China Producing Half of the Worlds Electrical Vehicle Batteries is Experiencing Explosive Pollution

[Kingrocker 0]

Haha I clicked on 'is experiencing explosive pollution", it then continued with "may bring explosive pollution" and no facts.

We.need more FUD, please. And better.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,131]

On 7/18/2021 at 8:08 AM, RichieRich216 said:

Generic replacement parts? Manufacturer’s don’t make there money on the selling of the vehicles, the real money is in the parts and repair of vehicle! 
 

They have such a mark up it’s insane, I had the opportunity to visit a 80,000 square foot regional Major U.S. brand parts depot for a meeting on how to destroy parts, believe it or not they put all car parts on a self life just like food and I’m talking chrome rimes to CPU’s to floor mats. My first question was Why then Why not ship to other regional that need them. The answer was the cost aka labor, tracking, shipping was more expensive ten ordering new parts so I designed a system that destroyed everything that they wanted destroyed before it left the building to a recycling center or landfill. They wanted nothing to end up on secondary market period. This is how they think and anyone believing they won’t push back on non certified repair facilities is dreaming. But hey what do I know……

Yes, that is how they think and work, still 3rd party replacement parts everywhere, some are good and some are Shit.  How is this relevant to the discussion?  We all know that happens.  Just as all big trucks last ~+1Million miles yet cars only go ~150,000-->200,000 with a rare few like the old Police cars going 300,000miles.  They purposefully design the civilian cars to break. 

How is this relevant to EV parts and repair?  We all know TESLA purposefully does not support repair and at the same time wants to demand everyone is tied to them for maintenance at the same time...

[RichieRich216 + 454]

Sorry, Not buying it! Manufacturer’s biggest profit center is parts and services.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,131]

1 hour ago, RichieRich216 said:

Sorry, Not buying it! Manufacturer’s biggest profit center is parts and services.

So, you are saying there is MORE incentive for 3rd party manufacturers to make spare parts.... 🙄

Listen to yourself dude

[RichieRich216 + 454]

Are you Forrest Gump, Auto Manufacturer’s have sizable contracts with suppliers not to allow 3rd party sellers! What don’t you grasp about a car is worth more in parts then as a hole car! No car manufacturer is going to build a car and say Hey screw all the R & D and line set up, tooling ect..Just to let some shade tree mechanic’s repair cars under warranty.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

3 hours ago, RichieRich216 said:

Are you Forrest Gump, Auto Manufacturer’s have sizable contracts with suppliers not to allow 3rd party sellers! What don’t you grasp about a car is worth more in parts then as a hole car! No car manufacturer is going to build a car and say Hey screw all the R & D and line set up, tooling ect..Just to let some shade tree mechanic’s repair cars under warranty.

As I demonstrated before - Tesla does. But the real problem with your argument is that if it is under warranty then the manufacturer is on the hook for parts and repairs. They lose money on warranty repairs. Why would you pay for your warranty work when you can get it done for free by the manufacturer?

Edited July 20, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[RichieRich216 + 454]

Check out the replacement cost of the Tesla Battery Pack, What non Authorized Repair Center is going to get the original Supplier to break with Tesla to sell too unauthorized service center? What National Repair Center has the money to complete with a manufacturer? 
 

I have been to a Dodge Distribution Center, every part has a shelf life, then it’s destroyed so will not make to secondary market unless your counting on Ukrainian or Russian suppliers! 
 

You really don’t get the lock on the supply chain they have do you, When a Distribution Center rather destroy parts instead of paying the costs to shipping it back! Literally seen chrome rims damaged before going to recycling. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

11 minutes ago, RichieRich216 said:

Check out the replacement cost of the Tesla Battery Pack, What non Authorized Repair Center is going to get the original Supplier to break with Tesla to sell too unauthorized service center? What National Repair Center has the money to complete with a manufacturer? 
 

I have been to a Dodge Distribution Center, every part has a shelf life, then it’s destroyed so will not make to secondary market unless your counting on Ukrainian or Russian suppliers! 
 

You really don’t get the lock on the supply chain they have do you, When a Distribution Center rather destroy parts instead of paying the costs to shipping it back! Literally seen chrome rims damaged before going to recycling. 

Tesla is the original supplier of their battery pack. So far most battery packs have been repairable by third parties and there is a healthy market not only of refurbs but for your old battery, you pay the difference. However the lifetime of a battery is quickly getting to the point where the car wears out first. 

You just haven't wrapped your mind around the fact that EVs are a paradigm shift of the automobile model. Car companies are no longer going to be able to make money on the repairs and service. The cost of batteries is decreasing by 50% every three years. Electric motors last practically forever. EVs require very little maintenance.

Here is an excerpt from a guy buying a new Ford Mach e

Next up he had to go and deal with a finance guy who tried to convince him that his EV would require maintenance. The guy also tried to sell him a $4,000 bumper-to-bumper warranty even though the battery is supposed to already have a 100K mile warranty for 8 years.

The finance guy basically went on a rant about how people who think EVs have less maintenance are wrong. When Get Energi explained what he needed for his EVs, the finance guy seemed to get angry. “He was getting pretty pissed.”

So, to calm the situation down, he let the finance salesman deliver his pitch: a $2,000 EV maintenance package that would “save customers $4,000 in maintenance fees.” His reaction to the price was natural and he explained that according to the Mach-E owner’s manual, maintenance would be very seldom.

“He was like, ‘what are you talking about?’ and I was like, ‘every 10,000 miles it’s a tire rotation and every 20,000 miles it’s a $10 cabin air filter. And he’s like, ‘no it’s not,’ and started getting mad again.”

