Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Chevrolet Volt Fire Prompts Investgation Into Batteries


    gallery_10485_267_846364.png

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has opened an investigation into the safety of lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles after a Chevrolet Volt caught on fire after a crash test three weeks earlier.

    The agency has asked all manufacturers who currently have electric vehicles on the road or plan to introduce one to provide information on the protocols they have established for discharging and handling their lithium-ion batteries, including how to lower risk of a fire. This is to

    NHTSA said it had investigated an incident involving a fire in a Chevy Volt after a crash test on May 12. The test involved a Chevrolet Volt crashing into a pole which caused the battery pack in the center tunnel and rear seat to crack. Then, NHTSA followed procedure to put the car on a rotisserie and rotate it 90 degrees every five minutes to see any fluid leakage. Coolant leaked out of the battery pack but the components stayed put.

    Three weeks after the test, the Volt caught on fire at NHTSA's storage facility in Wisconsin. NHTSA said the damage caused the fire.

    After the news, both NHTSA and General Motors both independently replicated the crash test and rotation. In both crashes, neither one could reproduce the conditions.

    GM spokesman Greg Martin said if NHTSA had followed certain protocols after the crash test, there would have been no fire.

    "We've developed very stringent safety protocols on the disposal and safe handling of the battery packs on the Chevy Volt. Those obviously were not followed in this case. GM also has also been unable to replicate the incident."

    NHTSA in a statement today said,

    “As manufacturers continue to develop vehicles of any kind -- electric, gasoline, or diesel -- it is critical that they take the necessary steps to ensure the safety of drivers and first responders both during and after a crash, Based on the available data, NHTSA does not believe the Volt or other electric vehicles are at a greater risk of fire than gasoline-powered vehicles. In fact, all vehicles -- both electric and gasoline-powered -- have some risk of fire in the event of a serious crash.”

    The agency says the information from automakers will be used to inform emergency responders, tow-truck operators, salvage yards, and consumers about the risks and how to handle an EV in a accident.

    We'll be keeping a close eye on this story.

    Source: Bloomberg, Detroit News, Green Car Reports, Jalopnik

    Statement from GM on Page 2


    GM Statement in Response to NHTSA Investigation

    DETROIT – The following statement can be attributed Jim Federico, General Motors chief engineer for electric vehicles:

    “First and foremost, I want to make this very clear: the Volt is a safe car. We are working cooperatively with NHTSA as it completes its investigation. However, NHTSA has stated that based on available data, there’s no greater risk of fire with a Volt than a traditional gasoline-powered car.

    “Safety protocols for electric vehicles are clearly an industry concern. At GM, we have safety protocols to depower the battery of an electric vehicle after a significant crash.

    “We are working with other vehicle manufacturers, first responders, tow truck operators, and salvage associations with the goal of implementing industry-wide protocols.”

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Concerns me a bit working in the collision industry. Makes me want to keep them out of the shop for concern of not following protocol to the letter.

    I don't know why this got voted down... its totally true. There were several stories on the news today, and the reporters explained that this impacts the collision industry and salvage industry more than the end user. I think its a valid concern, at this point, to err on the side of caution, because no body shop needs their shop burned to the ground, losing a bunch of other customers' cars in the process... and our environment doesn't need anymore junkyard fires.

    Lithium batteries are not like lead acid, where the steel piercing the battery pack vaporizes after shorting the cells... instead the Lithium ion elements go into thermal runaway, until the unit catches fire... regardless if its a Prius, Volt or Leaf.

    Sounds like they didn't dispose of the battery pack properly.

    Well, no... typical of NHTSA, they saved the wreck for further study. Now they know not to do that.

    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It was voted down because some greenie doesn't think about what happens... when green turns to a charred black and a livelihood is gone. What am I going to do, pick flowers for a living?

    • Disagree 4
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't drive a tow truck, I work in a bodyshop. We are not "first responders". This fire loss occurred a good while after the crash test... you know, when a car is likely sitting inside a bodyshop, torn down for a damage estimate.

    For something weird like this, I'd consult Alldata, I assume GM supplied them with the necessary info... but it's still daunting when one realizes how dangerous all electrified cars are after certain crashes. I do know that every stinkin' Prius we've worked on goes dead after being parked for several days, always need a jump box.

    If a gasoline-powered car is going to burn, it will do so at the scene as the fuel system is compromised and a spark or hot surface ignites the fuel. With these electric jobbies, the idea that degradation over several days can lead to fire is a legitimate concern.

    Edited by ocnblu
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    GM already put out a first responders information guide on the Volt many, many months ago. I have a copy that is too large in size to post here, but can email to anyone that would like it.

