Of the 3000 cars only 800 were EVs, and there’s no evidence yet they were the source of the fire. The headline seems misleading.
topkai22 · 1d ago
From the MSN article linked below:
“ UK-based shipowner Zodiac Maritime has since confirmed that the fire originated in the section of the vessel carrying electric vehicles.”
whartung · 1d ago
Is an EV with 2% charge in the battery any more or less prone to spontaneous combustion than one with 10%, 50%, or 100% of charge?
I'm under the assumption that these are roll on/roll off carriers and that cars themselves are driven on and off (so they have some level of charge or fuel).
I know that batteries (apparently) can "just catch fire", I just don't know what the risk of fire to charge capacity of the battery is.
SoftTalker · 1d ago
It stands to reason (and simple physics/chemistry) that a fully-charged battery is going to burn more intensely than a depleted one. But as I undertstand it, Li ion batteries need a minimum "base" charge below which the battery can be damaged or become unable to be recharged (at least not by normal means). So I'd guess that like phones and other devices, they are shipped with roughly a 50% charge, allowing them to be driven on and off the ship and then on and off a truck before finally arriving at the retail dealership or other buyer's location.
No comments yet
lazide · 1d ago
Higher state of charge absolutely correlates with fire danger - there are physical mechanisms in play where highly charged lithium batteries can have dentritic shorts, for example, which cause thermal runaway almost immediately.
It’s a much higher risk during charging as that is when the structures typically form, but they can also be borderline and then ‘cross the border’ suddenly when just sitting there.
dboreham · 1d ago
Higher than 80% is bad.
legitster · 1d ago
Even if the EVs were not the source of the fire, they were surely the cause of the firefighting problems the coast guard had. Once ignited, EV fires are quite a thing.
audunw · 23h ago
The intensity of an EV is almost the same as that of an ICE car. A little bit less severe actually. There’s a study from Sweden that set an EV and ICE on fire and measures the energy/heat from the fire over time. The curves are fairly similar.
An EV battery is much less likely to catch fire from nearby car fires. A whole parking garage burned down at Sola airport in Norway, with lots of EV inside. Not a single battery pack ignited.
The challenge with EVs is thermal runaway. That can last for hours, and if you don’t cool it down the intense heat will ignite other flammable materials (plastic) in the car, or nearby cars.
It shouldn’t be too hard to make these ships EV fire proof. You just need something that can spray water on each car from beneath. That will keep thermal runway contained to a single car.
LorenPechtel · 22h ago
Fire Triangle!
Normally you can extinguish a fire by depriving it of any of the three things fire needs. But a battery that goes up it has both fuel and oxidizer and will actually tend to react with water by getting hotter. The only solution is either isolation or massive amounts of water or other coolant.
It's not the energy of the fire, it's the difficulty in actually extinguishing it. Think of those trick birthday candles that relight themselves.
potato3732842 · 23h ago
That's a misleading slight of hand. You can choke off a "normal" fire with foam and water. Can't do that with a fire that comes with its own oxidizer.
From a firefighting perspective, which is what the comment you're responding to is talking about, a battery absolutely is the bigger PITA even if there's less energy release per input. You can knock it down all day and it'll just keep coming right back up.
mmmBacon · 23h ago
This is fundamentally incorrect and even a basic Google search returns:
EV and gas-powered vehicle fires pose different challenges to firefighters. EV fires are harder to extinguish due to deep-seated heat in batteries, potential for reignition, and release of flammable and toxic gases. Traditional firefighting techniques might not be sufficient, and specialized equipment like submersion tanks or specific types of foam are often needed.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
EV Fires:
Higher Temperatures:
EV fires can burn hotter than gas-powered vehicle fires, reaching temperatures of 1,200°F or more.
Reignition:
EV batteries can reignite hours or even days after a fire, even after the flames have been extinguished.
Toxic Gases:
Burning EV batteries release flammable gases (like hydrogen and methane) and other hazardous chemicals, posing a threat to firefighters and the environment.
Difficult to Extinguish:
Traditional firefighting methods, like using water or foam, may not be effective in cooling the battery cells to the point where the fire is extinguished. Special techniques like submersion tanks or specialized foam are often required.
Prolonged Fire Suppression:
EV fires can take longer to fully suppress compared to traditional car fires.