The salesman, to prove a point, looked it up on the Ford website and realized that his customer was right. Then he moved on to the warranty. Now, although the Mach-E comes with a warranty on the battery, dealerships try to make a bit of change off of an extended warranty. The salesman said, “You’re going to want to get a warranty because if anything goes wrong, there’s no way you’re going to be able to pay out of pocket.”

The guy started getting angry again, so Get Energi just said to give him the price. “We’re gonna do bumper to bumper for 100,000 miles, so you don’t have to worry about anything.” The price for the extended warranty was $4,000, which made Get Energi laugh, thus enraging the salesman.

“He got really mad because I didn’t accept his $4,000 cost. And I was like, ‘well, what would it add to my monthly payment?’ and it was between — I don’t remember, but it was between $100 and $200 extra on top of the $700 I’m paying already.

“I’m like, ‘that’s ridiculous just for a warranty? So I respectfully said ‘no, I’m just gonna decline it and go from there,’ and he was not happy about it whatsoever. I think he’s used to getting his way with other customers and me shooting him down royally, he became very unprofessional at this point.”

[markslawson + 1,042]

23 hours ago, turbguy said:

Wrong.

Just SO wrong.

Do you research before making such comments.

At least 3% of the weight of the high temperature parts are those elements. 

Sure I was corrected on the point by someone who does seem to know that the high-precision parts use those materials but I'm sorry my original point stands - the PVs, wind turbines and batteries require VASTLY MORE of those materials. They are no longer niche, as you would expect for conventional power plants but required in volume, which has to be created/mined/whatever.. hence the vast increase in production. As you can see it is not I who needs to do research. I can see, also, you are beginning to become abusive, so we'll call it quits at this point. Hopefully by the next topic you'll be calmer.  

[RichieRich216 + 454]

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Tesla is the original supplier of their battery pack. So far most battery packs have been repairable by third parties and there is a healthy market not only of refurbs but for your old battery, you pay the difference. However the lifetime of a battery is quickly getting to the point where the car wears out first. 

You just haven't wrapped your mind around the fact that EVs are a paradigm shift of the automobile model. Car companies are no longer going to be able to make money on the repairs and service. The cost of batteries is decreasing by 50% every three years. Electric motors last practically forever. EVs require very little maintenance.

Here is an excerpt from a guy buying a new Ford Mach e

Next up he had to go and deal with a finance guy who tried to convince him that his EV would require maintenance. The guy also tried to sell him a $4,000 bumper-to-bumper warranty even though the battery is supposed to already have a 100K mile warranty for 8 years.

The finance guy basically went on a rant about how people who think EVs have less maintenance are wrong. When Get Energi explained what he needed for his EVs, the finance guy seemed to get angry. “He was getting pretty pissed.”

So, to calm the situation down, he let the finance salesman deliver his pitch: a $2,000 EV maintenance package that would “save customers $4,000 in maintenance fees.” His reaction to the price was natural and he explained that according to the Mach-E owner’s manual, maintenance would be very seldom.

“He was like, ‘what are you talking about?’ and I was like, ‘every 10,000 miles it’s a tire rotation and every 20,000 miles it’s a $10 cabin air filter. And he’s like, ‘no it’s not,’ and started getting mad again.”

The salesman, to prove a point, looked it up on the Ford website and realized that his customer was right. Then he moved on to the warranty. Now, although the Mach-E comes with a warranty on the battery, dealerships try to make a bit of change off of an extended warranty. The salesman said, “You’re going to want to get a warranty because if anything goes wrong, there’s no way you’re going to be able to pay out of pocket.”

The guy started getting angry again, so Get Energi just said to give him the price. “We’re gonna do bumper to bumper for 100,000 miles, so you don’t have to worry about anything.” The price for the extended warranty was $4,000, which made Get Energi laugh, thus enraging the salesman.

“He got really mad because I didn’t accept his $4,000 cost. And I was like, ‘well, what would it add to my monthly payment?’ and it was between — I don’t remember, but it was between $100 and $200 extra on top of the $700 I’m paying already.

“I’m like, ‘that’s ridiculous just for a warranty? So I respectfully said ‘no, I’m just gonna decline it and go from there,’ and he was not happy about it whatsoever. I think he’s used to getting his way with other customers and me shooting him down royally, he became very unprofessional at this point.”

But one of the biggest problems with Tesla – leaving aside the electric or self-driving car debates – is that they’re remarkably anti-consumer when it comes to letting customers repair their own vehicles… And are pretty cavalier when it comes to their servicing charges.

Rich Rebuilds, a.k.a. Rich Benoit, is a Massachusetts-based car enthusiast who’s made waves in recent years for his outspoken advocacy of customer’s ‘Right To Repair’, shared a worrying story about a Tesla repair that demonstrates Tesla’s cartel-like (well, almost…) behaviour

The car’s owner relates how after driving over some debris in his brand new Model 3, he damaged a small part of the car’s cooling system, which prevented the car from running entirely. After taking his vehicle to a Tesla service centre, he was quoted $16,000 after being told that the entire battery would need replacing. To add insult to injury, his insurance refused to cover the cost, too.

Instead, he reached out to Benoit, who was able to fix the small part “using a brass fitting like you’d find at any home improvement store” for only $700 – 23 times less than Tesla’s estimate and a price based almost entirely on labour and diagnostic costs. Watch Benoit’s full video on the dilemma below

While this example is a rather out-there one, it demonstrates how much money you can save if you choose to work on a car yourself (or choose third-party mechanics instead of getting your car serviced at a dealership). More to the point, it highlights a growing concern as more and more auto makers are electrifying their model ranges.

Because EVs are so heavily reliant on software updates – and because EV technology is so nascent, few mechanics have the expertise to repair them – car brands really have consumers at their mercy. Of course, even modern internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles are heavily reliant on proprietary software updates and specialised servicing, but the problem is multiplied when it comes to EVs.

