What do recent shipping fires mean for EV transport?
What do recent shipping fires mean for EV transport?
Author
Discussion

Terryakki

Original Poster:

9 posts

3 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
Following the fire on the Morning Midas car transporter (now sunk), and recent hull loss fires on the Felicity Ace and Fremantle, shipping giant Matson has declared last week, effective immediately, that it will no longer be transporting electric vehicles or plug-in hybrids on it's vessels, citing the risk posed by lithium-ion batteries.

I wonder if the insurers requirements, or rising insurance cost for such vessels have a hand in this decision? A fire at sea that results in hull loss or sinking is one thing on a car transporter with just a few crew aboard, but on a passenger ferry with over 1,000 passengers too, the results are unthinkable.

So I wonder what does this mean generally for the transport of EVs by sea going forward?

samoht

6,706 posts

164 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
Is Matson really a "shipping giant"? Had you ever heard of it? I hadn't.

This lists them as 0.2% of international container trade
https://alphaliner.axsmarine.com/PublicTop100/

It seems they're a US company with a local monopoly thanks to the Jones Act there, but not really significant in international trade.

So I wouldn't see it as significant unless other, larger shipping lines follow suit.

Rhonda

1,778 posts

265 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
Reading this: https://gcaptain.com/a-brief-look-back-at-recent-c...

Seems to suggest that transporting vehicles (not just EV’s) causes shipping losses.

TheDrownedApe

1,484 posts

74 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
Haven't BYD just built their 7 OWN car transporter for their worldwide assault on the EV market

OP - it means nothing, move on

Huntsman

8,899 posts

268 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
TheDrownedApe said:
Haven't BYD just built their 7 OWN car transporter for their worldwide assault on the EV market

OP - it means nothing, move on
Geely do.



Muzzer79

12,370 posts

205 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
Terryakki said:
So I wonder what does this mean generally for the transport of EVs by sea going forward?
Absolutely nothing.

The dangers of transporting 500 cars with combustible fuel are comparable to 500 EVs.

Storm in a teacup.

dhutch

17,146 posts

215 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
Muzzer79 said:
Terryakki said:
So I wonder what does this mean generally for the transport of EVs by sea going forward?
Absolutely nothing.

The dangers of transporting 500 cars with combustible fuel are comparable to 500 EVs.

Storm in a teacup.
So why does there appear to be an increase in major fires? Is that all just a media storm?

ChocolateFrog

32,844 posts

191 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
Another new poster posting the same click bait crap.


PetrolHeadInRecovery

335 posts

33 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
dhutch said:
Muzzer79 said:
Terryakki said:
So I wonder what does this mean generally for the transport of EVs by sea going forward?
Absolutely nothing.

The dangers of transporting 500 cars with combustible fuel are comparable to 500 EVs.

Storm in a teacup.
So why does there appear to be an increase in major fires? Is that all just a media storm?
My off-the-cuff response: before Mt. Blanc tunnel fire in 1999 - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mont_Blanc_Tunnel_... -nobody really worried much about vehicles catching fire. The hill sections on the motorway between Geneva and Lyon seemed to have traces of car fires a few hundred metres apart, and it was just a normal part of the scenery.

ICE vehicles improved gradually, even though they still catch fire more often than EVs. I have a vague memory that most of the fires (ICE or EV) start from 12V system (plugged in devices?).

EV fires are newsworthy due to their "man bites dog" nature. How many off you saw this clip, followed by discussions about dedicated parking areas (far from inhabited areas) for ICE? https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1Bg5njXSsJ/?mibex...

Or this one: https://youtu.be/SAcN2TiGVfQ?si=dAybODzt-cN1GjwU



Muzzer79

12,370 posts

205 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
dhutch said:
Muzzer79 said:
Terryakki said:
So I wonder what does this mean generally for the transport of EVs by sea going forward?
Absolutely nothing.

The dangers of transporting 500 cars with combustible fuel are comparable to 500 EVs.

Storm in a teacup.
So why does there appear to be an increase in major fires? Is that all just a media storm?
You've answered your own question

On what basis "does there appear to be an increase in major fires"?

What figures do you have?

Blue62

9,908 posts

170 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
Muzzer79 said:
You've answered your own question

On what basis "does there appear to be an increase in major fires"?

