Chevy Bolt. Image Modified, source Wikimedia

GM Warns Chevy Bolt Owners Not to Park Within 50ft of Anything You Care About

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

In the wake of a series of severe battery fires, General Motors has just issued a safety recommendation not to park your Chevy Bolt within 50ft of other vehicles, in case it catches fire.

GM tells Bolt owners to park 50 feet from other cars in parking garages, confirms 12 fires

Kalea Hall The Detroit News
Sep 15 2021

Detroit — As it seeks a solution to a battery fire risk, General Motors issued yet another safety recommendation Wednesday for Chevrolet Bolt owners: If you’re pulling into a parking deck, keep your car at least 50 feet away from other vehicles. 

A customer’s concern about the safety of leaving their electric vehicle in a parking garage led the automaker to provide the additional guidance to owners of the Bolts, all of which GM has recalled, spokesman Dan Flores said. 

“In an effort to reduce potential damage to structures and nearby vehicles in the rare event of a potential fire, we recommend parking on the top floor or on an open-air deck and park 50 feet or more away from another vehicle,” Flores said in a statement. “Additionally, we still request you do not leave your vehicle charging unattended, even if you are using a charging station in a parking deck.”

GM recently had to recall every Chevrolet Bolt EV and Bolt EUV — more than 141,000 — after the batteries caught fire in a handful of the electric vehicles. GM and battery supplier LG Energy Solution are working to understand how two “rare” battery defects believed to be the cause of the fires occurred. The automaker has confirmed 12 Bolt battery fires, up from 10 when it issued its latest recall last month.

 “We are aware of 12 GM confirmed battery fires that have been investigated involving Bolt EVs vehicles in the previous and new recall population,” Flores said. “There have been three reports of injuries. We continue to share data with NHTSA.” 

Read more: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/general-motors/2021/09/15/chevrolet-bolt-gm-tells-owners-park-50-feet-from-other-cars/8355134002/

What a gift for insurance scammers – just park a Chevy Bolt in the building, and nobody will question the insurance claim when the building burns down.

On a serious note, in my opinion a risk of this magnitude is going to start having a real impact, on whether EVs are allowed into carparks or on ferries, unless the problem is rectified real fast.

Lithium fires are horribly difficult to extinguish, and emit dangerously toxic fumes which can cause long term or even permanent dementia like brain injuries, along with a host of other usually reversible harms.

Earlier this year I asked a serving fire fighter how they extinguish Lithium automobile battery fires. He said “We can’t. We cordon off the area, and spray a fine mist of water on the fire to try to keep the temperature down, then wait for it to burn itself out.”.

4.8 28 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

255 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
michel
September 17, 2021 12:36 am

Yes, the problem is that while electric cars may be a lot better than ICE if we just consider noise and pollution in heavy traffic areas, the fact is that lithium batteries of the required capacity are not a fit for purpose energy source for them, on the scale required to replace ICE.

This news makes it once again obvious that to replace ICE with EV will require a complete restructuring of personal transport. There will have to be far fewer cars, partly because of the greater cost and partly because of the use restrictions imposed by safety and charging times.

And this in turn will lead to huge consequential changes in how and where we live work and shop.

What will happen is that when the scale of all this becomes apparent, governments will pedal back from the replacement agenda, and the auto industry will be handed the bill.

The only way this is possible is if the industry develops batteries which are safe, far cheaper than lithium, don’t burst into flames, have the energy capacity of a tank of gas in not too much bigger a weight and size envelope, and don’t take a lot longer to recharge.

I don’t see any signs of mass production of such things. We are asking for safe storage of a huge amount of energy in the form of electricity in millions of individual machines in crowded buildings and on crowded roads. Even small blowup rates will be catastrophic.

But we live in hope.

Reply to  michel
September 17, 2021 5:03 am

The unspoken intention is precisely that, to have far fewer cars. The majority of people will be forced away from personal transport and onto public transport.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  michel
September 17, 2021 6:06 am

“What will happen is that when the scale of all this becomes apparent, governments will pedal back from the replacement agenda, and the auto industry will be handed the bill.”