The concern is that cars will become like iPhones, where it’s possible for a company to just stop offering software updates or servicing for them after a few years, making your five-figure-plus investment useless. People already call Tesla the Apple of the car world but there’s more than just a little truth to that comparison.

Last year, Apple was forced to pay out over US$113 million to settle consumer fraud lawsuits over allegations that it secretly slowed down old iPhones with clandestine software updates, a controversy that became known as ‘Batterygate’, NPR reported.

It’s not just cars where this behaviour from brands is a concern. Farm machinery brand John Deere has long been accused of monopolistic behaviour for the strict and expensive control it exercises over software updates for its tractors and the like, Bloomberg relates.

As more and more car brands join the EV revolution, the hope is that Tesla will be forced to become more competitive and consumer-friendly in order to maintain their status as the market’s leading EV maker.

Of course, the worst-case scenario is that this sort of thing just becomes the new normal… Ultimately, it’s up to us as consumers to demand more from tech and vehicle manufacturers.

DO YOUR HOMEWORK FORREST- FORREST GUMP😂

[turbguy + 1,398]

1 hour ago, markslawson said:

Sure I was corrected on the point by someone who does seem to know that the high-precision parts use those materials but I'm sorry my original point stands - the PVs, wind turbines and batteries require VASTLY MORE of those materials. They are no longer niche, as you would expect for conventional power plants but required in volume, which has to be created/mined/whatever.. hence the vast increase in production. As you can see it is not I who needs to do research. I can see, also, you are beginning to become abusive, so we'll call it quits at this point. Hopefully by the next topic you'll be calmer.  

I agree, my response could sound abusive.

As far as I can see, there are no vast amounts of rare earths required for on-shore wind machines (anymore).

Perhaps you know something i do not.

 

Edited July 21, 2021 by turbguy

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

6 minutes ago, RichieRich216 said:

But one of the biggest problems with Tesla – leaving aside the electric or self-driving car debates – is that they’re remarkably anti-consumer when it comes to letting customers repair their own vehicles… And are pretty cavalier when it comes to their servicing charges.

Rich Rebuilds, a.k.a. Rich Benoit, is a Massachusetts-based car enthusiast who’s made waves in recent years for his outspoken advocacy of customer’s ‘Right To Repair’, shared a worrying story about a Tesla repair that demonstrates Tesla’s cartel-like (well, almost…) behaviour

The car’s owner relates how after driving over some debris in his brand new Model 3, he damaged a small part of the car’s cooling system, which prevented the car from running entirely. After taking his vehicle to a Tesla service centre, he was quoted $16,000 after being told that the entire battery would need replacing. To add insult to injury, his insurance refused to cover the cost, too.

Instead, he reached out to Benoit, who was able to fix the small part “using a brass fitting like you’d find at any home improvement store” for only $700 – 23 times less than Tesla’s estimate and a price based almost entirely on labour and diagnostic costs. Watch Benoit’s full video on the dilemma below

While this example is a rather out-there one, it demonstrates how much money you can save if you choose to work on a car yourself (or choose third-party mechanics instead of getting your car serviced at a dealership). More to the point, it highlights a growing concern as more and more auto makers are electrifying their model ranges.

Because EVs are so heavily reliant on software updates – and because EV technology is so nascent, few mechanics have the expertise to repair them – car brands really have consumers at their mercy. Of course, even modern internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles are heavily reliant on proprietary software updates and specialised servicing, but the problem is multiplied when it comes to EVs.

The concern is that cars will become like iPhones, where it’s possible for a company to just stop offering software updates or servicing for them after a few years, making your five-figure-plus investment useless. People already call Tesla the Apple of the car world but there’s more than just a little truth to that comparison.

Last year, Apple was forced to pay out over US$113 million to settle consumer fraud lawsuits over allegations that it secretly slowed down old iPhones with clandestine software updates, a controversy that became known as ‘Batterygate’, NPR reported.

It’s not just cars where this behaviour from brands is a concern. Farm machinery brand John Deere has long been accused of monopolistic behaviour for the strict and expensive control it exercises over software updates for its tractors and the like, Bloomberg relates.

As more and more car brands join the EV revolution, the hope is that Tesla will be forced to become more competitive and consumer-friendly in order to maintain their status as the market’s leading EV maker.

Of course, the worst-case scenario is that this sort of thing just becomes the new normal… Ultimately, it’s up to us as consumers to demand more from tech and vehicle manufacturers.

DO YOUR HOMEWORK FORREST- FORREST GUMP😂

We already covered this case at the beginning of this very discussion. Damage was done to the car that was not covered under warranty. It was cheaply and easily repaired by a third party mechanic. Tesla doesn't want to be in the car repair business, so they charge a lot. As more EVs are sold more mechanics will learn how to work on them, it is pure fear mongering to say otherwise. 

As to Right to Repair - that is an issue for the entire economy that the government under Biden has begun to regulate.

[Eric Gagen + 713]

58 minutes ago, turbguy said:

I agree, my response could sound abusive.

As far as I can see, there are no vast amounts of rare earths required for on-shore wind machines (anymore).

Perhaps you know something i do not.

 

My understanding of this point between you and @markslawson is that while it is technically possible to make wind turbines without the rare earth magnets, it's rather bulky and cumbersome, and at present prices it is far cheaper to make efficient wind turbines by using the rare earth metal magnets.  'Normal' magnets are actually cheaper, but it takes up more space in the turbine hub, requiring a larger and more expensive turbine nacelle, the extra weight requires a re designed stiffer and stronger mast for the heavier turbine, etc.  By the time you do all of that, the rare earth magnets are the better buy.

