I went to a big shopping centre where I can see there are four charging spots near the entrance.
However, two of them parked there were not charging at all. I guess it was just because it was close to the shops.
Personally, I don't drive an EV but raised my eyebrows seeing those dogs in the manger.
Still waiting on that one.
This is the thing, man. This shouldn't need to be a pre-requisite for needing to care. What they were doing was wrong either way. But you're struggling (and that is okay, we all struggle with new things sometimes) with this concept and I think the training will help thanks
This is the thing, man. This shouldn't need to be a pre-requisite for needing to care
LOL but the answer to this question is key
What they were doing was wrong either way. But you're struggling (and that is okay, we all struggle with new things sometimes) with this concept and I think the training will help thanks
As a EV owner myself, I fully know that a lot of chargers have two bays to one charger…. See this is the thing that you are struggling to understand, is the answer to this question is what matters most to if anyone should be outraged or not.
There is a pile on the EV own who is in the wrong view here.
Now if there was only 1 charger per two bays as I think, hence 4 cars parked and only 2 charging. What the EVs not charging had been doing isn't wrong at all. They had been waiting as you are meant to for the other car to finish charging.
So yeah, hence my lack of outrage at the issue without the facts.
So you're equally outraged over a war as you are over a EV parked in a EV space not charging.
I didn't say "equally" outraged. This is you, once again, trying to inject a strawman into the conversation.
The irony here is you telling people "if something doesn't 'impact you' then you should just 'keep walking'…", yet what I am saying doesn't "impact you", yet here you are voicing your "concerns" and failing to "walk away".
I am also 100% sure that there are things in your daily life that you do not have a direct impact on you, but you sill have a strong opinion about, enough to feel the need to say something about it at some stage.
I, as a straight, white, middle aged male, should I not be concerned about things like racism, reproductive rights for women, housing affordability for young families, equal opportunity for every one, (the list could go on and on) because none of these things "impact" me directly? Or should I stand up and say NO, I wont accept trans or gay people from being harassed because of their choices, I don't accept someone being paid less then me for the same job because they were born in a different country, or that I wont stand someone not being allowed entry to somewhere based on what their religion tells them they have to wear or because of the colour of their skin.
Sometimes, for all the arseholes in this world to get away with being arseholes, is for good people to let them run unchecked. For the people that should say something to hold them to account, to say nothing.
"Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing."
If you don't stand up and say something, then you are part of the problem, and not part of the solution. The only way evil and entitled people succeed, is for the good people to say nothing.
Again, I reiterate, the whole "if it doesn't impact you, jog on" view of life is disgusting.
I didn't say "equally" outraged. This is you, once again, trying to inject a strawman into the conversation.
You tried to link and compare the two events. Not me.
If you don't stand up and say something, then you are part of the problem, and not part of the solution
So go write a note and put it on their windscreen, or report it to the center.
Posting online about it, isn't solving the problem is it?
So if you're going to be gutless and post about it online and not do anything about it, then yeah, keep walking.
You tried to link and compare the two events. Not me.
Jimmy, this is your reading comprehension failing, again. Sorry to point it out (again) but you're doing it a lot today!
This is your reading comprehension failing, again. Sorry to point it out (again) but you're doing it a lot today!
Not at all, why bring it up at all, if you are not trying to compare the two in the first place. They are far from 'equal' events to be outraged over.
@JimmyF: Jimmy I am doubtful that there is any level of explanation possible that would allow you or a person like you to comprehend the meaning behind their sentences. I suggest maybe starting here and moving on to some heavier stuff. Perhaps your local grade 10 students may be able to point you in a useful direction?
After that, you can read this comment again and hopefully you'll get it this time around. Take your time Jimmy, this isn't a race. Go at your own pace :)
You tried to link and compare the two events. Not me.
Incorrect again. At no stage did I "link" the events. They are mutually exclusive events. Their only commonality is they are: "events that do not impact me directly, but still piss me off enough to say something about them". You trying to link the events and saying that I linked them is called a "strawman"
So go write a note and put it on their windscreen, or report it to the center.
What? Not just "if it doesn't concern you, jog on"?? So, now you are saying that I should say something??
Posting online about it, isn't solving the problem is it?
It is, because it brings a spotlight to the subject and maybe, just maybe, it is a call to others to help stamp out this insidious behaviour by vocally shaming people for parking like arseholes and inconveniencing others… I actively encourage other people to speak out on things that don't "impact" them directly, so they may help others who need their voices amplified.
So if you're going to be gutless and post about it online and not do anything about it
This isnt what OP is doing. They are seeking some idea if this is normal behaviour and what they should do about it. They made a post saying "this is shit" even though it doesnt "impact" them directly.
What we should be saying to OP is "No, these drivers are absolute arseholes, you are right to think they arse being arseholes and you should let them know they are being arseholes…"
And for the record, 100% if I was there, I would have called out their bullshit, taken photos of these cars not plugged in and sent it to the shopping centre management AND local council for review.
The "gutless" thing to do would be to see someone parking like an arsehole and inconveniencing others and to just "keep walking". That is the very definition of "gutless". Weak, spineless and pathetic.
What? Not just "if it doesn't concern you, jog on"?? So, now you are saying that I should say something??
Yeah, if you're not going to do anything like what the OP did. Don't bother posting about it on the internet, just keep on walking.
