On 11/01/2024 13:24, Sn!pe wrote:
> Stop Press!
>
> Electric bus bursts into flames during rush hour in Wimbledon!
>
> <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/11/wimbledon-electric-bus-fire-rush-hour-london/>
>
> "An electric double-decker bus caught fire in southwest London during
> rush hour on Thursday morning.
>
> Police said emergency services were called shortly after 7am.
>
> No injuries have been reported but people have been told to avoid the
> area.
>
> Flames engulfed the back of the bus with thick grey smoke billowing out.
> The upper deck back windows were completely destroyed." (cont.)
>
>
It was not the first of the type to catch fire. These were, luckily, in
the garage, probably on charge.

https://www.electrive.com/2022/05/25/tfl-issues-recall-for-90-double-decker-buses-in-the-uk/

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 18:18:23 -0000 (UTC)
Richard Robinson <richard@qualmograph.org.uk> wrote:

> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
> > On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 17:15:24 -0000 (UTC)
> > Richard Robinson <richard@qualmograph.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
> >
> >> > A Statistician: What do you want people to believe it to be?
> >> IngSoc: 5
> >>
> >> That's not statistics, that's lies, damn lies, manipulation, dishonesty
> >> and politics, and anyone who does it should not be trusted as a
> >> statistician.
> >
> > Unless you're a cbyvgvpvna who prefers the numbers that will get
> > them re-elected over the honest numbers.
>
> What do you mean, 'unless' ? Statistics is about how to work with the

That cbyvgvpvna wouldn't trust an honest statistician not to
produce inconvenient results just because they're mathematically correct,
they want one who can be trusted to produce the results the cbyvgvpvna
likes.

This is (one reason) why you shouldn't trust a cbyvgvpvna.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

On 11-Jan-24 18:18, Richard Robinson wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>> On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 17:15:24 -0000 (UTC)
>> Richard Robinson <richard@qualmograph.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>
>>>> A Statistician: What do you want people to believe it to be?
>>> IngSoc: 5
>>>
>>> That's not statistics, that's lies, damn lies, manipulation, dishonesty
>>> and politics, and anyone who does it should not be trusted as a
>>> statistician.
>>
>> Unless you're a cbyvgvpvna who prefers the numbers that will get
>> them re-elected over the honest numbers.
>
> What do you mean, 'unless' ? Statistics is about how to work with the
> numbers. If they're not doing that, they're not a statistician, and if
> they get paid for being one Something Bad should happen to them.

I agree that's not a statistician - it's an accountant[1][2].

[1] As told to me by a senior accountant.

[2] Who would do nothing so crass as to say "2 + 2 = 5", but would
'adjust' one of the figures to arrive at the required answer.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 11/01/2024 19:29, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> I agree that's not a statistician - it's an accountant[1][2].
>
> [1] As told to me by a senior accountant.
>
> [2] Who would do nothing so crass as to say "2 + 2 = 5", but would
> 'adjust' one of the figures to arrive at the required answer.

(2a) As did The Post Office Fujitsu Horizon accounting system?

Tone

On 11/01/2024 16:19, hubops@ccanoemail.com wrote:
> Call it a motorized wheelchair ?
> John T.

That was going to be my next move, but the manager there has just
resigned. He has only been there for 3 months, so I guess there are
other problems with Acorn.

Tone

snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote in
news:1qn67jm.1ir71q01jhxulpN%snipeco.2@gmail.com:

> John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/01/2024 10:06, Peter wrote:
>> > John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote in
>> > news:l08kj4Fdqc4U1@mid.individual.net:
>> >
>> >> As a percentage, electric and hybrid car fires are much more
>> >> common than IC vehicle fires. About 1 in every 1,000 electric and
>> >> hybrid vehicles registered in London burned in 2021. About 1 in
>> >> every 3,500 fossil fuelled cars did the same. Don't forget, we
>> >> have far more than a Century of practice at designing petrol cars
>> >> so they don't self ignite.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Interesting. I asked Google copilot. It said:
>> > "No, fire is not more likely in electric vehicles than petrol
>> > vehicles. In fact, the data shows that petrol and diesel vehicles
>> > have a much higher fire risk than electric vehicles. According to
>> > one source, petrol and diesel cars catch fire 19 times more often
>> > than electric cars Another source estimates that the fire risk is
>> > between 20 and 80 times greater for petrol and diesel vehicles"
>> >
>> > I didn't persue the sources.
>> >
>> >
>> I wasn't certain, so I checked using official figures from the London
>> Fire Brigade and council.
>>
>> There were about six hundred and fifty fires involving fossil fuelled
>> vehicles in London, and just over sixty on electric vehicles. In
>> London, there are over two and a half million fossil fuelled vehicles
>> registered and about seventy thousand electric ones. (The number of
>> electric ones is increasing as rapidly as the delivery companies and
>> cabbies can get hold of them.) Windoze calculator did the number
>> crunching.
>>
>> Statistics are a ubggre, and you can prove whatever you want to by
>> misusing them. "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics"
>>
>
> Stop Press!
>
> Electric bus bursts into flames during rush hour in Wimbledon!
>
> <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/11/wimbledon-electric-bus-fir
> e-rush-hour-london/>
>
> "An electric double-decker bus caught fire in southwest London during
> rush hour on Thursday morning.
>
> Police said emergency services were called shortly after 7am.
>
> No injuries have been reported but people have been told to avoid the
> area.
>
> Flames engulfed the back of the bus with thick grey smoke billowing
> out. The upper deck back windows were completely destroyed."
> (cont.)

