Slashdot Mirror
Musk Lashes Back Over Tesla Fire Controversy
Nerval's Lobster writes "A small handful of Tesla electric cars have caught fire, driving down the company's stock price, and finally prompting CEO Elon Musk to tackle the issue in a new blog posting. 'Since the Model S went into production last year, there have been more than a quarter million gasoline car fires in the United States alone, resulting in over 400 deaths and approximately 1,200 serious injuries (extrapolating 2012 NFPA data),' he wrote in that posting. 'However, the three Model S fires, which only occurred after very high-speed collisions and caused no serious injuries or deaths, received more national headlines than all 250,000+ gasoline fires combined.' Responsible journalism on the matter, he added, has been 'drowned out' by 'an onslaught of popular and financial media seeking to make a sensation out of something that a simple Google search would reveal to be false.' According to his own figures, Tesla suffers an average of one fire per 6,333 cars, versus a rate of one fire per 1,350 gasoline-powered cars. Every Tesla vehicle includes internal walls between the battery modules, in addition to a firewall between the battery pack and the passenger compartment — enough shielding, in the event of a fire, to prevent pens and papers in the glove compartment from combusting. 'Despite multiple high-speed accidents, there have been no deaths or serious injuries in a Model S of any kind ever,' Musk continued. 'Of course, at some point, the law of large numbers dictates that this, too, will change, but the record is long enough already for us to be extremely proud of this achievement.' Tesla is about to push an 'over-the-air update' to its vehicles' air suspension that will create more ground clearance at highway speeds. In theory, that could reduce the chances of impact damage to the underbody, should the vehicle roll over an object — and that, in turn, could lower the chances of fire."
250K gasoline car fires, yes, but how many of those cars were 12 months old???
People are really bad at understanding statistics.
The masses will believe that electric cars are dangerously subject to spontaneous burning as a result of this press coverage, despite the extraordinarily solid safety record of the Tesla cars.
This is (to me) substantially similar to those people who frequently call violent crime a "growing problem" and probably comes from the same lazy, sensationalist reporters.
"Highway speeds" is when you'd most want a low center-of-mass in terms of improving driving quality. If you're going to increase it for highway speeds, maybe just make it higher, always.
I am sure Tesla will continue to find ways to improve their design in areas of safety and others, as you would expect from any newer technology. Of course, media attention forces the irony of making design changes while claiming there are no issues of concern. I feel for him, its a no win situation. He should be more up-front though, as we have already discussed at length the misuse of the statistical comparison.
If you mean that clearly you haven't read the summary of this or any of the other Tesla stories, then yes it's clear.
which is totally what she said
If Elon Musk and KAOS really wanted you DEAD , do you really think they're going to piddle around with setting your overpriced %1'er golfcart on fire?!!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
tfs:
Every Tesla vehicle includes internal walls between the battery modules, in addition to a firewall between the battery pack and the passenger compartment — enough shielding, in the event of a fire, to prevent pens and papers in the glove compartment from combusting
so, in case of a fire we should crawl into the glove box?
With cheap, longlasting oil on the horizon how dare they sell beautifully made 'lectric cars already now?
Check out my favorite electric car, a Mercedes SLS Electric Drive - a fantastic drive! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IElqf-FCMs8
*facepalm*
Now there's an institution that doesn't get enough scrutiny, especially the financial news channels. Bloomberg and their ilk aren't so far removed from Fox and Sky (or CNN) in terms of the actual product they deliver, which is sensationalist tripe, delivered by eye candy.
What passes for journalism today is often little more than a series "factoids" carefully chosen to fit a particular narrative - pro bono omnium hominum.
>> Tesla is about to push an 'over-the-air update' to its vehicles' air suspension that will create more ground clearance at highway speeds.
This is probably all a stupid kneejerk reaction. The suspension was likely already at the ideal height as determined by a lot of windtunnel etc research. Doing this will certainly create more lift under the car and so quite a lot less efficiency all in the name of being seen to be doing something visible (but actually pointless and only negative) in response to a microscopically small chance of another similar accident.
It just occurred to me that this is a whole lot like the retarded thinking behind the creation and continued existence of the TSA.
so you need to compare all the miles driven between gasoline and electric cars, not just their numbers.
