Here’s an interesting BBC story about the safety hazards associated with the Chevy Volt — specifically, the risk that its battery pack could catch fire after even a minor impact.
But the real problem may no longer be a technical one, but one of dented consumer confidence. Customers are handing back the keys in droves.
At first, when the problem first came to light, chief executive Dan Akerson offered to buy back Volt models from any concerned customers.
Then, when dozens of customers came forward wanting to hand back the keys to their cars, the company changed tack.
Rather than automatically buying back the Volts, and thus losing its as yet tiny army of early adopters of electric motoring technology, GM started offering them some 6,000 free loan cars while awaiting the outcome of an investigation into the fires.
And here’s why:
It now appears the fire hazard was first discovered back in June, when GM first heard about a fire in a Volt that occurred some three weeks after the vehicle had been crash tested.
Yet, almost five months went by before either GM or the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) told dealers and customers about the potential risks and urged them to drain the battery pack as soon as possible after an accident.
Part of the reason for delaying the disclosure was the “fragility of Volt sales” up until that point, according to Joan Claybrook, a former administrator at NHTSA.
“NHTSA could have put out a consumer alert,” he said, according to industry website Autoguide.com.
“Not to tell [customers] for six months makes no sense to me. They have a duty to inform people when they’ve rated a vehicle as ‘top rated’ and make it clear there’s a problem.”
While it isn’t surprising that GM was reluctant to announce product safety bulletins that would dampen early sales of its much touted hybrid, according to the linked story the NHTSA was an accessory to this as well, and for the same reason:
“Part of the reason for delaying the disclosure was the ‘fragility of Volt sales’ up until that point, according to Joan Claybrook, a former administrator at NHTSA.”
At Autoguide.com, there’s a story saying that Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood responded today saying the accusations were “absolutely not true.”
“We have opened an investigation into battery-related fires that may occur some time after a severe crash,” LaHood said. “Chevy Volt owners can be confident that their cars are safe to drive.”
Meanwhile, the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) filed a formal request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for any and all communications with General Motors (GM).
Sal Minella says:
OK, so there are only 100 million non-Volts and 6128 Volts in the US auto fleet. So, 100,000,000/6128 * 2 actual spontaneous Volt combustions = 32,637 non-Volt equivalent autocombustions.
So we have 61 ppm, just to put it into climate perspective. As long as we keep it under 350 ppm, we shouldn’t have any runaway warming, based on my computer model.
Electricity here in free-market Texas runs 9.8 cents per Kwh, so even tho we grow gas here, that still changes the economics in favor of the govt Firebird Volt. I’d need to install a firewall in the canopy connecting my garage to the mansion, but that’s an inconsequential expense. Then back up my computer files off-site.
Claude Harvey says:
December 9, 2011 at 8:58 am
Re:mkelly says:
December 9, 2011 at 7:28 am
Lost money thats what I figured too. MF Globals all over the place.
So, is Alessandro Volta rolling is his grave over the vehicle named after him?
What really disappoints me, is what the volt became, from what I recall the early prototypes where more of a series hybrid device like a locomotive diesel electric, with a smaller battery in between. Not a Prius parallel’ish wannabe. Rumor had it the one of the early development mules has a small 3 cylinder diesel that would run with varying duty cycles, with a battery sized for power boost during acceleration and to allow the engine not to run at stop lights and provide a reasonable charge/discharge duty cycle on the highway. Basically to allow the diesel engine to either be on, running at peak efficiency charging the battery, or completely off.
So without a twin power source transmission (ala Prius), and small 100 lbs battery, the vehicle was lighter than any other hybrid, and capable of gas mileage exceeding 70mpg (diesel version)
I was absolutely stocked reading these rumors.
Then as development continued, and it became more and more like a plug-in Prius, I was dismayed.
Now, well, why oh why????
face palms all around …..
“Chevy Volt owners can be confident that their cars are safe to drive.”
Unless they’re on fire when they get into them, then they can be somewhat less confident.
For that matter, is a vehicle safe to drive if you can drive it fast enough to keep the flames away from you?
“Quem deus vult perdere, Prius dementat.”
(Whom the gods would destroy, the Prius drives crazy.)
[LaHood said:] “Chevy Volt owners can be confident that their cars are safe to drive.”
Did you all notice that he didn’t say, “We Chevy Volt owners can be confident that our cars are safe to drive?”
The press and others have distorted this problem. The fires occurred days or weeks after the crash, and required a series of events to trigger it. That information was not revealed in most of the reports I read and in none of the TV reports. The idea that the car spontaneously combusts immediately after an accident makes good press but it is not correct and not fare to GM or to the owners.
