Luton Airport car park fire

[clk320x]

An optimist !

I don’t know the layout or numbers, but how easy is it to reopen the airport if it has lost a significant part of its parking?

Apparently the majority of the cars in the building are ok - and they are building a temporary ramp to get them out. Not sure how true this is at the moment.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

Why? because they statistically catch fire less than ICE cars?

Because the fire services have repeatedly said that fires involving EVs are far more violent and difficult to extinguish than in ICE, with a much greater risk of fire transfer in enclosed settings.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

another reason not to buy ev's

That’s just silly.

The reason not to buy first generation EV’s is that they’re rubbish compared to their ICE equivalents, unless you get that enormous tax break on running one.

No different to Windows 1.0 or the Nokia 9100 smartphone.

 

[clk320x]

Because the fire services have repeatedly said that fires involving EVs are far more violent and difficult to extinguish than in ICE, which a much greater risk of fire transfer in enclosed settings.

I agree with your point there - once they are ignited they are hard to control (with current fire-fighting methods) - but the risk of an EV igniting in the first place is lower per mile travelled.

 

[Dryce]

Why? because they statistically catch fire less than ICE cars?

I was surprised when I did a quick search as to the similar incidents involving large numbers of vehicles that have happened previously.

This one is maybe going to be better publicised.

But given the likely initial assumption by many that this incident is unique and 'new' then it's rather easy to make the leap of apparent logic that it must be some new factor at work such as the presence of EVs in the carpark.

I think many people will also be surprised by the lack of sprinklers in these facilities.

 

[clk320x]

I think many people will also be surprised by the lack of sprinklers in these facilities.

Especially considering the prices they probably paid to park there…

 

[190]

Seems to me that the learning point is not so much whether ICE's or EV's are more prone to fire but that multi story car parks are a relatively high risk environment. The risk of a fire in any individual car may be low but it can be multiplied 1000 fold or more in a multi story car park. Also that the risk of rapid fire spread has been increased in recent years by the almost universal adoption of plastic fuel tanks which melt and produce a running fuel fire. In that respect IC's are very much worse than EV's.

Something to think about when choosing long term airport car parking.

 

[SmartAmg]

another reason not to buy ev's

Why? Just in case a diesel car catches fire, next to you.

 

[SmartAmg]

Because the fire services have repeatedly said that fires involving EVs are far more violent and difficult to extinguish than in ICE, with a much greater risk of fire transfer in enclosed settings.

What, than a petrol tank blowing up!

 

[Darrell]

An optimist !

I don’t know the layout or numbers, but how easy is it to reopen the airport if it has lost a significant part of its parking?

It coped before the multi-storeys were built.

 

[D2028]

- but the risk of an EV igniting in the first place is lower per mile travelled.

Perhaps that's because they travel less miles than the internal combustion engine?

 

[clk320x]

Perhaps that's because they travel less miles than the internal combustion engine?

No - the states I quote are per mile travelled.

Anyway - similar patterns are shown per 100k vehicle sales.

Researchers from insurance deal site Auto Insurance EZ compiled sales and accident data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the National Transportation Safety Board. The site found that hybrid vehicles had the most fires per 100,000 sales at 3474.5. There were 1529.9 fires per 100k for gas vehicles and just 25.1 fires per 100k sales for electric vehicles.

 

[Londonscottish]

It coped before the multi-storeys were built.

Train links are better then ever for me in NW London now. Rarely drive there now.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

What, than a petrol tank blowing up!

Yes. A high voltage EV's fire is ferocious, intense, can last for hours, and requires specialist training for the Fire Crew.

A petrol explosion - rare and straightforward.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

It coped before the multi-storeys were built.

Obviously. Now explain what happens when parking is suddenly "switched off."

It's not just that the volume of passengers is several times higher than it used to be.

It's that there will limited contingency capacity to suddenly switch on Summer season off-campus parking. And then there'll be all the faffing around to sort out the existing parking, carry out safety evaluations and "probably" demolish a great chunk of the existing car park.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

Perhaps that's because they travel less miles than the internal combustion engine?

Not really, EV's generally are in the hands of higher mileage drivers because of the income tax and corporation tax avoidance.

It'll be quite a while before EV's reach the occasional, "second car." 18-24, and 70+ demographics.

.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

No - the states I quote are per mile travelled.
Anyway - similar patterns are shown per 100k vehicle sale Researchers from insurance deal site Auto Insurance EZ compiled sales and accident data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the National Transportation Safety Board. The site found that hybrid vehicles had the most fires per 100,000 sales at 3474.5. There were 1529.9 fires per 100k for gas vehicles and just 25.1 fires per 100k sales for electric vehicles.

There's little sense in analysing accidents per 100k vehicle sales.

While new tech hybrids are "probably" asking for trouble and likely to have more fires, "gas vehicles" aren't comparable to EV's generally - yet - because American "gas" vehicles are being used for all kinds of applications that EV's haven't begun to touch

Fires per vehicle mile has to be the more useful stat.

 

[clk320x]

There's little sense in analysing accidents per 100k vehicle sales.

While new tech hybrids are "probably" asking for trouble and likely to have more fires, "gas vehicles" aren't comparable to EV's generally - yet - because American "gas" vehicles are being used for all kinds of applications that EV's haven't begun to touch

Fires per vehicle mile has to be the more useful stat.

I agree.

Data from Tesla:

From 2012 – 2021, there has been approximately one Tesla vehicle fire for every 210 million miles traveled. By comparison, data from the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and U.S. Department of Transportation shows that in the United States there is a vehicle fire for every 19 million miles traveled.

In order to provide an apt comparison to NFPA data, Tesla’s data set includes instances of vehicle fires caused by structure fires, arson, and other things unrelated to the vehicle, which account for some of the Tesla vehicle fires over this time period.

 

[m80]

Fires per vehicle mile has to be the more useful stat.

I can't disagree, but I'll have a shot.

EV's are generally new(ish). As the take up increases, and they become as old as many of our ICE mo mo's, will there be a greater instance of batteries going poof?

On saying that the newer ICE mo mo's now come with far more electrickery to arc and spark,
but so do the Duracell Bunnies, I believe, as I've not been around one I must go from my reading.

 

[TC350]

"Andy Hopkinson, Bedfordshire's chief fire officer, said the service had "no intelligence than to suggest it was anything other than an accidental fire".

He said it was thought the fire started with a diesel car, and then spread through the car park."

Deleted.

Covered earlier.