TBH its way more likely to be a petrol or diesel fire : A week back I drove past the remnants of a new-ishdiesel Merc that went bang and was still being dampened down by the fire brigade. Such things tend to be caused by either oil or fuel leaking onto a hot Turbo or catalytic converter from a worn linkage or broken pipe. A lot of the FUD (Fear, Uncertanty and Doubt) regarding EV catching fire is from people who ignore all of the "normal" car fires that dont make the news.
Anyway, lots of cars in a semi-enclosed space such as a multi storey car park will make for a very big fire. Consider the amount of Diesel, Petrol, Oil, Brake fluid, plastics,Rubber and Aluminium that are present in several hundred vehicles that will burn very intensively. Open sides on the car park means there is a lot of airflow too. Its no wonder the structure colapsed the heat from all of the fuel/oil/platics fire would start to melt the steelwork in the carpark (so nothing to do with the weight of all of the vehicles)
Not back-pedalling at all – that is exactly why I put the gritted teeth emoji there in the first place.
Ah! Maybe you needed an Edinburgh castle emoji instead.
Its no wonder the structure colapsed the heat from all of the fuel/oil/platics fire would start to melt the steelwork in the carpark (so nothing to do with the weight of all of the vehicles)
But according to the 9/11 truthers out there, fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel.
Makes you think.
Now it's come out it was a Diesel I've seen quite a lot of conspiracy theory type posts over on facebook / twitter. Anything to fit their pre-existing belief it was an EV. However, the lack of trust in "the establishment" not to cover this up is quite worrying.
However, the lack of trust in “the establishment” not to cover this up is quite worrying.
It's nothing to do with trust. It's a conscious decision not to belive any narrative that doesn't agree with their own.
Yippee, another excuse for why the building works are not completed by 2030!!
EV Insurance will sky rocket after this....
My thinking, so totally unsubstantiated.
It's an airport. You have both airport fire appliances and civilian. Both are equipped to deal with fuel fires, especially the former.
Yet the fire engulfed the whole building. Something must have prevented the fire being extinguished.
I’d guess that the several hundred cars complete with their fuel tanks, bodywork and tyres etc combined with the air coming in from the open sides would make for a difficult fire to extinguish, with or without EV’s in there.
https://twitter.com/joerichlaw/status/1712075303428751832?s=20
Yet the fire engulfed the whole building. Something must have prevented the fire being extinguished.
-Access
-The speed at which the fire spreads
-The amount of water you can flood in there
-No sprinklers
-Diesel and oil will burn with the temperatures seen
It’s an airport. You have both airport fire appliances and civilian. Both are equipped to deal with fuel fires, especially the former.
Presumably if the airport fire engines are busy in the car park it can’t remain open anyway, but initially they can’t be redirected immediately if aircraft are landing or taking off.
The cars aren't all stacked 700 ontop of each other 😅
Airport fire appliances are designed to extinguish giant aluminium frames with wings full of fuel in literally minutes. Roughly the same materials as ICE cars.
I guess they are big though, so maybe they couldn't get close enough to lay the foam blanket over the fire.
It’s an airport. You have both airport fire appliances and civilian. Both are equipped to deal with fuel fires, especially the former.
The report and video indicate it was a couple of floors up and tucked away inside. So doubt the appliances would have been able to get close enough to be useful initially before it spread enough to be difficult to put out.
Airport fire appliances are designed to extinguish giant aluminium frames with wings full of fuel in literally minutes. Roughly the same materials as ICE cars.
On a runway. Not buried inside a carpark.
On their own. Not surrounded by other giant aluminium frames full of fuel
You may as well ask why they don't use those same appliances to fight fires on a submarine given they're so good at fighting fires or why not use halon on the fire engines given it is good enough to use on a plane in flight.
Even the best tech has limitations.
[edit: u also imagine all the security infrastructure designed to stop you driving a truck onto the runway is also a pita for rapidly deploying airside assets to a publicly accessible carpark. Response time is at least as important as the quality of your equipment for stopping "just another RR with a heater problem" taking hold and becoming towering inferno in that situation.]
the daily mail comments are quite the thing
- it was an EV
- ok it wasn't an EV that started it, but it was only this bad because of EVs
- it was EV's that caused it to collapse
- it was an EV but its being covered up because conspiracy
it’s going to be way too hot inside to deal with anyway once a few petrol/diesels are on fire in such a confined space, surely!
Sprinklers aren't just for cooling, the steam released snuffs out the fire by starving it of oxygen.
I wouldn't have thought most car parks had sprinklers unless they're part of another building like underground car parks, they wouldn't have high enough occupancy rates to justify them.
Range Rover that started it - that explains it ! Dodgy electrics as fitted standard at factory. LOL
BTW it takes a good long while to melt a plastic tank
To comply with the regulations (see below) a plastic fuel tank has to last for TWO MINUTES subjected to a flame without losing fuel. Not what I'd call a good long while...............
<h1 class="main-publication-title">Regulation No 34 of the Economic Commission for Europe of the United Nations (UNECE) — Uniform provisions concerning the approval of vehicles with regard to the prevention of fire risks [2016/1428]</h1>
To comply with the regulations (see below) a plastic fuel tank has to last for TWO MINUTES subjected to a flame without losing fuel. Not what I’d call a good long while……………
How does it compare with a metal one?