...and a non-electric one caught fire in Bradford just a couple of months
ago. But, as one bus driver commented, you'd be amazed at just how often
buses don't catch fire.

--
Peter
-----

Peter <myshed@prune.org.uk> wrote:

> ..and a non-electric one caught fire in Bradford just a couple of months
> ago. But, as one bus driver commented, you'd be amazed at just how often
> buses don't catch fire.
>

Have had my EV for 3 years and the bugger refuses to catch fire. Same with
the battery in my loft. Can’t trust modern tech!

Tim
--
Please don't feed the trolls

On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 11:32:44 +0000, John Williamson
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:

>The killer for us is speed of charging and cycle efficiency. They can be
>charged much more quickly when using the engine or a generator,which
>saves fuel, and they can be discharged safely to a lower level than lead
>acid (20% as against50%)
>
>LiFePO4 batteries also have a 90% cycle efficiency as against the 70% of
>lead, so we lose less energy that way.

There's also little-known Nickel-Iron cells.

No lead, electrolyte (KOH -- potassium hydroxide, ISTR) change rejuvenates the
cells, very tolerant of deep discharge and overcharge, 19–25 Wh/kg, etc etc.

Been around since Edison sold them...

Thomas Prufer

On 12/01/2024 09:56, Thomas Prufer wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 11:32:44 +0000, John Williamson
> <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> The killer for us is speed of charging and cycle efficiency. They can be
>> charged much more quickly when using the engine or a generator,which
>> saves fuel, and they can be discharged safely to a lower level than lead
>> acid (20% as against50%)
>>
>> LiFePO4 batteries also have a 90% cycle efficiency as against the 70% of
>> lead, so we lose less energy that way.
>
> There's also little-known Nickel-Iron cells.
>
> No lead, electrolyte (KOH -- potassium hydroxide, ISTR) change rejuvenates the
> cells, very tolerant of deep discharge and overcharge, 19–25 Wh/kg, etc etc.
>
> Been around since Edison sold them...
>
Take forever to charge, no use for high discharge rates, low energy
density, and they waste more energy in the charge/ discharge cycle than
even lead acid.

They also have a low cell voltage (1.2 to 1.4volts per cell), so you
need a lot more cells in the stacks.

For these reasons they are no longer common.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 10:56:18 +0100
Thomas Prufer <prufer.public@mnet-online.de.invalid> wrote:

> There's also little-known Nickel-Iron cells.
>
> No lead, electrolyte (KOH -- potassium hydroxide, ISTR) change
> rejuvenates the cells, very tolerant of deep discharge and overcharge, 19–
> 25 Wh/kg, etc etc.

Unfortunately they suffer from low cycle efficiency and discharge
rate, thermal runaway during charging and a tendency to emit hydrogen -
otherwise they're very good.

Will someone please invent the Shipstone.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 10:17:47 +0000, John Williamson
<johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:

>On 12/01/2024 09:56, Thomas Prufer wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 11:32:44 +0000, John Williamson
>> <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The killer for us is speed of charging and cycle efficiency. They can be
>>> charged much more quickly when using the engine or a generator,which
>>> saves fuel, and they can be discharged safely to a lower level than lead
>>> acid (20% as against50%)
>>>
>>> LiFePO4 batteries also have a 90% cycle efficiency as against the 70% of
>>> lead, so we lose less energy that way.
>>
>> There's also little-known Nickel-Iron cells.
>>
>> No lead, electrolyte (KOH -- potassium hydroxide, ISTR) change rejuvenates the
>> cells, very tolerant of deep discharge and overcharge, 19–25 Wh/kg, etc etc.
>>
>> Been around since Edison sold them...
>>
>Take forever to charge, no use for high discharge rates, low energy
>density, and they waste more energy in the charge/ discharge cycle than
>even lead acid.
>
>They also have a low cell voltage (1.2 to 1.4volts per cell), so you
>need a lot more cells in the stacks.
>
>For these reasons they are no longer common.