I think you are right. The automobile companies ought to think about that before going plunging ahead.

The Free Market is the only way to work this out properly. Government trying to force changes on society is just going to make things worse, not better.

And government is trying to force this on society as a means to control CO2 when there is no evidence that CO2 needs controlling.

All this insanity is built on lies that promote the notion that CO2 is the temperature control knob of the Earth’s atmosphere, when there is not one shred of evidence to back up this claim. Yet Government proceeds as though this is an established fact.

Btw, thanks to the person who recommended reading the book, “The Delinquent Teenager who was mistaken for the world’s top climate expert”, by Donna LaFramboise.

If you want to read about who the people making all these claims about CO2 are, you should read this book. You would be surprised at how many inexperienced and politically motivated people are involved in pushing this claim that CO2 needs to be controlled. It looks like a three-ring-circus of climate change activism, not science. We are being misled by people with an political agenda, and it is costing the world Trillions of wasted dollars, and apparently the mental health of a large portion of young people, who believe the climate change lies.

People, we are being misled by Charlatans at the United Nations who are disguised as scientists. Read the book.

Human-caused Climate Change is the biggest science scam in human history. And nearly all our leaders have bought into the scam.

See who our leaders are looking to at the United Nations IPCC for their information. This is all about politics.

It’s unbelievable that it has gone this far. The reason it has gone this far is because the radical Left recognizes this climate change scam as the perfect vehicle to impose their ideology on everyone else, and the radical Left has control of the Media, the Voice of Authority in our society (much as I hate to say that).

One thing about it: These climate change scam artists don’t have the facts on their side. So far, that hasn’t made much difference, but I can’t see that lasting forever. Let’s just hope it doesn’t last long enough for the Left to impose their will totally.

Mike Lowe
Reply to  Tom Abbott
September 17, 2021 2:07 pm

Yes, the auto companies ought to think about it before plunging ahead. But they have ALL made that decision, proving that auto company decisions are made by non-technical heads without technical input. They think that political decisions forced on them by politicians can overcome the forces of nature Or, just maybe, they never even properly think about it. Big rethink coming, I hope.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Mike Lowe
September 19, 2021 5:41 am

“They think that political decisions forced on them by politicians can overcome the forces of nature”

That’s what the politicians think, too. “Make it so”, they say.

Jim Whelan
Reply to  Tom Abbott
September 19, 2021 10:59 pm

Leftist thought is all about believing that your ideas replace facts, truth and nature.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
September 17, 2021 1:11 am

And how exactly are visually impaired – blind people especially – going to be warned not to fall over cables trailing 50 ft to recharge these frankenstein vehicles? Or people in wheelchairs or with prams negotiate the hazards?

The U.K. has smaller roads and lots of terrace houses in towns and cities where the idea of finding any parking ten, never mind fifty, feet from next door or another vehicle is impossible.

My little town is already seeing annoyance and rows starting where cables are run across a pavement. That arch brainless dolt Lord Deben was given BBC time yesterday to argue that in rural areas all street lighting should be turned off at night. Obviously he won’t compensate anyone who is injured by tripping over a cable or has losses from the huge increase in crime that will follow from his latest saving the planet wheeze.

You can see the cut , ripped out cables, and superglued charging points that will ensue as this inevitable conflict between greenie posers and the rest of sane society escalates. People will only suffer so much virtue seeking eco-stupidity.

Ed Zuiderwijk
September 17, 2021 1:51 am

I can see a ban on EV’s in city centres for environmental reasons. Oops!

Craig W
September 17, 2021 3:50 am

Though GM is okay with parking your butt inside the car!

2hotel9
September 17, 2021 4:39 am

I see Unsafe At Any Speed already hit the thread. I could just see Ralph losing his mind over the numerous safety issues with EVs. Hell, because of him USG destroyed 1000s of jeeps, the farquing bastich!

Jim Whelan
Reply to  2hotel9
September 17, 2021 7:49 am

Nader is a dyed in the wool environmentalist. All-in on the climate change agenda. He’d never oppose EV’s. His opposition to various automobiles was driven more by a desire to eliminate them all than any valid concerns.