Also the hoses and so on. No point the fuel tank outlasting the rest of the vehicle - or indeed just developing a lovely hole at either end that allows burning vapour to escape right down to the point it has a good mix of air and fuel.
Airport fire appliances are designed to extinguish giant aluminium frames with wings full of fuel in literally minutes. Roughly the same materials as ICE cars.
They also are used on the runway and don’t respond to the car parks.
I hope the driver is insured, as so many Range Rovers are getting stolen now, the insurers either won't insure or they have put their prices right up.
How does it compare with a metal one?
I don't have the time to search for the Standard for metal tanks but here's a firefighters view from https://www.fireengineering.com/firefighter-training/vehicle-fires-plastic-fuel-tanks/#gref
Metal fuel tanks can be exposed to and resist the high temperatures brought on by fires for much greater times. When fires occur, metal tanks are far less likely to break down when compared to the newer style plastic tanks. When I first began my firefighting career, it seemed as though most of the vehicle fires to which we responded simply involved vehicle components. Fast forward 15-plus years, and it’s not uncommon to roll up to a car fire with a stream of gasoline on fire and flowing down a graded slope on Interstate 95.
A Land Rover diesel tank was responsible for the most disappointing day in my time at the MOD. Sat in front of 4 jets of mixed propane, aluminium powder and liquid oxygen it failed to do anything interesting at all. A dreadful waste of hundreds of feet of 16mm film 🙂
The anti-ev lobby are out in force over the Luton fire. Desperate to prove it was an EV and not a diesel Range Rover that started it, despite video evidence to the contrary.
A Land Rover...
...failed to do anything interesting at all
No surprise there.
In all likelihood it failed because being a LR it has fallen off and rusted through about two days before leaving solihull and was consequently bone dry
The anti-ev lobby are out in force over the Luton fire. Desperate to prove it was an EV and not a diesel Range Rover that started it, despite video evidence to the contrary.
*Gets popcorn and sits back to watch*
Desperate to prove it was an EV and not a diesel Range Rover that started it, despite video evidence to the contrary.
Wasnt the Liverpool carpark fire also caused by a Range Rover?
Sounds like they need banning.
To comply with the regulations (see below) a plastic fuel tank has to last for TWO MINUTES subjected to a flame without losing fuel. Not what I’d call a good long while……………
Current tanks will go *slightly* over 2 minutes before failure.
Fire in car park at Stavanger airport that trashed my neighbours car. Started by a diesel
https://www.aftenbladet.no/lokalt/i/EaEnmG/kort-oppsummert-brannen-i-p-huset-paa-flyplassen
Fire in car park at Stavanger
Ooo, off topic but I do like Stavanger, you're very fortunate to live in such a part of the world
Going back to the "EV being too heavy, damages carpark strucutrally" argument, seems a Range Rover can be up to 2.8 tonnes, compared to 1.9 for a tesla model Y.
Edit - an Evoque, which it appears this is, can be up to 2.1.
Range Rover can be up to 2.8 tonnes
Can't be true. I often see them towing 3.5t trailers.
So we've sussed that EV's are considerably less likely to catch fire than an ICE, so why do EV's need to be differentiated when you're getting on the Ferry / Channel Tunnel, and their status is even indicated on modern number plates? Was this borne out of some old suspicions that they would be more dangerous, and the information hasn't been updated?
Less likely to catch fire, harder to put out once on fire I think.
So we’ve sussed that EV’s are considerably less likely to catch fire than an ICE,
They're much less likely to go up in flames. On the other hand once on fire they're much more difficult to extinguish properly and that is potentially a huge problem.
(they do use halon on the chunnel and I've no idea how effective or safe it is with li-ion)
their status is even indicated on modern number plates
The green bar on number plates indicates a zero emission vehicle, so a hydrogen fuel cell car would be eligible if you could buy one. It's mainly a ploy to raise awareness of zero emission vehicles rather than because of any fear or suspicion. Oh and it's optional too, though I expect most dealers would default to using it unless the owner specifically requested them not to.
I've just had a quick scan of twitter - the social media sleuths are out in force identifying make and mode and arguing about whether it was a hybrid or not (what type of hybrid etc...)
I've no idea why people are so invested.
.
I've been a firefighter for nearly 25 years. The biggest factor in the amount of car fires we attend is the price of scrap!
It’s mainly a ploy to raise awareness of zero emission vehicles rather than because of any fear or suspicion.
This -^
It's marketing by the government, otherwise you'd look around, spot a few Teslas and a Leaf, dismiss electric cars as a fad only bought by pinkos, sheeple and tech bros'. Whereas the reality is >20% are fully electric now, and if the year on year growth carries on at 30-50% the Tories beloved market forces will kill off ICE by 2030 even if they won't.
I’m glad sensible people have already pointed out the EV fire statistics before I got here. <br /><br />
I work in the fire industry and am constantly having to fight against this “trend” of EV fires. It doesn’t exist. <br /><br />
cars, on the other hand, have become more flammable. Some of the reasons have been given above. EVs actually help fight against this.
and their status is even indicated on modern number plates?
That is optional only (introduced in 2020) apparently to raise awareness of electric cars. Although most new electric cars come with them you can change them for normal ones without any issue.
The apparent theory was it could allow for privileges such as cheaper parking and so forth but this doesnt seem to have happened.
A cynic might call it virtue signalling but since it was introduced by the tories it couldnt possibly be.