    I have a copy of that, as well. Maybe you guys should read it. It tells you about what cables to cut, where the Manual Service Disconnect is, etc... but NOWHERE does it mention that a pierced battery pack may cause a fire... either immediately, or in three weeks time.

    Time for greenie to rate me down for speaking the truth.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't drive a tow truck, I work in a bodyshop. We are not "first responders". This fire loss occurred a good while after the crash test... you know, when a car is likely sitting inside a bodyshop, torn down for a damage estimate.

    For something weird like this, I'd consult Alldata, I assume GM supplied them with the necessary info... but it's still daunting when one realizes how dangerous all electrified cars are after certain crashes. I do know that every stinkin' Prius we've worked on goes dead after being parked for several days, always need a jump box.

    If a gasoline-powered car is going to burn, it will do so at the scene as the fuel system is compromised and a spark or hot surface ignites the fuel. With these electric jobbies, the idea that degradation over several days can lead to fire is a legitimate concern.

    Just because it works differently than how you are used to doesn't make it "bad."

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just because it works differently than how you are used to doesn't make it "bad."

    I don't think anyone here is describing this as "bad" technology... but this is real problem with these battery packs and the car makers have obviously not informed enough people to the dangers of Lithium Ion batteries... otherwise, the NHTSA would have taken the appropriate action to protect the wreck.

    What is the appropriate action? Honestly, I don't see anyone suggesting a course of action. Removal of the battery pack immediately in _any_ accident for inspection? What if its damaged internally? Immediate recycling of the battery pack? Who even takes these yet? In any case, in order to reduce the damage of possible fire, the battery pack is required to be quarantined. That's space that costs money, if its a parking spot, a warehouse or a container being shipped overseas full of battery packs to be recycled.

    Obviously, this is a problem for the Volt first because it has the biggest battery pack... and therefore is most likely to be damaged. GM needs to ensure EVERYONE including owners, tow truck drivers, body shops, recyclers and used car lots to know the risk.

    Quite frankly, GM, all along has towed the party line of "electric cars are safe, safe, safe"... and that is somewhat misleading.

    Are other Li Ion battery devices being irresponsible? Sure... look at the exploding Dells a couple years ago... and Dell still does not really tell people about the dangers of damaging a battery pack, aside from a couple questionably understandable gyphs on the pack itself. Luckily, nobody has taken a shank to the laptop recently.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Posts

