[Plantagenet]

I said your claim that insurance companies have made a recent change to their policies to start SCRAPPING EVs with damaged batteries was made up. And I stand by that.

Thats utter nonsense.

Again, I can't tell if you are being dishonest or if you just don't understand what you are reading.

First of all, this isn't my claim.

This is the claim of reporter after reporter after automotive expert after reporter in article after article about this problem. I read those articles, and like a normal person (which perhaps you aren't) I took note when the reporters and experts cited in those new articles all say this is a new problem.

EVs are exploding in popularity now and shouldn't be a surprise that new problems are appearing with the spread of this new technology. This happens with all new technologies.

AND there have been a spate of recent news articles about this problem, several of which I linked to and quoted, AND ALL THESE ARTICLES SAY this is a new problem.

AND since I know you have problems with reading comprehension, I tried to make this clear for you by directly quoting, with the quote highlighted IN LARGE AND BOLD FONT so you couldn't miss it, a recognized expert in automotive risk analyses saying that this was a "WHOLE NEW PROBLEM."

Did you miss somehow miss all that?

Really....you need to get a grip. We're all just having a conversation here. Your personal attacks on me or on other posters isn't conducive to friendly discussion. It turns out that you and I and other people can actually all have different opinions about things. And it's not the end of the world......thats just how things are.

------------------------

OK.....hopefully we are past that..... now here's another "new" issue that these article raise......because the insurers have decided not to insure EVs after even minor accidents, insuring EVs is becoming more expensive then insuring comparable ICE vehicles.

AND PLEASE NOTE....THIS IS THE NEWS REPORTS I LINKED TO ABOVE SAY. (Jeez....its so boring having to explain the most basic and obvious things to people who should know these things without having it explained to them........but ok.......some people need everything explained to them.........)

So back to the insurance cost problem with EVs. LETS do a thought experiment......imagine a month old EV and a month old ICE vehicle both get in minor accidents.....the Ice vehicle gets repaired for, say, $5000, which the insurance company finds acceptable, and the ICE car gets repaired and continues on down the road for another 10 years but the insurance company says it won't insure the EV because the minor accident might make it more likely to spontaneously combust, and the whole $75,000 EV gets scrapped and shredded.

It just seems outrageous to me that the EV gets scrapped after a minor accident. Its almost crazy. There is the massive waste of money and materials and the huge carbon production that never gets offset when the EV gets shredded. But it doesn't stop there....the destruction of EVs after minor accidents will have an effect on the overall cost of driving all EVs by driving up insurance rates.

Obviously when the next EV owner try to get insurance coverage the insurance company is definitely going to charge that next driver a higher premium, because their data will show a significantly greater risk of the entire EV being scrapped and shredded after even a minor accident.


EV insurance rates are going to be HIGHER then those for comparable EVs because insurance companies won't pay for repairs on EVs that get in minor accidents due to an increased likelihood of spontaneous combustion

Cheers!

[kublikhan]

Again, I can't tell if you are being dishonest or if you just don't understand what you are reading.

First of all, this isn't my claim.

EVs are exploding in popularity now and shouldn't be a surprise that new problems are appearing with the spread of this new technology. This happens with all new technologies.

AND there have been a spate of recent news articles about this problem, several of which I linked to and quoted, AND ALL THESE ARTICLES SAY this is a newly developing problem.

AND I directly quoted, with the quote IN LARGE AND BOLD FONT so you couldn't miss it, a recognized expert in automotive risk analyses saying that this was a "WHOLE NEW PROBLEM."

Did you miss that?

*Sigh* Let's try this again. You rejected my data on EV salvage rates because it only went up to 2022, correct? And your justification for that rejection was "A WHOLE NEW PROBLEM" that started in 2023, correct? Well when they said this was a whole new problem, they mean that it was a new problem in that ICE vehicles don't have this problem. Not that the issue just started happening in 2023. How do I know this? Well I already posted multiple articles going back years describing this problem such as this one:

2019 - Q: Why are Tesla cars so difficult to repair after a minor accident? Is it company policy to ensure cars are scrapped after even a minor accident as you see many lightly damaged ones at Copart?
A: The sad truth is Yes. They are great cars, but if you wreck it, there is a great chance it will be totaled. You see, damaged Teslas sell for 10’s of thousands as a wrecked car. The insurance company uses a basic formula to determine when to total a car. If the cost of repairs, plus the salvage value of the car is more than the cost of declaring it a total loss, then it’s a total loss. So, if repairs are 15 grand, and the salvage value is 10 grand, but the value of the car is only $20 grand, they will total it since it’s cheaper. This is true of any car make or model.

