EVs Spark Deadly Fire On Dutch Ship
By Paul Homewood
A fire on a cargo ship carrying almost 3,000 cars off the coast of the Dutch island of Ameland has left one sailor dead and 22 others hurt.
A major salvage operation is in full swing in an area of the North Sea designated a World Heritage site.
Twenty-two crew members were taken to hospital with breathing problems, burns and other injuries.
A Dutch coastguard spokesman said the fire was probably caused by one of 25 electric vehicles on board the ship.
Photos shared by the coastguard showed the Panamanian-flagged Freemantle Highway engulfed in smoke with flames licking the deck.
The coastguard told Dutch news agency ANP the fire could continue for days. The sides of the ship were being doused with water to cool it down, but rescue boats avoided pouring too much water on board because of the risk of sinking.
The cargo ship left the port of Bremerhaven in northern Germany at around 15:00 local time on Tuesday on course for Port Said in Egypt.
It ran into trouble overnight, about 27km (17 miles) north of the Ameland in the Wadden Sea, on the edge of the North Sea.
Members of the crew initially tried to douse the flames themselves but were overwhelmed and were eventually forced to evacuate.
The captain of the Ameland lifeboat, Willard Molenaar, told public broadcaster NOS that seven people had leapt 30m into the sea: "One by one they jumped and we had to fish them out of the water. They were really desperate so they had to jump."
A tugboat was used to pull the cargo ship out of major shipping routes to and from Germany.
The freighter, which is operated by K-Line but owned by a subsidiary of the Japanese shipbuilding firm Imabari Shipbuilding, is currently stationary but the Dutch coastguard said it may be listing.
The immediate challenge for emergency crews at the scene is to extinguish the fire and keep the cargo ship afloat.
Salvage boats are circling, in preparation for all possible scenarios.
The North Sea foundation environmental group said the Wadden Sea had become increasingly vulnerable because of bigger ships using an extremely busy shipping route.
Four years ago 270 shipping containers, some containing chemicals, fell off another Panamanian-registered cargo ship in a storm and some of the containers washed up on Dutch beaches.
But this latest incident has also raised issues surrounding the risks of transporting electric vehicles.
Last year a cargo ship carrying 4,000 luxury cars caught fire and sank off the Azores. Lithium-ion batteries in the cars caught fire and firefighters needed specialist equipment to put out the fire.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66310280
This is truly scary stuff.
This was a cargo ship with 20 odd crew. Just imagine the catastrophe if it had been a car ferry, with hundreds of passengers and crew. Add in a ship full of EVs, and I suspect the ship would literally blow up in minutes.
Anybody who has sailed on one will know the virtual impossibility of getting all passengers off alive from below decks. Indeed, with the narrow corridors on board, I suspect many would be crushed in the panic to get off the ship.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Grant Shapps who is now Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (you couldn’t make it up ). Previously, in his job as Secretary of State for Transport, he had NO IDEA that EV’s were a Fire risk when asked about it in the House of Commons, and he is in now charge of all this, God help us!
That is the worrying thing. All sorts of things that we think are common knowledge appear to be a closed book to our politicians, unless of course they just don’t want to acknowledge basic truths as they have nailed their colours firmly to the mast.
I think we might struggle to comprehend how stupid they are if we encountered them.
Good old ‘5 O Levels Shapps’.
“…stupid…”
Could not care less about knowing anything and immediately totally glassy-eyed and dismissive when they realize they have accidentally met a non-sheeple, is more my experience of them.
I’m somewhat surprised at Paul pulling in this article, since your such a stickler for detail, perhaps you should verify what the Dutch coastguard actually said?
“And how do we know that? Well, we called them and asked them. And they told us that, no, they have not made a statement to that effect, because they don’t know the cause of the fire yet, and that this seems to be speculation in the media.”
According to the BBC:
“A Dutch coastguard spokesman said the fire was probably caused by one of 25 electric vehicles on board the ship.”
I’d complain to them if I were you!
No point
BBC will say
Not us just quoting Dutch Coast Guard
Presumably you have also been countering the misinformation on wildfires and ‘record’ temperatures over the last few weeks? Or the unscientific hottest global temperatures ever
It will be interesting to see how it turns out but it would be genuinely interesting to know what you think of Ev’s traveling through the Channel tunnel and parking in multi storey car parks particularly below residential blocks?
Hmm shall we apply some common sense? There are 3,000 cars on board. They will be new cars and the ICE’s will have either zero or very little fuel on board – after all they have no reason to be fully fuelled do they? The few EVs though will likely be charged as a flat battery is a serious problem for loading and unloading EVs – isn’t it?