Gas-Powered Vehicle Fires:
magicalhippo · 22h ago
The point GP made was that unless the fire starts in the battery, the battery is unlikely to catch fire. Thus when an EV catches fire, as opposed to starts a fire, in the EV burns about the same as an ICE.
They even note this in the Sola fire report[1], that the EVs did not contribute anything particular compared to regular ICEs to how the fire evolved.
They even say there is so much plastic and composites in modern cars, regardless of power source, that they output twice the heat compared to old cars made mostly of metal.
I have no idea what this says. Quite literally every single English language reference returned by a simple search refutes the assertion that EV fires are not more difficult or toxic than a regular car.
The fact that EV fires are more difficult to extinguish and produce substantially more toxic byproducts than regular gasoline powered cars is well established.
Last month, a battery-storage plant went up in flames and burned for days, prompting the evacuation of more than 1,000 residents and shutting down local schools. The plant, located in Moss Landing, an unincorporated community in Monterey County, is the largest facility in the world that uses lithium-ion batteries to store energy. Residents have reported feeling ill, and many of them worry that the fire polluted the air, soil and water with toxins.
“Now you don’t see anybody walking outside because it’s terrifying, everything that’s going on,” said Esmeralda Ortiz, who had to evacuate from her home in Moss Landing after the plant began burning on Jan. 16.
magicalhippo · 12h ago
> a simple search refutes the assertion that EV fires are not more difficult or toxic than a regular car
The assertion is that EV fires are not particularly more difficult than ICE vehicle fires if the battery has not entered thermal runaway.
Most EV fires do not start in the battery (at least for EVs that are not involved in a collision).
And while the battery certainly can enter thermal runaway by an external fire heating it up sufficiently, it's not a given as real-world examples like the Sola fire shows as well as various research. Here are some quotes from a paper about full-scale EV fire tests[1]:
In both cases the fire ignition took place in the rear seats. However, it has to be mentioned that in the case of the BEV, the battery was not involved in the fire for the first 800 s (full voltage in all cells of the battery).
However, the test also showed that although the vehicle had already burned for more than 10 min, the battery was still not involved in the fire and the temperature inside the battery was well below 50 °C
In the tests they forced thermal runaway after a while, by shorting the batteries.
Here's[2] another, smaller study where they tried to initiate a thermal runaway by placing a propane burner under the battery, but failed as they removed it too soon.
The burner was in place for 12 minutes, at which point the rest of the car had caught fire which also contributed to heating the battery. Yet no thermal runaway occurred.
Modern cars, EVs and ICEs alike, have more flammable material in the form of plastics than in their batteries or gas tanks[3]. And those plastics also release a lot of toxic smoke when burning. Sure, if the battery catches fire it will release nasty HF gas, but it's not like fumes from an ICE fire is healthy stuff.
For any fire, once the fire gets hot enough, it can be difficult or impossible to extinguish.
The fundamental problem is that battery fires get to be very high temperatures 1200C and cannot be extinguished at that point. I think the distinction you’re making about presence of thermal runaway or not is really rather irrelevant because yes you can put that fire out. That’s not the problem. The problem is that the devices do runaway and when they do it’s very difficult to put them out.
The ship in the original article was abandoned because it the fire could not be extinguished. The battery fire at Moss Landing could not be extinguished for 2 weeks.
Here’s a great video of the MountainView Fire Department talking about the difficulties of putting out EV fires. They explain that they’ve had cars catch on fire again 6 days later. They purchased new specialized equipment but at the time their department was one of the only fire companies that had this in California.
Per a link I posted, EV are not necessarily the cause of the fires, though they do consistently make it more difficult to extinguish.
whynotmaybe · 1d ago
I don't know if there's any relation but I see clear surge in anti EV news in North America and Europe, so much that my apophenia is itching a lot.
xnx · 1d ago
Again? These ships must make attractive sabotage (or insurance fraud?) targets.
> In 2022, a vessel carrying about 4,000 vehicles caught fire in the Atlantic and ended up sinking despite efforts to tow it to safety. A year later another ship with close to 3,000 cars on board caught fire near the Dutch coast.
lazyeye · 23h ago
I found this to be a fascinating read about maritime insurance fraud
Baseless conspiracy theories... or lithium batteries sometimes catch fire. Hmm.