2hotel9
Reply to  Jim Whelan
September 17, 2021 8:31 am

Totally in shock that fishfaced enemy of the people is still alive. Perhaps dementia has set in, the Nader I remember would have been screaming at the top of his lungs over the self-driving debacle much less the spontaneous combustion.

Craig from Oz
September 17, 2021 4:46 am

Had this argument with a younger work mate earlier this week.

He was musing about how much he really wanted to get a hybrid or a full EV and just live in the country and never go into the city.

I ignored the fact that hybrids are only ‘useful’ in stop start traffic (aka Not Country Driving) when the regenerative braking can kick in, otherwise you are carting around a lot of extra gear that is dead weight and suggested that an EV would be fine as long as they didn’t catch fire and burn your house down.

He got very defensive. EV cars don’t catch fire! Lithium batteries only burn when they are damaged! Petrol and diesel cars catch fire too! Lithium fires can be put out!

Oh to be in my early 20s and know everything again.

MarkW
Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 17, 2021 8:56 am

Stop and go driving is when regenerative breaks perform the worst. Below a certain speed (10-15mph?) breaking is 100% friction.

Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 17, 2021 2:25 pm

“get a hybrid or a full EV and just live in the country and never go into the city”

Talk about out of touch. I LIVE in the country. EV just won’t cut it.

michel
Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 17, 2021 2:43 pm

Its weird, and you can see it on this thread. There are people who feel they have to defend EVs against any criticism, including criticism of their batteries, and it takes them into total denial of reality. And in this case chemistry of combustion.

And further down you’ll find people who feel they have to defend of all things the Corvair against any criticism.

Both are equally irrational, equally indefensible, and both are the result of lining up with ‘people like us’ who all have the same world view, and this dictates what they think about issues. Don’t bother them with the facts.

You find it with the Hockey Stick. Nothing, but nothing, will ever convince the faithful that the Hockey Stick was and is pure hokum. No matter how many observations you cite from all around the world to show that the MWP was real and was global. Or even when you show them the leaked emails, and the way the decline was hidden.

And nothing will convince the faithful that the original Corvair was a disaster. Not even the fact that in September 1959 a couple of Ford test drivers got hold of some early examples from a Chevy dealer, and took them out on the track. They lost control. Not even all the suits against GM by the people who crashed them.

It was a fine family car sabotaged by left wing near communist agitators, and who needs seat belts anyway….? It had to be, because for some reason defence of the Corvair, like defence of the Hockey Stick, or the Tesla and Bolt lithium batteries, has become not so much a matter of reality, its more, never mind the facts, I am telling you who I am.

Its the end of the Enlightenment, and some of us see we are living through it.

CapitalistRoader
Reply to  michel
September 18, 2021 10:25 am

In 1971 the NHTS released their report on testing the ’60-’63 Corvair handling. They found that the Corvair was no more nor less safe than the other compact cars of the day. Rather, it just handled differently. They also tested against other rear engine/swing axle cars available in the US, specifically the VW Type 1 and Renault Dauphine, and found that the Dauphine, with it’s relatively heavier cast iron, water cooled engine and higher rear weight bias was more prone to sudden oversteer than the Corvair. An analysis of road accidents showed that the Dauphine and VW were much more likely to roll over than the Corvair.

The report also devotes an entire section to the Ford testing and found that it was not a valid analysis.

https://www.intergarten.com/halffast/index_htm_files/PB211015-NHTSA-Corvair.pdf

Craig from Oz
September 17, 2021 4:49 am

“Additionally, we still request you do not leave your vehicle charging unattended, even if you are using a charging station in a parking deck.”

Opps, missed that line on first read through.

So much for charging your EV at night while you sleep. Now you can charge your EV at night while you sit up and watch it.

OEM’s advice. I wonder if this now means if your EV does go pop while charging that GM will not accept blame unless you can prove you were monitoring it the entire charge time.

Jim Whelan
Reply to  Craig from Oz
September 17, 2021 7:52 am

And absolutely DO NOT charge the vehicle in your garage or even near your house!

