Graham Butcher

What a faff, and what happens if your battery does not enough charge to do all that and get you to a charger?

And if you don't have a phone?, I know people who don't have a basic mobile phone, let alone a smartphone.

I'm still calling BS, it's an old ploy produce graphs etc to convey whatever story line they want us to believe, knowing full well that the average person will go along with it, they know the average person in the street has no way of testing things for themselves. We've been there in modern history, in most peoples lifetime with the diesel scandal and the pip etc.

Are they?? But CO2 is a good gas as well and essential for lots of things in the plant and also aquatic life and the more we chop down forests, burn them and give up the land to becoming large slabs of concrete and tarmac etc, the worse we will be as a result of an increase in CO2 as more plants which thrive on it and give us back oxygen, will be lost.

This is just BS, using the https://aqicn.org/map/world/ it is clearly not the case at all, the bad air is mostly coming from the burning of gas used in heating, cooking and industrial processes etc. Targeting the car is just a convenient tool, as it serves another purpose as well, raising revenue. Pollution from ICE has fallen dramatically in just the last 30 years and will continue to fall as ICE get ever more efficient.

Yeah, 3 to a seat is a bit too much and this from a country where they have to have such huge bumpers on their cars too.

This actual fire was on 27th Nov 2924 and was blamed on a diesel heater and although, I had my doubts I went with what was the official verdict. However, upon further investigation, that verdict has since revised and it seems that my doubts were correct all along.

Exactly, this reinforces my belief that the car is being wrongly targeted and blamed for both Global warming and air quality. This is partly what I have saying when I was referencing Air Pollution in World: Real-time Air Quality Index Visual Map which to my very clearly demonstrated this when zooming in onto the various air quality monitoring sites in the London at street level and then cross-referencing that with Google Earth street level photos, there are high readings in areas that are predominantly residential and or very close to fast food outlets, or near to London Underground station entrances or ventilation shafts for the underground and yet right on the North Circular at Wembley, which is always extremely busy with heaver traffic 3 or 4 lanes of it and loads of jams, the readings are much lower and in the green safe zones? This area is also less residential and more commercial, with lots of retail (Tesco and Ikea etc) yet many firmly believe the false line of TFL and the London Mayor are telling them about air quality is all down to ICE, it is not, it is more about raising revenue and other undisclosed things.

Please don't judge everybody by your standards, the info I gave above was relating to posts made months ago and was I thought correct. I'm pretty sure that I saved a copy of that document but as my computer is playing up, and i Have had loads of files that have just disappeared from my hard drive, I have had to splash out almost £500 buying replacement parts to repair it with, would you like to see a receipt of that expenditure with Amazon to prove that it is not a lie??? I have already given you a possible explanation as to why I cannot retrace my footsteps and get another copy of it, but you can choose to believe it or not it's upto you, but you do not go round saying that I'm a lier, because that is something I'm not and does it not also go against the standards set for this forum???? Sod it, I'll post a copy of the order and dispatch status then perhaps you will kindly shut up with your accusations.

The so-called green ferry as it turns out is not green after all then. Now when you consider the amount of Methane being produced by us humans and animals alike plus all the rotting vegetation and also from landfill sites, and that it is 28 times more potent than CO2, which plants do actually thrive on and they also digest it and give us back pure Oxygen, it makes me wonder yet again if we are being sold this net-zero for other reasons after all, and no, I'm wearing a hat made out of tin foil, just like I always said, I don't take everything the authorities tell us as being 100% gospel truth. For instance, the heavy use of fertilizers on soil actually has a harmful effect on the soils ability to act as a Methane sink thus ensuring a higher level of Methane in the atmosphere and so it is claimed in the ferry article that Methane has 28 times the global warming effect and thus 28 times the climate change effect as well, so it could well be that the CO2 emissions from ICE and other forms of fossil fuel being used for all kinds of energy demands is NOT the smoking gun that we have been told it is after all then, who knew that? Methane Emissions - Farm Carbon Toolkit

It wasn't just pagers, they even did mobile phones, but the point I was making was that even the most innocent of things can be used for other purposes and with data tracking could be used to pretty good effect.

Now here's a thing, as long as the cars have computers and GPS's on board, they can track your movements and that data could potentially be made available to anyone if the price was right, private companies, governments and even foreign powers who could make use of it militarily for example. The Israelis were able to turn ordinary pager etc into weapons that effectively became small personal bombs that killed some of their enemies.

Could it be that those tin foil hat wearers, who have been labelled as conspiracy theorists, have been right all the time?? They have always claimed that the electric push, the cameras that track us allegedly purely to determine if our cars enter certain zones etc, the mobile phones that loads of us carry are there for other reasons? This data tracking of course is not with EV's, think about all the electronic tech that even ICE vehicles have onboard these days, they could all be tracking our movements. Smartphones for instance all have cameras and microphones as well as GPS system built-in. My own phone for instance has a feature that listens to music being played and identifies it on screen, it is always active, even when the phone is locked.

Hopefully I will be able to go out soon and take some shots with my new Canon L series white lens I got from my sons for Christmas.

