Nothing really new in this but a good explanation from a working firefighter (and mechanical engineer specializing in lithium-ion battery and electric vehicle safety):
He also explained recently why the oft-quoted US statistics for vehicle fires by fuel type are unreliable:
Thanks for posting. I watched both clips.
The first clip is somewhat redundant in the context of this thread, I think we've already discussed here that EV battery fires are far more problematic than petrol or Diesel car fires, on several levels.
Also, the information may be correct from the firefighter's perspective, but he's missing out on some things.
He is saying that ICE fires usually start with short circuit somewhere inside the cabin which causes slow smoldering smoke for several minutes before the fire erupts.
The point he's missing is that both ICE cars and EV's are equally likely to catch fire as result of a short circuit inside the cabin that will cause slow smoldering smoke for several minutes before the fire erupts.
This is simply because the cabin electrics of ICE cars isn't really that much different to that of an EV.
The differentiating factor here is the ICE fuel tank and fuel delivery system vs the EV's Li-ion battery, not the cabin electric consumers.
To my layman's knowledge (and I am obviously not a firefighter), many ICE car fires actually start by a raptured petrol hose, or an oil or Diesel leak dripping onto a hot exhaust pipe - I've personally seen this happen on an Alfsud many tears ago, I used a fire extinguisher but could stem out the fire, and the car was totally engulfed in flames by the time the first fire truck arrived.
In fact, throughout my life I've seen cars engulfed in flames on the hard shoulder on three occasions, all of them on the motorway, and in all three cases the emergency services were not yet on the scene when I drove past these cars. Perhaps in his FD they always get to car fires before the car is consumed by the flames... but if so, then this certainly isn't universal.
Again, my layman's view is that most ICE car fires start under the bonnet, and not inside the cabin. Even when it comes down to a short circuit and not due to a fuel leak, there's probably more electrics going on in the engine bay than inside the cabin.
Then, this clip is only taking about spontaneous combustion. But this is only a small part of the picture. The bigger issue here is what happens in the event of crash. What is more devastating: an Li-ion battery igniting, or 70L of burning Diesel oil spilling through the wreckage? I don't have an answer.
Regarding the second clip, I fully agree that the NTSB fatal crash data isn't the right data pool for the purpose of comparing ICE car fires to EV fires. There are many reasons for that, which he explains well in the clip. But it's still neither-here-nor-there when it comes to trying to establish which is statically more probable.
(Where I disagree with him is in his conclusion that Diesel car fires are significantly more deadly than petrol car fires due to the fact that trucks are 'heavier' and 'cause more damage' in a crash. The actual issue is that a large truck will have a 300L Diesel fuel tank, and if this ruptured in a crash, then the burning oil will have devastating effect on anything that gets in its way, and the thick black smoke will get anyone who survived the fire. Plus, trucks have cargo! WhIch is often flammable or combustible)
The important issue here is comparing the statistical probably, which as yet remains unknown. As an example, an airplane crash is about 100 times more deadly on average than a car crash, and a train crash is about 10 times more deadly. And yet, air travel and train travel are far safer than car travel, because the probability of a crash is so much lower.
And so, we're all in agreement that EV fires are far worse - on several levels - than ICE car fires. The key question, however, is what is the statistical probability of each one? As yet, we do not know.