It is, because it brings a spotlight to the subject
It did nothing to address what the OP saw.
shaming people for parking like arseholes
Again, as a EV owner you should know a lot of spots are two spaces, one charger…. Maybe the car not charging was……. waiting for a charger to free up. The OP did say, 4 spots used, only 2 had been charging.
What we should be saying to OP is "No, these drivers are absolute arseholes, you are right to think they arse being arseholes and you should let them know they are being arseholes…"
And what positive will come from people thinking they are arseholes? Going to slash their tyres to teach them a lesson?
The "gutless" thing to do would be to see someone parking like an arsehole and inconveniencing others and to just "keep walking". That is the very definition of "gutless". Weak, spineless and pathetic.
LOL, Thats the one, don't whine about it on the internet if you're going to keep walking and not do anything about it.
So back to my first post that outraged you as much as a war does.
This impacts you how? Keep walking
OP got a car park, OP doesn't have a EV, OP didn't need to charge, OP didn't want to do anything. So yep, keep walking.
Don't bother posting about it on the internet
Why not? You are not the arbiter of the internet, you don't get to dictate what people do and do not post. I am glad that we have a space where people like OP can post this dislike for things that they witness that they don't like and then maybe get ideas on how to handle it next time instead of being a gutless, spinless NPC and "walking on". Change has to start somewhere and open dialogue is usually the first place. I'm just glad that not everyone has your shit "iF iT DoEsNt AffEcT YoUSe, JuSt JoG oN!11!" attitude.
It did nothing to address what the OP saw.
No, it didn't… but next time OP see it happening, or someone else who came into the thread and read it, next time they might just have the balls to say "Hey, dude, if you are not charging, you really shouldn't be parking there as it can seriously inconvenience others…" The post isnt about solving what happened, but about changing the way people think for "next time" they encounter these arsehole…
Again, as a EV owner you should know a lot of spots are two spaces, one charger…
And as an EV owner, I can assure you, a LOT of these spaces are 1 spot, 1 charger, or 2 spots, 1 charger with 2 outlets on it. I have been to a lot of charging bays over the last 18 months, and I have NEVER seen a 2 bay charging spot with only 1 charger. It's always 1 charger per bay OR a single charger, but with 2 outlets on it. (I'm not saying they dont exist, just saying in the many that I have seen, I've never seen 2 bays with only a single charger)
Even if I get to a charger and the charger isnt working/isnt there/whatever reason, I still dont park there… because I'm not a c#%t.
And what positive will come from people thinking they are arseholes?
Really? So your alternative is to "say nothing and walk on" and let them continue to be arseholes??
Some arseholes are going to be arsehole no matter what, I will agree there, but some people are part time arseholes or ignorant/uneducated. The prime directive is to "educate" and you cant educate if you stay silent.
In my reply above where I took a photo of a Tesla arsehole. I asked him politely if he was going to plug in, he said "no, I'm just parking"… I informed him that it was a DC fast charging bay and someone might need it in an emergency, This is where the guy told me to quote: "go f%#k yourself".
I then informed him that road rule 203C was a thing and that the fine can be anywhere from $130~$2,200 in NSW and that the shopping center had a policy of towing vehicles parked in EV bays. His big, fat loud mouth Karen wife told me to "f%#k off and mind my own business"… to which I just started taking photos of the vehicle for local council and the shopping centre management.
He came back to his car and moved it. Mission accomplished… All because I bothered to say something. He now knows that people are not going to tolerate him parking like a c#%t and that he may get a mouth full every time he tried to park like a c#%t. What he did didn't "impact" me, but it is still my place to call out arseholes when I see them acting like c%#ts.
If I said nothing and walked on, he would be none the wiser and it would have just reinforced his entitlement because no one said anything. Now he might think twice… is someone watching? Am I going to get into another verbal stouch in front of my kids? Could they be taking photos to send to council? Will I actually get a fine?
OP got a car park, OP doesn't have a EV…
Again with the shit attitude… and we have come full circle… I am not handicapped and I dont require handicapped parking spaces, but I can assure you 100% I am going to bitch about it with people so it spreads awareness and I am 100% going to say to the arsehole that parked there that they are being a c#%t… even when it doesn't "impact" me.
Something doesn't need to impact you directly for you to be concerned about it and for you to ask questions about the ethicality of what someone else is doing. The worst thing you can do is say "well, it doesn't impact me, so, I'll ignore it…" because one day, it may just impact you…
A lot of your views would say otherwise.
Says the guy with all the down votes so far… Pretty sure it's not me that people think is the c$&t in this situation ;)
@pegaxs: If this was a post about a car parked in a parm spot without a car seat would anyone care? Nope…. Tell them to mind their own business and keep walking.
Ahh but this is a post about EVs, so they always bring out the nutters. Hence why they love you!
I want to know if the OP also check every disabled car space to make sure everyone had a permit? How about the parm parking? Check every car had a car seat? Why just single out the EV spots?
@JimmyF: yes EV fire can startup again even when the car is under water. yeh perfectly safe.
https://www.mynrma.com.au/electric-vehicles/basics/understan…
Thermal runaway can also happen in an EV that has been in a flood or saltwater. In the event of water ingress, salty water can create a path for electricity to spark thermal runaway.
…
Water remains the most effective method for suppressing EV fires, requiring large volumes sustained over an extended period. However, emergency responders are also exploring other encapsulating agents. Even after an EV fire has been suppressed, there's a risk of secondary ignition due to stranded energy in unburnt cells.
@CowFrogHorse: So tell me again how many EV fires there are per 100k units sold?