What figures do you have?
None, it’s just the usual band waggoning from those desperate to feed their prejudice. The OP’s post count suggests it’s part of the same, pity we all get a little triggered, but business is slow today.

ashenfie

1,723 posts

64 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
Muzzer79 said:
Terryakki said:
So I wonder what does this mean generally for the transport of EVs by sea going forward?
Absolutely nothing.

The dangers of transporting 500 cars with combustible fuel are comparable to 500 EVs.

Storm in a teacup.
The ICE problem was solved years ago with Fire suppression systems and only putting a drop of petrol in. These measures don’t work with EV so new solutions will be needed to keep the insurance industry happy. For better training has to be part of the solution.

D9

39 posts

9 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
The problem is battery cars do seem to mainly catch fire while switched off and unattended.
Which is the worst case really.

petrol & diesel cars generally catch fire while running, or at least with the ignition switched on , so there is normally a driver around to raise the alarm and possibly put out the fire.

Plus petrol & diesel fires can actually be put out easier than lithium battery fires.

Terryakki

Original Poster:

9 posts

3 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
dhutch said:
So why does there appear to be an increase in major fires? Is that all just a media storm?
I believe that there are no more incidence of fires, but that once a battery fire does occur, unlike on a ICE vehicle, it's almost impossible to extinguish with conventional means. In the confined space of a ship at sea, this becomes a big problem.

kambites

70,015 posts

239 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
D9 said:
The problem is battery cars do seem to mainly catch fire while switched off and unattended.
Do you have a source for that?

Most electric car fires (I mean cars, not things like E-scooters and those ridiculous little quadracycle things) I've actually heard specific details of have been caused by ICE cars catching fire nearby. There have been a few (very few) cases of EVs catching fire while charging. I've never actually heard of one catching fire when unattended and not charging. I can't really imagine what would cause such a thing.

As you say, the problem with EV fires is that Lithium Ion thermal runaway is extremely difficult to deal with when it does happen, not that it happens often or spontaneously.

Edited by kambites on Tuesday 29th July 17:14

Rhonda

1,778 posts

265 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
D9 said:
The problem is battery cars do seem to mainly catch fire while switched off and unattended.
Which is the worst case really.

petrol & diesel cars generally catch fire while running, or at least with the ignition switched on , so there is normally a driver around to raise the alarm and possibly put out the fire.

Plus petrol & diesel fires can actually be put out easier than lithium battery fires.
I’d like to see some data to support this?

Terryakki

Original Poster:

9 posts

3 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
said:
Most electric car fires (I mean cars, not things like E-scooters and those ridiculous little quadracycle things) I've actually heard specific details of have been caused by ICE cars catching fire nearby. There have been a few (very few) cases of EVs catching fire while charging. I've never actually heard of one catching fire when unattended and not charging.
I think it matters not the source of the fire, but if an EV battery is involved, it becomes an unmanageable situation pretty quickly.

Rhonda

1,778 posts

265 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
Terryakki said:
I think it matters not the source of the fire, but if an EV battery is involved, it becomes an unmanageable situation pretty quickly.
Unmanageable, really?

LivLL

11,827 posts

215 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
There clearly are concerns despite the pile on that happens on these forums whenever it's mentioned.

Matson said:
Matson does not transport battery-powered electric or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles due to the hazardous material classification of their lithium-ion batteries. Lithium-ion batteries have a high energy density and are classified as hazardous materials under both domestic and international regulations. Because of this high energy density, fires involving electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles are much more dangerous than combustion engine vehicles.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a65539651/shippi...

Not unusual for transport companies to have policies in place for shipping dangerous goods. I'm sure there are others who will continue to ship said vehicles with mitigation in place.

Muzzer79

12,370 posts

205 months

Tuesday 29th July
quotequote all
LivLL said:
There clearly are concerns despite the pile on that happens on these forums whenever it's mentioned.

Matson said:
Matson does not transport battery-powered electric or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles due to the hazardous material classification of their lithium-ion batteries. Lithium-ion batteries have a high energy density and are classified as hazardous materials under both domestic and international regulations. Because of this high energy density, fires involving electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles are much more dangerous than combustion engine vehicles.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a65539651/shippi...

Not unusual for transport companies to have policies in place for shipping dangerous goods. I'm sure there are others who will continue to ship said vehicles with mitigation in place.
Thank God that ICE cars aren't powered by and don't contain, anything that's classed as a hazardous material.

Oh wait.........


Lithium fires burn more intensely, but in the same way that ICE transport risk was solved in terms of risk management, Lithium will aswell.
It's not an issue.