Why are Tesla cars so difficult to repair after a minor accident?

In addition, Thatcham Research, the ones who made the quote about the "WHOLE NEW PROBLEM", has been talking about this problem for years. Here is a link on their website from back in 2021 talking about this issue. So clearly, they did not mean the issue just started happening in 2023:

2021 - CREATING A SUSTAINABLE REPAIR FRAMEWORK FOR ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES
Electric Vehicles are likely to bring societal benefits, but there is also the need for a sustainable repair framework to be developed to ensure their safe, efficient, and timely repair.

While EVs are no more difficult to repair than cars with internal combustion engines (ICE), the Repairability of batteries is a key element to successful adoption of electric vehicles. Without it, there is no sustainable means of managing them through the existing repair workflow. Batteries often account for more than 50 per cent of the vehicle price, with sometimes even minor damage resulting in battery replacement. However, options for recycling and repurposing in the UK are scarce, and low salvage values are failing to mitigate cost. Meanwhile, gaps in repair industry skills and capability are challenging how EVs are handled and their safe and timely repair.

Thatcham Research: Creating A sustainable Repair Framework For Zero Emission Vehicles

Thus, given that this issue did not just start happening in 2023, there is no justification for you to reject the salvage data I posted earlier.

insuring EVs is becoming more expensive then insuring ICE vehicles.

That too has been going on for years:

2017 - AAA is raising insurance premiums for the Tesla Model S and Model X based on data indicating higher claim frequencies and higher average costs for claims, according to Automotive News. Premiums for Tesla electric cars could increase by up to 30 percent, the insurer said. AAA made its decision after noticing abnormally-high costs for Teslas in its own data.

AAA Raises Tesla Insurance Premiums, Citing ‘Higher-Than-Average’ Claim Rates

2019 - Insurance experts say electric cars can attract higher premiums.

Are electric cars more expensive to insure?

2021 - An electric vehicle will generally cost you more to insure. That’s because electric vehicles cost more outright and are more expensive to repair. The insurance company may deem you low risk to file a claim, but if anything happens to your car, it’s going to mean costly repairs. So your premiums will be set high to reflect that risk.

I’m Buying an Electric Vehicle — Will My Insurance Rates Go Up?

2022 - Higher claim costs due to expensive batteries, in-car technology, and limited repair networks are currently leading to more expensive premiums in EVs.

EV Insurance. Impact of Electric Vehicles on the Insurance Industry

[AdamB]

Thats utter nonsense.
Again, I can't tell if you are being dishonest or if you just don't understand what you are reading.

You mean like you claiming that the Dem's bailed a dead man out of the morgue? You went one step farther and proclaimed that your posts were "scientifically accurate". Care to clear up you, the pot, calling kettles black?

And to be honest, Kubi hasn't struck me as being dishonest at all. Closer to scientically accurate posting than you've ever approached, well referenced, honest points, and quite thorough. As compared to political trolling, faux concern for the environment and that doozy of "scientifically accurate" catching you out about every 4th post.

[kublikhan]

Thanks Adam, I try to be as honest and accurate as I can. I like you posts too BTW.

[Plantagenet]

You rejected my data on EV salvage rates because it only went up to 2022, correct?

No -- that's more utter nonsense from you. I never said that and I never thought that.

Once again you are just making things up.

Please stop. This is the second time you've made something up and then accused me of thinking and doing what you are fantasizing.

I hate to break it to you but your fantasies are not real.

Back here in the real world I never even mentioned your data on EV salvage rates in any of my prior posts, and I never thought the fact it ended in 2022 was a problem at all. Both those things are a product of your personal delusions.