Then do the same for ICE vehicles per 100k sold.
Whichever is highest should be banned right as they are the unsafe product!
I mean if you read your own article you linked to, you would have seen that zero EVs have just 'caught' fire for no reason.
Electric vehicle fire consultancy EV FireSafe notes in the video below that only 40% of EV fires involve the lithium-ion battery. It says there have been just seven EV battery fires in Australia including the above incident out of the 120,000 battery electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on the road. In all cases, the battery fires were caused by damage to the battery pack: by arson, home fires, road collision or impact from road debris.
Of the 120k EV or hybrids, 7 have had fire issues and all 7 were caused by damage to the pack from their owners damaging it.
Keep reading on
Australia experiences approximately six EV fires per million EVs, comparable to the global average.
But wait it gets better… Did you read till the end?
ICE vehicles are 60 times more likely to catch fire than electric vehicles and hybrid vehicles are 138 times more likely to catch fire
LOL so ICE cars should be banned, not EVs as they catch fire far more.
Most EVs made changes long ago to the battery makeup to address thermal runaway events. Just look up the ones that have crashed, they don't burst into fireballs like you claim.
@JimmyF: Jimmy: o tell me again how many EV fires there are per 100k units sold?
cow: I didnt ask you how many fires happen.
Jimmy: Then do the same for ICE vehicles per 100k sold.
Whichever is highest should be banned right as they are the unsafe product!
cow: Whats worse 5x ICE cars fire in Sydney Harbour Tunnel or 1x EV that causes the steel to fail and the entire tunnel to collapse and flood ?
DO you think EV's will be allowed into other tunnels in Australia when that happen ?
~
Jimmy: I mean if you read your own article you linked to, you would have seen that zero EVs have just 'caught' fire for no reason.
cow: And thaat shows taht article is obviously incomplete… but you being honest know that isnt true.
~
Jimmy: Most EVs made changes long ago to the battery makeup to address thermal runaway events. Just look up the ones that have crashed, they don't burst into fireballs like you claim.
cow: Have all the old batteries as you claim been removed from the public ?
The fire in Luton will disagree with you, the REAL problem was EV cars caught fire and the extreme heat destroyed the structure.
Regular ICE cars do not melt and destroy an entire carpark by thesemves.
Show proof for your claims.
@JimmyF: jimmy:
Most EVs made changes long ago to the battery makeup to address thermal runaway events. Just look up the ones that have crashed, they don't burst into fireballs like you claim.
cow:
Most is not all is it ?
Big words have you got any proof for your statement because the NSW fire service completely disagrees with you…
No where do they say the problem of thermal runaway is basically gone they list it as a real problem for ALL of todays EV batteries.
Who do you think we should trust you or the NSW F ?
https://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=9389
Why do lithium-ion batteries catch fire?
Lithium-ion batteries are highly energy-dense and contain electrolytes that are highly flammable. There are several situations that can lead to lithium-ion batteries catching fire, including:
Overcharging or use of non-compliant charging equipment
Overheating or exposure to heat or extreme temperatures
Physical abuse (e.g. dropping, crushing, piercing, and/or vibrations)
Short-circuiting, battery cell malfunctions or system faults
Defects or contamination introduced during manufacture
When lithium-ion batteries fail they can undergo thermal runaway. This involves violent bursting of one or multiple battery cells, hissing and release of toxic, flammable and explosive gases, and an intense, self-sustaining fire that can be difficult to extinguish.
@JimmyF: jimmy: But wait it gets better… Did you read till the end?
ICE vehicles are 60 times more likely to catch fire than electric vehicles and hybrid vehicles are 138 times more likely to catch fire
cow:
the mynrma articles makes many points each from different sources, read the citation for the items you are mentioning.
You also need to appreciate context, one EV can take out 1500 cars, another EV took out a car trasnport ship 2 ish months ago and that destroyed 1000s of cars worth many many millions
Tell me how many ICE cars took out anything on taht scale ?
Big difference between an bad ICE car fire and a bad EV car fire…
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cargo-ship-fire-netherlands-ev-…
You also need to appreciate context, one EV can take out 1500 cars
Things that didn't happen. It wasn't a EV that started the fire. Maybe focus on facts not FUD.
https://www.autoblog.com/2023/10/12/heres-the-car-that-spark…
Tell me how many ICE cars took out anything on taht scale ?
1 ICE took out 1500 cars at an airport. Then only a few days ago another ICE car took out another 11 cars at an airport.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/fire-bristol-airport-car-park-2103…
So tell me again how bad EVs are? How many airport fires have they started?
You also might want to read your own articles you posted The Dutch coast guard said Thursday that the cause of the fire was unclear
LOL So blaming a EV for starting a fire with an unknown cause. Just pure FUD. There was 3,783 vehicles on the ship including 498 EVs.
As we know from your earlier article posted, ICE are 60+ more times likely to catch fire than a EV, so why do you think an EV started it!?
Also learn to quote. I can't take anything you say seriously if you don't know how to do that!
@JimmyF: https://www.autoblog.com/2023/10/12/heres-the-car-that-spark…
look at the picture thats a classic battery fire, notice how it burns downwards.
the fire is from the bottom on the left which is the location of the battery of a RR.
https://www.evfiresafe.com/ev-fire-behaviour
look at the diagrams discussing identification of a battery fire. Petrol doesnt burn downwards and under like that. Go ask your local fire deprt.