D13Fd · 1d ago
Couldn’t it just be that EVs are highly combustible and prone to spontaneous ignition? It may be that we just need better means of shipping these vehicles so that they are less likely to catch fire in an uncontrollable way (maybe with the batteries uninstalled).
sagarm · 1d ago
The reporting of the 2022 sunken car carrier did not mention EVs, saying that only "Porches and Bentleys" were lost. Even if the cars themselves have no fuel, the ship has lots of it.
No, EVs are far less likely to spontaneous ignition than ICE cars. The statistics on this is very clear now. Depending on the source an ICE car is 10-20 times of a similar age is more likely to catch fire.
Since most EVs are new I would guess the statistics is mostly applicable to fairly new cars, and so should also be applicable to brand new cars.
One caveat is there may be some EVs from less reputable Chinese car companies that may fall outside these statistics, since they’ve not been sold in the countries where I’ve checked (Northern Europe and USA). Some smaller Chinese companies cut a lot of corners, and they have had an explosive growth of EV car companies.
lupusreal · 23h ago
There's a qualitative difference between a car that's likely to burn on the road when being driven, and one that's likely to burn in the middle of the night when parked in a garage attached to my house.
mrguyorama · 22h ago
>one that's likely to burn in the middle of the night when parked in a garage attached to my house.
ICE cars do this all the time. It doesn't make the news as much as a brand new product doing that.
Granted, the "EVs are less likely to start fires" take is also misleading. It's not usually doing a "like for like" comparison, because the majority of ICE fires are in very old and poorly maintained cars. Things like wires chewed through by rats, oil leaking out of gaskets and accumulating, stupid wiring for speakers, etc.
It will depend how gracefully the average EV ages when owned by the average person who ignores maintenance.
Keep in mind we've had old lithium ion batteries for two decades now, and we don't see your average phone store randomly burning down. Or those kiosks you can sell absolutely clapped out, old phones to. How often do those burn down?
rgreeko42 · 1d ago
Why would we want unsafe vehicles to reach consumers? Better that they don't reach the showroom if that's the case.
rkagerer · 1d ago
If EV's used well-engineered Lithium Iron Phosphate (LiFePO4) batteries (ie. with proper controllers, built-in heaters to avoid sub-zero charging, etc.) how much fire risk would that alleviate?
Why is this news? ICE cars in container ships catch fire frequently.
One example was the Grande Costa D’Avorio at Port Newark in 2023, which resulted in two firefighter fatalities and over $23 million in vessel damage. Not EV related.
> Hybrid vehicles report 3,475 fires per 100,000 vehicles, driven by the complexity of their dual powertrains. Gasoline and diesel cars follow with 1,530 fires, while EVs report significantly fewer at 25 fires.
Their own data is showing that their conclusion might be sketchy. If EVs were so naturally unlikely to start fires, shouldn't hybrids only have a small number more fires per 100000 than ICE vehicles?
Car fires usually come from poorly maintained electrics and leaking oil. How could adding an EV system to that make it so much more likely to ignite, but so unlikely to ignite when it's just the EV?
Most full EVs are still extremely expensive and sold to the luxury market and are even fairly new. How often do fairly new, luxury ICEs and Hybrids ignite?
floxy · 20h ago
>How could adding an EV system to that make it so much more likely to ignite, but so unlikely to ignite when it's just the EV?
I have no idea, but just spit-balling:
- Heat from the engine causes premature embrittlement of the high voltage wiring harnesses insulation system, causing failures that lead to short circuits. Causing more fires.
- Layers of grime/oil from the engine / oil-changes that gets on power electronic components. Electronic component fails in a way that lets the smoke out. In an EV, this just disables the vehicle. In a hybrid, the extra layer of oil catches on fire.
- Power electronics components under the hood are subject to much higher operating temperatures, due to proximity to the engine, leading to earlier failures, of which some cause fires, due to the closeness of flammable liquids.
- Fully battery electric vehicles are more pampered / maintained / see less severe operating conditions. BEVs more likely to be stored in a garage where they get charged, maybe fewer mice chewing through the high voltage cabling, etc..
- Hybrid batteries are stressed more, from the much more frequent full charge cycles. Batteries also see more heat from living in the engine bay(?). Hybrid batteries are included in more budget-minded vehicles, with lower price points, and so the batteries are sourced from less reliable tier two suppliers with less quality control? Adds up to more failures and more fires?