One of the great things about this site is that it has the "quote" function. If there something I post that you want to discuss then quote that part of my post and let's discuss it. It's a total waste of time for you to make things up and then post your little fantasies about what I think because they are delusions that exist only in your head and they are generally totally nonsensical.

-----------------------

Of course I read that part of your post on salvage rates and I thought that there was a fundamental problem in the basic nature of the data you were comparing from EVs and ICE cars but the fact that the data set ended in 2022 isn't of concern except in your own delusional fantasies.----The error that caught my attention is so fundamental I assumed anyone who wasn't stupid and/or anyone knew the slightest thing about statistics would see the problem immediately so I didn't even bother to discuss it.



But if you want to discuss it I'm happy to discuss it with you now, if you can post about it in a rational, non-delusional way.

Please repost your data on EV vs. ICE salvage rates, complete with a link to the source of the data, and lets have a friendly chat about it.

Cheers!

[kublikhan]

You don't have to worry about 40% of EVs being scrapped because of fender benders. The percentage of EVs scrapped in the last decade was in the single digits. And that was back before most manufacturers started paying attention to the issue of making batteries repairable.

Between 2013 and 2022, 6.6 percent of electric vehicles in operation were scrapped. During that same time, just 5.2 percent of combustion vehicles met their maker.

The Cars, Trucks on the Road Are Older Than Ever

It doesn't matter what happened in the last decade. Things have recently changed. The situation is totally different now.

I'm surprised you aren't aware of this....I've posted on this a couple of times already in this thread.

Here...I'll explain it again.

The US insurance companies have recently changed their rules to say they will no longer insure EVs after they have been in minor fender benders because the accidents may have damaged the Li Battery and the EV may be at greater risk of spontaneous combustion. As a result new EVs are being totaled (ie. destroyed) in the US if they are in even minor accidents.

THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 13

You said it doesn't matter what happened in the last decade. Things have changed recently. The situation is totally different now. Did you write that or am I still having a 'delusion'?

[AdamB]

One of the great things about this site is that it has the "quote" function. If there something I post that you want to discuss then quote that part of my post and let's discuss it. It's a total waste of time for you to make things up and then post your little fantasies about what I think because they are delusions that exist only in your head and they are generally totally nonsensical.

I'm game!! Let's review your claim of owning an EV powered from a wall socket somewhere when, in reality, you didn't <GASP!> and then my favorite not being the peak oils you fell for (sucker!) but the ALWAYS scientifically accurate claim and in the next instant claiming Dems bailed a dead robber out a morgue. Can we do that one, please please please?

[theluckycountry]

Norway, the big leader in EV adoption, seems to have reached saturation and the sales are falling against petrol powered vehicles. Perhaps it's because they dropped the massive subsidies. Or perhaps the Norwegians finally figured out that battery powered vehicles are shite in cold climates.

[AdamB]

....perhaps the Norwegians finally figured out that battery powered vehicles are shite in cold climates.

You'd think in the first winter they had the things they would have learned that, and by winter #2, sales would have cratered. Of course, sales didn't, so no, I doubt current sales patterns have anything to do with winter. Of course, in order to see this, folks do this thing...called thinking....part of what makes Americans exceptional I suppose..but that's another story....

[kublikhan]

Norway, the big leader in EV adoption, seems to have reached saturation and the sales are falling against petrol powered vehicles. Perhaps it's because they dropped the massive subsidies. Or perhaps the Norwegians finally figured out that battery powered vehicles are shite in cold climates.

More like January was a slow month. EV sales have already bounced back:

Norway increased its plugin electric vehicle market share to 91.1% in April 2023, up from 84.2% year-on-year. The bestselling vehicle was, again, the Tesla Model Y. This is the first time Norway has seen 3 consecutive months with combined plugin share staying above 90% (see graph below). April’s combined share of 91.1% comprised 83.3% full battery electrics (BEVs), and 7.8% plugin hybrids (PHEVs).

All other powertrains lost volume YoY, with petrol-only vehicles at their 2nd lowest volume of the modern era (just 112 units), and 3rd lowest share ever, just 1.25% of the auto market.

