Data from the National Transportation Safety Board showed that EVs were involved in approximately 25 fires for every 100,000 sold. Comparatively, approximately 1,530 gasoline-powered vehicles and 3,475 hybrid vehicles were involved in fires for every 100,000 sold.
gokgs 发表于 2024-06-19 00:09 Data from the National Transportation Safety Board showed that EVs were involved in approximately 25 fires for every 100,000 sold. Comparatively, approximately 1,530 gasoline-powered vehicles and 3,475 hybrid vehicles were involved in fires for every 100,000 sold.
Chat GPT: The perception that electric vehicles (EVs) are more prone to catching fire compared to internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles is not supported by data. Studies indicate that EVs have a significantly lower incidence of fires than ICE vehicles. According to AutoInsuranceEZ, for every 100,000 EVs, there are approximately 25 fires, compared to about 1,530 fires for every 100,000 ICE vehicles. Hybrids, interestingly, are even more fire-prone, with about 3,475 fires per 100,000 vehicles (Popular Science) (Electrek). In terms of fatalities, ICE vehicle fires result in a higher number of deaths compared to EV fires. ICE vehicles, due to their reliance on gasoline, which is highly flammable, are inherently more dangerous in the event of a fire. In 2020, vehicle fires accounted for 18% of civilian fire deaths in the US, with ICE vehicles being the primary contributors (Electrek). This discrepancy in public perception versus reality can be attributed to the novelty of EV technology and the media attention given to EV fires, which often highlight the dramatic nature of battery fires without providing context about their relative rarity compared to ICE vehicle fires (Popular Science). For more detailed statistics and insights, you can refer to the Popular Science and Electrek articles that discuss these findings in depth. https://electrek.co/2022/01/12/government-data-shows-gasoline-vehicles-are-significantly-more-prone-to-fires-than-evs/
dcbby 发表于 2024-06-19 18:32 Chat GPT: The perception that electric vehicles (EVs) are more prone to catching fire compared to internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles is not supported by data. Studies indicate that EVs have a significantly lower incidence of fires than ICE vehicles. According to AutoInsuranceEZ, for every 100,000 EVs, there are approximately 25 fires, compared to about 1,530 fires for every 100,000 ICE vehicles. Hybrids, interestingly, are even more fire-prone, with about 3,475 fires per 100,000 vehicles (Popular Science) (Electrek). In terms of fatalities, ICE vehicle fires result in a higher number of deaths compared to EV fires. ICE vehicles, due to their reliance on gasoline, which is highly flammable, are inherently more dangerous in the event of a fire. In 2020, vehicle fires accounted for 18% of civilian fire deaths in the US, with ICE vehicles being the primary contributors (Electrek). This discrepancy in public perception versus reality can be attributed to the novelty of EV technology and the media attention given to EV fires, which often highlight the dramatic nature of battery fires without providing context about their relative rarity compared to ICE vehicle fires (Popular Science). For more detailed statistics and insights, you can refer to the Popular Science and Electrek articles that discuss these findings in depth. https://electrek.co/2022/01/12/government-data-shows-gasoline-vehicles-are-significantly-more-prone-to-fires-than-evs/
gokgs 发表于 2024-06-19 00:09 Data from the National Transportation Safety Board showed that EVs were involved in approximately 25 fires for every 100,000 sold. Comparatively, approximately 1,530 gasoline-powered vehicles and 3,475 hybrid vehicles were involved in fires for every 100,000 sold.