Lets skip discussing what started the fire … the q you need to consider is EVs within the carpark is what made made the temperature so high the entire structure failed and thaats why the FD couldnt fight the fire.
WHen was the last time you heard an ICE fire melting steel and causing buildings to collapse ?
@JimmyF: jimmy: LOL So blaming a EV for starting a fire with an unknown cause. Just pure FUD. There was 3,783 vehicles on the ship including 498 EVs.
cow: ICE cars dont start fires randomly when "not moving".
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/26/cargo-ship-fir…
The ship’s owner said an electric car in the cargo was suspected as a possible cause for the blaze.
In a statement, Shoei Kisen Kaisha Ltd said: “We are now trying to extinguish the fire in cooperation with the local authorities of [the] Netherlands, the salvor and the ship management company.
Again you are completely ignoring the PRIMARY problem.
ICE cars do cause fires, but we know how to fight them, EV cars are unstoppable and they burn much much hotter…
Thats the PROBLEM.
FD can stop an ICE fire, they have real problems and often cant stop EV fires.
How many ICE fires do you know have melted the steel of a building -> NONE, to get those temps you need EV fire, petrol doesnt burn that hot.
@JimmyF: https://www.drive.com.au/news/electric-car-cargo-ship-fire-s…
However, Mr Dillon claims these techniques are almost impossible to execute on a roll-on, roll-off cargo ship as there is significantly less space to access the vehicles – a factor which can increase the intensity of a fire and put firefighters at greater risk of injury.
John Frazee, a managing director of insurance broker Marsh, also told Reuters recent electric-vehicle fires on cargo ships has led to an increase in insurance prices for car makers and transport companies
https://www.drive.com.au/news/electric-car-cargo-ship-fire-s…
Love that you ignore your early claims that had been proven wrong…. What happened to that 1500 car fire at the airport by an EV? Oh right it didn't happen, so you'll just ignore that point now will you?
Anyhow this article has the same shit in it as the other one.
The ship had 498 electric cars out of 3783 total vehicles, the article says very clearly the ship fire has not been officially attributed to an electric vehicle
So what was your point? Oh ban ICE cars as they cause ship fires. Got it.
@JimmyF: Jimmy: The ship had 498 electric cars out of 3783 total vehicles, the article says very clearly the ship fire has not been officially attributed to an electric vehicle
cow: No you need to learn to read, the article mentions they dont know at that stage. I gave another article from a few days later where they blame EVs.
jimmy: The ship had 498 electric cars out of 3783 total vehicles, the article says very clearly the ship fire has not been officially attributed to an electric vehicle
cow: no it doesnt. you need to learn to LINK n QUOTE.
i give real links with real quotes, you give nothing but your own words, they arent the same.
mmyF: https://www.drive.com.au/news/electric-car-cargo-ship-fire-s…
However, Mr Dillon claims these techniques are almost impossible to execute on a roll-on, roll-off cargo ship as there is significantly less space to access the vehicles – a factor which can increase the intensity of a fire and put firefighters at greater risk of injury.
John Frazee, a managing director of insurance broker Marsh, also told Reuters recent electric-vehicle fires on cargo ships has led to an increase in insurance prices for car makers and transport companies
@CowFrogHorse: Far out Cow, learn to quote or don't bother replying. You replies look worst than a cow pat.
i give real links with real quotes, you give nothing but your own words, they arent the same.
LOL You might want to check again as I did quote from the article you posted, here is another direct quote from that same article, and it is REAL too, go check the article yourself https://www.drive.com.au/news/electric-car-cargo-ship-fire-s…
The ship fire has not been officially attributed to an electric vehicle, however some overseas media reports, and the ship's owner have identified a battery-powered vehicle as a possible source of the blaze.
So it wasn't a EV that started it. Glad we got that bit clear. Stop spreading FUD based on dribble.
Don't want to own a EV? Don't buy one. It really isn't that hard to understand.
@JimmyF: jimmy:LOL You might want to check again as I did quote from the article you posted, here is another direct quote from that same article, and it is REAL too, go check the article yourself https://www.drive.com.au/news/electric-car-cargo-ship-fire-s…
The ship fire has not been officially attributed to an electric vehicle, however some overseas media reports, and the ship's owner have identified a battery-powered vehicle as a possible source of the blaze.
cow: I gave u the guardian artivle whichi s about a week later which does blame an EV.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/26/cargo-ship-fir…
The ship’s owner said an electric car in the cargo was suspected as a possible cause for the blaze.
In a statement, Shoei Kisen Kaisha Ltd said: “We are now trying to extinguish the fire in cooperation with the local authorities of [the] Netherlands, the salvor and the ship management company.
The guardian article is about a week AFTER the drive.com.au….
@CowFrogHorse: Mate if you can't quote correctly, don't bother replying to me. I don't have time to work out your cow pat dribble that doesn't make sense.
You posted the article link, that article said that the EV didn't start the fire.
Now lets talk about the 1500 car fire at the airport? Bloody ICE cars burning all those cars!! Crazy unsafe!!
@JimmyF: jimmy:
Don't want to own a EV? Don't buy one. It really isn't that hard to understand.
cow:
its not a question of if i want to buy one..
When an EV fire starts in a tunnel or underground car park or similar…. its going to destroy the entire place, because the heat will melt the supporting steel…
just like Luton airport.
If you or me are there in the wrong place, it doesnt matter if we do or dont have an EV you are in serious trouble.