Norway Continues To Grow Plugin Share With 3rd Month Above 90%

[AdamB]

Norway Continues To Grow Plugin Share With 3rd Month Above 90%

Well look at that. Kubli finds data to disprove silly ideas in real time. Isn't it amazing that some folks know stuff and can prove it, and others just say stuff and step on landmines of their own making time and time again? It is almost as though they...well...don't care about the facts and just make stuff up? Dream it up, say it, and pretend it is true. Weird.

[theluckycountry]

Business as usual for the EV manufacturers

Jaguar Recalls Thousands Of I-Pace EVs Over Fire Risk, Tells Owners To Park Outside

...The documents posted Wednesday by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said the recall covers I-Pace vehicles delivered between 2019 and 2024.
The problem is centered around the EV batteries produced by LG Energy Solutions. The NHTSA is investigating LG because its batteries have forced five other automakers to issue similar recalls due to fire risk. Most notable has been the fire risk around Ford F-150 Lightnings.

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/ja ... rk-outside

Enjoy your BBQ's

[AdamB]

Business as usual for the EV manufacturers

Jaguar Recalls Thousands Of I-Pace EVs Over Fire Risk, Tells Owners To Park Outside

Enjoy your BBQ's

While I understand Plants fear of their hybrid bursting into flames, as it happens like 3X more often than with EVs, I am unconvinced that only some back woods gap toothed Third Worlder would think it would make a good excuse for a barbeque. Ok, maybe some West Virginians here in the States as well, but still, a barbeque?

For the record, from someone approaching a decades experience and 100's of thousands of kilometers experience with them, and both in garage at the same time at this very moment, no fires in them, or any of the other EVs on the block. Although one of the EVs owners just upgraded from an older style Leaf to the new, longer range type. There are now 3 of those on the block, mine is the only older style but 4th leaf, one tesla and one ford. You have to go around the corner to the next street, and that house has a tesla and one of those new Hyundai EVs.

No fires in the neighborhood yet. Or barbeques.

[Plantagenet]

You said it doesn't matter what happened in the last decade. Things have changed recently. The situation is totally different now. Did you write that or am I still having a 'delusion'?

Good morning to you. We're having a little snow here in central Alaska....I hope the weather is better where you are.

Now back to this never-ending discussion about what I said in a post several days ago.

Of course I wrote the words that you are quoting.

You just read it in my post and then you used the quote function to quote it directly from my post, didn't you?

That means I wrote it. Why don't you know that?

Thats how the quote function works.

It directly copies what someone else has written. Thats why it is called a "quote". It directly copies the words of the other poster.

Do I have to explain every single simple thing to you?

Apparently I do.

SHEESH!!!!!!


-----------------------------------------------------------

AND I've got a bit more to say to put this bizarre discussion into context and hopefully bring it to a conclusion.

First of all, re-read my sentence in that quote word by word. OK.....now what exactly is it that got you so wee-wee'd up about my statement? My statement is just common sense....OF COURSE THINGS KEEP CHANGING AND YOU"VE GOT TO KEEP UP TO DATE ON THE RECENT CHANGES TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON NOW. Whether it's the government or an airline or an insurance company, it's the CURRENT rules and laws that control what is happening at the current time. I hope you will agree with me on that obvious point now? I'm clearly right about that....might I suggest you just admit it?

AND please check my quote again and you'll see that nowhere did I say that I am "rejecting your data because it only went up to 2022." You must have searched for something like that, and you never found it because I never said it. So where did that false claim about what I said come from? It came from some kind of fantasy or delusion in your head. You made it up. It's an oddly specific thing to make up, but apparently thats how your mind works. The bottom line is I said nothing like that --- you just made it up. Thats why I am 100% justified in calling it a fantasy or delusion----you made up a false claim about what I said that was totally untrue. Naturally I objected to that.

Hopefully now that it's clear that you made up a false statement and falsely attributed it to me, we can bring this discussion to a close.

If you'd like to apologize now for making up a false statement and falsely attributing it to me, that would a gracious and mature thing to do. I thank you in advance for showing maturity about this episode.

