Jake Bullit Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 I wonder what caused this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flight1 Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 3 minutes ago, Jake Bullit said: I wonder what caused this? I know I know! electric mobility scooter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lee Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 1 hour ago, Jake Bullit said: I wonder what caused this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 Does it really matter what the source was - the investigation into the similarly devastating Liverpool car park fire concluded that the spread of fire was mainly due to vehicle fuel tanks releasing fuel which ran down drainage gulleys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 (edited) 44 minutes ago, John Lee said: Don't worry, the Geoff by cars Youtube channel will be there within 15 mins to offer a high quality "analysis" of the fire that "proves" EVs were 907% to blame for this incident... 🧐 Yepp, ding ding, my money was safe! To be fair it is a bit more balanced than his normal content. he is right in that, whether or not an EV started this, I this will be a major moment for the adoption EVs in the UK. Whislt I don't agree that the risk of fire is increased by driving an EV, the consequences of one clearly are higher, especially if there are multiple cars in close proximity such as in a car park. On that basis the public (and onward government) reaction to this will be important. Will our lords and masters carry on with the current trajectory, or are they going to see going anti-EV as more of a vote winner than loser, and decide to very publically "protect" us from incidents like this by about turning for fire safety reasons? I'm sure Rishi's minions are running the numbers right now, they'll get back to you in 3 months time... Edited October 11, 2023 by MattyB 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Kearsley Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 I like the comment, reported on the BBC News website, made by the Leighton Buzzard fire crew commander: "Lots of electric vehicles were involved"! So were lots of petrol and diesel vehicles - the fire apparently started in a diesel vehicle. Regardless of what fuel they use, large numbers of vehicles in close proximity will be vulnerable once fire breaks out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Walsh Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 17 minutes ago, Tim Kearsley said: I like the comment, reported on the BBC News website, made by the Leighton Buzzard fire crew commander: "Lots of electric vehicles were involved"! So were lots of petrol and diesel vehicles - the fire apparently started in a diesel vehicle. Regardless of what fuel they use, large numbers of vehicles in close proximity will be vulnerable once fire breaks out. Perhaps the point he was making was "a lot of electric vehicles were involved so that's why it took us so long to put the fire out" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Learner Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 (edited) As has been said how or what started the fire is not the issue. The issue is how fast it spread , especially as the airport would have there own fire crews possibly only minutes away. Edited October 11, 2023 by Learner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDD15 Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 22 minutes ago, Learner said: As has been said how or what started the fire is not the issue. The issue is how fast it spread , especially as the airport would have there own fire crews possibly only minutes away. How it started IS the issue. It should not have started, period. Regardless of motive power type. As the Liverpool fire proved you don’t need an EV to have a dangerous multi storey car park fire. Idd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Skilbeck Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 Not sure if the airports fire crew actually responded, the interviews seemed to all be with local firecrews, who noted it wasn't safe to enter so decided to fight it externally. Not surprising when it was assumed that there were around 1500 cars in the car park, lets say 1200 were ICE, each with 25 litres on board, that's a lot of hydrocarbon vapour which could ignite in a fireball at anytime. I've seen a still from a CCTV that seems to show an SUV (Range Rover/Land Rover/) on fire not in a parking space, so probably caught fire as it was being driven in the car park, leak from a high pressure fuel injection system onto a hot exhaust maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Learner Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 2 minutes ago, IDD15 said: How it started IS the issue. It should not have started, period. Regardless of motive power type. As the Liverpool fire proved you don’t need an EV to have a dangerous multi storey car park fire. Idd It should not of started I agree but without checking every vehicle entering a car park how are you going to stop it. Idd 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul De Tourtoulon Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 No point in speculating, we will probably never know the truth anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 I think is more a case of poor build standards. It’s a car park fire. Lots of air, shaped to channel flames. No fire chief is going to commit the lives of crews to going into that, as long as the belief is it’s merely property burning, after the first few cars have gone up. Any thing with things wot can burn, it the same box as a source