[turbguy + 1,398]

11 hours ago, Eric Gagen said:

My understanding of this point between you and @markslawson is that while it is technically possible to make wind turbines without the rare earth magnets, it's rather bulky and cumbersome, and at present prices it is far cheaper to make efficient wind turbines by using the rare earth metal magnets.  'Normal' magnets are actually cheaper, but it takes up more space in the turbine hub, requiring a larger and more expensive turbine nacelle, the extra weight requires a re designed stiffer and stronger mast for the heavier turbine, etc.  By the time you do all of that, the rare earth magnets are the better buy.

Here's what's in modern land machines (a 50 HZ application).  Note that NO rare earth magnets are required. In fact, they cannot even be used.  Nor can any type of permanent magnets.  It's all electromagnets, which can provide a much stronger field than rare earth permanent magnets.  And of some importance, not only can the rotor's field be rotated at a difference frequency than the RPM, THE FIELD CAN BE VARIED IN STRENGTH, ON DEMAND.

The "extra 10 HZ" in the example is provided by power electronics modifying the rotation of the magnetic field flux of the rotor. Instead of a DC current as used in "conventional" synchronous generators, an alternating excitation current is used.

Is it heavier? Could be.

Does it have other advantages with regards to grid stability?  You bet!

The real issue with wind machines is reliability of the planetary gearbox and bearings.

Edited July 21, 2021 by turbguy

[RichieRich216 + 454]

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

We already covered this case at the beginning of this very discussion. Damage was done to the car that was not covered under warranty. It was cheaply and easily repaired by a third party mechanic. Tesla doesn't want to be in the car repair business, so they charge a lot. As more EVs are sold more mechanics will learn how to work on them, it is pure fear mongering to say otherwise. 

As to Right to Repair - that is an issue for the entire economy that the government under Biden has begun to regulate.

What entire economy? Give me a break from the bleeding heart liberal bullshit, Biden is President in name only, The guy’s brain is long left him and if the media was not corrupt we would have a real President that has all his facilities not some Pedophile nut job…

[RichieRich216 + 454]

16 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

We already covered this case at the beginning of this very discussion. Damage was done to the car that was not covered under warranty. It was cheaply and easily repaired by a third party mechanic. Tesla doesn't want to be in the car repair business, so they charge a lot. As more EVs are sold more mechanics will learn how to work on them, it is pure fear mongering to say otherwise. 

As to Right to Repair - that is an issue for the entire economy that the government under Biden has begun to regulate.

Details are emerging from a dozen Chevy Bolt EV fires that have occurred in a little over the past year. Electrek sat down with the owner of one of the first to get his story. More than a year later, he is still making car payments on a car he doesn’t own. GM confirmed his case to be a battery fire.

 

GM again exploded into the mainstream news last week with an announcement that it was no longer safe to charge the Chevy Bolt EV unattended and that owners should park outside and away from structures out of fire concerns. This all started with a recall of 68,000 Bolt EVs in November of last year. While Hyundai had a similar problem and eventually elected to replace all Kona EV batteries with newer ones, GM decided that software could fix their problems. There have been at least two Bolt EV fires that had the final software update installed, which prompted GM’s recent announcement.

We reached out to a GM spokesperson for comment. We were told that GM is diligently investigating these latest fires and is working on a potential update to owners as quickly as possible. But the spokesperson could not give a timeframe for how this would progress.

While some are quick to dismiss electric vehicle fires as still less common than gas car fires, the opposite is actually true in this particular case. The Chevy Bolt, at least the 2019 model year, is more than an order of magnitude more likely to catch fire than a 2019 gas car, and it can do so in the middle of the night when you’re sleeping.

Electrek exclusively sat down with several owners of Bolt EV fires, and here’s one of their stories.

This is the owner’s recount from his Bolt EV fire that occurred on June 29, 2020, that GM confirmed to be battery-related.

Scott really loved his car

This is a refrain we hear from all Bolt fire victims. They really loved their car.

Scott was cleaning out his car the morning of June 29, 2020. He had to take it to a local body shop for some minor roof paint repair work. He remembers thinking to himself, “I can’t believe how much I love this car,” as he removed a few personal effects, leaving it nearly spotless. The only thing that remained in the rear seat was his son’s infant car seat. It had only been a few months since he brought his son home from the hospital.

Indeed, Scott was a self-described EVangelist. “I told everyone who would listen how amazing how awesome this car was. It was the best move that I ever made,” he recounted. He had intended to own a new one of these every 3-4 years. It was the best car that he had ever driven, and he couldn’t see himself driving anything else.

One last night

Like usual, Scott had plugged the car in the night before to his L2 ChargePoint unit. He thinks that it had about a third of a charge remaining. He always used the car’s time-of-departure charging so that the battery would be full around 7 a.m. Scott had driven the car about 21,000 miles in the year and a half that he owned it. He actually enjoyed the long trips he would take for work, some days driving more than 150 miles before getting home. Most of the time, he would plug in around 30%, almost never plugging in above 50% — a refrain we’ve heard from almost all of the fire victims. 

Leaving around 10:30 a.m., he had to run a few errands and dropped the car off at the body shop around noon. He had only drive around 7-8 miles, so the car was still nearly at a full charge. His wife picked him up and drove him home.

Then, an emergency call

A little more than four hours later, he notices a missed call from the body shop with a text message saying, “Emergency re: your car — call immediately.” It turns out that before the body shop even had a chance to look at the car, there was an awful acrid smell, and it started to smoke. The fire department was called and showed up just before 4:30 p.m. One big problem — they didn’t know how to deal with an electric vehicle fire. Scott had to 3-way call the dealership so that they could tell the firefighters how to cut the wires to ensure their safety. They removed the back seat and sprayed some water on the battery, then doused the back seat with dry chemical fire suppressant and left a little more than half an hour later as the smoke had stopped.