And they are not really available.

I found C/2 as a max charge rate. Energy density isn't much of an issue in
narrowboat/ shed solar application. And I could live with the energy loss, in a
solar shed/allotment setup.

No point in considering the pros and cons of a practically unavailable item,
though!

Thomas Prufer

Tim+ <timdownieuk@yahoo.co.youkay> wrote in
news:1552236185.726704425.304406.timdownieuk-yahoo.co.youkay@news.individ
ual.net:

> Peter <myshed@prune.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> ..and a non-electric one caught fire in Bradford just a couple of
>> months ago. But, as one bus driver commented, you'd be amazed at just
>> how often buses don't catch fire.
>>
>
> Have had my EV for 3 years and the bugger refuses to catch fire. Same
> with the battery in my loft. Can’t trust modern tech!

I hear your frustration and sympathise. My EV is only a year old and uses
lithium iron phosphate batteries, so might be slightly more resistant to
self-immolation. The two batteries in the loft have been there a several of
years. None of these things have shown the slightest inclination to combust
so far, buggrem.

--
Peter
-----

On 12/01/2024 11:02, Thomas Prufer wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 10:17:47 +0000, John Williamson
<NiFe batteries>
>> For these reasons they are no longer common.
>
> And they are not really available.
>
True. But they are easy enough to make if there is a demand for them.

> I found C/2 as a max charge rate. Energy density isn't much of an issue in
> narrowboat/ shed solar application. And I could live with the energy loss, in a
> solar shed/allotment setup.
>
In a narrowboat, energy density is definitely an issue. I have 4 kWh of
lead acid batteries in my engine bay for the domestic stuff. It tucks
nicely into a spare corner. To get the same energy into NiFe batteries,
I would need about three times the volume, so would need to move the
fuel tank to fit them in. I would also need double the weight of NiFe
compared with lead acid to power the microwave due to the limited output
power per kilogramme. My current battery bank lets me run the boat
electrical and electronics stuff for about 15 hours when I'm off grid,
and the 2 kilowatts the microwave pulls doesn't cause a problem, even if
the engine isn't running.

I can put up with the inefficiency of lead acid batteries, but a NiFe
battery takes much more energy going in to get a kilowatt hour out, so I
either need to run the engine for twice as long, (That would be ten
hours instead of five) or have double the area of solar panels on the
roof (Academic, as I don't have any at the moment, and the four hundred
quid it would cost me has a payback period which is too long for comfort
compared to grid power, which is available here).

Lithium iron phosphate are much better than lead for energy density by
weight and volume as well as their ability to absorb charge rapidly up
to the point where they are full than lead acid, (Two hours engine
running instead of five) which is why they are being installed by so
many boaters. Ballast isn't a problem, as concrete slabs are often given
away if you see them replacing a pavement. If you are feeling flush,
scrap steel is also fairly cheap, and lets you put the floor a bit lower
due to its greater density.

> No point in considering the pros and cons of a practically unavailable item,
> though!
>
True, but it's a fun thought experiment to do.

I did the calculations long ago, when I was offered a bank of NiFe
cells. They are fantastic as backup batteries for phone exchanges and
other UPS applications, as they can just sit there, happily, fully
charged or not, for years without any maintenance.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

Well that same company has other homes, you could start by finding out where
they are and asking them about it. I'd say that you might have an action
under the Equalities act, if there are many other companies running homes
that provide the facility. It is often said that the main problem is the
design of the premises, ie corridors too narrow to take a buggy from the
room and do a 90 deg turn or where doors are too narrow or lifts too small.
These are maybe things the owners have no control over and might expect with
a buggies go to a home where there is better access.
Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Hymermut" <tone@email.com> wrote in message
news:unjm80$21o9g$1@dont-email.me...
> Bought the X^6 a new state of the art mobility scooterer for Christmas.
>
> Tried it out in the grounds of the hotel where we spent Christmas. Within
> ten minutes she had hit a gate post and broken a mudguard, but not to
> worry. It's only a bit of replaceable plastic.
>
> What is more upsetting is she has a flat in sheltered accommodation in
> Leeds owned by Anchor.
>
> They are not allowed to have mobility scooters in the building and there
> is no provision to keep them anywhere!
>
> What?
>
> That is so stupid. Most of the residents are over 60 and less abled.
>
> Is it even legal?
>
> I also live in sheltered accommodation owned by The Joseph Rowntree
> Housing trust in York. Here we have a dedicated room for scooters, as we
> did in my previous JRHT Court.
>
> I'm wondering how to tackle this nonsensical problem on her behalf.
>
> Tone

