Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefighters bring large battery fire near Geelong under control

news.cfa.vic.gov.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 66 posts

Re: Firefighters bring large battery fire near Geelong under control

#31

Post by amelius »

s_dev wrote: post #16
rjzzleep wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's paying for the transition? The customer or Tesla? Funny this got downvoted. Was this comment controversial in any way?

>Who's paying for the transition? The customer or Tesla? Since nearly all Tesla revenue comes from Tesla customers I would imagine the customers will be ultimately footing the bill. >Was this comment controversial in any way? Honestly it comes off as cynical and a little dumb -- which is why it might be grey. If a business agrees to a cost -- it will be the customers paying for that cost. Your peevish "Who is paying…

Perhaps they meant that new customers will (not) be paying for the upgrade of cars of old customers.

Re: Firefighters bring large battery fire near Geelong under control

#32

Post by londons_explore »

tyingq wrote: post #21
cromulent wrote: post #8

Another link to a story about the Megapack fire, with photos: https://www.theverge.com/2021/7/30/22602411/neoen-tesla-mega...

It's interesting how closely placed the two center rows are. That seems to invite a spread of the fire. The land looks pretty remote/rural, so I can't imagine space is a constraint. I wonder if there's a technical reason for them to be so close together.

Bigger site costs more, requires more fencing, more concreting, more wiring, more security staff and cameras, etc.

I expect someone did the maths and decided that the low (and probably insured) risk of a fire taking out two rather than one container outweighed additional concrete/fencing/land/wiring.

Re: Firefighters bring large battery fire near Geelong under control

#34

Post by hexa22 »

rjzzleep wrote: post #9
Reason077 wrote: post #6

According to recent reports[1], Tesla is transitioning to using Iron Phosphate (LFP) Li-ion cells in it's Megapack stationary storage products. Unlike nickel-based cells, LFP is highly resistant to fire and thermal runaway. Presumably, this particular installation was still using nickel-based cells. [1] https://cleantechnica.com/2021/05/11/tesla-transitions-to-lf...

Who's paying for the transition? The customer or Tesla? Funny this got downvoted. Was this comment controversial in any way?

What does this question even mean? What does paying for mean in this context? Are you asking if Elon takes the cost out of his personal bank account? Or if they send every tesla customer a bill for new battery tech?

What is the difference between the customer or tesla paying?

Re: Firefighters bring large battery fire near Geelong under control

#35

Post by anthony_r »

s_dev wrote: post #16
rjzzleep wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's paying for the transition? The customer or Tesla? Funny this got downvoted. Was this comment controversial in any way?

>Who's paying for the transition? The customer or Tesla? Since nearly all Tesla revenue comes from Tesla customers I would imagine the customers will be ultimately footing the bill. >Was this comment controversial in any way? Honestly it comes off as cynical and a little dumb -- which is why it might be grey. If a business agrees to a cost -- it will be the customers paying for that cost. Your peevish "Who is paying…

Either the customer or the investor. All of the current Tesla capital comes from the investors.

They've just started breaking even now, and it can take a while to cover all the past costs. As of the latest 10-Q the accumulated deficit (sum over all past earnings) is -$3.6B. The total capital raised from investors is well over $15B.

Re: Firefighters bring large battery fire near Geelong under control

#36

Post by shorner »

rjzzleep wrote: post #9
Reason077 wrote: post #6

According to recent reports[1], Tesla is transitioning to using Iron Phosphate (LFP) Li-ion cells in it's Megapack stationary storage products. Unlike nickel-based cells, LFP is highly resistant to fire and thermal runaway. Presumably, this particular installation was still using nickel-based cells. [1] https://cleantechnica.com/2021/05/11/tesla-transitions-to-lf...

Who's paying for the transition? The customer or Tesla? Funny this got downvoted. Was this comment controversial in any way?

I think it's a fair question - hardware companies have recalled and replaced dangerous components before.

I got a free replacement battery from Apple in the mid 2000's when they said that a batch of their batteries had a "small fire risk"...

If I'm being cynical, I guess it depends if their line is:

"the old battery is dangerous which is why we've changed the materials we use"

or

"we're changing the materials we use, and that has this interesting side effect that totally coincidentally fixes a dangerous issue with out old batteries"

Re: Firefighters bring large battery fire near Geelong under control

#37

Post by makomk »

Reason077 wrote: post #6

According to recent reports[1], Tesla is transitioning to using Iron Phosphate (LFP) Li-ion cells in it's Megapack stationary storage products. Unlike nickel-based cells, LFP is highly resistant to fire and thermal runaway. Presumably, this particular installation was still using nickel-based cells. [1] https://cleantechnica.com/2021/05/11/tesla-transitions-to-lf...

It's been... interesting watching Tesla migrate from their more oddball technical decisions to using the same tech as the rest of the industry. LFP is a really conventional tech for stationary storage as well as vehicle applications with less demanding power-to-weight requirements. They also seem to have mostly switched from the AC motors that inspired their name to permanent magnet brushless motors like the rest of the car industry.

Re: Firefighters bring large battery fire near Geelong under control

#38

Post by treeman79 »

ant6n wrote: post #15
abledon wrote: post #10

Whats stopping them from erecting a barrier around the battery in question and just burying it in sand?

Wouldnt it just burn for years then?

A coal mine has been burning for 50.

https://www.history.com/news/mine-fire-burning-more-50-years...

Re: Firefighters bring large battery fire near Geelong under control

#39

Post by jonnycomputer »

robertwt7 wrote: post #19

Wow something from Melbourne comes to the first rank in HN! actually I still can't find any explanation why the fire starts at all. Or maybe they haven't found out yet Edit: I don't get the downvotes, I am from Melbie, nothing is controversial here

I bet people downvote more than they upvote. That would be a cool stat to see next to people's usernames in posts.

Re: Firefighters bring large battery fire near Geelong under control

#40

Post by foepys »

teruakohatu wrote: post #4

Not a car battery. > a 13-tonne lithium battery inside a shipping container The other ~99 container battery packs survived.

The bad thing isn't the fire itself. It required multiple fire units to be on site at all times. That's resources you can't use anywhere else for that time.
Post reply on HN