The NHTSA was, I feel, justified in not immediately sounding alarms since there was no immediate danger to drivers. If it were a case of fires immediately after a crash, or while driving, then yes, a delay in the warnings would be inexcusable. The crash tests showed that the car is as safe as other, non-electric cars. GM’s procedures call for the battery to be discharged after a crash. Do that and there would be no problem. Would be park a wrecked car with a connected battery and full tank of fuel in your garage?
Be skeptical of reports of the car catching fire in a garage in NC. The Volt was not the source. Another one did catch fire, in WI, because it had been in a crash three weeks earlier and lost its coolant. A couple of planes have had fires that likely were caused by batteries being shipped, but they were not Chevy Volt batteries.
I don’t agree that the government should subsidize these or any other cars. The price is too high and the all-electric range not enough for most people. Drop the price $10K, and increase the range to 80 miles, and it would meet my needs.
For comparison, from http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/pdf/osvehicle.pdf
329,500 vehicle fires, 565 civilian deaths, 1,825 civilian injuries were reported in 2002.
Public fire departments responded to 329,500 vehicle fires in the United States during
2002. These fires caused 565 civilian deaths, 1,825 civilian injuries and $1,392,000,000
in direct property damage. (See Table 1.) Vehicle fires accounted for 20% of the
1,687,500 fires reported to U.S. fire departments that year. In that same year, vehicle
fires caused 17% of all civilian fire deaths, 10% of all civilian fire injuries and 13% of the
nation’s property loss to fire. More people died from vehicle fires than from apartment
fires, and vehicle fires caused seven times the number of deaths caused by non-residential
structure fires.
As you can see, vehicle fires are a real issue that needs attention.
Full disclosure: I drive a Chevy Silverado HD. I have no financial interest in GM and wouldn’t invest a penny.
Batteries – ANY battery – should be considered a ‘hand gren-ade’ with the pin in … the wrong move and the pin comes out … I had a battery pack for a 2-way radio melt a couple decades back, when a pen or pencil came across the contracts while it was in my briefcase. Fortunately, not a high capacity Li-ion or Ni-MH set of cells at that time, so no fire or explosion BUT the plastic battery case deformed (melted) to the point it could not slide back onto the radio …
.
@_Jim says:
December 9, 2011 at 10:57 am
I had a deal melt a couple of decades back, when a lawyer came across the contracts while they were in my briefcase. Sorry – just a little bit of humor. No offense intended. Maybe they should rename it the Chevy Jolt – along the lines of the AMC Matador.
Leon Brozyna says:
December 9, 2011 at 1:07 am
Reminds me of the story of the man’s house burning down from his Volt catching fire while plugged into the charger, or the story of an air freight shipment of batteries (FedEx or UPS) catching fire and bringing down the plane. The batteries are safe, except when they’re not.
******
It was UPS. I was talking to a UPS pilot in the Dallas airport recently. He was dead-heading to another assignment. I noticed his flight bag displayed a decal memorializing two UPS pilots who were killed on the job and I enquired about it. They were flying a brand new 747 from Japan to Dubai. Nearing their destination, smoke appeared on the flight deck. The Captain left to check the cargo bays. He never came back. The First Officer continued to try to save the aircraft but it crashed in the desert. Subsequent investigation on the ground revealed the source of the fire was a pallet of Li-I batteries.
Try to imagine if the Bush administration TOOK OVER GM (ponder that for a minute),
then HID safety data in order to protect “fragile sales.”
Try to imagine any non-government-subsidized business getting away with this (or with shredding birds, to name but one other example)
Pretty well known in the computer industry that damage to your LION packs will mean bad stuff for your data-centre. Which is why a lot of places shifted back from rackmount LION to PB based onsite temporary, and diesel/ng power. Besides, if you take a li battery and add water fun stuff happens, like fire and explosions. That one’s been known for a while, especially in mobile devices, and if I remember right most of these fires are storage fires after the vehicle has been in a crash. And left outside without removing the battery pack, or ensuring that there won’t be any environmental contact. Even a lead-acid battery will explode in the open given the right opportunity after a crash.
I am starting to see a pattern.
First a report in the WSJ on how FERC has basically abdicated its responsibility by refusing to act on the topic of new EPA regulations which all expert testimony stated a significant risk to the reliability of the nations electrical grid. (This after the EPA deleted statements in their preliminary staff report which acknowledged such risk.)
Then today this same agency releases a decision stating that BPA acted in a discriminatory matter last spring when it enacted curtailments on power producers, which included wind turbine generators. This after BPA gave preference to wind generators by placing them at the bottom of the curtailment list – i.e. last ones to be effected – and after NW lawmakers urged the agency to wait on the outcome of negotiations between BPA and the wind generators.
Now we have another government agency with responsibility to protect consumers, compromising themselves in order to support policy of an administration currently in office.