Prsy
September 17, 2021 5:16 am

A recent report on new S Korean electric car noted that the front seats fold almost flat, so the driver can nap for an hour whilst the car charges!

Jim Whelan
Reply to  Prsy
September 17, 2021 7:53 am

If you’re asleep you are not “attending” to the car while it is charging.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Jim Whelan
September 17, 2021 10:47 am

They could hang a smoke detector above the car and the alarm would wake up the sleeping car owner. Then, the car owner can jump up and run away as fast as he can.

Jim Whelan
Reply to  Tom Abbott
September 17, 2021 1:48 pm

I hadn’t realized that the reason for “attending” to the car was so you knew to run away. But now that you mention it, that does seem like the only option. In which case I suggest the owners not bother with “attending” and just run away!

ResourceGuy
September 17, 2021 5:26 am

Next Michael Moore movie–“Who killed the family that owned the electric car?”

ResourceGuy
September 17, 2021 5:34 am

In theory, EVs could improve historically unreliable brands and models. The Bolt upends that thinking just in time for mass rollout of many more models. It puts a whole new light on the just-in-time-inventory concept and replaces it with just-in-time battery scares.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 17, 2021 10:49 am

I wonder how much hesitancy the electric car fires put in people? I guess we’ll see when we get the numbers of EV cars purchased in the future.

Olen
September 17, 2021 7:48 am

I will keep my money at least 50 ft away from the car or any transaction for purchase.

Steve Z
September 17, 2021 8:27 am

That means a person can’t recharge his/her Bolt in a garage attached to the house, without fear of burning the house down (the frames of most garages are made of flammable wood). In some suburbs close to major cities, the lots on which houses are built are only 50 feet wide, so a Bolt owner can’t safely recharge the car on his/her own property!

Another question: will insurance companies pay for damages from a battery fire in an electric car that burns a house down? Would that be covered by auto insurance or homeowner’s insurance? Will insurance companies charge higher premiums for electric car owners due to the risk of battery fires?

Even if increased CO2 in the air caused the climate to warm by a degree or two over the next 100 years, it still wouldn’t be warm enough for anyone’s house to spontaneously combust. That seems a lot safer than everyone driving electric cars!

Fernando (Brasil)
September 17, 2021 9:41 am
Chevy is exchanged for Ford Pinto
ResourceGuy
September 17, 2021 9:52 am

“Take your Chevy to the levee”—and park it there!

ResourceGuy
September 17, 2021 9:55 am

So exploding batteries get a pass from NHTSA but fuel line leaks in ICE cars do not?

Jim Whelan
Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 17, 2021 1:40 pm

You can count on it!

ResourceGuy
September 17, 2021 9:57 am

Don’t give them to the Afghan refugees–they’ve been through enough live fire.

Tom Abbott
September 17, 2021 10:55 am

Lithium Electric Vehicles really are a danger from a terrorist attack viewpoint.

If all it takes to start a lithium fire is to damage the battery, that can be done quite easily with a small pipebomb or handgrenade. One Tesla parked in an underground parking garage would be a disaster waiting to happen from that perspective.

ResourceGuy
September 17, 2021 12:54 pm

It seems like only yesterday there were glowing reviews of the Bolt. i.e. not flaming

otsar
September 17, 2021 2:30 pm

Once upon a time a company I worked for bought a lithium battery powered remote data logger. We put the batteries in it and went to lunch. When we got back from lunch, there was a fire engine outside of the building. The remains of the data logger were in the parking lot, still smoking. The carpet, some of the furniture and the ceiling of the lab had fire/chemical damage. The place smelled terrible. The data logger of course was destroyed. It turned out that one of the C size battery holders had been mis-wired at the factory. The manufacturer replaced the data logger after an attorney had a chat with them. Most of the equipment that was in that lab suffered from corrosion, even after being decontaminated. Anything storing that much energy should be handled carefully and have built in disconnects and other safety features.

September 18, 2021 6:13 am

UNDERSTATING CO2 EMISSIONS PER KILOWATT-HOUR TO HYPE EVs AND HEAT PUMPS
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/some-ne-state-governments-play-deceptive-games-with-co2-emissions

EXCERPT:

THETFORD; July 2, 2021 — A fire destroyed a 2019 Chevy Bolt, 66 kWh battery, EPA range 238 miles, owned by state Rep. Tim Briglin, D-Thetford, Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Technology.

