this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2026
600 points (95.2% liked)

Technology

84103 readers
4078 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from : https://lemmy.zip/post/62209262

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Asetru@feddit.org 167 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

the breakthrough that makes EVs safer than ICE cars

Did Toyota write this? EVs already are much safer than ICEs, the headline reads like it's trying to gaslight people into thinking otherwise.

[–] BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 55 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Except ones with no handles. You're supposed to burn alive in these.

[–] Asetru@feddit.org 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Which has nothing to do with the drive train.

[–] BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Except the fact that batteries burn extremely rapidly. In case of fire you have seconds to open the door and help the driver/passaners escape out of the vehicle

[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I've heard that gasoline also tends to burn rapidly. The Mythbusters usually had to add gas to make their explosions look cooler

[–] BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Not as rapidly as lithium batteries. From firefighting perspective this is much uglier case. Bonus issue: unlike gasoline, you can't extinguish it reliably - it has to burn out on its own

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Battery fires can be extinguished.

[–] BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The only way I know how to reliably extinguish a lithium car battery fire, is to throw the whole car into a water tank

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That's two ways: if you can throw a whole car in a water tank, you can throw a whole water tank on a car.

[–] BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Nope. The moment you stop flooding it with water, it starts burning back again. Lithium reacts with water producing heat and hydrogen. Spraying the surface with hose just doesn't work. You have to drop car into a water tank for prolonged period of time. Long enough for water to reach all damaged cells and react with all exposed lithium

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Make it a sand tank. Or a cement tank. Ooh or an army tank!

[–] Asetru@feddit.org 2 points 2 weeks ago

So? Overall risk is still much lower.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

Dude...gas cars blow up every day. It's so common it's not news.

Vehicle fires report | NFPA Research

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) https://www.nfpa.org/ › research › fire-statistical-reports Oct 31, 2024 — The 195,927 highway vehicle fires per year in 2018–2022 caused an average of 579 civilian deaths; 1,336 civilian injuries.

[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

That’s a feature as far as I’m concerned

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 23 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Except their weight which leads to insane amounts of energy transfer and also none of the intrastructure, like guardrails, is built to handle that much weight so low down.

The way to safer is to reduce the amount of cars.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

The way to safer is to reduce the amount of cars.

Hersey! Blasphemy! Unamerican!

[–] Asetru@feddit.org 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

First time I ever heard about guardrails having issues with EVs. Do you have a source for that?

Also the comment was about the fire risk, which the article was about.

It affects more than the guardrail situation as well. Any collision with a car laden with extremely heavy batteries as low to the ground as possible has inertia and force that was not calculated into road safety systems originally.

This can be corrected, but the first step is recognizing and accounting for it. Which seems to upset people for reasons I cant comprehend.

But as the other guy said, the safest systems are the ones with the fewest cars on the road in general.

[–] Romkslrqusz@lemmy.zip 12 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

EVs already are much safer than ICEs

For the occupant or those who are involved in a collision with one?

EVs are heavy

[–] Asetru@feddit.org 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

They don't catch fire that often though.

Which is what that headline is about.

[–] monkeyFromTheLake@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Do ice car catch fire more often?

[–] amju_wolf@pawb.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

While true, you should also mention that there's way more ICEs and (more importantly) the way they burn is much, much safer.

You can't really extinguish lithium fire, it burns way hotter, and it's more toxic.

Comparatively an ICE car burning is not a big deal; they almost never make other stuff around them burn, and also when they catch on fire it's pretty much exclusively only when people are still near/in them so there's A chance to notice it and do something about it.

[–] rjek@feddit.uk 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Came here to say exactly this.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

But it was already said so....

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)
[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

You do realize that article neither negates or supports the above statement.

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 weeks ago

"But Teslas are electric and Teslas are bad!" -the person we're replying to.

It's like the commenter doesn't realize there's more electric cars than just Teslas.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Safer cars get into less crashes. You seriously want to argue semantics?

https://www.tesladeaths.com/

[–] Malfeasant@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

There are electric cars that are not Teslas..

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

So the article's source has been updated. Tesla was number 1 in the last year's report (2024's numbers) but it's number 3 now (2025's numbers).

Source used by the article you shared

TLDR: It's a close battle between BMW (44.9 per 1000), Ram (44.7 per 1000), and Telsa (42.8 per 1000)

EDIT: "That includes accidents, DUIs, speeding and citations" If you instead just isolate accident rates it's slightly different: Ram (23.9 per 1000), Subaru (23.2), and Tesla (23.1).

I should clarify that I'm not a fan of Tesla AT ALL. I'd love to see Tesla fail (in particular Elon failing especially). There's more electric car's than just Tesla's.

[–] OfCourseNot@fedia.io 14 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It probably has more to do with the people that buy BMWs, Rams, and Teslas driving like fucking idiots than with the cars themselves.

[–] xylol@leminal.space 6 points 2 weeks ago

I was about to say that when I am near a tesla, bmw, or ram truck I anticipate them driving like jackasses. teslas can go both ways though, either unnecessarily slow or crazy bmw style impatient driving

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

Tesla crashes are a function of a poorly designed interface, overweight cars, and too much power for public roads.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.wtf 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This battery is even safer than Li-ion cells, why is that “gaslighting”?

[–] catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 weeks ago

Because the headline is not making that comparison?

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

EVs already are much safer than ICEs

That's new to me. Why exactly?

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The main thing is there's no big engine in the front, so your entire hood can now be a crumple zone, and it's easier to design to be safe in impacts. The center of gravity is also much lower so there's a lower chance of a rollover.

On the other hand... Tesla's have a habit of locking their occupants inside when the car is on fire because SOMEONE decided mechanical latches were too expensive.

And as others have mentioned... the added weight also makes it less safe for everyone else outside the car.

[–] Asetru@feddit.org 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The article is about batteries that might catch fire less often.

ICEs catch fire much more often than EVs already. The comment was specifically about that.

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The fires from EVs (ones that use lithium batteries that is) are incredibly hard to extinguish.

Sodium ion batteries don't ignite which makes them even safer.

Link to a video of a puncture test of Sodium cells.

And another one that's also cool.

[–] Asetru@feddit.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

That's nice and all but not what the headline compared and therefore not the point. That comparison was specifically between ICEs and EVs.