JuergenK says:
December 9, 2011 at 4:03 am
<>
Actually, lithium is far more reactive than carbon and will happily combust in an atmosphere of carbon dioxide—as will a number of metals. The only safe way to smother a metal fire is with sand (silicon dioxide), and even that may be dicey if lithium is involved. (The ultimate resort would be to use a totally inert substance. Anyone own a liquid argon extinguisher?)
Let’s be fair. If a petrol-powered car has a serious accident it’s best to disconnect the battery immediately in case the wiring is damaged. Would you leave a badly damaged car with a full tank of petrol? I wouldn’t. It seems obvious to discharge the battery in a damaged Volt.
Downdraft says:
December 9, 2011 at 10:54 am
“The press and others have distorted this problem. The fires occurred days or weeks after the crash, and required a series of events to trigger it. That information was not revealed in most of the reports I read and in none of the TV reports. The idea that the car spontaneously combusts immediately after an accident makes good press but it is not correct and not fare to GM or to the owners.
The NHTSA was, I feel, justified in not immediately sounding alarms since there was no immediate danger to drivers.”
You are wrong; the first time I read about it in the media they made it very clear that the car was catching fire 3 weeks after the crash test – NOT immediately. It spontaneously combusted after sitting there, seemingly harmless. Had there been a human inside in that moment it would have combusted just as well; I find this MORE shocking to have such a time bomb car than having it combust as a direct consequence of a crash (which would be bad enough).
All Li batteries are dangerous, but the fire you might get in your phone or your computer is at least likely to be small because the battery is tiny. The ones they put in cars are – not so tiny.
A few weeks ago, in the annual solar powered car race across the outback here in Australia, one of the cars burst into flames while parked and burned to the ground. No-one is sure why, because there was just a smoking heap of melted polymers and twisted metal left at the end.
Luckily, the car was in the parking lot and the driver was on a meal break in a restaurant at the time.
These cars are supposed to be state of the art high tech wonders, and have to pass all sorts of safety tests. And no, it hadn’t been in a crash. The battery casing probably sprung a leak somehow (bumps on the road?) and the rest was inevitable.
Li batteries in cars are death traps.
HMMMmmmmm,
Takeout the battery and hitch up a standardbed Top speed is 30MPH or better (I clocked a friends pair at 40MPH +) The range is up to 100 miles in a day. All this on 7 bale of hay ($42) and a 50# bag of grain ($10) or $42 per week or less. This is the pulling power preferred by the Amish by the way.
It is interesting to look at the old cars and see they have Shaft Shackles fastened to the front axle of the vehicle so when the engine failed they could easily be hitched to a horse and pulled. http://www.engelscoachshop.com/shafts_files/image011.jpg
In my line of work I work with rechargeable batteries of various types. When a CONVENTIONAL Lithium – Ion battery burns it does not cause a lithium metal fire. The lithium-Ion battery’s Lithium is already in an oxidized salt form inside the cell. Lithium-Ion is different than Lithium Primary. The greater fire risk of the lithium-ion cells is due to the fact that the electrolyte is a volatile organic solution and not aqueous like most cells, and Also the cell itself packs more power (higher voltage and capacity) than other types of cells so any kind of problem is magnified. It is more susceptible to thermal runaway. A lithium-Ion battery fire can be extinguished in the same ways as any electrical fire. NiMH and Pb-Acid cells also have the risk of venting hydrogen under certain conditions.
Just about every major lithium-Ion cell manufacturer has had a manufacturing plant burn down at one time or another.
Where’s Ralph “Unsafe at any speed” Nader?
Once I had a regular lead-acid car battery short itself out under the hood when the bracket broke and the battery shifted to contact the positive lead to ground..it exploded in a ball of fire spraying sulfuric acid all over the place. The fireball was the hydrogen/oxygen mixture catching fire from the heat generated from the dead short. Imagine a whole pile of those suckers ganged together essentially in the back seat?
According to NHTSA regulations a vehicle manufacturer has 5 days to report a safety defect or noncompliance with a safety regulation to the NHTSA.
For a site whose readers proclaim they’re interested in facts it’s amazing how few seem to actually go and look any up.
You regularly ridicule the BBC yet here you take their word for it. Yet, had you done a bit of research you’d quickly realize that neither the NHTSA nor GM could replicate what happened in May, even after crashing numerous Volts. The NHTSA then opted to take the battery packs and subject them to major abuse. Only then, after six months of hammering at the car and its packs, could they get a reaction. Six months! They even used the US military to assist in breaking the batteries. Yet many here sit smugly in front of their computers pontificating about which they know little. For the curious, go read about it in The Economist: http://www.economist.com/node/21541395
Next, it seems many of the commenters are woefully unaware that 0.1% of car crashes in the US result in a fire. That’s nearly 300,000 fires per year. As there are 6000 Volts in the US by simple arithmetic there should have been 6 fires, yet not one crashed Volt has caught fire.