- Are the more frequent hybrid fires equally distributed across manufactures? Or is Toyota on one end of the spectrum and say Stellantis on the other?
- BEV-only companies have obsessed over weight in the quest for efficiency, which reduces wiring and parts count, which reduces failure points that can cause fires. Where hybrids and EVs from traditional ICE companies have a less optimal BoM, with more components reused from existing product lines, leading to additional complication in the design with more failure points.
- Hybrid fires are predominately associated with crashes. The engine bay is crammed with more components, because of the dual power trains. Crash causes flammable liquids to escape, and a high voltage system failure ignites the flammable liquid. BEVs in a crash would have the ignition source, but no fuel. Gas-only has the leaked fuel, but no ignition source. Hybrids have both.
- Hybrid vehicles are more popular with less affluent owners. Vehicle gets in a moderate accident, cousin Vinny gives it a once over to get things running again, possibly overlooking damage to the high voltage system that manifests as a fire later on.
Any info on the brands of electric vehicles onboard?
Lendal · 1d ago
Where does the buck stop in this scenario? My assumption is the manufacturers have already been paid, so does that mean they don't care about this? I'm thinking the individual dealer owners of the vehicles probably have to file claims with their insurance companies. So insurance rates will go up. Is that where it ends?
cdot2 · 1d ago
Unless someone was negligent in causing the fire that is likely the end of it.
cogman10 · 23h ago
Lawsuits will likely fly and both the shipping company and the manufacturer (or at least their insurance agencies) will try and prove the other was negligent.
benji-york · 1d ago
Did the front fall off?
smallnix · 1d ago
The frunk fell off
floren · 23h ago
> EV fires can take up to 8,000 gallons of water to cool the lithium-ion batteries.
where could a cargo ship possibly obtain that quantity of water
coderintherye · 23h ago
Most large ships have large water storage vessels as well as make fresh water using pumps (while operating). They also usually have separate pumps to pump salt water for firefighting. But in the event the pumps are not running that's a problem such as what happened with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Bonhomme_Richard_(LHD-6)
Triggers the “Battery fires will be bad during a catastrophic earthquake” thought.
bell-cot · 23h ago
Other than pancaked parking garages, how many EV's would a major earthquake damage badly enough to start a battery fire? And how many crushed ICE cars would be turned into gasoline fires?
OutOfHere · 23h ago
Ensuring that EVs are drained to be <1% powered should be an obvious hard requirement. This is no matter the mode of transport.
mrguyorama · 22h ago
Are you not aware that Lithium batteries cannot be fully drained like that without causing damage to them?
I'm under the assumption that these are roll on/roll off carriers and that cars themselves are driven on and off (so they have some level of charge or fuel).
I know that batteries (apparently) can "just catch fire", I just don't know what the risk of fire to charge capacity of the battery is.
No comments yet
It’s a much higher risk during charging as that is when the structures typically form, but they can also be borderline and then ‘cross the border’ suddenly when just sitting there.
An EV battery is much less likely to catch fire from nearby car fires. A whole parking garage burned down at Sola airport in Norway, with lots of EV inside. Not a single battery pack ignited.
The challenge with EVs is thermal runaway. That can last for hours, and if you don’t cool it down the intense heat will ignite other flammable materials (plastic) in the car, or nearby cars.
It shouldn’t be too hard to make these ships EV fire proof. You just need something that can spray water on each car from beneath. That will keep thermal runway contained to a single car.
Normally you can extinguish a fire by depriving it of any of the three things fire needs. But a battery that goes up it has both fuel and oxidizer and will actually tend to react with water by getting hotter. The only solution is either isolation or massive amounts of water or other coolant.
It's not the energy of the fire, it's the difficulty in actually extinguishing it. Think of those trick birthday candles that relight themselves.
From a firefighting perspective, which is what the comment you're responding to is talking about, a battery absolutely is the bigger PITA even if there's less energy release per input. You can knock it down all day and it'll just keep coming right back up.