He had been driving back and forth from Thetford, VT, to Montpelier, VT, with his EV, about 100 miles via I-89
He had parked his 2019 Chevy Bolt on the driveway, throughout the winter, per GM recall of Chevy Bolts
He had plugged his EV into a 240-volt charger.
The battery was at about 10% charge at start of charging, at 8 PM, and he had charged it to 100% charge at 4 AM; 8 hours of charging. See Note

Li-ions (pos.) would plate out on the cathode (neg) each time when charging from 80 to 100%.
Li-ions would plate out on the anode (pos) each time when charging from 10% to 20%, especially when such charging occurred at battery temperatures of 32F or less.

Fire: Firefighters were called to Briglin’s Tucker Hill Road home around 9 AM Thursday. 
Investigators from the Vermont Department of Public Safety Fire and Explosion Investigation Unit determined: 

1) The fire started in a compartment in the back of the passenger’s side of the vehicle
2) It was likely due to an “electrical failure”.

https://www.vnews.com/Firefighters-put-out-blaze-in-car-of-Vt-State-Representative-41272606
https://www.engadget.com/gm-chevy-bolt-fire-warning-215322969.html
https://electrek.co/2020/11/13/gm-recall-chevy-bolt-evs-potential-fire-risk/

GM Recall of Chevy Bolts: In 2020, GM issued a worldwide recall of 68,667 Chevy Bolts, all 2017, 2018 and 2019 models, plus, in 2021, a recall for another 73,000 Bolts, all 2020, 2021, and 2022 models. 
GM set aside $1.8 BILLION to replace battery modules, or 1.8 BILLION/(68,667 + 73,000) = $12,706/EV.

https://insideevs.com/news/524712/chevrolet-bolt-battery-recall-cost/
https://thehill.com/policy/transportation/568817-gm-expands-bolt-ev-recall-to-include-73000-more-vehicles

Owners were advised not to charge them in a garage, and not to leave them unattended while charging, which may take up to 8 hours; what a nuisance!
I wonder what could happen during rush our traffic, or in a parking garage, or at a shopping mall, etc.
Rep. Briglin heeded the GM recall by not charging in his garage. See URLs

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2021/09/16/electric-social-distancing/
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/some-ne-state-governments-play-deceptive-games-with-co2-emissions 

NOTE
– Cost of replacing the battery packs of 80,000 Hyundai Konas was estimated at $900 million, about $11,000 per vehicle 
https://insideevs.com/news/492167/reports-lg-chem-cost-hyundai-battery-recall/
– EV batteries should be charged from 20 to 80%, to achieve minimal degradation and long life, plus the charging loss is minimal in that range 
– Charging EVs from 0 to 20% charge, and from 80 to 100% charge, 1) uses more kWh AC from the wall outlet per kWh DC charged into the battery, and 2) is detrimental to the battery. Also, it requires additional kWh for cooling the battery while charging. 
– EV batteries must never be charged, when the battery temperature is less than 32F; if charged anyway, the plating out of Li-ions on the anode would permanently damage the battery. 
https://www.energy.gov/eere/articles/how-does-lithium-ion-battery-work

See section Charging Electric Vehicles During Freezing Conditions in URL
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/some-ne-state-governments-play-deceptive-games-with-co2-emissions

Tom Abbott
Reply to  willem post
September 19, 2021 5:46 am

“THETFORD; July 2, 2021 — A fire destroyed a 2019 Chevy Bolt, 66 kWh battery, EPA range 238 miles, owned by state Rep. Tim Briglin, D-Thetford, Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Technology.”

LOL !!!

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Tom Abbott
September 19, 2021 6:32 am

Karma, anyone?

Reply to  Tom Abbott
September 20, 2021 3:21 pm

Tom,

He had been bragging about range was not an issue, even in winter.
By his own admission he had been range driving, filling and emptying the battery every day, which is against ALL recommendations

That A hole has never answered my emails