On 11/01/2024 16:55, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On 11 Jan 2024 16:27:42 GMT
> Tim+ <timdownieuk@yahoo.co.youkay> wrote:
>
>> Massive amounts of stored chemical energy being released as heat too
>> quickly. Usually when an internal short happens for whatever reason.
>> Battery design is steadily improving though to make them almost impossible
>> to get into a “thermal runaway” situation, even after gross mechanical
>> disruption.
>
> Apparently LiFePO4 batteries are very resistant to this - even
> though the combination of lithium and phosphorus sounds alarming.
>
I have to admit to increasing (hopefully needless) worry about the
96Kg[1] of LiFePO I have in the cupboard under the stair.

[1] 8.2KW allegedly.

--
Nev
It causes me a great deal of regret and remorse
that so many people are unable to understand what I write.

In article <unogtm$2v3d9$1@dont-email.me>, soup <invalid@invalid.com>
on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 10:46:15 awoke Nicholas from his slumbers and
wrote
>On 09/01/2024 22:29, John Williamson wrote:
>> On 09/01/2024 22:09, Nicholas D. Richards wrote:
>>> In article <l05h96FqrkjU1@mid.individual.net>, John Williamson
>>
>>> Didn't Boeing also have a problem of fires with lithium ion batteries,
>>> that were in the electronics bay of their 787 Dreamliners?
>>>
>> They did.
>>
>> Luckily, the Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries that are being installed
>> on more and more narrowboats are a lot safer than those and the car types.
>>
>First of all I know two things about narrow boats, nowt and Bugger-all,
>so feel free to completely ignore my inane ramblings.
>
>But it seems to me they are a classic case for huge and heavy lead acids
>as they need the weight (instead of ballast)and there is lots (FSVO)
>space. You do not need, for the most part, small and light high energy
>density storage devices in s boat.

From my point of view, space is short on narrow boats. The skill in
designing the interior of a narrow boat is in maximizing the use of a
limited space.

Lead/acid batteries have to be located with plentiful ventilation to the
open air and no space where the products of charging can accumulate.
They cannot be placed in or under (as ballast) the living space shell.
--
0sterc@tcher -

"Où sont les neiges d'antan?"

On 12/01/2024 12:59, Nicholas D. Richards wrote:
> Lead/acid batteries have to be located with plentiful ventilation to the
> open air and no space where the products of charging can accumulate.
> They cannot be placed in or under (as ballast) the living space shell.

Considering the lack of dredging in the canal system nowadays and the
low bridges, narrowboat manufacturers need to keep the draught of their
boats as small as possible whilst maintaining a reasonable cabin
headroom. So mounting anything under the 'living space shell' would be a
mistake, anyway. Batteries are normally located in the engine well.

Any boat having a draught of more than three feet would find itself in
trouble on certain canals, notably the Basingstoke and Chesterfield.

It is so critical that my boat Dreamcatcher No 1 had a bottom plate that
was 8mm thick*. This kept the weight of the boat down. Normally boats
are built with bottom plates of 12mm or more. The draught was
consequently about 2ft 9ins. That made a big difference. I was able to
explore areas that most other narrowboats couldn't, notably the Upper
Thames beyond normal navigational limits, several branches of the
Birmingham Canal Navigations and Titford Pools that are normally
unnavigable, and some connected rivers and feeders. All jolly good fun!

Miss it all, badly.

* The current owner has had the boat re-bottomed, so this probably no
longer applies.

Tone

Peter said:
> Tim+ <timdownieuk@yahoo.co.youkay> wrote in
> news:1552236185.726704425.304406.timdownieuk-yahoo.co.youkay@news.individ
> ual.net:
>
>> Peter <myshed@prune.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> ..and a non-electric one caught fire in Bradford just a couple of
>>> months ago. But, as one bus driver commented, you'd be amazed at just
>>> how often buses don't catch fire.
>>>
>>
>> Have had my EV for 3 years and the bugger refuses to catch fire. Same
>> with the battery in my loft. Can’t trust modern tech!
>
> I hear your frustration and sympathise. My EV is only a year old and uses
> lithium iron phosphate batteries, so might be slightly more resistant to
> self-immolation. The two batteries in the loft have been there a several of
> years. None of these things have shown the slightest inclination to combust
> so far, buggrem.

