances because of the ease of using transformers to step it up or down.
Li-ion batteries contain no pure lithium, Li-ion doesn't react with water. Only reasons not to use water is because of potential voltages. The water could either conduct back to fire fighters, or as it gets contaminated cause more shorting internal and external to the battery.
Because gasoline/diesel powered cars never ever ever catch fire after an accident.
You mean like the Nucleon?
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
AC is easier to transmit over long distances because of the ease of using transformers to step it up or down.
Actually, AC used to be more efficient. With modern technology, high voltage DC is usually more efficient, especially for longer distances.
Seriously though. I have seen a Diesel Toyota hilux catch fire after hitting a tree and diesel is very hard to start a fire with. Petrol cars catch fire all the time. I highly doubt that these battery packs are statistically more likely to catch fire than a Petrol car. Please ignore overly dramatic journalism. These cars are thoroughly tested before they get approval to be on the road. Much more so than the dodgey chinese imports that are arriving.