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.
Nobody here wants everything with rubber wheels banned. We just want cars to be a form of personal transport to be the lowest prioritized compared to other forms like buses, trains, etc.
imagine a nationalized train system where you essentially own and park your own traincar. shit could be so efficient you could replace power lines and roads with one
I mean like minus the massive inneficiency of small scale combustion engines, plus it takes away all but production pollution (rubber from the tiresz exhaust, literally anything in a car that spills out)
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.
If we only had cars where they are needed, for emergency and delivery vehicles etc, then the demand for these sorts of things would reduce massively and the likelihood of something like this happening would plummet.
They transport cars with no gas in them. When I was going to school I used to work part time for a service center that prepped cars for the dealer after overseas transport. There were a lot of things that had to be done. The cars didn’t even have oil in the engine.
They transport EV’s with a 40% charge which is the industry standard storage charge for Li-Ion batteries. At storage charge a Li-Ion battery is greatly less likely to spontaneously combust due to a manufacturing defect. It can still happen, but a lot less of a chance. More likely an internal short will drain the battery to zero charge before catching fire.
In any case they don’t know the cause for sure. They’re stating an EV as a possible cause, but it could be anything at this point. They can’t know the cause for sure without an investigation and that won’t happen as long as it’s burning. If the ship sinks there may be no investigation at all.
The aim of a sprinkler system is to contain a fire, not necessarily to extinguish it. A sprinkler system can, will, and has kept a burning EV from spreading to other vehicles.
Now, gasoline on the other hand, that floats on water, which is very annoying to put out.
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.
Nobody here wants everything with rubber wheels banned. We just want cars to be a form of personal transport to be the lowest prioritized compared to other forms like buses, trains, etc.
imagine a nationalized train system where you essentially own and park your own traincar. shit could be so efficient you could replace power lines and roads with one
That just sounds like cars with extra steps.
I mean like minus the massive inneficiency of small scale combustion engines, plus it takes away all but production pollution (rubber from the tiresz exhaust, literally anything in a car that spills out)
Hey it looks like your comment got quadruple posted. Do you happen to use liftoff for lemmy? I do and multiposting happens to me occasionally.
Wefwef/liftoff actually! Kept getting errors and refreshing didn’t show anything. Thanks for the heads up
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.
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
If we only had cars where they are needed, for emergency and delivery vehicles etc, then the demand for these sorts of things would reduce massively and the likelihood of something like this happening would plummet.
Yeah but then rich people will have to ride public transit together with the poors. Obviously we can’t have that
Good luck fighting a burning EV with sprinklers!
good luck doing it with a burning gas powered car!
deleted by creator
They transport cars with no gas in them. When I was going to school I used to work part time for a service center that prepped cars for the dealer after overseas transport. There were a lot of things that had to be done. The cars didn’t even have oil in the engine.
They transport EV’s with a 40% charge which is the industry standard storage charge for Li-Ion batteries. At storage charge a Li-Ion battery is greatly less likely to spontaneously combust due to a manufacturing defect. It can still happen, but a lot less of a chance. More likely an internal short will drain the battery to zero charge before catching fire.
In any case they don’t know the cause for sure. They’re stating an EV as a possible cause, but it could be anything at this point. They can’t know the cause for sure without an investigation and that won’t happen as long as it’s burning. If the ship sinks there may be no investigation at all.
that’s the fun thing - unless you remove every last drop, emptying the gas tank makes it MORE dangerous, not less.
liquid gas in enclosed containers is actually pretty harmless. But leaking fluids mixtures of gas and air are explosive.
If they’re brand new cars they shouldn’t have gas in them yet. All of the final touches are done after they unload them at port.
how do you think those cars were loaded into the ship? by crane?
Duh?
So, how would you do that on a ship built to be filled by two ramps?
You think they drove them all onto the ship?
@krolden @DAT I have seen them being driven onto the ship.
on a ship of that type? yes, I do.
The aim of a sprinkler system is to contain a fire, not necessarily to extinguish it. A sprinkler system can, will, and has kept a burning EV from spreading to other vehicles.
Now, gasoline on the other hand, that floats on water, which is very annoying to put out.