of heat, and an oxygen supply can go up in flames. Poor engineering, design,maintainence, damage et al. What might just help, the cretins who designed that building, built that building, held the budget for its construction, or wrote fire codes for it, are jointly and severally liable for not installing a sprinkler system. Brain dead obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrumpyGnome Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 It would need to be a mahoosive sprinkler system to cope with all the cars parked that close together.... yes, it MAY have put out the initial fire, but who knows. Certainly wouldn't have touched an EV fire I expect. Anyway, it's very harsh to call people cretins or brain dead when we have no idea who decided what, when, how or why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 Gg, I did say jointly and severally. Also it will limit the fire. That’s why they are installed. And I only called them cretins for arriving at a bread dead obvious bad idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrumpyGnome Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 Presumably, all those 'cretins' and 'brain dead' individuals created a building that complied with building regulations in force at the time. Maybe it's those who created the regs that should carry any blame, although we're judging them with the benefit of hindsight. I doubt those individuals should be called 'cretins' or 'brain dead' either.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 Gg, again, I point out, I merely said a brain dead bad idea, not necessarily brain dead individuals, and I did cover the fire reg writers whos only job it is to have some foresight. Now just as this fire is nothing to do with electric vehicles, or global heat death, covered by this thread, I think we might leave it there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrumpyGnome Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 Sounds sensible :-) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zflyer Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 Does it really matter what the power source of the vehicle was! As for the building not being firesafe, really its a car park no residence above or below, no business properties above or below. You cannot prevent all potential sources of fire or explosion nor can you proscribe all 100% extinguishing systems, or even containment. Looks like an accident until or if its ever found otherwise. As for Rishi's minions, draw it in Matty B. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Skilbeck Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 1 hour ago, GrumpyGnome said: It would need to be a mahoosive sprinkler system to cope with all the cars parked that close together.... yes, it MAY have put out the initial fire, but who knows. Certainly wouldn't have touched an EV fire I expect. Possibly not, but what it would have done is kept the other cars around the fire cool so they don't catch fire and fuel didn't then leak from them. There's actually more hydrocarbons stored in one of these car parks than there is inventory on a small offshore oil facility, which would have a full fire and gas detection system, sprinkler system and drain segregation to prevent a pool fire from spreading. But it's a cost/risk analysis and if the regulations don't require it (because the risk is so low?) then why would the developer fit it. The personnel fire escapes would have been through fire doors and then a segregated stair well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 (edited) I just heard on the TV the source of the fire has been changed to a "Lithium" battery in a vehicle. I am surprised that there has been a change, as it is politically sensitive and a Diesel is far more acceptable, to some. As to there being no sprinkler system on the upper floor, I have never as yet seen a multi storey, or ground base car park with one. Again I suspect that the cost benefit, relative to frequency is not favourable. Just like our homes, the cost to benefit does not really work that well. Installation and maintenance is probably something we would want, as the cost to disposable funds, for many just do not stack up. Although some lives and property may be saved. The good news is that a significant source of Lithium has been identified in the USA, also nickel, cobalt and manganese as a new development. Taking the substitution of alternative Anode materials. Apparently the Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries that some are currently use being heavier, but cheaper. This indicates that building a battery factory comes with some risk, which type will become the dominant, type. Again it seems that the licence vehicle weight limit is under review (for ordinary licences), as many EVs are pushing the maximum of the current limit. Edited October 11, 2023 by Erfolg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 Ah, just taken back to a Diesel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Skilbeck Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 6 minutes ago, Erfolg said: Ah, just taken back to a Diesel. GB News? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Kearsley Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 7 minutes ago, Erfolg said: Ah, just taken back to a Diesel. Yes, as hard as they try the press can't make an electric vehicle the culprit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul De Tourtoulon Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 I can't understand why the airport emergency fire brigade didn't hose it down with their monster canons, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.