this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
6 points (87.5% liked)

UK Rail and Trains

233 readers
16 users here now

Talk about the UK rail network.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Mex
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] jabjoe 1 points 2 days ago (11 children)

If the fires are four times as bad, but twenty times less likely, still a win. ๐Ÿ˜ƒ

[โ€“] HumanPenguin 1 points 2 days ago (10 children)

try 100 times.

The fires cannot be put out. They burn for days.

[โ€“] jabjoe 1 points 2 days ago (9 children)

I've not found stats on how hard it is to put on when compared. I'm sure it significantly more, but 100 seams way too much. Tank of fuel burns well. It's got more energy than the battery.

[โ€“] HumanPenguin 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Most fire extinguishing involves starving the fire of oxygen and or fuel.

Given the batteries have both able to self sustain.

Consider instead how you would actually put a fire out. How do you starve it.

Remember top gear. When Hammond crashed the ev supper car. Took 2 days to stop it burning.

If the batts catch most fire brigades clear rather then try to extinguish. They try to remove plastic and rubber that will turn into prisoners fumes rather then extinguish the self supporting fire.

So yeah 100x is a reasonable guess.

[โ€“] jabjoe 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm not sure. 100x is a lot. I read about it generating it's own oxygen. Apparently it's about cooling rather than just starving it, because as you say, it has it's own oxygen. We'll get better at it and the risks is continue go down.

[โ€“] HumanPenguin 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think the tech will change. Li-ion the runaway effect is built into the chemistry.

Lifepo4 Dose not have this issue. And while it still needs electronics to manage charge and discharge like lion. It is about not damaging the cells. They do not ignite independent of another source like lion. So generally much safer.

For all the recent use of these lithium technologies, they are not actually a new invention. The concepts were invented in the 1800s. We just did not have the tech to make them efficient. It is materials tech over the last 20 years that has really enhanced this. And while we know there are limits to how much we can store. Lifepo4 theoretically can improve a little. Also,

lithium salt tech is well understood theoretically. Those theories mean it is able to be Much more dense (4x lion from what I remember) would not have the runaway effect. We just lack the materials tech to make it efficiently. But are able to make it in a lab.

So there is other options down the line. It's just that Lab to cost-effective factory manufacture is a big step. Takes people wanting to invest.

[โ€“] jabjoe 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think EVs should be built to have batteries replaced. Not because the batteries will wear out, but because they well be obsolete before the EV is.

[โ€“] HumanPenguin 1 points 1 day ago
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)