Sine gasoline care drive about 3 Trillion miles a year in the US, and the total Tesla mileage. probably isn't even a million limes yet, it paint a different picture, doesn't it Elon?
Miles driven before incident is the measure that's used, not how many are on the road.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The per capita statistic is right in the summary:
I read a story early this morning talking about Musk's posting, and the author described the three car fires as "engulfed in flames". Similar language was used in early October; engulfed, erupted, etc.
In one case, the car provided dashboard cautions immediately after collision with road debris, then warnings, then the driver pulled over a couple of minutes later, the pack was smoking, he was able to get his belongings, etc. The interior of the car remained accessible and intact.
Meanwhile, I've witnessed, fought, and heard from friends who had car fires. It typically goes something like this: smoke from somewhere. Seconds, maybe 30 if you're lucky, there are flames. Within a minute or two the car is unsalvageable. In a crash in a gasoline car, the car can be on fire within seconds, and it can be a massive fire; rear collisions break up the fuel systems, front crashes cause both oil and gasoline to leak all over hot engine exhaust parts.
Firefighters generally don't rush to car fires because by the time they got the dispatch call, the car was already gone anyway; they're there mostly to put it out so the wrecker can collect it. Seriously, go look on youtube at car fires. Within the space of a minute or two, the car is well past the point of no return.
The hyperbolization here is amazing. Years ago Bose had a little problem with their car audio systems; the electrolytic capacitors would leak the electrolyte, which would then drip down the circuit board. In some cars, the amplifier board was positioned such that this would cause a short that would at the least cause smoking, and caused several fires.
One owner described driving down the highway, hearing the stereo crackle and drop out, looking in the back window and seeing smoke, racing over to the breakdown lane and getting out and the back shelf was already in flames; he barely had time to stop the car and escape an INTERIOR PASSENGER COMPARTMENT FIRE. In a less-than-a-year-old Audi. Reportedly Audi's regional rep inspected the burned-to-the-ground car and the customer got a replacement car.
Audi, Infiniti, Corvette, and a couple of other companies were affected; recalls were made for everyone except Audi; a bunch of Audi owners banded together when Audi refused to fix the damaged speakers, and kept selling defective units to replace failed ones. nhtsa refused to discuss with us whether they had reports of other fires or failures and refused to allow owners to speak to the person handling the investigation; Audi USA repeatedly claimed they hadn't ever heard of any malfunctions or fires, when we knew they'd paid for replacement vehicles a decade prior, and continued to claim as such even after other owners had sent in registered mail complaints and received confirmation.
Lo and behold, nhtsa finally got interested and Audi revised the amp board and did a voluntary recall. Presto, no more failures. They spent years milking owners (the amps would last a few years at most before failure.)
Then there's all the exotic cars that go up in flames; car enthusiast sites cover them routinely. Funny how Ferrari and Lambo never seems to get mentioned in the press as having a lot of car fires, huh? That's what the best money in PR gets you: shit swept under the rug fast.
Please help metamoderate.
Let's not forget age. Many of the cars that burned were probably much older than any Tesla on the road. We'll see how Teslas built in 2011 do in 2025.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
The age of the cars matters as well, as does the relative state of maintenance.
It's a reasonable assumption/statement that all Tesla Model S cars are essentially new and likely to be in near perfect maintenance condition.
If the gasoline car fire numbers were adjusted to only include cars within the age range of Tesla Model S cars and (if possible) the number of cars still within factory warranties, I would imagine the number of gasoline car fires would be significantly lower.
The negative stories in financial press are designed to drive down the stock price. Then the buddies of the press - or the people the analysts really work for - can pick up shares on the dip. Or they can warn their buddies that a negative story is coming out and work the options angle.
- Jasen.
That is, if the fires per tesla car is 1/6,000, with a total of 6 billion miles driven, and the fires per gas car is 1/1,300 with a total of 12 billion miles driven (because people drive gas cars much further), then tesla would still be more dangerous than a gas car.
Note, I personally believe that a Tesla car is safer and less prone to fires than a gas powered car, but the statistic we really need has not been given.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
That's what you get for using DC in a car named after me, Elon!
Set your phasers on "funky"!