@CowFrogHorse: learn to quote, we're done until you clean up your cat pat replies.
just like Luton airport.
Bloody ICE started that fire…. Suck a disgrace BAN THEM NOW!!!! SO UNSAFE!!!
@JimmyF: jimmy:
Don't want to own a EV? Don't buy one. It really isn't that hard to understand.
cow:
its not a question of if i want to buy one..
When an EV fire starts in a tunnel or underground car park or similar…. its going to destroy the entire place, because the heat will melt the supporting steel…
just like Luton airport.
If you or me are there in the wrong place, it doesnt matter if we do or dont have an EV you are in serious trouble.
Can u not grasp the problem ?
Theres a difference between a fire the fFD can put out like ICE, and a fire they cant handle like EV.
and one melts steel and causes buildings to collapse the EV and the other does not like ICE.
@JimmyF: Jimmy:
It doesnt matter which started the fire… the EVs made the fire destroy the entire carpark…
What part of that dont you understand ?
@CowFrogHorse: ICE fires dont cause steel to fail and building to collapse and melt ?
EV fires are much hotter and they do cause steel to melt and buildings to collapse and melt !
@CowFrogHorse: Thats why Luton was a disaster, once the EV cars started burning, the FD couldnt stop it. and the building started to collapse again because of the EV heat.
It doesnt matter which started the fire… the EVs made the fire destroy the entire carpark…
LOL no it didn't…. 1500 cars burned, So how many had been EVs?
ICE cars are full of plastic, foam and rubber oh and a liquid that burns really well too. They burn really well by themselves and in this case it spread from car to car.
What part of that dont you understand ?
I understand completely, do you? As you seem to think ICE cars are some magical thing that never catches fire and they self extinguish themselves.
Both things that are far from untrue.
Can you send me some news articles of recent EVs catching fire this year then? I mean clearly should be nice and easy for you as they catch fire at the drop of a hat.
@JimmyF: jimmy:
LOL no it didn't…. 1500 cars burned, So how many had been EVs?
ICE cars are full of plastic, foam and rubber oh and a liquid that burns really well too. They burn really well by themselves and in this case it spread from car to car.
cow:
Its not a question of whether stuff burns, the problem is the batteries in an EV THEMSELVES burn 3x hotter than an ICE car and its bits.
Can u grasp that ?
EV burns 3x hotter, and that melts the steel and building collapses…
An ICE car doesnt burn as hot so steel doesnt melt and building doesnt collapse…
@JimmyF: Jimmy:
Can you send me some news articles of recent EVs catching fire this year then? I mean clearly should be nice and easy for you as they catch fire at the drop of a hat.
Cow:
Yet again you dont understand the problem…
A fire you cant stop is WORSE than a fire you can.
ICE cars have fires, but they dont take out an entire multi floor building and make it melt, thats the problem. If an ICE has a fire in SYdney harbour tunnel, its a bad day, but the tunnel melt and fail. If an EV has a fire in SYdney Harbour Tunnel, theres a real chance it will cause the tunnel to fail because of the 3x hotter fire.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicle_fire_…
https://techxplore.com/news/2022-04-paris-electric-bus-fleet…
@CowFrogHorse: I can't understand what any of your cow pat replies are meant to say, learn to quote. If you can't quote, then I assume whatever you are dribbling is just FUD.
@JimmyF: U ask for links to fires i gave you two links and you run away.
I explain the problem of EV fires burning hotter nd being difficult or impossible to put out and you ignore that problem.
coward.
U ask for links to fires i gave you two links and you run away.
I asked for links to EV fires this year, and you gave me some cow pat reply as you can't quote, so was unreadable.
I explain the problem of EV fires burning hotter nd being difficult or impossible to put out and you ignore that problem.
and I explained ICE cars are 60x more likely to catch fire and all your 'examples' like the 1500 car fire at the airport or the ship fire hadn't been caused by EVs but ICE cards instead.
coward.
LOL
@JimmyF: https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-news/medical-staff-told-not…
Monash Health has banned electric vehicle (EV) charging at its hospitals and medical centres, citing a WorkSafe Victoria safety alert warning EVs pose a fire risk.
“When overheated, lithium-ion batteries of all sizes can catch fire. The fire is often hard to put out and the smoke from the fire can be toxic,” said WorkSafe Victoria in its alert, published on August 30, 2023.
WorkSafe Victoria recommends employers should “prevent the use, storage or charging of electric plant or passenger vehicles in enclosed and restricted spaces, unless the fire detection and suppression system is suitable for the special fire hazard (a lithium-ion battery fire).”
The recommendations from the government body state vehicles with lithium-ion batteries should not be charged close to office spaces or near people.
Monash Health has banned electric vehicle (EV) charging at its hospitals and medical centres, citing a WorkSafe Victoria safety alert warning EVs pose a fire risk.
and yet not a single EV has caught fire in an enclosed space based on that article. Sounds like someone reading all the FUD and making some recommendations based on it.
I hope Monash applied the same rules to the rest of the car park with ICE cars 60x more likely to catch fire, so all the car park areas should have fire detection and suppression systems. Infact I might write to them and raise these issues that ICE cars should be banned from all enclosed car parks that don't have these systems in place due to these risks!
BTW the only battery fire in that article was a golf car that caught fire. LOL
@JimmyF: @jimmy: I hope Monash applied the same rules to the rest of the car park with ICE cars 60x more likely to catch fire,
cow: Who says ICE cars cause 60x more fires ?