Of course, if you actually /want/ your things to burn, there's more than
one way it could happen ...

--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

Richard Robinson <richard@qualmograph.org.uk> wrote:

> Peter said:
> > Tim+ <timdownieuk@yahoo.co.youkay> wrote:
[...]
> >> Have had my EV for 3 years and the bugger refuses to catch fire. Same
> >> with the battery in my loft. Can't trust modern tech!
> >
> > I hear your frustration and sympathise. My EV is only a year old and uses
> > lithium iron phosphate batteries, so might be slightly more resistant to
> > self-immolation. The two batteries in the loft have been there a several of
> > years. None of these things have shown the slightest inclination to combust
> > so far, buggrem.
>
> Of course, if you actually /want/ your things to burn, there's more than
> one way it could happen ...

My dear old Dad once told me that a couple of galleons of eRtnkoli fluid
in the cupboard under stairs helps to ensure a good conflagration.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.

Richard Robinson <richard@qualmograph.org.uk> wrote in
news:unrg1p$3fp44$1@dont-email.me:

>
> Of course, if you actually /want/ your things to burn, there's more
> than one way it could happen ...

I trained as a chemist. Of course I want things to burn, preferably with a
pretty flame, and if possible to go BNAG.

--
Peter
-----

On 11-Jan-24 21:40, Hymermut wrote:
> On 11/01/2024 19:29, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> I agree that's not a statistician - it's an accountant[1][2].
>>
>> [1] As told to me by a senior accountant.
>>
>> [2] Who would do nothing so crass as to say "2 + 2 = 5", but would
>> 'adjust' one of the figures to arrive at the required answer.
>
> (2a) As did The Post Office Fujitsu Horizon accounting system?

Dunno, but it's a classic case of "Computer says you're guilty."

--
Sam Plusnet

On 12-Jan-24 12:15, nev young wrote:
> On 11/01/2024 16:55, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On 11 Jan 2024 16:27:42 GMT
>> Tim+ <timdownieuk@yahoo.co.youkay> wrote:
>>
>>> Massive amounts of stored chemical energy being released as heat too
>>> quickly.  Usually when an internal short happens for whatever reason.
>>> Battery design is steadily improving though to make them almost
>>> impossible
>>> to get into a “thermal runaway” situation, even after gross mechanical
>>> disruption.
>>
>>     Apparently LiFePO4 batteries are very resistant to this - even
>> though the combination of lithium and phosphorus sounds alarming.
>>
> I have to admit to increasing (hopefully needless) worry about the
> 96Kg[1] of LiFePO I have in the cupboard under the stair.
>
> [1] 8.2KW allegedly.
>
People have been talking about having battery array up in the loft.
That would seriously worry me - not the fire risk, but would the joists
take the weight?

--
Sam Plusnet

On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 19:25:33 +0000
Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

> People have been talking about having battery array up in the loft.
> That would seriously worry me - not the fire risk, but would the joists
> take the weight?

I don't see why not, I have a 500l thermal store tank (over half a
tonne) that's been sitting over two joists for the last ten years. A 2x10
on edge can take a *lot* of load.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

On 12/01/2024 12:59, Nicholas D. Richards wrote:

> Lead/acid batteries have to be located with plentiful ventilation to the
> open air and no space where the products of charging can accumulate.
> They cannot be placed in or under (as ballast) the living space shell.

Never thought of that .
Told you I knew He-Haw about narrer boats.

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
> On 12-Jan-24 12:15, nev young wrote:
>> On 11/01/2024 16:55, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 11 Jan 2024 16:27:42 GMT
>>> Tim+ <timdownieuk@yahoo.co.youkay> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Massive amounts of stored chemical energy being released as heat too
>>>> quickly.  Usually when an internal short happens for whatever reason.
>>>> Battery design is steadily improving though to make them almost
>>>> impossible
>>>> to get into a “thermal runaway” situation, even after gross mechanical
>>>> disruption.
>>>
>>>     Apparently LiFePO4 batteries are very resistant to this - even
>>> though the combination of lithium and phosphorus sounds alarming.
>>>
>> I have to admit to increasing (hopefully needless) worry about the
>> 96Kg[1] of LiFePO I have in the cupboard under the stair.
>>
>> [1] 8.2KW allegedly.
>>
> People have been talking about having battery array up in the loft.
> That would seriously worry me - not the fire risk, but would the joists
> take the weight?
>

Depends on where you put ‘em. Different parts of the loft have different
load carrying capability.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls