Electric Cars

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

There's no scientific data to suggest only 25 out of 100k that's literally a number you made up

They examined insurance data from the National Transportation Safety Board. I'm not sure what other "scientific data" you'd be looking for? Seems pretty conclusive to me. They examined real world fire data vs. number of purchases via the Bureau of Transportation Statistics data. They also factored in fire related recalls, and even with the Bolt battery recall, gas vehicles were still recalled more often for fire risk.

Here's a great example of gas vehicles recently being recalled for spontanious combustion, and owners told to park outside:

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[NU_WTF?]

regardless, the % of EVs that have spontaneously combusted is very low.

the argument here is just splitting hairs because you aren't providing anything to say it is higher than the number he is offering

Government data show gasoline vehicles are up to 100x more prone to fires than EVs

Aside from the argument that gasoline vehicles operate via combustion, a study shows how prevalent gas vehicle fires are compared to EVs.

electrek.co

Again I am not anti ev, I just want to know the actual numbers, I'm able to point out bullshit numbers because there's been no source to verify.


My curiosity doesn't seem cable tech support answers

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

regardless, the % of EVs that have spontaneously combusted is very low.

the argument here is just splitting hairs because you aren't providing anything to say it is higher than the number he is offering

Government data show gasoline vehicles are up to 100x more prone to fires than EVs

Aside from the argument that gasoline vehicles operate via combustion, a study shows how prevalent gas vehicle fires are compared to EVs.

electrek.co

Beyond the actual data that verifies what we're saying, it just makes more sense. Gasoline vehicles require combustion to actually work. They make fire, that's what propels you.

 

[NU_WTF?]

They examined insurance data from the National Transportation Safety Board. I'm not sure what other "scientific data" you'd be looking for? Seems pretty conclusive to me. They examined real world fire data vs. number of purchases via the Bureau of Transportation Statistics data. They also factored in fire related recalls, and even with the Bolt battery recall, gas vehicles were still recalled more often for fire risk.

Here's a great example of gas vehicles recently being recalled for spontanious combustion, and owners told to park outside:

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Oh please show me where it stated 25 of 100k we're parked in the garage overnight and spontaneously combusted...

The data I want to know for personal reasons, because I want to know, isn't being presented. I think you should stick to telling people to unplug their modems and plug em back in

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Oh please show me where it stated 25 of 100k we're parked in the garage overnight and spontaneously combusted...

The data I want to know for personal reasons because I want to know isn't being presented. I think you should stick to telling people to unplug their modems and plug em back in

It doesn't say that. What are you arguing here?

The data combines ALL incidents of EV's catching on fire for ANY reason. Which means that the real world data shows that only 25 out of 100,000 purchased EVs caught on fire for ANY reason. That number would INCLUDE any that spontaneously combusted. The worst case you could argue is that all 25 out of 100,000 sold were spontaneous combustions. Which is an extremely low rate on its own.

 

[NU_WTF?]

It doesn't say that. What are you arguing here?

The data combines ALL incidents of EV's catching on fire for ANY reason. Which means that the real world data shows that only 25 out of 100,000 purchased EVs caught on fire for ANY reason. That number would INCLUDE any that spontaneously combusted. The worst case you could argue is that all 25 out of 100,000 sold were spontaneous combustions. Which is an extremely low rate on its own.

I'm not arguing you nincompoop. My original statement was me wanting to know the difference between internal combustion engines spontaneously combusting overnight vs ev you presented data that didn't satisfy the criteria.


Pretty friggin simple, you don't have the answer, stop providing incorrect data to support an inaccurate answer that is clearly just you talking out of your ass

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I'm not arguing you nincompoop. My original statement was me wanting to know the difference between internal combustion engines spontaneously combusting overnight vs ev you presented data that didn't satisfy the criteria.


Pretty friggin simple, you don't have the answer, stop providing incorrect data to support an inaccurate answer that is clearly just you talking out of your ass

But that data gives us a pretty damn good indication. It's not like we're comparing data sets in the same ballpark. The gas vehicle data is 5900% higher than the EV data on fire risk.

 

[NU_WTF?]

But that data gives us a pretty damn good indication. It's not like we're comparing data sets in the same ballpark. The gas vehicle data is 5900% higher than the EV data on fire risk.