The big difference is an ICE car is going to burn down the underground car park and cause the entire building to collapse ?
Whats worse 1x eV that burns down an entire complex including the hospital or 10 ice cars that burn and destroy themselves and maybe the car next door ?
What do you think will happen when an EV takes out a shopping center in AU and melts the entire multi level car park ?
Pretty sure ZERO ice cars fires have done that because ICE doesnt burn that hot.
@CowFrogHorse: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8150535/review-urged-…
Firefighters concerned about risks of battery fires in underground carparks
but hey. i guess you know more than the canberra firies.
cow: Who says ICE cars cause 60x more fires ?
Its funny, you don't even bother to read the articles you post. Are you just looking at the 'head lines'? I guess you can't quote, so guessing so, but if you did read this one
https://mynrma.com.au/electric-vehicles/basics/understanding…
You would have read the bit that says this
A 2022 analysis by insurance company AutoinsuranceEZ showed that based on US-based National Transport and Safety Board data, ICE vehicles are 60 times more likely to catch fire than electric vehicles and hybrid vehicles are 138 times more likely to catch fire
So ICE is 60x more likely to catch fire than an EV.
The big difference is an ICE car is going to burn down the underground car park and cause the entire building to collapse ?
LOL I'll take things that won't happen Eddie.
Whats worse 1x eV that burns down an entire complex including the hospital or 10 ice cars that burn and destroy themselves and maybe the car next door ?
Please show me 1 EV that has done this anywhere in the world.
What do you think will happen when an EV takes out a shopping center in AU and melts the entire multi level car park ?
hahahaha Mate can you wind the FUD machine back from 11.
Pretty sure ZERO ice cars fires have done that because ICE doesnt burn that hot.
cough cough, 1500 cars burned at an airport recently. How many EVs have started something like that? Oh zero.
Firefighters concerned about risks of battery fires in underground carparks
but hey. i guess you know more than the canberra firies.
Sure firefighters have concerns, doesn't mean they are valid or right concerns.
I have concerns that ICE cars shouldn't be left in enclosed spaces as they are 60x more likely to catch fire than a EV. But I have a research article to back up those concerns, do the fire fighters?
You have provided a lot of articles from places that are using FUD reporting with very little to zero facts being applied into their statements.
@JimmyF: Yeh very safe.
How are the firies going to submerge an EV car on fire in an underground car park ?
https://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=9391
If any incident occurs involving an EV
Act quickly and make sure the parking brake is engaged and the vehicle is switched off before evacuating the vehicle of all passengers.
Keep clear of the vehicle and warn passers-by to keep at a safe distance (at least 30 metres), even if there is no visible smoke, vapours or flames.
Damaged electric vehicles (EVs)
An electric vehicle that has been involved in a collision, a fire, or has been submerged, must be treated with caution as the high voltage battery pack may be compromised. Damaged EV batteries may ignite hours, days, or even weeks after the initial incident.
@pegaxs: you seem very angry, wanting to confront everyone.. Someone known to me has a disable parking and we dont go sticking our nose into every windscreen to verify a permit.
What about when you stand up to wrong person and they sit you back down?
I hate this whole “if it doesn’t concern you, jog on” attitude people have.
You'll be happy to know there are loads of nosy self-righteous quick-to-judge people around these days.
The war in Ukraine doesn’t “impact” me personally
Sure it does, isn't that one of the excuses for our inflation?
You'll be happy to know there are loads of nosy self-righteous quick-to-judge people around these days.
You mean like the OP? :)
Pram parking bays are just to placate “mommies” who think walking 10 feet further to the door with a crotch goblin is their “hard work” for the day…
It's safer for young children, minimises the amount of time spent crossing through the parking area.
Yeah OK agree until u got to the pram parking. They also exist because people recognize that parents with young chidren need a bit more space to get in and out and tight spaces with little fingers is a recipe for disaster. And parents arent just mommies. In one single sentence you've shared that you are sexist and have a narrow empathy range only for things that fit within your 2 degrees of separation. Give yourself a pat!
They also exist because people recognize that parents with young chidren need a bit more space
There are many carparks to choose from that give you space if that is what you want.
The funny thing is, you claim they are 'bigger' spaces, but the ones at my shopping center are the same size as every other car space.
So yeah, I raise my eyebrows at 'pram' parking spots next to the doors, as many of the 'users' in these spaces don't have prams, the spaces are no bigger and you could say they are taking up space that could have been used for people who really need to be closer to the doors aka disabled spaces.
And parents arent just mommies. In one single sentence you've shared that you are sexist
I didn't put a gender in my first post about these spaces, you added that in your mind. So that would be your sexist slant on things not mine.
But you're right, I do lack empathy for the OP, who wasn't impacted by this as the OP didn't have a EV. They also didn't do anything about it at the time.
Did they also check every disabled car space to make sure everyone had a permit? How about the parm parking? Check every car had a car seat?
Or was this just a anti EV bashing post with a wrapper around it.
The pram parking spaces are not placed in the ideal places in the car park. They should actually be placed next to the trolley bays.
After shopping with a toddler, the parent loads the shopping into the car, then load bubs into their baby seat, then has to leave bubs alone in the car while the they walk half way across the car park to return the trolley. Not a good scenario. Yes, the can bring bubs with them to return the trolley, the then have to carry the back again. Kind of defeats the purpose of having parents with pram spots.
So keep walking and you suggest people shouldn't bring it up on the internet either ss that makes them gutless? Pretty much you just don't want to hear anyone say a thing if it doesn't match something you're interested.
Yeah man…. Whet is the point of this post? OP isn't going to do anything, the people on the internet either.
So its just a whine of its someone elses problem.
Next time don't tell me, leave a note or tell the center.
Sorry that was me. Thought the charging spots were wireless
Honest mistake, we are not there yet in Australia unfortunately
The fact that people feel they have to make these posts make me lose hope in humanity.
Why limit this discussion to EV parking spaces!? What about the 'Parents with Pram', 'Elderly/Senior Parking', 'Click and Collect'…
They too deserve the same level of discussion :p
(my sentiments are with @Drakesy above)
I thought covid would have shown you that all hope in humanity had been lost a long time ago.
oi bad enough we have ICE-holes.
Don't do it knowingly.
Council EV charging spots typically put a "P while EV Charging" sign basically meaning you can only park there while actively charging.
(And usually have an EV charger configured to charge $$ when you stay over 15mins after your charge is complete).
Councils can say what they want on a sign. Whether they police breaches or whether they should is another thing. I'd prefer no local govt so we can have better normal necessary law enforcement and CRIME PREVENTION, rather than having a bottomless unproductive,unaccountable,pseudo political trough draining rate payers cash.
I'd prefer no local govt so we can have better normal necessary law enforcement and CRIME PREVENTION, rather than having a bottomless unproductive,unaccountable,pseudo political trough draining rate payers cash.
So your roads, parks, garbage disposal, drainage street cleaning, paths, lighting are all a waste, but as long as you have crime prevention everything's good?
Don't know about you but i'd rather live in a managed area with police rather than an area with zero management but with police everywhere.
Nope they are not waste, but managed by incompetent expensive loads on ratepayers. Waste is a contracted thing and mainly run ex-state govt anyway.The services are great, the cost and quality of delivery is not.Councils role can and should be run by the state.We don't need three troughs when the 3rd is the worst performer.It's a springboard for politicians, and a playground for developers and others with vested interests.
There's a difference between management and control.Efficiency and sloth. Every year council rates go up, admin staff numbers and salaries go up,charges and rates go up. Does the service match it? If it does wherever you are gate the place.It's a unicorn.
The point about crime prevention is police are too reactive, not proactive enough.You don't necessarily need more cops, you need better more smarter cops. Being in the numbers needed at the places needed. eg QLD right now needs a lot more night patrols.
EV charging stations cost a lot of money. If a council were to provide enough charging stations for 1/4 of all cars in their area, they would be broke.
Putting a few in a local shopping center or council area is a stupid waste of money. Councils should not and do not run petrol stations or car mechanics, they shouldnt be doing the same for EV car.
Typical of the current entitled human plague. There's a higher % of AH in EV ownership ,though.
Is it "closer to the moral high ground" to ask questions like this online,though, knowing that nothing changes and all that happens is wasted (multiple types) of energy.
If it pisses you off OP, park YOUR halo wearing car across the non charging EVs and change the paradigm meaningfully.
Definitely not ethical. Should be illegal too.
Good news…in most states, it is. :D
You learn something new every day in OzBargain.
I have never in all my life before heard of a "dog in the manger".
Did you not have Uncle Arthur's Bedtime Stories as a kid?
Does tesla charge idle fees in Aus when the car finishes charging?
Not sure how they keep track of how many chargers are free or being used
Does tesla charge idle fees in Aus when the car finishes charging?
They do at super charger stations that are busy to encourage people to move on so the next person can charge. But if the site is empty, they don't. Rightly so too.
No
Are they putting charging stations near the entrance?
I understand why they'd put disabled parks near entrance, so I'm happy to leave them vacant.
I also understand why they put 15 minute parks near the entrance, and I'd never use them if I'm going to be longer.
But I don't see why someone who wants to charge their EV needs to park near the entrance… in fact I would suggest they could park down the road in a charging lot and get a shuttle to the shops (like airport parking).
So I have no issue with anybody using those parks. They need to move the chargers.
But I don't see why someone who wants to charge their EV needs to park near the entrance… in fact I would suggest they could park down the road in a charging lot and get a shuttle to the shops (like airport parking).
LOL, so could parents with prams too, but they are next to the entrance.
So I have no issue with anybody using those parks. They need to move the chargers.
It was a EV in a EV parking spot, the 'outrage' here is it wasn't GASP charging….
LOL, so could parents with prams too, but they are next to the entrance
I disagree. I should have included prams as another valid reason for premium parking. Do you really expect someone juggling kids and a pram to park a mile away?
It was a EV in a EV parking spot, the 'outrage' here is it wasn't GASP charging….
I have no idea what that is. What I'm saying is it's dumb to put EV charging (aka long stay) in parks normally reserved for handicapped, short-term shoppers and prams. I don't see a good reason for EVs to have reserved premium parking.
I disagree. I should have included prams as another valid reason for premium parking. Do you really expect someone juggling kids and a pram to park a mile away?
You can disagree, it your view mums with prams in their big SUVs need premium parking.
Prams have wheels, why can't they walk?
PS A mile isn't used in this country
I have no idea what that is. What I'm saying is it's dumb to put EV charging (aka long stay) in parks normally reserved for handicapped, short-term shoppers and prams. I don't see a good reason for EVs to have reserved premium parking.
Its clear then you have no idea about what you are outraged over, the EV charging spots are not spots that would have been disabled or pram spots ever.
