This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng

On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
>
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng

Scary. When I was looking for an electric sustainer/self launcher I checked out the GP series. Leaving aside their supply chain and cash-flow challenges, the technical reason that I discounted their design was that they had a very small cockpit and a ballistic recovery parachute. One of the key failure mechanisms with Li-ion batteries is the propensity to catch fire - it would be pretty horrible to be stuck in the aircraft with the battery in flames and no means of making a safe exit. Pulling the recovery rocketty thing would not be a good idea - with my luck I'd get toasted for 5 minutes while it floated towards the ground at a leisurly pace, and then dropped like a rock the last 300 ft when the shrouds finally burned through.

On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
>
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng

This just in! Rash of spectacular fires sparks doubts about decades-old energy policies!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwwWkvzlco8
https://lailluminator.com/2023/08/25/fire-at-marathon-refinery-in-st-john-parish-burns-for-seven-hours/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/05/20/refinery-fires-east-texas-pollution/

On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 6:59:10 PM UTC-7, Doug Bailey wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
> >
> > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
> >
> > https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
> Scary. When I was looking for an electric sustainer/self launcher I checked out the GP series. Leaving aside their supply chain and cash-flow challenges, the technical reason that I discounted their design was that they had a very small cockpit and a ballistic recovery parachute. One of the key failure mechanisms with Li-ion batteries is the propensity to catch fire - it would be pretty horrible to be stuck in the aircraft with the battery in flames and no means of making a safe exit. Pulling the recovery rocketty thing would not be a good idea - with my luck I'd get toasted for 5 minutes while it floated towards the ground at a leisurly pace, and then dropped like a rock the last 300 ft when the shrouds finally burned through.
The ideal situation might be a glider equipped a BRS and provision for a personal parachute. There are, however, many aircraft with just a BRS. Most of these are LSA airplanes with a Rotax engines and gasoline, a combination that's can catch fire. My Phoenix U15 touring motorglider (LSA glider category) is one of those.

Current EASA regulations require the battery container to safely contain a cell that ignites and burns to completion, without igniting other cells or damaging the structure. For gliders that meet those criteria, I think the usual reasons to bail out would be significantly more likely than fires, and that overall, I'd be safer with just a BRS than just a personal parachute.

On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 10:38:57 AM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 6:59:10 PM UTC-7, Doug Bailey wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > > This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
> > >
> > > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
> > >
> > > https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
> > >
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
> > Scary. When I was looking for an electric sustainer/self launcher I checked out the GP series. Leaving aside their supply chain and cash-flow challenges, the technical reason that I discounted their design was that they had a very small cockpit and a ballistic recovery parachute. One of the key failure mechanisms with Li-ion batteries is the propensity to catch fire - it would be pretty horrible to be stuck in the aircraft with the battery in flames and no means of making a safe exit. Pulling the recovery rocketty thing would not be a good idea - with my luck I'd get toasted for 5 minutes while it floated towards the ground at a leisurly pace, and then dropped like a rock the last 300 ft when the shrouds finally burned through.
> The ideal situation might be a glider equipped a BRS and provision for a personal parachute. There are, however, many aircraft with just a BRS. Most of these are LSA airplanes with a Rotax engines and gasoline, a combination that's can catch fire. My Phoenix U15 touring motorglider (LSA glider category) is one of those.
>
> Current EASA regulations require the battery container to safely contain a cell that ignites and burns to completion, without igniting other cells or damaging the structure. For gliders that meet those criteria, I think the usual reasons to bail out would be significantly more likely than fires, and that overall, I'd be safer with just a BRS than just a personal parachute.

Yeah - that's the regulation. But there's a lot of safety effort put into automotive batteries too, yet you can find plenty of YouTubes of EVs in flames. Not to mention the two car freighters that burned over the last couple of years. As with all things, and particularly general aviation, you need to make your own decisions about which risks you're willing to take. I'm not willing to share a composite shell with 30 million BTUs of lithium 2 feet from my ass and no means to run away.

On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 10:38:57 AM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 6:59:10 PM UTC-7, Doug Bailey wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > > This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
> > >
> > > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
> > >
> > > https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
> > >
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
> > Scary. When I was looking for an electric sustainer/self launcher I checked out the GP series. Leaving aside their supply chain and cash-flow challenges, the technical reason that I discounted their design was that they had a very small cockpit and a ballistic recovery parachute. One of the key failure mechanisms with Li-ion batteries is the propensity to catch fire - it would be pretty horrible to be stuck in the aircraft with the battery in flames and no means of making a safe exit. Pulling the recovery rocketty thing would not be a good idea - with my luck I'd get toasted for 5 minutes while it floated towards the ground at a leisurly pace, and then dropped like a rock the last 300 ft when the shrouds finally burned through.
> The ideal situation might be a glider equipped a BRS and provision for a personal parachute. There are, however, many aircraft with just a BRS. Most of these are LSA airplanes with a Rotax engines and gasoline, a combination that's can catch fire. My Phoenix U15 touring motorglider (LSA glider category) is one of those.
>
> Current EASA regulations require the battery container to safely contain a cell that ignites and burns to completion, without igniting other cells or damaging the structure. For gliders that meet those criteria, I think the usual reasons to bail out would be significantly more likely than fires, and that overall, I'd be safer with just a BRS than just a personal parachute.
I forgot to mention the battery pack must be tested using a cell that ignites to demonstrate it can actually protect the glider structure when a cell catches fire in real battery pack. I'd like to see videos of the testing, though a test of a successful design would be a bit boring, as just the fumes would exhaust from the test article, no flames or explosions.