A petrol or diesel fire expires very quickly indeed and there is very little other combustible material on a cargo ship. The conflagration is visibly entirely above the deck.
The fire is still burning now over 13 hours since first reported and the authorities are expecting it to burn for days despite such continuous flooding with water that there are concerns of actually sinking the ship with too much.
So two questions. Firstly, what do you think is the cause of this fire? Secondly why have you chosen to post sarcastically on here?
Fires on board ships are very very difficult to put out. Even in dock. Specialist firefighting teams are used by navies but even then ships are lost due fire as often as damage by gunfire or missile strikes.
In WW2 the Americans learnt the lessons of carrier battles in 1942 and damage control is vital and havent lost a fleet carrier to fire since the end of 2942, despite the best efforts of the Japanese and accidents
Commercial vessels with minimal crew not trained to a high level are vulnerable to loss due to fire. EVs just make that worse.
Oh and while you are considering your reply how about….
“The ship’s owner said an electric car in the cargo was suspected as a possible cause for the blaze.
In a statement, Shoei Kisen Kaisha Ltd said: “We are now trying to extinguish the fire in cooperation with the local authorities of [the] Netherlands, the salvor and the ship management company.”
No coastguard comments required – funny how Electrek didn’t contact the owners?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/26/cargo-ship-fire-off-dutch-coast
Last night the Beeb had a puff piece on EV’s saying the future is electric. Funny thing they didn’t mention that EV’s have a tendency to self combust. Nor did she find space to explain why fire crews are doubled up if they attend a EV fire. However what got our little presenter’s knickers in a sweat was being driven around at speed in an airfield in an e-Type Jag running on synthetic petrol.
I saw that. It was every inch the eco-puff piece we expected it to be. As a piece of critical, evidence-based journalism it was a 1/5.
As expected for the Biased Broadcasting Corporation…
Next EV disaster could well be in the Chunnel.
Living near the Channel Tunnel and being a regular user, it frankly astonishes me that EVs are allowed but a tiny camping gaz cylinder is prohibited. Sadly this is already a disaster waiting to happen.
I like using the Chunnel and am also surprised that there seem to be no restrictions. An enclosed space and an Ev fire is a potential nightmare. I can only assume they have ‘robust’ firefighting measures in place but I wouldn’t bet on it.
I would also be worried at these things being stored and charged in underground car parks, private or public.
I have carried gas cylinders through the tunnel without any bother. At first I do recall being routed to one side so that a sticker could be put on my mirror to show that there was gas onboard.
On this topic, were one so inclined, it would be very simple to cause one’s own EV to go Roman candle in the Chunnel. I hope some consideration has been given to this possibility.
There needs to be a Government Independent Enquiry into EV’s and the propensity for their batteries to spontaneously combust.
The Lithium Batteries are definitely the problem, because it doesn’t matter which EV car manufacturer, E scooter brand etc has them, the risk of fire is universal over ALL Lithium Ion Battery EV’s! I saw a report and a camcorder recording of a £300k+ EV McLaren being completely destroyed by the fire.
I doubt even the metal of the car could be salvaged, the flames release Hydrogen Fluoride which when in contact with atmospheric water vapour forms Hydrofluoric Acid, which can dissolve glass and anything else that it is in contact with!
To put this in to context, I have been driving for 50 years, with 30 of those years covering 18-20,000 miles pa. In that time I have only ever seen one car in flames and that was before EV’s were ever thought of, apart from milk-floats and any other vehicles with Lead/H2SO4 batteries, which very rarely catch fire. They only do so if there is a short-circuit, however, exactly the same is applicable for EV batteries too.
My final thought on this is that EV’s driven, or as freight carriers should be banned from ferries, enclosed car parks and tunnels. If an EV caught fire in the Channel Tunnel, it would create a massive carnage of the most horrific kind!
TPTB are far too busy virtue signalling to bother their gargantuan brains with such trifling issues.
You might want to brush up on your chemistry. Lithium batteries do not contain flourine, but some air conditioning gases do; these are being phased out, due to concerns about fire hazards which when combusted producing HF gas. That would apply to ICE vehicles as well. The problem with Lithium is its highly reactive nature especially when in contact with moisture.
In fact the batteries contain liquid electrolyte (usually a solution of lithium hexafluorophosphate salts in a mixture of ethylene carbonate and propylene carbonate or tetrahydrofurane) .
