All of those people producing tables etc, from official bodies like paid for consultancies by various governments from around the world in the pursuit of getting net-zero, so the pushing of a narrative that electric vehicles is the way to achieve that and hence the big push towards a total ban on the sale of petrol and diesel cars by 2035 and in the UK, a lower date of 2030, are presenting misleading information.
I have been stating for some time that I believe we are foolishly chucking everything at the electric utopia theory when it should be considered as an alternative only with a free market choice only. We should be examining other alternatives at the same time, such as reducing engine sizes in both capacity and power outputs, seeing as in most parts of the civilised world it is impossible to use the available power and performance of these big powerful engines.
Seeing as this thread is all about fires and as mentioned above, we are being fed duff information, which the critical thinker should have been able to see through all the smoke and mirrors, when they come out with statements and claims that ICE vehicles are many times more likely to catch fire than electric vehicles, therefore EV vehicles are way safer than ICE ones and that I should just accept that as a true fact and that I'm a doom and gloom merchant with extreme bias against electric vehicles. To which I counter that of course there will be more ICE vehicles involved in fires because of their numbers on the road being far greater, coupled with their ages are also considerably older and older vehicles are more prone to failures of all kinds, so that kind of makes perfect sense and I always thought 10 years plus years was when they start the downward decline and becoming more likely to be a fire risk as they lose value and repair costs could be more than the vehicle is worth, so corners tend to get cut. As the vehicles gets even older, their value tends to increase and the vehicles become classics and their owners then can see that the better ones are worth spending money on and restoring them to almost new condition as they become valuable assets.
This analysis of fires in parking buildings, carried out in New Zealand, nicely re-enforces the above and was pre EV vehicles, which really helps my theory. It was done from 1995 to 2003 and this link takes you to this report Analysis of vehicle fire statistics in New Zealand parking buildings - CORE Reader and the graph and data on pages 11 and 12 it clearly demonstrates that the number of fires dramatically increases when the vehicles reach 11 to 15 years old and once they get past that age they suddenly start getting to roughly the same as that of newer vehicles, which fits my theory perfectly.
Now we currently do not have electric cars of that age on our roads, so when these claims that state electric vehicles have extremely low odds of catching fire when compared to their ICE counterparts, they are NOT comparing apples with apples, instead they are making sure that the net-zero narrative is not being derailed, and hoping that by the time they reach that age, that engineers will have solved fire hazards and mitigated the risks to similar levels of ICE vehicles and that includes the hazmat hazards also being contained to a similar level.
I have been saying that the information being put out is flawed, and we are being hoodwinked, and we need to be aware of this ourselves.