Scott arrived around 5:30, took pictures, and called his insurance company to file a claim. They said that they could send a tow truck to pick it up the following day.

After about 20 minutes, he left, thinking that was it. Well, at least he’d get a new car — after all, that’s what insurance is for, and the battery was under warranty.

Not so fast.

Just minutes after getting back home again, he gets a call at about a quarter after six. The car had reignited. The shop owner took a video while he was waiting for the fire department — the only thing that he could do was use a garden hose.

Rushing back, the fire department was already on site but didn’t know what to do. The owner of the body repair shop was understandably upset since the entire inside of his shop stunk from the smoke. The insurance company was freaking out and told Scott to tow it back to his house (yes, despite the fact that it was still smoldering). Instead, the fire department winched it to a nearby parking lot and tried for four hours to put it out:

 

Then things got really bad for Scott

As if all of that wasn’t bad enough, the ensuing battle to deal with this was exhausting. It shouldn’t have been that big a deal — at least nobody was hurt, and it was away from home. He thought that at least he’ll get a new car out of the situation. The car has an eight-year battery warranty and was fully insured.

Well, it didn’t work out that way. Scott says that he fought with GM for three weeks. The dealership “ghosted” him and refused to provide needed documentation. GM didn’t respond to calls, then sent him an email claiming that it couldn’t reach him. Despite all this, he finally had enough details to settle with the insurance company.

The main problem? No gap insurance. He owed $32,964 on the car, and the insurance appraised the vehicle at just over $21,000. Because of all of the steep discounts that GM was offering on the Bolt, his 18-month-old car was worth about half what he paid for it.

Scott was left with a little under $12,000 in debt because of his battery-related Bolt EV fire and thus couldn’t even afford a replacement car. One of the major selling factors of an electric vehicle is that it’s supposed to save you money. Now, he’s in debt.

GM would not help him

Calling GM back to complain about this, he questioned why this was even necessary. He bought this car knowing that GM would stand by the battery for eight years. Regardless of what happened, it would be covered by warranty, the dealership assured him when he bought it. The entire purpose of a warranty is so that the manufacturer will replace or repair a product if there is a defect. GM has admitted there is a defect, so clearly, this should be covered under warranty, or so he thought.

Instead, this is what Scott says that GM told him:

The car was not a total loss — it sold at auction as “REBUILDABLE.” But because of the Bolt EV fire, GM refused to honor its warranty. As Scott protested, he was shut down. They told him that the only way that GM would be willing to investigate further is if he sued them. At that point, he says that his case was closed.

Left In Debt

After getting the payout from the insurance company, Scott still had $12,000 still owing on the debt. Even worse, he had no car to show for it. He felt that he couldn’t afford to sue GM. There’s no guarantee of a favorable outcome when suing a company that large.
 

Scott is still paying off the debt today. He eventually had to borrow money from family just so that he wouldn’t have to be reminded every two weeks as the loan payments came out of his bank account.

 

He could have had gap insurance. Scott could have taken the payout and bought another used Bolt or even a Leaf. But after all that happened, he was understandably reluctant to get into another electric vehicle. Instead, he has returned to driving his diesel pickup, despite really disliking it. It made more sense to him to put the money into paying off the debt and wait for the technology to mature.

Scott didn’t share his story until now because he didn’t want to dissuade others from buying an electric vehicle. He’s not looking for a handout. He didn’t want to whine about the money. He doesn’t even care if he gets another penny out of them. But after seeing the fires that keep occurring, he wants GM to stand up and do what’s right.

Electrek’s Take

This is an insane story, and it’s easy to feel Scott’s pain. Nobody should have to go through what Scott had to endure after his Bolt EV fire. The car was supposedly repairable and sold at auction for over $10,000. GM should have just replaced the battery and cleaned it up or given him a replacement car. To shut down his inquiries and just tell him to sue them is reprehensible.

In GM’s original filing with the NHTSA for the recall, the company confirmed his battery fire. Scott has had to relive this for more than a year. Every time he heard about another Bolt EV fire, all of this frustration resurfaced.

Yes, he could have had gap insurance (hindsight is 20:20). Yes, he could have just bought another EV. But can you blame him for not wanting to after how he was treated? 

What’s even worse? GM has been doing buy-backs and MSRP swaps. Scott has been hearing how GM is giving some owners a brand new 2022 Bolt with a check because the 2022’s are less expensive than the 2019s were. They’re literally paying some people to take a new car out of the risk of a battery fire. However, they have left Scott — who actually had a battery fire — with $12,000 in debt. They also apparently haven’t helped out the owner of the May 1 fire, who says that his insurance won’t pay out or start repairs on his house until GM concludes their investigation. (We reached out to GM about this, as there are always two sides of the story, and were told that the company is looking into it.)

How would you feel in Scott’s position after having a Bolt EV Fire?

GM needs to do the right thing. Make all of the Bolt fire victims whole, work with their insurance, pay off any debts, and replace their vehicles. It’s the least that they can do based on the inconvenience and the stress and worry that they’re under now. GM also needs to offer all the affected owners either a battery replacement or a new Bolt so that these fires don’t keep happening.

It wouldn’t even cost them that much. If GM reached a similar settlement that Hyundai did with LG, it should cost them around $250 million to replace all of the affected batteries. This may sound like a lot, but don’t forget that GM is expecting $10 to $11 billion in profit this year. That’s less than 3% of their profit.

GM’s All Electric Future At Risk

There are more owners like Scott who are swearing off GM based on how the company is handling the Bolt EV Fire recall. It wasn’t even that long ago that GM had another major problem to deal with — the faulty ignition switch scandal.