No it doesn't, the data gives us data for the criteria of the data, nothing else.

None of the data is exclusive to overnight in garage fires 5 hours after not being driven

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

No it doesn't, the data gives us data for the criteria of the data, nothing else.

None of the data is exclusive to overnight in garage fires 5 hours after not being driven

Do you think that data exists anywhere? Do you think that data will ever exist? No. Fires started after x amount of idle time?

 

[NU_WTF?]

Do you think that data exists anywhere? Do you think that data will ever exist? No. Fires started after x amount of idle time?

I don't know, but I can still want the data and not some phone support answers.

You answered a question you weren't qualified to answer with data that didn't satisfy the criteria

I'm not anti ev, I'm not arguing anything (aside from you being unable to understand this)

My next vehicle will be a full ev


I still want to know the answer to my question, if you don't know the actual numbers, STFU. It's that simple

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I don't know, but I can still want the data and not some phone support answers.

You answered a question you weren't qualified to answer with data that didn't satisfy the criteria

I'm not anti ev, I'm not arguing anything (aside from you being unable to understand this)

My next vehicle will be a full ev


I still want to know the answer to my question, if you don't know the actual numbers, STFU. It's that simple

I do know the answer. Less than 25 per 100,000.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I don't know, but I can still want the data and not some phone support answers.

You answered a question you weren't qualified to answer with data that didn't satisfy the criteria

I'm not anti ev, I'm not arguing anything (aside from you being unable to understand this)

My next vehicle will be a full ev


I still want to know the answer to my question, if you don't know the actual numbers, STFU. It's that simple

I'm not sure where this phone support thing came from? You do understand that most people in IT do not work in call centers, right?

 

[Mofo]

Nuclear plants will be built again. Stop talking about something you don't know about

Nope. The permitting takes an incredibly long time.

Of all the new nuclear being built in the next 5-6 years, approximately 0% is in the United States:

Plans For New Reactors Worldwide - World Nuclear Association

Nuclear power capacity worldwide is increasing steadily. Most reactors under construction are in the Asian region. Significant further capacity is being created by plant uprating.

world-nuclear.org

Here's an old article describing the problem for you:

The controversial future of nuclear power in the U.S.

As the climate crisis worsens, the discussion intensifies over what role nuclear power should play in fighting it.

www.nationalgeographic.com

 

[ill]

Nope. The permitting takes an incredibly long time.

Of all the new nuclear being built in the next 5-6 years, approximately 0% is in the United States:

Plans For New Reactors Worldwide - World Nuclear Association

Nuclear power capacity worldwide is increasing steadily. Most reactors under construction are in the Asian region. Significant further capacity is being created by plant uprating.

world-nuclear.org

Here's an old article describing the problem for you:

The controversial future of nuclear power in the U.S.

As the climate crisis worsens, the discussion intensifies over what role nuclear power should play in fighting it.

www.nationalgeographic.com

oh I am well aware...

but SMRs are being pushed a little harder these days.

and the new Vogtle plant will hopefully get licensed in the next 5 yrs.

but really, you don't need to attempt to explain anything to me. I know my industry better than you.

 

[NU_WTF?]

I do know the answer. Less than 25 per 100,000.

No you don't, and you can't show that. 25/100,000 is yet another number you're making up

 

[NU_WTF?]

I'm not sure where this phone support thing came from? You do understand that most people in IT do not work in call centers, right?

Yes, but you're not qualified for anything else.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

No you don't, and you can't show that. 25/100,000 is yet another number you're making up

You're asking for an unreasonable level of data under almost all contexts. I'm quoting a number, from a study, that compiled the data. You want the excel sheet.

 

[NU_WTF?]

You're asking for an unreasonable level of data under almost all contexts. I'm quoting a number, from a study, that compiled the data. You want the excel sheet.

I'm asking about data I want, you don't have that data so just zip it with your conjecture.

Go back and screenshot the original source you're quoting you'll see your error (maybe)

 

[ill]

I'm asking about data I want, you don't have that data so just zip it with your conjecture.

Go back and screenshot the original source you're quoting you'll see your error (maybe)

what data do you want exactly?

maybe you should google it yourself if we aren't able to help you in the way you want

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I'm asking about data I want, you don't have that data so just zip it with your conjecture.

Go back and screenshot the original source you're quoting you'll see your error (maybe)