You must log in or register to comment.
This could happen with every other ship as well, with every cargo.
Fewer shipments would be needed for more efficiently sized vehicles, so it would happen less.
Cargo containers are a standardized sizes and they fit a certain number of cars, the only way to fit more is to make cars small enough that they’re simply unsafe in an accident.
Smaller cars are great. “Unsafe in an accident” is dependant on speed, and if you’re just driving in a city you don’t need a vehicle designed for highway speeds.
Also other vehicles do exist.
If you only drive in a city then you don’t need to own a car at all, so that point is moot.
Small cars from the 80s/90s are a death trap even at slow speeds and making them safe requires them to be bigger, even if it’s only for slow speed accidents. Heck, speed limits in cities can go as high as 55mph/90kph, that’s pretty freaking fast and not a speed I would love getting hit at in a Kei car (my brother has one, you’re safe in it because of how small it is and how thin everything is around you).
Small cars from the 80s/90s are a death trap even at slow speeds and making them safe requires them to be bigger
it’s probably not the 90s you’re thinking about.
90s cars had airbags, large crumple zones and seat belts. Those were pretty safe already. Maybe you are thinking 60s and 70s?
Yes, 90s cars were fucked if hit by 3t of steel at 180km/h, yes. But so are current cars.
And less heavy cars that run into you, made less safety needed. So if we were to build only light (say sub 1t and driving 80km/h max) cars to modern standards, we would all be way better off. But people are assholes, so that won’t happen.
The ship is expected to keep burning for weeks.
Actually, it might also sink and release up to 2,000 tons of heavy fuel oil (plus molten plastic, metals etc.) to the Wadden Sea which is on the UNESCO World Heritage List as an important biosphere reserve.
Just tow it beyond the environment.
Yeah. Just pipe it to /dev/null
Into another environment?
No. Out of the environment!
So it’s no longer in an environment.
Well, what’s out there?
Nothing.
There’s nothing out there.
Just sea and birds and fish.
And?
a couple thousands cars, sixteenhundred tons of fat oil and two-hundred tons of marine diesel.
And?
Whether you like it or not, our modern society can’t function without cars entirely, we still need delivery vehicles etc. Focusing on the fact this vessel dares to carry cars, rather than the fact the fire was able to spread between presumably multiple decks, and cause the entire cargo to burn.
Sprinkler systems on vessels is very much a thing.
Good luck fighting a burning EV with sprinklers!
good luck doing it with a burning gas powered car!
Fuel and other hydrocarbons float on water, which makes them very difficult to extinguish.
and a burning car is a whole lot of burning material
it’s not a tiny piece of wood - in many cases you’ll detect it first, when there’s actually a whole lot and flames/smoke escaping from the car.
can’t function without cars entirely, we still need delivery vehicles etc.
yeah, okay. But we need far fewer than we have. So producing them and shipping them around the globe needs to be reduced dramatically. So that point still kinda stands?
And yes “this should have been made safer” is another point - but that doesnt invalidate the other.
So producing them and shipping them around the globe needs to be reduced dramatically. So that point still kinda stands?
The supply side is the wrong place to tackle this problem though. If you limit the amount of new cars that may be produced, people will simply drive their older ones for longer.
Driving an older car, and by extension not buying a newer car, decreases demand and would improve the amount of these cargo ships on the sea, thus lowering the opportunity for this to happen. I’m not sure if your comment was for or against people driving their older cars, but I think driving an older car is better than upgrading and buying a newer car
An older more polluting car migth not be the better option. But if the new car is one of those giant murde boxes then it’s not going to be an upgrade either.
no infastructure needs to change. less roads more rails that simple. walkable cities and transit in between cities
Exactly
totally correct
They corrected the number of cars up to 4000 (:
“Of the 3000 cars onboard, 25 are electric and one of those has apparently set light to the whole cargo”
BULLSHIT!
Nobody said so.
But “journalists” nowadays are full of shit and all reporting “currently there’s no proof that some electric car started the fire” (always with #electriccars) - what everyone reads as “yeah, sure the electric car was it!”
meanwhile electric cars are actually LESS likely to start a fire and still nobody in the know has actually claimed electric cars had ANYTHING to do with it.
Dutch authorities have said that the fire was started by an electric cars battery.
yeah, right now there’s a lot people claiming that it was probably some electric car.
it’s now a different scenario to right at the start, when we had nobody in the know giving that claim.
it will be another scenario again, when we finally have people look at it scientifically - after everythig has settled down. But then again that’s the point when nobody will care anymore.
because it’s impossible that the other 3000 cars filled with an explosive liquid could have ignited the fire. No, it’s definitely impossible, those fuel tanks never leak, and gas vapor never explode
Pretty sure they don’t ship cars with gasoline in em, thats extra weight that doesnt need to be there let alone the fire hazard.
The electric cars on the otherhand most likely have the batteries built into the fucking frame.
Tbh all cars have at least one battery. Or it might have been some order random accident that has nothing to do with the cargo. I think we need more info on this
While that’s true I was more pointing out the falsehood in the other commentor, and while most cars have batteries lets not pretend a batter the size of a cinder block is the same as one the size of a mattress.
well that and it’s different chemistry (lead vs lithium)
…aaaand EVs have those old lead-acid batteries too. (btw: we should finally ditch those for LiFePo or similar)
I mean statistics are clear on that one… :D
What journalist?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hembrow
If you read the actual article by a journalist they don’t say it’s a certainty. Maybe the problem is people like you who can’t tell a journalist from a random guy.
If you read the actual article by a journalist they don’t say it’s a certainty. Maybe the problem is people like you who can’t tell a journalist from a random guy.
did you even read what I wrote?
I specifically said that journalists are writing “there’s no proof that it wasn’t” and that other people are reading “it was” into it.
It’s exactly that. People are unable to read/understand.
The article linked in the post says:
A spokesman for the Coast Guard said earlier today that the fire is believed to have started in one of the electric cars. Later in the evening, the Coast Guard said that nothing is yet known about the cause.
So yeah they aren’t sure but it’s coming from the coast guard not the journalist.
German news said there might have been a Short circuit near those cars, once the Battery catches fire you basically can’t put it out.
I said there might have been aliens, testing new beam weapons - anything is possible.
we’ll never know‽ /s
Other people actually reported that coast guard not only responded with “we don’t know anything yet”, but also with “nobody of us would have told you a cause and we don’t know who did”
I’ve not seen any proof apart from wild speculation by owner/journalists yet.
And yes, the owner too pointed at electric cars - but neither people on board nor anybody near the ship was telling about that. So I’d guess that’s just repeating headlines too.
My point was: don’t claim “maybe it was electric cars”! because people don’t understand “maybe”