GM’s CEO, Mary Barra, had her “Pearl Harbor” momentafter it was discovered that GM had “a pattern of incompetence and neglect” that led to the deaths of at least 13 people.

She also said that “In fact, I never want you to forget it. This is not just another business crisis for GM. We aren’t simply going to fix this and move on.” But it seems that is exactly what they did with the software fix for the Bolt. Luckily nobody has been injured or died, but with cars that burst into flame in the middle of the night, how long until that happens?

Now’s your time, Mrs. Barra. As GM forges ahead into its all-electric future, let’s hope that you haven’t forgotten.
 

Hey FORREST- FORREST GUMP MAYBE YOU CAN DIRECT HIM TO A 3RD PARTY REPAIR SERVICE……😂😂😂

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

18 minutes ago, RichieRich216 said:

Details are emerging from a dozen Chevy Bolt EV fires that have occurred in a little over the past year. Electrek sat down with the owner of one of the first to get his story. More than a year later, he is still making car payments on a car he doesn’t own. GM confirmed his case to be a battery fire.

 

GM again exploded into the mainstream news last week with an announcement that it was no longer safe to charge the Chevy Bolt EV unattended and that owners should park outside and away from structures out of fire concerns. This all started with a recall of 68,000 Bolt EVs in November of last year. While Hyundai had a similar problem and eventually elected to replace all Kona EV batteries with newer ones, GM decided that software could fix their problems. There have been at least two Bolt EV fires that had the final software update installed, which prompted GM’s recent announcement.

We reached out to a GM spokesperson for comment. We were told that GM is diligently investigating these latest fires and is working on a potential update to owners as quickly as possible. But the spokesperson could not give a timeframe for how this would progress.

While some are quick to dismiss electric vehicle fires as still less common than gas car fires, the opposite is actually true in this particular case. The Chevy Bolt, at least the 2019 model year, is more than an order of magnitude more likely to catch fire than a 2019 gas car, and it can do so in the middle of the night when you’re sleeping.

Electrek exclusively sat down with several owners of Bolt EV fires, and here’s one of their stories.

This is the owner’s recount from his Bolt EV fire that occurred on June 29, 2020, that GM confirmed to be battery-related.

Scott really loved his car

This is a refrain we hear from all Bolt fire victims. They really loved their car.

Scott was cleaning out his car the morning of June 29, 2020. He had to take it to a local body shop for some minor roof paint repair work. He remembers thinking to himself, “I can’t believe how much I love this car,” as he removed a few personal effects, leaving it nearly spotless. The only thing that remained in the rear seat was his son’s infant car seat. It had only been a few months since he brought his son home from the hospital.

Indeed, Scott was a self-described EVangelist. “I told everyone who would listen how amazing how awesome this car was. It was the best move that I ever made,” he recounted. He had intended to own a new one of these every 3-4 years. It was the best car that he had ever driven, and he couldn’t see himself driving anything else.

One last night

Like usual, Scott had plugged the car in the night before to his L2 ChargePoint unit. He thinks that it had about a third of a charge remaining. He always used the car’s time-of-departure charging so that the battery would be full around 7 a.m. Scott had driven the car about 21,000 miles in the year and a half that he owned it. He actually enjoyed the long trips he would take for work, some days driving more than 150 miles before getting home. Most of the time, he would plug in around 30%, almost never plugging in above 50% — a refrain we’ve heard from almost all of the fire victims. 

Leaving around 10:30 a.m., he had to run a few errands and dropped the car off at the body shop around noon. He had only drive around 7-8 miles, so the car was still nearly at a full charge. His wife picked him up and drove him home.

Then, an emergency call

A little more than four hours later, he notices a missed call from the body shop with a text message saying, “Emergency re: your car — call immediately.” It turns out that before the body shop even had a chance to look at the car, there was an awful acrid smell, and it started to smoke. The fire department was called and showed up just before 4:30 p.m. One big problem — they didn’t know how to deal with an electric vehicle fire. Scott had to 3-way call the dealership so that they could tell the firefighters how to cut the wires to ensure their safety. They removed the back seat and sprayed some water on the battery, then doused the back seat with dry chemical fire suppressant and left a little more than half an hour later as the smoke had stopped.

Scott arrived around 5:30, took pictures, and called his insurance company to file a claim. They said that they could send a tow truck to pick it up the following day.

After about 20 minutes, he left, thinking that was it. Well, at least he’d get a new car — after all, that’s what insurance is for, and the battery was under warranty.

Not so fast.

Just minutes after getting back home again, he gets a call at about a quarter after six. The car had reignited. The shop owner took a video while he was waiting for the fire department — the only thing that he could do was use a garden hose.

Rushing back, the fire department was already on site but didn’t know what to do. The owner of the body repair shop was understandably upset since the entire inside of his shop stunk from the smoke. The insurance company was freaking out and told Scott to tow it back to his house (yes, despite the fact that it was still smoldering). Instead, the fire department winched it to a nearby parking lot and tried for four hours to put it out:

 

Then things got really bad for Scott

As if all of that wasn’t bad enough, the ensuing battle to deal with this was exhausting. It shouldn’t have been that big a deal — at least nobody was hurt, and it was away from home. He thought that at least he’ll get a new car out of the situation. The car has an eight-year battery warranty and was fully insured.

Well, it didn’t work out that way. Scott says that he fought with GM for three weeks. The dealership “ghosted” him and refused to provide needed documentation. GM didn’t respond to calls, then sent him an email claiming that it couldn’t reach him. Despite all this, he finally had enough details to settle with the insurance company.

The main problem? No gap insurance. He owed $32,964 on the car, and the insurance appraised the vehicle at just over $21,000. Because of all of the steep discounts that GM was offering on the Bolt, his 18-month-old car was worth about half what he paid for it.