Hydrofluoric Acid: The Chemical Hazard Hiding in Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Batteries
https://www.autoresource.co.uk/resources/hydrofluoric-acid-the-chemical-hazard-hiding-in-electric-and-hybrid-vehicle-batteries/
The flaw there is in trusting the government….the same one that refuses to acknowledge a huge rise in excess deaths, ignores people dropping dead suddenly and is still pushing a vaccine that we now know has a 1 in 35 chance of damaging your heart.
I’ve seen several vehicle fires not EV one – yet. There are several reasons why this can happen design eg The Pinto, badly maintained old and not so old vehicles to name a couple. EVs are not immune from either of these but have the added dangers of self ignition for various reasons in various circumstances
I’ve had one car catch fire in over 60 years of motoring, a rather decrepit Singer Gazelle at the bottom of Deansgate in Manchester in about 1970 due to the petrol pipe from the fuel pump to the carburetter snapped off at the pump end, sprayed fuel all over the engine compartment and caught fire.
This announced itself by a sheet flame emerging from the back of the bonnet over the windscreen, quite alarming as we were in traffic at the time.
So I dived into a bus stop, a charitable driver pulled up with a fire extinguisher and using that and the spare gallon of water always carried to top up the radiator we put it out.
So, a quick visit to a nearby auto accessory shop to buy a few yards of wire to fix the wiring harness and a nipple for the fuel pipe, we were driving again an hour later!
Try THAT in a new car!
I carry a fire extinguisher, and when I drove old cars a couple of litres of water, lengths of wire, radweld, engine oil, jubilee clips, bulbs and fuses. It’s just fuses and bulbs now, whether I could locate and replace any is doubtful.
I carry a card with the phone number of the breakdown service these days!
With prescient timing, yesterday the BBC’s old, world-famous, and now ex- energy analyst Roger Harrabin tweeted a puff-piece by ex-colleague and stickler-for-accuracy Justin Rowlatt.
On EVs.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0fzlswg
I watched the programme waiting for Justin Rowprat to talk about child labour in the Congo, EV fires and explosions, increased pollution due to excess tyre wear, increased damage to road surfaces and dangers to multi-story car parks. But I waited in vain.
Don’t forget this one: https://www.euronews.com/2022/03/01/massive-cargo-ship-carrying-electric-cars-sinks-in-atlantic-ocean-after-fire
The other major concern is that huge battery energy storage systems (BESS) are being constructed all over the country. They are disasters waiting to happen (battery bombs).
Phillip, I’ve sent letters to the HSE, local council and our local MP on this theme. Our local MP was surprisingly sympathetic to the risks of BESS application: unfortunately, in other areas this is not the case.
I’ve objected to several of them in Devon, but the planners, councils and planning inspectors don’t care about the hazards to the people and the environment. They don’t understand. All they think about is that BESS will enable more renewables and will stop the so-called climate emergency.
It must have been terrifying for the crew but another fact from the report struck me.
The ship was going from Germany to Egypt, presumably to offload there. There were 3000 cars on board yet only 25 were EVs. Does this mean the the Egyptians are not exactly falling in love with EVs nor net zero maybe. According to one report I read, in 2022 there were only 350 EVs out of a car population of 6 million. Thats even less than the 1000 out of 12 million in South Africa. I don’t expect XR have a great following there either.
When will the insurance companies pull the plug on ships carrying EVs?
Too political
They will have to raise the premiums to massive levels then.
here is what I put on the Mail…..
“Battery Electric Vehicles, what does it take to stop these death traps from being sold. A fire in a multistorey car park at a shopping centre with hundreds unable to escape and suffocating from the toxic fumes, All fire fighting equipment is too big to enter a multistorey car park, so no way of extinguishing the chemical fire (not needing atmospheric oxygen for combustion). I accept that petrol and Diesel cars catch fire as well, but they can be easily extinguished with a foam fire extinguisher, which are mandatory in multistorey car parks”
……I just do not see how we can go ahead with Lithium battery powered transport. it is just too dangerous.
Interesting point that Fire Engines are too big to enter multi storeys but presumably there must be some sort of fire fighting capability.
But not spontaneously while parked. ICE cars need to be involved in accidents or left in the middle of a desert in an actually hot country for several hours.
>> I accept that petrol and Diesel cars catch fire as well
ICE vehicles can self ignite from, ironically, electrical faults at any time and fuel leaks onto hot exhausts shortly after parking. Both more common in old badly maintained vehicles
Point about Diesel and Petrol fires is that invariably it is the engine that catches fire, not the tank which is basically inert. And the amount of fuel present in the engine is quite limited along with some lubricants and some plastic.