The notion that a “minor accident” will breach the battery is beyond stupid. The battery is in the middle of the car. For the battery housing to be breached requires severe damage, to the point the car will be utterly written off.
The worry about the fire is also misplaced. The fires typically happen weeks later, when the car should have had its battery disconnected. If you’re still in your car 3 weeks after an automobile accident large enough to damage the Volt’s pack you have bigger worries, such as being dead.
Note, the cables that must be disconnected are labeled with a Firefighter and Cable Snaps picture in bright yellow. Only a fool wouldn’t be able to see it.
Furthermore, none of the house fires were caused by the Volt. There is this giddy desire to associate every single fire with any Volt that happens to be nearby. The fact is, human stupidity accounts for most house fires. I’ve seen pictures of people plugging their Volt’s into extensions cords when the manual explicitly says to plug it into a dedicated circuit. No manufacturer can build a product to suppress the natural human ability to be more idiotic than anyone can imagine. Ask Einstein.
Instead of comprehending that the Volt represents the future of motoring many comments seem hellbent on picturing the car purely from a political point of view, even though the car was started well before GM’s bankruptcy. The electrification of the automobile is a foregone conclusion. If there are those who don’t like it, perhaps their ancestors bemoaned us coming down out of the trees a few million years ago.
For those who still may be a bit confused, look at the Volt as the way towards eliminating a good percentage of oil needs from unfriendly states. The cash spent on a Volt and the gas saved remains in the US. From a national security perspective you’d think most folks would be all for not arming one’s enemies every time they went to a gas station.
I’d love to see a set of updates on the story posted by Mr. Watts, but I highly doubt it’ll happen. Do note that this whole episode has shown a major disregard for science and testing by this community and has made me begin to question how open and honest a discussion self-described skeptics desire if they immediately jump to a conclusion on the Volt without looking into the facts.
Gene,
Good post. This site is all about different points of view. That’s how the truth gets winnowed out, through online debate, without censorship. But Anthony doesn’t have an obligation to post follow-ups on every article. Commenters can disagree like you did, and maybe change minds if your argument withstands scrutiny.
Re: Gene says:
December 9, 2011 at 4:25 pm
“Note, the cables that must be disconnected are labeled with a Firefighter and Cable Snaps picture in bright yellow. Only a fool wouldn’t be able to see it.”
I don’t think you quite “get it” Gene. Lithium-ion batteries are prone to run away internally, generating enormous heat and destroying both the battery and its surroundings. Pulling the input/output cables gets you nothing. The delay between crash and fire in the Chevy Volt strongly suggests internal runaway for which lithium-ion batteries are notorious.
If you want “followup” and the ultimate scientific truth of the matter, monitor IEEE Spectrum and I guarantee you the postmortem analysis of the Volt failure will eventually appear in that publication. I’ll give you heavy odds the bottom line turns out to be “internal runaway”.
Claude,
I know all about internal run away. I’m in high tech. We use li-ion a lot. It’s life. Much as driving with 15 gallons of combustible fluid under your arse is something you get used to.
The fact remains the Volt’s battery pack only experienced the failures when abused to the point the surrounding car would be considered a total write off. The battery is, after all, in the middle of the car. To damage the middle you have to get there, meaning the folks sitting on either side of the battery are going to be in pretty bad shape.
It’s not as if a slight bump, a pot hole, or anything minor is going to set the Volt afire. It requires breaching the battery pack. That’s why, ultimately, the NHTSA had to give up on smashing Volts and actually just start smashing battery packs. If it was simply doing some minor damage to the Volt the fires would have been replicated. The fact they couldn’t replicate it for 6 months implies the damage has to be quite substantial.
Note that the way the packs do finally ignite require all these events to happen:
1. The car must be in a severe side impact (>35-40mph).
2. The car must impact a pole or tree or other immovable object (>25mph).
3. The car must flip over onto its roof.
Now, I don’t know about you, but that’s one edge case. You have all that happen to you in pretty much any car and you’re going to be pretty badly mangled. The fact the battery might — MIGHT — ignite a week to three weeks later is of little consequence. That car is a writeoff and, with luck, you’re alive.
In case you think I’m making those 3 steps up, go check what the NHTSA said is required to induce a failure. Those three steps. It’s quite obvious why they couldn’t get a Volt to ignite except by fluke. It’s such an edge case it’s unlikely to ever happen. Even severely damaging packs by themselves didn’t result in fire all the time.
The car is safer than a gas powered car, considering the 300,000 car fires in the US per year!