"Tesla is about to push an 'over-the-air update' to its vehicles' air suspension that will create more ground clearance at highway speeds."
Great. In the future I can look forward to my car's performance changing at a corporate whim just like all of my cloud-based services do.
I assume when you buy a Tesla you own the car. Does anyone know, is the Tesla's software licensed to the owner in the same way that purchased software is licensed to the buyer? Can I legally control the software on a car that I own, or does DMCA say that I am a criminal if I do any customization?
I here this cry a lot, but it's just an attempt to push a particular narrative.
The real comparison is the the number and severity of outcomes from high speed collisions between full side sedans and sub substantial debris on the road (i.e reciver hitch mounts as in the case of the latest Tesla fire). To determine if the vehicle has an out of the ordinary safety problem, you have to look at fires, rollovers, catastrophic loss of control, injuries, deaths, etc.
That's what the NTSB will be doing.
Which is less safe:
a.) a small, easily contained battery fire that you were warned about and had almost an hour to avoid
b.) a rollover accident at 80MPH?
It's falling because the stock price got way ahead of the company's prospects, which Musk himself has previously acknowledged. The fires were only a catalyst that reminded investors of the systemic, secular, and event risk associated with any company, and in particular for a company that is valued for perfection by the markets.
Sure, there have been a few fires, but that's no reason for Elon Musk to lash his own back. Poor guy.
My guess? They won't be driving as fast by then and will actually have fewer fires.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Yeah, but don't tell that to the people who marked me flamebait for stating the obvious.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
It's the modern version of blame the messenger. Chris Rock said it best when addressing how people blame the media for the "portrayal" of race and crime - "When I go to the ATM money machine at night, I am not looking over my shoulder for the media."
People are really bad at understanding statistics because the Mainstream Media purposely skews reporting to maintain current power structures.
Not really. If you want to understand why the media reports on what it reports on how it reports on it, you just have to remember that all TV news companies are large, for-profit corporations. That means that the news is a product just like any other. You want a product that (a) sells to the most people (b) for the lowest cost. The true bias of journalism is lazy, greedy, self-interest.
The reason why stories are low on research and fact-finding (aka "investigative journalism") is because of (b). The reason why some stations skew towards the emotional biases of one demographic or another is because of (a). The reason we get so much coverage of celebrities, sports, and "missing white girls" instead of international politics, finance, and science is because of (a) + (b). That's also the root of the behavior you mention of sportscasters cheering for a close game and whichever team is most popular.
Fox News, MSBNC, the Drudge Report, and the Huffington Post all cater to their respective partisans, because partisans like to have their egos stroked with nothing but stories that confirm their own biases. It's a reliable revenue source. CNN acts like a toddler with ADHD because they think that appeals to millennials (and they simply just don't care anymore). And "fringe" journalism? That's just catering to a niche, like any other small competitor in a market.
You want reliable journalism? Look for someone how isn't making a profit. The closest thing I can find to services that care about journalism is listener-funded NPR and billionaire-owned money sink newspapers. Facts just aren't profitable anymore.
If Tesla gains enough 'momentum' and mainstream acceptance (industry is large enough to gain its own power brokers), you will start seeing sensational articles about how great the Tesla is.
Pfft. Tesla gets plenty of free press in their favor. The problem is that no one likes a scandal quite like a scandal from someone who is popular. The "fires" thing is really the first major negative press Tesla has gotten since its inception. It's frankly just it's time in the ring.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
You try implementing a universal software system and let us know how many problems it has out the door.
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
How many of those 1 out of 1350 gasoline-powered cars are from low-income drivers who are driving cars which became unsafe many years ago? We already know that the 1 out of 6,333 Teslas that caught fire were new and driven by someone affluent enough to keep the car maintained.
But let's try to match something similar like Tesla's fires versus Toyota Camry Fires due to defective door switches. There have been six complaints for the entire 830,000 vehicles produced and sold. This gives us figure of 1 out of 138,333 cars sold. So by Elon Musk's measure you would be safer in a 2012 Toyota Camry than a Tesla.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
The top 1% is > $394,000. Given how right-skewed income distribution is, I think everybody in the 1% who isn't there only transiently can afford a Tesla.
Ah, so socialized medicine is evil---because it isn't enough socialism?