@Ootohere Now this is fascinating as if you have the facility to view the video on a decent large screen (phone or tablet does not hack it) then you can stop the video at a point where he shows the top page and also the second page, then his letter is entirely different to the one that he showed in the previous video that he downloaded from a Porsche forum. In the original letter, it mentions no charging under a cover, no charging beyond 80% and did also state not to park it undercover or adjacent to buildings. His letter makes none of these points whatsoever. He also said that he had again spoken to his insurers following the receipt of the letter I think, and he said that they told him that because of the letter they will not be renewing his cover from next month regardless of the letter not stating what the other letter said. If you can't do the above, then I can and can enlarge it and post it here for all to see the differences between the letter that others received and the one he received. I would not call him a liar at all at this stage of the game, I prefer to give him the benefit of doubt, after all he even posted the recording between him and the insurance company in his video, and I'm sure that if that is not the truth that they will seek to clarify the position in a court of law in case he goes further and names them. Let me know if you would like me to copy, enlarge and repost both letters to aid clarification of the points of reference. Edit as my PC is struggling a little at the minute, its like me, getting on in years and slower, loosing some bits of information along the way, I have orderd a new motherboard, hard drive, ram and memory so will be rebuilding it over the next days and so will be restricted to phone only and I hate them with a passion give me a proper decent PC anyday. So with that in mind I have taken screen prints of letters that were referred in his 2 videos about the recalls and subsequent insurance company allegedly saying that will be insuring him in the future, the letters different and are exactly as he read them out, here goes.

Perhaps I didn't word my reply to George correctly then, so how about No I have not even began to look for it again, and TBH I doubt that it is currently published anywhere where the public can access it as it goes against the narrative doesn't it with their Net Zero policy and big push towards getting ICE vehicles off the roads. I thought I had posted a link to it, but maybe I was confused. I have just tried to find the link again on Google but all I get now is links to Westminster car public car parks operated by Westminster Council, these are not exclusively for government officials and their cars, so maybe Google had a glitch and passed me last time directly to the UK Governments own internal intranet server, who knows?

No names, no pack drill and no they aren't the ones you mention and neither are you one of them either.

Sorry, but my point is that it is staggering just how some people are ignoring that EV's do pose a significant increased risk to property and life and limb over and above that with ICE vehicles. And yet we are still pushing ahead with them before we have mitigated the risks, cart before the horse in other words. There are many here who constantly bury their heads in the sand and do everything that they can to deny this is the truth. It does NOT make me a EV hater, but someone who can see through smoke and mirrors and thinks that before pushing ahead with Net Zero at tail pipe, we need to do more. Yes IO do think that given time we have a battery does not have the current problems, but shouldn't, we wait until have reached that goal before deciding on the banning of ICE vehicles?

The thing with EV's is not that they are any more prone to fires than ICE vehicles, but if and when the batteries do catch fire, the consequences are so much more serious and poses greater risks for damage and fatalities than ICE vehicles do, can we all at least accept that fact and stop tearing each other up. If that was not a fact, then the likes of Arup would not have been commissioned to compile a report and recommended guidelines for the developers of car parks etc to follow.

Conclusion extracted from the above site. Conclusion While it’s difficult to draw conclusions about the Fremantle Highway fire and others from previous incidents, a look back at similar incidents does provide some insight and background about the dangers associated with transportation of new and used vehicles on roll-on/roll-off ships. With the growing popularity of electric vehicles, it will be interesting to see how or if rules and regulations evolve to meet new challenges associated with transporting them by ship.

I did say car transporting ships, not cargo ships etc, I don't recall that many major fires on car transporting ships that resulted in the loss of the ship, either by way of sinking or by way of being scrapped like the Fremantle Highway in 2023.

The second video that @Ootohere kindly shared, has a number of flaws, all of which I have, and many other interested parties pointed out as misinformation. Similarly, the first video also pointed out some of those flaws. It is also worthy of mention that we have been transporting ICE vehicles all over the globe via special ships for decades now, but it is really only in the last few years that we have a multitude of such fires onboard ships, with many ships being lost as a result of the fires. These ships were all carrying both EV and ICE vehicles, doesn't that seem at odds when we have all those decades relatively free of such events?

None of this is new, there is a copy of that guide that Arup produced already in this thread, which I do believe I put there. Arups is one of the many consulting engineering companies that I have worked with for around 40 years, mainly in the London area as well. Interesting to hear the consultant confirm precisely what I said about the fire blanket not being the ideal solution in the real world, along with the water tank for immersing the vehicle, also not always suitable or easily transportable to the scene of the fire. Also the PSS person also pointed out the fact that in the demonstrations of the fire blanket, the batteries were not on fire. It also endorses the points I've already raised about fires on car transport ships, CO2 flooding does not stop the fires, fire blankets are not suitable because there is no space to deploy it either, and water as was mentioned is not effective either.

No I have not even began to look for it, and TBH I doubt that it is published anywhere where the public can access it as it goes against the narrative doesn't it with their Net Zero policy and big push towards getting ICE vehicles off the roads.

The other thing with mainstream EV's is that they also tend to have smaller HV batteries as the cars themselves are both lighter and more efficient in the way that they use energy thus need smaller batteries, so that becomes an advantage if problems ever were to arise.