    • I was upgraded in a rental contract and, while going up by one category is not a big deal, getting to try out the new hybrid Camry was somewhat of a big deal.  The latest and current Camry only features hybrid powertrains.  The base 2.5 liter 4-cylinder engine, which was previously naturally aspirated, continues forward, but is assisted by an electric motor.  To make the powering on and off work, a CVT is now the standard transmission, when Camry had an excellent 8-speed automatic transmission for many years.  This vehicle had front wheel drive, but AWD is also available.  The V6 engine and ICEs are no longer available. Getting used to this car doesn’t take much time.  Having already driven another rented hybrid – a Honda Accord – all I needed to know is that turning the key does not fire up an engine, but makes the car ready to move in EV mode, at least initially. With 2.5 liters, the Camry pulls away nimbly and with agility, even with a minimally feathered pedal.  It doesn’t take much.  It’s fun to watch the centered power display setting move between eco and power modes.  If stomped on, the engine responds very quickly.  Surprisingly, stomping on it produces a more notable than expected engine hum.  The cabin remains mostly quiet and handling is predictable, neither firm nor vague, with some rougher pavement making it less quiet.  The transmission feels very much like a CVT, but a well behaved one.  Still, drivers with old school tastes can lament the absence of the very last slick shifting 8-speed automatic that came standard in the Camry.  I know I do.  However, the current CVT behaves well because it doesn’t have that “stuck” feeling when pushed, but the spool is more of an exhaust node than the winding out and high rpm droning caused by the variable gearing. The Camry’s exterior was freshened up and they worked off the last model.  It’s a compendium of small changes that, together, amount to a lot.  The front lights are narrower and cleaner.  The “appliance” grille is more understated than it once was.  (Sadly, it’s the more expensive versions where the grille is more flared, and even overworked.)  The rear lights are thinned out, complete with a boomerang effect, as they wrap around the rear fender edge and add to the horizontal look of the rear lip and the monolithic bumper panel.  Also, the almost retro, and not too effective, sweep of the rear pillar (think ‘72 Caprice coupe) is gone and the side profile of the windows is cleaner, perhaps a larger rendition of what was done with the Corolla.  Most of the vantage points look better than those of the previous Camry. Inside, the Camry is also much improved.  The dashboard is organized in cleaner volumes.  The dash has a simple main instrument pod.  In its center is a round dial, whereby the upper part displays the speed and eco/power, and the lower part, through toggling, provides other information – direction, tire pressure, trip information and mileage, or even graphics of the flow of energy involving the engine and the battery.  There is no dedicated tachometer; however, the temperature and fuel gauges remain.  Around the main circle are small digital readouts for the exterior temperature, the time, the odometer, and the remaining range.  Filling up this hybrid showed close to 500 miles of range.  Not only that, the fuel cap is on the driver’s side and, like the trunk, they can be remotely opened by buttons in the interior. That said, there is none of that capless fuel filler stuff! Being a Camry LE meant the lower grade fixtures inside.  Sadly, this meant a urethane steering wheel.  Sometimes, a mere leather steering wheel imparts the feeling of better handling and a smoother ride.  It’s that equipment choices and groupings seem to work together to give a vehicle its feel. The LE seats are nicely upholstered in a tougher, durable fabric with slightly contrasting parts.  The front headrests can scoot all the way down and they actually point forward so the driver and passenger can use them without having to lean their heads all the way back.  Headrests for rear seat passengers are integrated into the seating and do not have features to adjust them. The infotainment system is on its screen which is engaged to the dash, but moved slightly forward, and creates a cleaner look because it does not go up over the top of the cowl.  Fortunately, it remains a touch screen.  The functions are easy to work with, but I had a little bit of finicky interactions with Bluetooth and Android Auto.  Climate control has toggles instead of dials and they are easy to work with.  I will only say that the center vents of the climate control system do not work that quickly and powerfully.  Beneath this small panel are the cubby, a charging pod for a phone, and the flat console surface for the shift lever.  I found the console a little high for my taste.  Possibly to accommodate the new mechanical set-up, there is no storage cubby underneath the console as one sees on larger GM products, for example – both SUVs and even the last-gen Buick LaCrosse.  However, the console box is amply sized. In addition to being able to look over the hood, visibility is commendable all the way around.  Except for being a little shoehorned into the Camry’s cockpit, the front of the cabin feels spacious and the legroom is also good.  (I had to push the lever to get the seats to move upward, which provided a view over the top of the hood, as evidenced by seeing the paint color, and which I prefer.)  They have retained good cabin space in the rear of the cabin.  Also, the trunk has a decent amount of usable capacity for this genre and for having kept this sweeping roofline.  I again want to state how pleasing it was to control the trunk, in addition to the fuel door, from a bar of buttons on a panel at the lower left part of the dashboard rather than on the floor near the door.  There are 5 functions and they were thoughtful about putting the (auto) lights control onto this bar, and all the way to the left, such that it can easily be noticed from behind the steering wheel.  The new Camry shows a lot of thought as to how the driver connects to the car through its controls and functions, and this is one of the areas where this Camry shines. While I didn’t calculate fuel mileage, I know that I added only 3.5 gallons of regular unleaded fuel to cover one jaunt of about 160 miles of mixed driving.  This seems close to the EPA estimate. The little green EV icon shone quite a bit. I imagine that this is a very easy car to live with over the long haul.  For Camry, this powertrain is obviously a new combination, but it’s technology that Toyota and other Asian marques have worked with for quite a while.  I mostly took note that, apart from the major powertrain change, there is the evident synergy of the many small changes that make this a more nicely packaged vehicle than the last Camry. - - - - - PHOTOS FORTHCOMING
    • The BYD Han interior does look really good.  Shame the outside looks like a 2-generations-ago Civic.
    • No one cares about that amount of horsepower in this class. These are chauffeur driven vehicles. Up until electrics came around, most were trundling around with 2.0T 4-cylinders or diesels.  While Genesis is still relatively new to us in the the U.S., they've made such strides on interior quality that I'd put them up against MB dollar for dollar. The nicest of the Chinese EVs sedans, the NIO ET7 is a pretty good looking car though I kinda think it looks like a Model-3 had it's way with a Buick Envista. It would do really well in the US up against the Teslas, but it is still not playing in the luxury ballpark with Genesis (or Benz or Audi) when it comes to design and materials.  Low end EQE Sedan rival? Sure. G90 rival? No.
    • Well 25% tariff added to it, which makes a G90 like $125,000, and probably dead in the water in the US.  The Chinese have luxury cars with over 1,000 hp for less than the price of a G90.  I don't know that they are really going to compete there either.  Unless they come up with some  next gen EV tech and have full self driving and impeccable build quality or something.
    • The thing is that Panera offers a better laptop and hot drink environment than does Starbucks and they cash in on that.  It's "space rental." The tab for a HALF chicken avocado chipotle sandwich and a small CUP of baked potato soup (both good, not great) was absurd.  Coffee, tea, and lemonade are roughly the same. I go there because it's near a friend's condo and it's better for having a discussion than a fairly nice Starbucks nearby.  A Starbucks has to have an excellent interior for me to go there and pay their now crazy prices for coffee and tea.
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search