Scott was left with a little under $12,000 in debt because of his battery-related Bolt EV fire and thus couldn’t even afford a replacement car. One of the major selling factors of an electric vehicle is that it’s supposed to save you money. Now, he’s in debt.

GM would not help him

Calling GM back to complain about this, he questioned why this was even necessary. He bought this car knowing that GM would stand by the battery for eight years. Regardless of what happened, it would be covered by warranty, the dealership assured him when he bought it. The entire purpose of a warranty is so that the manufacturer will replace or repair a product if there is a defect. GM has admitted there is a defect, so clearly, this should be covered under warranty, or so he thought.

Instead, this is what Scott says that GM told him:

The car was not a total loss — it sold at auction as “REBUILDABLE.” But because of the Bolt EV fire, GM refused to honor its warranty. As Scott protested, he was shut down. They told him that the only way that GM would be willing to investigate further is if he sued them. At that point, he says that his case was closed.

Left In Debt

After getting the payout from the insurance company, Scott still had $12,000 still owing on the debt. Even worse, he had no car to show for it. He felt that he couldn’t afford to sue GM. There’s no guarantee of a favorable outcome when suing a company that large.
 

Scott is still paying off the debt today. He eventually had to borrow money from family just so that he wouldn’t have to be reminded every two weeks as the loan payments came out of his bank account.

 

He could have had gap insurance. Scott could have taken the payout and bought another used Bolt or even a Leaf. But after all that happened, he was understandably reluctant to get into another electric vehicle. Instead, he has returned to driving his diesel pickup, despite really disliking it. It made more sense to him to put the money into paying off the debt and wait for the technology to mature.

Scott didn’t share his story until now because he didn’t want to dissuade others from buying an electric vehicle. He’s not looking for a handout. He didn’t want to whine about the money. He doesn’t even care if he gets another penny out of them. But after seeing the fires that keep occurring, he wants GM to stand up and do what’s right.

Electrek’s Take

This is an insane story, and it’s easy to feel Scott’s pain. Nobody should have to go through what Scott had to endure after his Bolt EV fire. The car was supposedly repairable and sold at auction for over $10,000. GM should have just replaced the battery and cleaned it up or given him a replacement car. To shut down his inquiries and just tell him to sue them is reprehensible.

In GM’s original filing with the NHTSA for the recall, the company confirmed his battery fire. Scott has had to relive this for more than a year. Every time he heard about another Bolt EV fire, all of this frustration resurfaced.

Yes, he could have had gap insurance (hindsight is 20:20). Yes, he could have just bought another EV. But can you blame him for not wanting to after how he was treated? 

What’s even worse? GM has been doing buy-backs and MSRP swaps. Scott has been hearing how GM is giving some owners a brand new 2022 Bolt with a check because the 2022’s are less expensive than the 2019s were. They’re literally paying some people to take a new car out of the risk of a battery fire. However, they have left Scott — who actually had a battery fire — with $12,000 in debt. They also apparently haven’t helped out the owner of the May 1 fire, who says that his insurance won’t pay out or start repairs on his house until GM concludes their investigation. (We reached out to GM about this, as there are always two sides of the story, and were told that the company is looking into it.)

How would you feel in Scott’s position after having a Bolt EV Fire?

GM needs to do the right thing. Make all of the Bolt fire victims whole, work with their insurance, pay off any debts, and replace their vehicles. It’s the least that they can do based on the inconvenience and the stress and worry that they’re under now. GM also needs to offer all the affected owners either a battery replacement or a new Bolt so that these fires don’t keep happening.

It wouldn’t even cost them that much. If GM reached a similar settlement that Hyundai did with LG, it should cost them around $250 million to replace all of the affected batteries. This may sound like a lot, but don’t forget that GM is expecting $10 to $11 billion in profit this year. That’s less than 3% of their profit.

GM’s All Electric Future At Risk

There are more owners like Scott who are swearing off GM based on how the company is handling the Bolt EV Fire recall. It wasn’t even that long ago that GM had another major problem to deal with — the faulty ignition switch scandal.

GM’s CEO, Mary Barra, had her “Pearl Harbor” momentafter it was discovered that GM had “a pattern of incompetence and neglect” that led to the deaths of at least 13 people.

She also said that “In fact, I never want you to forget it. This is not just another business crisis for GM. We aren’t simply going to fix this and move on.” But it seems that is exactly what they did with the software fix for the Bolt. Luckily nobody has been injured or died, but with cars that burst into flame in the middle of the night, how long until that happens?

Now’s your time, Mrs. Barra. As GM forges ahead into its all-electric future, let’s hope that you haven’t forgotten.
 

Hey FORREST- FORREST GUMP MAYBE YOU CAN DIRECT HIM TO A 3RD PARTY REPAIR SERVICE……😂😂😂

No, this is a warranty and product liability issue. I have consistently said that warranty work needs to be done by the manufacturer because it is free. In this case GM did not accept the warranty claim when it clearly was valid. That is not an EV issue, they no doubt fail to accept proper warranty claims on ICE as well.

His mistake was not to publicize this when it happened and not to hire an attorney if GM still didn't take care of him. The article makes it clear that GM took care of everyone else, this one poor guy got screwed. I predict that GM will take care of him now that it has been publicized.

[RichieRich216 + 454]

You and Joe Biden would work well together, The BLIND leading the BLIND!

[Eric Gagen + 713]

@Jay McKinsey @RichieRich216  all of the discussion about the Chevrolet bolt reminds me of the rule I learned in 1980 when my dads Vega caught fire, was reinforced when the door handles for my wife’s Pontiac fell off, and again when my grandmothers Saturn hood hinge broke:  never ever purchase or attempt to use any product, service or part which General Motors was involved in.  This isn’t an electric car problem it’s a GM problem. 