Yes, you are correct. If the gasoline vehicles included in the study are generally older than the electric vehicles, the comparison may indeed be biased. Older vehicles, regardless of their fuel type, are more likely to experience issues that could lead to fires due to factors such as wear and tear, maintenance history, and outdated safety technologies. Here are some key points to consider: Age and Fire Risk: Older vehicles have had more time to accumulate mileage and experience mechanical issues, which can increase the risk of fires. Components like fuel lines, electrical systems, and engines degrade over time, which can contribute to higher fire risks in older vehicles. Study Bias: If the majority of gasoline vehicles in the study are older, while most electric vehicles are newer, the fire risk comparison might not be entirely fair. This discrepancy in vehicle age could artificially inflate the fire risk for gasoline vehicles relative to electric vehicles. Longitudinal Data Needed: To make a more accurate comparison, longitudinal data that tracks vehicles of similar ages and usage patterns over time would be ideal. As electric vehicles age, it will be important to monitor their fire incidence rates to see if they remain lower than those of gasoline vehicles. Current Findings: While current studies suggest that electric vehicles have a lower fire incidence rate than gasoline vehicles, these findings are based on the current fleet, which is skewed towards newer EVs. More comprehensive studies that control for vehicle age and usage would provide a clearer picture of the relative fire risks. In conclusion, while current data suggests that electric vehicles have a lower incidence of fires compared to gasoline vehicles, the potential age bias in the data must be taken into account. As electric vehicles age and accumulate more usage history, continued analysis will be necessary to determine if this trend holds true over the long term.
起火的电车里，逃生的比例和起火的油车比，有数据吗？ 感觉心里有点过不去，不敢买。国内电车占新车销售的一半了， 就想问下，大家都觉得被烧死这件事都不会发生在自己身上？
不要买！
自己看图
买几套防火服装加氧气罩 开车时候用 就比较放心了
我觉得中国电车的电池质量肯定有问题， 起火太多了。 美国的就没那么多。
据说死了以后灵魂还会继续受煎熬
还有冬天电池不续航！
有时候这种直觉不一定对啊
世界上任何一件事，都是有人完全放心，有人非常担心。担心的不去就好了。看能承受多大风险。炒股也是一个例子。能承受损失的去炒股，不能的老老实实存CD。
确实是。
不过我可能年纪大了，对直觉不敢轻易忽视，尤其是强烈的直觉，总觉得是冥冥中给我的提示，我要是你就先不选电车了。
那就别买了
选择那么多，干嘛找一个自己不放心的
听到过好几起了，前几年每年都有吧，还不包括逃掉了/人不在里面的情况。
这个数据有具体出处吗？它说非电车 5% 都会着火？5千辆每十万辆就是5辆每百辆，或者说500/1万辆 上面gokgs给的国内数据里，油车起火率也就 60/1万辆。所以这位网友是说美国的油车（非电车）比国内油车起火率高10倍？
我觉得你说的有道理，按起火数量 / 保有量 算起火率。那油车是多旧的车都算进来，还有改装的，新能源车那是都是新车啊。这些起火数据要能按车龄分开比较，应该比较有说服力。
这是官方数据， 不过我觉得都有问题。 是自燃， 还是碰撞起火， 碰撞还分是高速还是低速碰撞， 所以本身就很难统计。
我现在最担心的是停在车库， 自燃把房子都烧了， 美国有过这样的报道， 大概概率很低吧。 湾区满大街都是特斯拉。基本不需要什么 maintenance， 我记得只加过挡风玻璃洗涤剂， 换过小电池， 省心的很。
电车自燃把房子烧了这事，感觉就在这一两年，在附近有过新闻。。。。
这个电车起火比率，比后面gopkg说的美国的比率低。。。
这是啥道理，这两件事怎么可能是关联的。
不要买三元锂电池版的，买LFP 磷酸铁锂电池版的 Model 3/Y 应该是2024年开始改LFP 磷酸铁锂电池版
保护环境，买油车吧
https://electrek.co/2022/01/12/government-data-shows-gasoline-vehicles-are-significantly-more-prone-to-fires-than-evs/
中国政府强推电车，数据不能信
我有电车，我也不相信这些数据。 美国的电车相对还是比较安全的。 概率总是有的， 不应该很大。
This
這個數據是有問題
每十萬賣出 是指去年的賣出
但 燃油車 累積的是三十年的車
電車 兩年
意思每次开车都穿吗！
特別是某些號稱 質量比容量 單位質量能裝的電容量
超高的 電池
靠犧牲結構安全與冷卻來獲得高質能比
不可取啊
哦，知道你住Santa Clara了
美国电车好多用的都是中国电池吧，连Tesla有些型号都是用中国电池。不懂就不懂,别装专家。
哈哈， 你是真专家， 我是假的。 你不会觉得 made in china 的 iphone 跟 小米手机质量是一样的吧？
愚昧的要命。