George Mason University runs a website, stats.org, that clearly shows that journalists are unqualified to report on anything that must be supported by facts (think about it). Today's news journalists must created divisive, polarizing, sensational, etc. reports to hold their job. Like the US Justice System, TRUTH is never a priority. And maybe that is why the US Justice System is equally incompetent on "judging" science and technology.
Gasolene tanks are NOT buried in the car, they're on the edge of it, defended by a thin bit of aluminium plate and plastic.
They are, however, UNDERNEATH the car, so anyone trying to reach it standing by the side of the car will reach though almost the entire depth of the car before getting to the gas tank. Indeed, that's the problem: they're on the bottom far edge of the car open to puncturing.
Just like your claim of the Tesla.
Except the Tesla has thick armour-class steel protecting it from below and internal baffles.
Completely unlike your gas tank.
I think it is clear that the Tesla is more likely to have a fire if you hit something hard enough to puncture the vehicle's armor plating and pierce the battery pack. It's a specific mode of failure and I don't know how common of an event this will be in the long run. I also don't think it's as big of a deal as the media is making. It doesn't "explode" or unexpectedly burst into flames that engulf the passenger compartment. A cluster of events does not define a trend in my mind.
I really like the low center of gravity, the balanced fore-aft weight distribution and the ridiculous amounts of trunk space the "skateboard" design allows. It makes for a great handling car, which improves safety. It also means huge crumble zones to absorb kinetic energy in a crash, which also improves safety. To me, it's a design trade-off. The real measure of the trade off will be whether people are safer, on average, or not. So far there have been no deaths or serious injuries, but the sample size and time frame is small for that to be really meaningful. But I'm hopeful, and if I could afford one, I'd buy one.
Some privacy policy Slashdot.
That just sounds awesome. To be able to tune something on a car without taking it into a dealership or have a mechanic (including yourself) touch the thing is just cool.
Telsa will release a "over-the-air update' to its vehicles' air suspension"....
Quick iterations is why this company will be so successful imo.
Wow, not running from a recall as is usual, but actively inviting one.
LOL.
+1 hillarious
Tesla is about to push an 'over-the-air update' to its vehicles' air suspension that will create more ground clearance at highway speeds.
Now that scares me. The suspension can be updated remotely? What could possibly go wrong? Just how good is the security on that? Who has access to the keys? Are you sure? How are the download servers secured? Is the update system protected against cut-and-paste attacks?
That kind of update could be used as an assassination weapon.
When Tesla was talking about automatic driving, I suggested that there must be a second processor, with completely different software, checking the main system for sanity (like "not approaching obstacle at high speed") and able to force a stop. The backup system should have its program in ROM, and changing that program should require breaking seals and physically plugging in a new program module.
Flight control software for airliners works like that. For the Airbus line, the backup software was written by a different team for a different kind of CPU in a different programming language, to avoid any possibility of a common mode failure.
You could be earning 20 million, but have outgoings of 19 million in alimony, 900,000 in mortgage payments and 90,000 in student loans.
In short, income is only half the story.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I wish Michael Hastings had been driving a Tesla. Take one look at what happened to him and what constitutes 'car fire' takes on a whole new meaning. That was a late model high-end car German engineered gasoline powered automobile. If it had been a Tesla we'd still have him writing hardcore news for us.
rm -rf ms/*
You'd certainly have very a low risk of catching a venereal disease.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I'm a Tesla S owner and I don't want this OTA update to compromise my car's handling. I can avoid large pieces of debris on the highway myself TYVM. I'll be less likely to roll the car while doing so with less ride height.
Just kidding! But what if I wasn't?
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Turbo thrusters on 11, BatKid!
That's a feature, not a bug.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Genius marketing move, and it will probably be a rounding error in warranty costs - which will again pay off in marketing.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
It is okay to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater if there actually is a fire.
The argument about the age of the car isn't a good one. Fire safety in cars has been pretty close to modern standards for many decades - at least since the '80s. And there are some factors that are not in new cars' favor as well - more common turbo systems, more densely packed engine bays, more electronics, more common composite materials.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
but here it is anyway: don't start an argument with a man who buys ink by the barrel.
Two types of burning sensations prevented!