EV and gas-powered vehicle fires pose different challenges to firefighters. EV fires are harder to extinguish due to deep-seated heat in batteries, potential for reignition, and release of flammable and toxic gases. Traditional firefighting techniques might not be sufficient, and specialized equipment like submersion tanks or specific types of foam are often needed. Here's a more detailed breakdown: EV Fires: Higher Temperatures: EV fires can burn hotter than gas-powered vehicle fires, reaching temperatures of 1,200°F or more. Reignition: EV batteries can reignite hours or even days after a fire, even after the flames have been extinguished. Toxic Gases: Burning EV batteries release flammable gases (like hydrogen and methane) and other hazardous chemicals, posing a threat to firefighters and the environment. Difficult to Extinguish: Traditional firefighting methods, like using water or foam, may not be effective in cooling the battery cells to the point where the fire is extinguished. Special techniques like submersion tanks or specialized foam are often required. Prolonged Fire Suppression: EV fires can take longer to fully suppress compared to traditional car fires. Gas-Powered Vehicle Fires:
They even note this in the Sola fire report[1], that the EVs did not contribute anything particular compared to regular ICEs to how the fire evolved.
They even say there is so much plastic and composites in modern cars, regardless of power source, that they output twice the heat compared to old cars made mostly of metal.
[1]: https://www.rogbr.no/Rapporter%20og%20utredninger/Evaluering... (page 24)
The fact that EV fires are more difficult to extinguish and produce substantially more toxic byproducts than regular gasoline powered cars is well established.
The toxicity of battery fires is widely reported: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/10/us/california-battery-pla...
Last month, a battery-storage plant went up in flames and burned for days, prompting the evacuation of more than 1,000 residents and shutting down local schools. The plant, located in Moss Landing, an unincorporated community in Monterey County, is the largest facility in the world that uses lithium-ion batteries to store energy. Residents have reported feeling ill, and many of them worry that the fire polluted the air, soil and water with toxins.
“Now you don’t see anybody walking outside because it’s terrifying, everything that’s going on,” said Esmeralda Ortiz, who had to evacuate from her home in Moss Landing after the plant began burning on Jan. 16.
The assertion is that EV fires are not particularly more difficult than ICE vehicle fires if the battery has not entered thermal runaway.
Most EV fires do not start in the battery (at least for EVs that are not involved in a collision).
And while the battery certainly can enter thermal runaway by an external fire heating it up sufficiently, it's not a given as real-world examples like the Sola fire shows as well as various research. Here are some quotes from a paper about full-scale EV fire tests[1]:
In both cases the fire ignition took place in the rear seats. However, it has to be mentioned that in the case of the BEV, the battery was not involved in the fire for the first 800 s (full voltage in all cells of the battery).
However, the test also showed that although the vehicle had already burned for more than 10 min, the battery was still not involved in the fire and the temperature inside the battery was well below 50 °C
In the tests they forced thermal runaway after a while, by shorting the batteries.
Here's[2] another, smaller study where they tried to initiate a thermal runaway by placing a propane burner under the battery, but failed as they removed it too soon.
The burner was in place for 12 minutes, at which point the rest of the car had caught fire which also contributed to heating the battery. Yet no thermal runaway occurred.
Modern cars, EVs and ICEs alike, have more flammable material in the form of plastics than in their batteries or gas tanks[3]. And those plastics also release a lot of toxic smoke when burning. Sure, if the battery catches fire it will release nasty HF gas, but it's not like fumes from an ICE fire is healthy stuff.
[1]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037971122...
[2]: https://www.fireproductsearch.com/full-scale-electric-vehicl...
[3]: https://www.europeanfiresafetyalliance.org/wp-content/upload...
The fundamental problem is that battery fires get to be very high temperatures 1200C and cannot be extinguished at that point. I think the distinction you’re making about presence of thermal runaway or not is really rather irrelevant because yes you can put that fire out. That’s not the problem. The problem is that the devices do runaway and when they do it’s very difficult to put them out.
The ship in the original article was abandoned because it the fire could not be extinguished. The battery fire at Moss Landing could not be extinguished for 2 weeks.
Here’s a great video of the MountainView Fire Department talking about the difficulties of putting out EV fires. They explain that they’ve had cars catch on fire again 6 days later. They purchased new specialized equipment but at the time their department was one of the only fire companies that had this in California.
https://youtu.be/lnLqJqAT48E?si=UmEmSu841WyGU8PP
Per a link I posted, EV are not necessarily the cause of the fires, though they do consistently make it more difficult to extinguish.