They are near the door so people can move their car when done. Put them far away and they won't.
You can disagree, it your view mums with prams in their big SUVs need premium parking. Prams have wheels, why can't they walk?
Okay we agree to disagree on prams. Can we do the same as to whether EV charging parks should also be close to the entrance?
Its clear then you have no idea about what you are outraged over
I'm not outraged at all. I'm suggesting that anyone outraged at someone parking in front of an EV charger needs to chill.
EV charging spots are not spots that would have been disabled or pram spots ever. They are near the door
Contradictory much??
so people can move their car when done
EV drivers are such good citizens they will move their vehicle when charged… and presumably move to another park if not done shopping? Your credibility is slipping.
Put them far away and they won't.
If you were honest, you know that no one is going to move their car until they're done shopping. Since they have hours to make arrangements, it wouldn't be that inconvenient to book a lift to the charging lot down the road. If they were willing to move their car mid-shopping when charged, I'm sure EV drivers would be gracious enough to accept this instead of tying up premium parks.
I'm not outraged at all. I'm suggesting that anyone outraged at someone parking in front of an EV charger needs to chill.
Then scroll up, as I said the same. OP should have just keep walking.
Contradictory much??
Not at all, not every spot near the door is a disabled or pram spot. EV spots are normally ones that don't work for these parking spots due to pillars or not wide enough etc.
EV drivers are such good citizens they will move their vehicle when charged… and presumably move to another park if not done shopping? Your credibility is slipping.
They certainly won't be moving them if they have to get a bus like you wanted.
If you were honest, you know that no one is going to move their car until they're done shopping
Free EV charges at shopping centers, They most likely won't move until done. But then do people really spend hours at a shopping center? Unless watching a movie, I couldn't think of a worst place to 'hang out'.
Paid chargers, generally most will move once done. Even more so for the ones with idle fees!
as I said the same
Awesome, let's leave it as we agree except where we agree to disagree and move on
They certainly won't be moving them if they have to get a bus
No one needs them too, the can leave it there all they like
But then do people really spend hours at a shopping centre?
So why put an EV charger at the entrance rather than a 15 minutes or less zone
Are the charging stations shopping centers property? Makes sense to keep assets close to the building.
EV charging stations are greenwashing by the shopping centers etc.
They place them at the entrance for maximum visibility. Its not about doing the right or wrong thing its a stupid stunt.
The concept of EV charging stations doesnt scale. The grid wouldnt be able to support 100x charging stations in one place and secondly the cost also would be sustainable, the shopping cneter would go broke and would never spend tens of millions to support this.
Or, just maybe, they are near the building cause that's the most accessible power supply?
As ethical as able person parking at disabled spot, or leaving car parked for an hour at petrol bowser.
Illegal in several states already with fines up to $3000 AUD.
Shopping centers cant fine anyone, only the gov can fine someone, any more than you can fine someone who parks in front of your driveway.
I park anywhere except disabled parking bays, because I can't work it out anymore. We have parking for disabled (acceptable), parking for seniors, parking for parents, parking for EV's, parking for small cars, parking for cars with trailers. There are 1 or 2 other categories I can't recall, not to mention all the reserved and short term parking bays. After a couple laps Im like "f it this'll do".
words are hard, aren't they
ditto the big pictures they put on the ground
and all the different colours
would you like a mime to stand in front of each spot or do you reckon you could put all those things together and work it out like a grown up
There is no parking for EV's that I've seen. There's only charging bays. EV owners pay to use them, so it's not a free parking space at all.
If there is dedicated EV parking spaces that aren't a charging facility, I would not support that. I drive an EV.
I put this in same category as reserving parks for a carwash. Both should need to use the parks furthest away from the the entrance, if at all. Actually, I think they should get their own property for such purposes. e.g. my car service centre doesn't have reserved parking at the local shopping centre, they provide their own car park and a shuttle bus to take me to the shopping centre.
I'm okay to give up premium parks to disabled, short-time shoppers and those with prams, but not because someone wants to leave their EV there to charge, or because a carwash has bought some real estate from the shopping centre.
One of my local shopping centers has low emissions carpark (away from the entrance). They don't enforce it and it's basically a twincab showroom, so it serves no function other than to make the asphalt painters do more work to make it green.
Just park an EV blocking them in.
We need disabled and wheelchair parks separated. Wheelchair users need room to open the door all the way so need the larger space. If you have a permit for a disability but don't need a wheelchair you don't need a wider car park just one near the door for example
Spoken like someone who hasn't used a mobility walker, or crutches, or other aids on a daily basis.
If people have a permit for a disability, then you don't get to decide who 'needs' it based on your very limited worldview.
I once saw a Karen/Mary harassing some old guy who parked in disabled parking, with a permit, because he was "walking just fine"…
Probably similar ethics to taking your trolley back at the supermarket.
No, you should not park your EV in a charging bay when you're not charging.
If you have to ask, the answer is probably NO
Obviously not.
Just because you have a disability permit doesnt mean you have to use a disabled spot.
My uncle had a real bad car accident years ago he has good days and bad days on a good day he is happy to park further away his of the belief if he keeps the body moving as much as he can then his real bad days dont happen as often.
When he has a bad day he will use a disabled spot.
@DiscountForThee:
Empathy? LOL So was anyone impacted? Were there EVs waiting to use this spot? I'll hold my empathy for real causes thanks.
So was there even a charger there that wasn't used? Still waiting on that one.