Cegorach

yeah, I get that.

I have no problem with the article itself - the headline is still stupid though.

so it’s not the “electric” part that’s the problem in norway

it’s still better than combustion engines

stupid headline!

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)

fire

and the burning ship

a couple thousands cars, sixteenhundred tons of fat oil and two-hundred tons of marine diesel.

Nothing.

There’s nothing out there.

Just sea and birds and fish.

So, how would you do that on a ship built to be filled by two ramps?

on a ship of that type? yes, I do.

and look surprisingly similar to the one in those articles :D

how do you think those cars were loaded into the ship? by crane?

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.

No. Out of the environment!

So it’s no longer in an environment.

I mean statistics are clear on that one… :D

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.

I said there might have been aliens, testing new beam weapons - anything is possible.

we’ll never know‽ /s

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.

good luck doing it with a burning gas powered 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.

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”

“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.