> In 2022, a vessel carrying about 4,000 vehicles caught fire in the Atlantic and ended up sinking despite efforts to tow it to safety. A year later another ship with close to 3,000 cars on board caught fire near the Dutch coast.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58395055-dead-in-the-wat...
https://www.reuters.com/world/us-coast-guard-responding-carg...
https://www.porsche.com/usa/models/taycan/taycan-models/tayc...
Since most EVs are new I would guess the statistics is mostly applicable to fairly new cars, and so should also be applicable to brand new cars.
One caveat is there may be some EVs from less reputable Chinese car companies that may fall outside these statistics, since they’ve not been sold in the countries where I’ve checked (Northern Europe and USA). Some smaller Chinese companies cut a lot of corners, and they have had an explosive growth of EV car companies.
ICE cars do this all the time. It doesn't make the news as much as a brand new product doing that.
Granted, the "EVs are less likely to start fires" take is also misleading. It's not usually doing a "like for like" comparison, because the majority of ICE fires are in very old and poorly maintained cars. Things like wires chewed through by rats, oil leaking out of gaskets and accumulating, stupid wiring for speakers, etc.
It will depend how gracefully the average EV ages when owned by the average person who ignores maintenance.
Keep in mind we've had old lithium ion batteries for two decades now, and we don't see your average phone store randomly burning down. Or those kiosks you can sell absolutely clapped out, old phones to. How often do those burn down?
https://gcaptain.com/ntsb-calls-for-national-reforms-after-f... Bloomberg didn't cover it (at least a quick search didn't find a story)
More to the point, ICE vehicles pose fire risks 60 times higher than EVs. https://www.evengineeringonline.com/did-you-know-ice-vehicle...
This is anti EV FUD from Bloomberg.
Their own data is showing that their conclusion might be sketchy. If EVs were so naturally unlikely to start fires, shouldn't hybrids only have a small number more fires per 100000 than ICE vehicles?
Car fires usually come from poorly maintained electrics and leaking oil. How could adding an EV system to that make it so much more likely to ignite, but so unlikely to ignite when it's just the EV?
Most full EVs are still extremely expensive and sold to the luxury market and are even fairly new. How often do fairly new, luxury ICEs and Hybrids ignite?
I have no idea, but just spit-balling:
- Heat from the engine causes premature embrittlement of the high voltage wiring harnesses insulation system, causing failures that lead to short circuits. Causing more fires.
- Layers of grime/oil from the engine / oil-changes that gets on power electronic components. Electronic component fails in a way that lets the smoke out. In an EV, this just disables the vehicle. In a hybrid, the extra layer of oil catches on fire.
- Power electronics components under the hood are subject to much higher operating temperatures, due to proximity to the engine, leading to earlier failures, of which some cause fires, due to the closeness of flammable liquids.
- Fully battery electric vehicles are more pampered / maintained / see less severe operating conditions. BEVs more likely to be stored in a garage where they get charged, maybe fewer mice chewing through the high voltage cabling, etc..
- Hybrid batteries are stressed more, from the much more frequent full charge cycles. Batteries also see more heat from living in the engine bay(?). Hybrid batteries are included in more budget-minded vehicles, with lower price points, and so the batteries are sourced from less reliable tier two suppliers with less quality control? Adds up to more failures and more fires?
- Are the more frequent hybrid fires equally distributed across manufactures? Or is Toyota on one end of the spectrum and say Stellantis on the other?
- BEV-only companies have obsessed over weight in the quest for efficiency, which reduces wiring and parts count, which reduces failure points that can cause fires. Where hybrids and EVs from traditional ICE companies have a less optimal BoM, with more components reused from existing product lines, leading to additional complication in the design with more failure points.
- Hybrid fires are predominately associated with crashes. The engine bay is crammed with more components, because of the dual power trains. Crash causes flammable liquids to escape, and a high voltage system failure ignites the flammable liquid. BEVs in a crash would have the ignition source, but no fuel. Gas-only has the leaked fuel, but no ignition source. Hybrids have both.
- Hybrid vehicles are more popular with less affluent owners. Vehicle gets in a moderate accident, cousin Vinny gives it a once over to get things running again, possibly overlooking damage to the high voltage system that manifests as a fire later on.
Worth examination
where could a cargo ship possibly obtain that quantity of water
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/other/cargo-ship-vanished-in...
I think instead of trying to click on these pay-walled links we should do a search and comment with a non-paywalled link.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a64967938/car-carrier-elec...