----------------------------

AND IN CONCLUSION: Once again, since this issue seems important to you I am perfectly willing to have a friendly discussion what I believe is a serious flaw in the way you are interpreting the statistical data comparing EV and ICE scrappage rates. I already invited you once to repost those numbers with links if you'd like to have a friendly chat about that data. I'm inviting you again now. Perhaps I can entice you into a friendly discussion by telling a story......... sometimes I charge a fee when I do consultations on technical and scientific issues. I think the most I was ever paid was $150/hr to consult for the State of Alaska on a case that was before the US Supreme Court involving isostatic rebound----the case was to determine who owns the new land created when isostatic rebound causes formerly submerged land to emerge from the sea. This is actually a big issue in southeast Alaska because ongoing glacier retreat is causing quite a bit of isostatic rebound. And the state of Alaska won the case. I like to think the technical report I prepared as a scientific consultant helped a tiny bit, and the money wasn't bad either. But usually I don't charge for technical advice, and I'm perfectly happy to to discuss that scrappage data with you for free, if you are still interested, and if you promise not to make up anymore false claims about what I post after our discussion.


The question was who owns the land that emerges from the sea after glacier retreat......and the Supreme Court of the United States agreed with me!!!!

CHEERS!

[kublikhan]

I did repost the scrappage data with the source. You ignored it completely and spent the entire post on a tirade against me, just like your previous two posts. You are not engaging on the issue at all, you are simply attacking me over and over again. I ignored all of your snipping at me and tried to concentrate on the issue at hand. But it seems you would rather attack me. You want to the play game of which one of us lied? Ignore the issue, snipe at each other? Fine, lets play that game. Let's take a close look at your posts. Here is one of your claims:

The US insurance companies have recently changed their rules to say they will no longer insure EVs after they have been in minor fender benders because the accidents may have damaged the Li Battery and the EV may be at greater risk of spontaneous combustion.

But is it true? Let's take a close look at the original article this comes from and determine the validity of your claim:

For many electric vehicles, there is no way to repair or assess even slightly damaged battery packs after accidents, forcing insurance companies to write off cars with few miles - leading to higher premiums and undercutting gains from going electric. And now those battery packs are piling up in scrapyards in some countries, a previously unreported and expensive gap in what was supposed to be a "circular economy."

"We're buying electric cars for sustainability reasons," said Matthew Avery, research director at automotive risk intelligence company Thatcham Research. "But an EV isn't very sustainable if you've got to throw the battery away after a minor collision." Battery packs can cost tens of thousands of dollars and represent up to 50% of an EV's price tag, often making it uneconomical to replace them. EVs constitute only a fraction of vehicles on the road, making industry-wide data hard to come by, but the trend of low-mileage zero-emission cars being written off with minor damage is growing.

Scratched EV battery? Your insurer may have to junk the whole car

The article talks about insurance companies having to write off EVs with battery damage, true. But there is nothing in the article about insurance companies "recently changing their rules". That was a fabrication on your part. A lie. Dishonesty. Fantasy. Utter nonsense. Lack of reading comprehension. Pick whatever word you want to use.

The article also talks about scrapping cars that have battery damage. But your claim was that it won't be insured even if it was just in a minor fender bender. There are plenty of minor fender benders that don't result in damage to the battery. So another one of your claims is a lie. Dishonesty. Fantasy. Utter nonsense. Lack of reading comprehension.

Let's look at another one of your claims:

You rejected my data on EV salvage rates because it only went up to 2022, correct?

No -- that's more utter nonsense from you. I never said that and I never thought that. Once again you are just making things up.

No? You never said anything remotely like that? That is a complete fabrication on my part? Hmmmm. Let's see if that is true:

Between 2013 and 2022, 6.6 percent of electric vehicles in operation were scrapped. During that same time, just 5.2 percent of combustion vehicles met their maker.

It doesn't matter what happened in the last decade. Things have recently changed. The situation is totally different now.

So when I brought up the rate EVs were scrapped at, you said it doesn't matter. That sounds like a rejection to me. Another one of your claims is a lie. Dishonesty. Fantasy. Utter nonsense. Lack of reading comprehension. If you want to apologize for being so dishonest, I am willing to hear it.

And let's not even get into your infantile tirades about typos and quote functions. Do you want to continue snipping at each other like this planty? Or do you want to return to the topic of EVs?