[markslawson + 1,042]

21 hours ago, Eric Gagen said:

My understanding of this point between you and @markslawson is that while it is technically possible to make wind turbines without the rare earth magnets, it's rather bulky and cumbersome, and at present prices it is far cheaper to make efficient wind turbines by using the rare earth metal magnets. 

 

20 hours ago, turbguy said:

Here's what's in modern land machines (a 50 HZ application).  Note that NO rare earth magnets are required. In fact, they cannot even be used.  Nor can any type of permanent magnets. 

Guys - you're missing major pieces in the discussion .. notably PV panels and batteries.. I was talking about the whole area, not just wind turbines. In any case, to repeat the basic point.. the rare earth sector is undergoing massive expansion, as is production in various previously niche materials, all widely attributed to green power projects of one sort or another. There is no real argument on the matter, despite what a handful of die hard activists will try to tell you. So its really a matter of working out which particular part of the green power sector is boosting the demand, not that a particular part doesn't need them or whatever..     

[Boat + 1,315]

On 7/13/2021 at 1:05 AM, ronwagn said:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/with-china-producing-half-the-worlds-new-energy-vehicles-retired-batteries-may-bring-explosive-pollution_3897010.html

I have heard optimistic claims for using used batteries in America, but this story is scary. 

FY 2020	$9,057,401,000	14,172
FY 2019	$8,849,488,000	14,172
FY 2018	$8,824,488,000	14,172
FY 2017	$8,058,488,000	15,408
FY 2016	$8,139,887,000	14,779
FY 2015	$8,139,887,000	14,725
FY 2014	$8,200,000,000	15,408
FY 2013	$7,901,104,000	15,913
FY 2012	$8,449,385,000	17,106
FY 2011	$8,682,117,000	17,359
FY 2010	$10,297,864,000	17,278
FY 2009	$7,643,674,000	17,049
FY 2008	$7,472,324,000	16,916
FY 2007	$7,725,130,000	17,072
FY 2006	$7,617,416,000	17,355
FY 2005	$8,023,483,000	17,495
FY 2004	$8,365,420,000	17,611
FY 2003	$8,078,703,000	17,741
FY 2002	$8,078,813,000	17,590
FY 2001	$7,832,211,000	17,558
FY 2000	$7,562,811,000	17,726
FY 1999	$7,590,352,000	18,110
FY 1998	$7,363,046,000	17,739
FY 1997	$6,799,393,000	17,152
FY 1996	$6,522,953,000	17,082
FY 1995	$7,240,887,000	17,508
FY 1994	$6,658,927,000	17,106
FY 1993	$6,892,424,000	17,280
FY 1992	$6,668,853,000	17,010
FY 1991	$6,094,287,000	16,415
FY 1990	$5,461,808,000	16,318
FY 1989	$5,155,125,000	14,370
FY 1988	$5,027,442,000	14,442
FY 1987	$5,364,092,000	13,442
FY 1986	$3,663,841,000	12,892
FY 1985	$4,353,655,000	12,410
FY 1984	$4,067,000,000	11,420
FY 1983	$3,688,688,000	10,832
FY 1982	$3,676,013,000	11,402
FY 1981	$3,030,669,000	12,667
FY 1980	$4,669,415,000	13,078
FY 1979	$5,402,561,000	12,160
FY 1978	$5,498,635,000	11,986
FY 1977	$2,763,745,000	11,315
FY 1976	$771,695,000	9,481
FY 1975	$698,835,000	10,438
FY 1974	$518,348,000	9,743
FY 1973	$2,377,226,000	9,077
FY 1972	$2,447,565,000	8,358
FY 1971	$1,288,784,000	5,744
FY 1970	$1,003,984,000	4,084

[RichieRich216 + 454]

3 hours ago, Eric Gagen said:

@Jay McKinsey @RichieRich216  all of the discussion about the Chevrolet bolt reminds me of the rule I learned in 1980 when my dads Vega caught fire, was reinforced when the door handles for my wife’s Pontiac fell off, and again when my grandmothers Saturn hood hinge broke:  never ever purchase or attempt to use any product, service or part which General Motors was involved in.  This isn’t an electric car problem it’s a GM problem. 

Remember the Ford Pinto, A decent rear ending and 💥 BOOM…..

[turbguy + 1,398]

47 minutes ago, markslawson said:

 

Guys - you're missing major pieces in the discussion .. notably PV panels and batteries.. I was talking about the whole area, not just wind turbines. In any case, to repeat the basic point.. the rare earth sector is undergoing massive expansion, as is production in various previously niche materials, all widely attributed to green power projects of one sort or another. There is no real argument on the matter, despite what a handful of die hard activists will try to tell you. So its really a matter of working out which particular part of the green power sector is boosting the demand, not that a particular part doesn't need them or whatever..     

Yes, discussion's do tend to strongly wander, don't they.

I  would agree that refined rare earths need much greater domestic supply.  Apparently it is difficult to compete with "that major refiner" due to lax environmental practices.  Somehow, that needs change.

[Boat + 1,315]

That’s a list of money per year for superfund sites by industry that didn’t do so well at cleaning up. So yea, charge industry for cleaning up their future costs before they sell, take the money and run. This would be a great start of dismantling the power of the deep state and swamp Trump loves to talk about. Oh yea, how about a clean up of the industries that support Republicans past and future. You know, that part of the swamp.

[Eric Gagen + 713]

1 hour ago, RichieRich216 said:

Remember the Ford Pinto, A decent rear ending and 💥 BOOM…..

yech!!  that said,  Ford has made enough good quality vehicles before and since, that I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, just like most others.  IMHO only GM has earned the 'never buy' label - everyone else it's worth looking at the merits of the individual situation before making a decision.