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
Slashdot is not the right forum to tell everyone about your hot nuts.
I firmly believe that there should be publicly-funded journalism for exactly this reason.
At its best, it can take on issues that are important but not profitable enough to interest for-profit "news" organizations.
oil/fluid leaks dripping on to cataclysmic converters...
Well, there's your problem.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
You could pee on the fire to put it out if it didn't hurt so much.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Unlike the Pinto, it never exploded in low-speed collisions, and it had a quarter-inch metal plate between its fuel source and danger. Your own car wouldn't handle a spike impaling its tank nearly so well, nor would you have had as much time to safely pull over or have a car left afterwards because gasoline & oil aren't as easy to contain once punctured as a battery is.
The fuel source in a Tesla is better armored than practically any other mass-produced car on the market. I think they're just being overly cautious rather than "admitting" danger; any other car with a similar ride height would have experienced far more catastrophic failure hitting a spike at highway speeds like that.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
So that's how it's done? I had an escort 1300 flat head engine in my Anglia, I tried to blow it up when I got a 1600 to replace it with... I couldn't, valves were bouncing and tires smoking but the thing wouldn't die, I ended up getting an oil jet in one of the cylinders while driving normally some weeks later and figured that was as good a time as any to discard it.
Shoving a spike through my gas tank is not a guaranteed fire. An environmental incident, maybe, but certainly not a guaranteed fire.
Puncturing a LiIon battery is a fire almost every time.
Maybe (though I'm skeptical), but no one has died from a punctured battery in a Tesla yet due to the firewall design. Each cell is wrapped in a gel that reacts in the presence of fire to cool down the pack and to harden into a material with low conductivity to heat. You can read more about the very interesting design here.
Sadly, you can't say the same for a gas tank, and punctured tank fires can get very energetic, very fast. Just ask the families of any number of Jeep Grand Cherokee owners, thanks to an unshielded plastic tank anchored close to the rear.
It's not impossible for an electric vehicle to catch fire due to the battery, but there's less that burns easily without gas & oil, and a more careful design like Tesla's allows you to safely bring the car to the side of the road and exist first. The only people to have died in an incident where an electric vehicle's battery system caught fire most likely did so from the force of impact.
Hell, that's another nod for Tesla, because one of the three fires that got so much press involved some drunk idiot driving through a concrete wall into a tree. The man walked away just fine. (Or more ran away to flee the cops and asked Tesla to expedite the replacement. However, being bought by total douches is no sign your car isn't safe.)
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
I can't help notice the irony of the GP posting "People are really bad at understanding statistics.", yet you use a random stat (3/20 Tesla Accidents had an auto-fire) to make it sound like the Tesla Model S is "more likely to catch fire". Kind of ignores the ridiculously small sample size, the fact all 3 cars were going extremely high speeds (maybe sports cars in general have higher accident rates?), or that fire-related problems are less likely with a more detailed on board computer etc... And where's this 20 coming from? (honest question, I don't see anything in the links - are there only 20 reported Tesla S accidents to date?) . There were only 3 fires in the Tesla Model S... ever! You can't make a statement with odds that low.
Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
...but in a good way. If Musk's figures are correct, the headlines should be saying, "Gas-powered cars catch fire 4.7x more often than Teslas".
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
If the rear of the car is raised more than the front of the car, there may actually be less lift than before the update.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
Miles driven before incident is the measure that's used
An even better measure would be "number of incidents per mile driven" (lower is better) or its reciprocal, "miles driven per incident" (higher is better).
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
How funny would it be to see a smear campaign commercial:
Thomas Edison rolls up in his 2013 Tesla whatever, gets out and hooks some wires from the car to Topsy the elephant, then gets back to the car and starts it. The elephant shakes until it falls over and catches fire, all the while, Edison's in the car revving it more and more, laughing hysterically. Fade to black. White text appears: Think of the children!
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
Nothing I've seen in these 3 fires makes me want a Tesla any less. The people involved in those accidents all got out completely unharmed and, as far as I know, still praising their cars.
The right question to ask how many new gasoline cars (less than 1 year old) and price tag $50-80k catch a fire. Who gives a damn about old GM pickup truck bought by illegal alien for $100 catching a fire?
Camrys do not cost $80k.