[AdamB]

The article talks about insurance companies having to write off EVs with battery damage, true. But there is nothing in the article about insurance companies "recently changing their rules". That was a fabrication on your part. A lie. Dishonesty. Fantasy. Utter nonsense. Lack of reading comprehension. Pick whatever word you want to use.

Oh now wait one second Kubli! We have been informed by Plant personally that every post is scientifically accurate!!! So the only conclusions we can draw are 1) wherever Plant resides "scientifically accurate" is a kindergarden level class where after you learn to write your full name with a pencil they hand you a certificate of "scientifically accurate" accomplishment or 2) Plant does post lies, fantasies, and utter nonsense, and can't read to boot.

Only things I can think of, based on claims of political parties bailing out dead robbers and whatnot. Maybe Plant is using ChatGPT to post because that was what was required to get that certificate claiming whatever they wrote was now "scientifically accurate"?

[Plantagenet]

Yo Kublaiklan:

Wow! You'e still ranting about the post I made four days ago. Thats amazing. I've never seen you so wee-wee'd up before.

I'm sorry but I must have missed it if you reposted the scrappage data. I never saw the data----I started reading your post and it immediately went into unnecessary and nonsensical and dishonest personal attacks which I then refuted. That used up the time I had to post at this site for the day. Try to be reasonable---you can't really expect me to wade through paragraphs of delusional fantasies to get to the data after I politely offered to help you with the statistical interpretation. After I politely requested that you leave out the delusional fantasies and that we just talk about data and I was disappointed you went right back into the imaginary stuff.

No offense, but after your post today I'm going to withdraw my offer to help you with the statistics.

Please get a grip on yourself. I suggest that we drop this topic now and move on to another subject.

Attacking me isn't going to change what I posted about.

All I did was note that multiple recent news reports say that insurance companies are cancelling insurance on EVs that get in minor fender-bender type accidents. I provided a link. It's a factual news story. It's what's happening in the real world. You've got to accept things that happen out there in the real world.

It's unfortunate that multiple news reports say that insurance companies are cancelling coverage for EVs after they get in minor accidents over fears that the minor accidents could make the EV batteries more likely to spontaneously combust........but your rants aren't going to change this unfortunately fact.

Its just reality.

Or as the poet used to say.....it's a reality sandwich.


EVs are being scrapped after minor accidents over fears they will spontaneously combust.......life just served up another reality sandwich.

Cheers!

[kublikhan]

I'm sorry to say that I've seen you like this all time. You take something that has a small kernel of truth, then you twist it and distort to say something completely different. Then when someone calls you out on it, you go on the attack against them. Accuse them of delusions, fantasies, having reading comprehension problems, you post silly pictures, change the subject, etc. But you are right this has gone on long enough so let's just drop it. Have a nice day.

[AdamB]

No offense, but after your post today I'm going to withdraw my offer to help you with the statistics.

Thank God! it isn't as though someone who can't read their own news paper clippings is automatically disqualified from knowing anything about statistics, but if your "scientifically accurate" spills out into yet another arena you don't know anything about, pretty soon you'll decide to divide the odds of hybrid cars bursting into flames risk by 100 in order to pretend they aren't the worst at bursting into flames. Is that why you talk about it so much, because of how likely your cage is to burst into flames compared to even ICE powered machines?

[careinke]

sometimes I charge a fee when I do consultations on technical and scientific issues. I think the most I was ever paid was $150/hr to consult for the State of Alaska on a case that was before the US Supreme Court involving isostatic rebound----the case was to determine who owns the new land created when isostatic rebound causes formerly submerged land to emerge from the sea. This is actually a big issue in southeast Alaska because ongoing glacier retreat is causing quite a bit of isostatic rebound. And the state of Alaska won the case. I like to think the technical report I prepared as a scientific consultant helped a tiny bit, and the money wasn't bad either.

So who owns the land? The state or the shoreline property owner?

The reason I ask, is our beachfront property is growing everyday do to tidal wash. The state sold us the beachfront property rights down to the "Low Low tideline." As a result, the tidelands have added about three acres to the property over the past 50 years, without being challenged. But I'm rather surprised we have not been challenged on this.

Another interesting point, is when the tide comes in, we don't own the water above the land, and people are free to use it.

Peace