To blow up a fuel tank you need a fairly sizeable ignition, my favourite would be a really good Lithium fire in the Tesla parked next 50cm away.
I see a Grenfell type scenario where a ferry turns into a roman candle because fire hazards hadn’t been addressed holistically. A battery fire turns the petrol car parked next to into a fireball and within minutes the whole deck is on fire.
If an EV catches fire on a motorway, they have to let it burn …than repair the road, just wait till that happens
You might like to listen to today’s media show at 4.30. About 15 minutes in I could not believe my ears as the presenter shut a contributed down. B.B. C. censorship??
BBC doesn’t allow AGW sceptics on far less shut them down halfway through.
Perhaps the industry has already anticipated these disasters. The shipping industry’s bulletin gCaptain Daily reported on 17th July that Hoegh Autoliners ( Norway-based) have just ordered from Chinese shipyards four more autocarriers bringing the total number of vessels under their newbuilding program to 12. They have reserved “slots” for an additional 4 vessels according to
Their vehicle capacity is for 9,100 cars.
It will be interesting to see whether the underwriters for the hull and cargo are able to price for the emerging extra hazard.
Seems that one of the crew has died this time.
We already know that lithium-ion batteries can be a fire hazard. Is that what caused this ferry disaster?
By the way, do you all realise that we can NEVER EVER power 30 million electric cars [EVs] from the UK National Grid if it is powered by renewable energy alone.
There are 37 million vehicles in the UK; 32 million are cars. If we have 30 million small Nissan Leaf TYPE EVs after 2030, they would need to charge for 8 hours at 5kW to fully charge their 40kWhour batteries…to travel their documented [CLAIMED] 150 miles per day. However, that mileage is only possible with air con, heater, wipers, lights and radio ALL SWITCHED OFF!!
Now 30 million EVs will not AVERAGE 150 miles a day of travel anyway , I hear you say.
Fair enough! So DIVIDE BY 4 ! That means 30 million would still need to charge at 5kW for 2 hours a day to travel 37.5 miles ONLY…….as long as all the above are switched off !!
But 5kW x 30 million = 150,000,000 kW = 150,000MW ! THAT AMOUNT NEEDS TO BE AVAILABLE IN THE NAT GRID JUST TO CHARGE 30MILLION EVs , BECAUSE JOE PUBLIC WILL CHARGE UP…….WHEN HE PLEASES!!
However, check Nat Grid web-site http://www.gridwatch.co.uk and you’ll find that UK wind energy only AVERAGED 7033MW in 2022 and dropped as low as a minuscule 141MW in windless conditions. That latter amount is almost NOTHING!!
Now, we use around 35000MW, in the UK, on average ……most days for domestic and commercial uses. In fact , in cold winter weather , we use 45000MW…….THAT’S WITHOUT ANY EVs!!!
Therefore, after 2030 , we will need 150,000MW +45000MW = 195,000 MW…….to be AVAILABLE in the National Grid. IMPOSSIBLE!!
Most people will want to charge in the 6 hour period between 6pm and midnight . How can they EVER do that when only renewables are supplying the National Grid? In winter, it is dark from about 4 pm……so solar is totally useless in winter! It’s dark for 17 hours of 24 ! The sun is also weak , morning and evening….and on cloudy or wet days. Anyone who thinks that Wind and solar can power the whole UK…..PLUS 30 MILLION EVs MUST BE COMPLETELY INNUMERATE, NON-TECHNICAL…..AND DREAMING!!
GRIDWATCH.CO.UK PROVES IT CANNOT BE DONE!!
Look at that 2022 wind energy graph! It resembles STALAGMITES!! Even if one built a MILLION wind turbines, the peaks may climb higher…….but the TROUGHS will be the same…….ZILCH ENERGY ……. BECAUSE THERE IS NO WIND ACROSS THE UK !!
This is 11-plus arithmetic…..not higher maths!
Wind turbines need CONSTANT backing by fossil fuel power stations…..and the 2022 wind energy graph PROVES IT!!
You cannot power a nation of 68 million people and 37 million vehicles with such a graph. Newspapers need to reproduce that 2022 wind energy graph and debate it properly. Please spread this information. Send it to your politicians ,please! Check Gridwatch.co.uk for FACTS !!
EVs to heavy for car parks. Smaller footprint, greater weight higher pressure causing road damage.
Batteries from rare minerals, mined and refined by non compliant countries then transported to UK factories.
Has any political research got a scientific degree?