On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:56:31 AM UTC-7, GliderCZ wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
> >
> > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
> >
> > https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
> This just in! Rash of spectacular fires sparks doubts about decades-old energy policies!
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwwWkvzlco8
> https://lailluminator.com/2023/08/25/fire-at-marathon-refinery-in-st-john-parish-burns-for-seven-hours/
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/05/20/refinery-fires-east-texas-pollution/

I am unaware of any propane-powered motorgliders; perhaps you can enlighten me?

Tom 2G

On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 8:58:08 PM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 10:38:57 AM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 6:59:10 PM UTC-7, Doug Bailey wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > > > This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
> > > >
> > > > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
> > > >
> > > > https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
> > > >
> > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
> > > Scary. When I was looking for an electric sustainer/self launcher I checked out the GP series. Leaving aside their supply chain and cash-flow challenges, the technical reason that I discounted their design was that they had a very small cockpit and a ballistic recovery parachute. One of the key failure mechanisms with Li-ion batteries is the propensity to catch fire - it would be pretty horrible to be stuck in the aircraft with the battery in flames and no means of making a safe exit. Pulling the recovery rocketty thing would not be a good idea - with my luck I'd get toasted for 5 minutes while it floated towards the ground at a leisurly pace, and then dropped like a rock the last 300 ft when the shrouds finally burned through.
> > The ideal situation might be a glider equipped a BRS and provision for a personal parachute. There are, however, many aircraft with just a BRS. Most of these are LSA airplanes with a Rotax engines and gasoline, a combination that's can catch fire. My Phoenix U15 touring motorglider (LSA glider category) is one of those.
> >
> > Current EASA regulations require the battery container to safely contain a cell that ignites and burns to completion, without igniting other cells or damaging the structure. For gliders that meet those criteria, I think the usual reasons to bail out would be significantly more likely than fires, and that overall, I'd be safer with just a BRS than just a personal parachute.
> I forgot to mention the battery pack must be tested using a cell that ignites to demonstrate it can actually protect the glider structure when a cell catches fire in real battery pack. I'd like to see videos of the testing, though a test of a successful design would be a bit boring, as just the fumes would exhaust from the test article, no flames or explosions.

Yup - as I said, everyone makes their own choice about acceptable risk; I'm planning to wear a parachute when flying a glider with a large Li-ion battery. I simply don't believe that any reasonable enclosure can contain every conceivable failure mechanism - there's just too much energy in too small a volume. I'm not afraid of it - but as a power engineer I have a lot of respect for energy density. In our lab, when someone blows up a power device they have to buy a box of ice cream for the communal freezer in our break room. We are never short of high calorie frozen snacks.

On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:58:13 PM UTC-7, Doug Bailey wrote:
> On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 8:58:08 PM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 10:38:57 AM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 6:59:10 PM UTC-7, Doug Bailey wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > > > > This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
> > > > >
> > > > > https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
> > > > >
> > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
> > > > Scary. When I was looking for an electric sustainer/self launcher I checked out the GP series. Leaving aside their supply chain and cash-flow challenges, the technical reason that I discounted their design was that they had a very small cockpit and a ballistic recovery parachute. One of the key failure mechanisms with Li-ion batteries is the propensity to catch fire - it would be pretty horrible to be stuck in the aircraft with the battery in flames and no means of making a safe exit. Pulling the recovery rocketty thing would not be a good idea - with my luck I'd get toasted for 5 minutes while it floated towards the ground at a leisurly pace, and then dropped like a rock the last 300 ft when the shrouds finally burned through.
> > > The ideal situation might be a glider equipped a BRS and provision for a personal parachute. There are, however, many aircraft with just a BRS. Most of these are LSA airplanes with a Rotax engines and gasoline, a combination that's can catch fire. My Phoenix U15 touring motorglider (LSA glider category) is one of those.
> > >
> > > Current EASA regulations require the battery container to safely contain a cell that ignites and burns to completion, without igniting other cells or damaging the structure. For gliders that meet those criteria, I think the usual reasons to bail out would be significantly more likely than fires, and that overall, I'd be safer with just a BRS than just a personal parachute.
> > I forgot to mention the battery pack must be tested using a cell that ignites to demonstrate it can actually protect the glider structure when a cell catches fire in real battery pack. I'd like to see videos of the testing, though a test of a successful design would be a bit boring, as just the fumes would exhaust from the test article, no flames or explosions.
> Yup - as I said, everyone makes their own choice about acceptable risk; I'm planning to wear a parachute when flying a glider with a large Li-ion battery. I simply don't believe that any reasonable enclosure can contain every conceivable failure mechanism - there's just too much energy in too small a volume. I'm not afraid of it - but as a power engineer I have a lot of respect for energy density. In our lab, when someone blows up a power device they have to buy a box of ice cream for the communal freezer in our break room. We are never short of high calorie frozen snacks.

Yup, that's what you pay for: energy density, the more the better (until things go south!). And it's not just the lithium, the electrolytes in the battery are also extremely flammable and put out toxic gases. Worse still, a lithium battery under thermal runaway (read "explosion") puts out compressed flammable gases AND oxygen. This is also known as a blow torch that can cut thru steel. If you watch a few EV fires on Youtube you will see this in brilliant, living color.

Tom 2G

On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:20:23 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:56:31 AM UTC-7, GliderCZ wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > > This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
> > >
> > > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
> > >
> > > https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
> > >
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
> > This just in! Rash of spectacular fires sparks doubts about decades-old energy policies!
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwwWkvzlco8
> > https://lailluminator.com/2023/08/25/fire-at-marathon-refinery-in-st-john-parish-burns-for-seven-hours/
> > https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/05/20/refinery-fires-east-texas-pollution/
> I am unaware of any propane-powered motorgliders; perhaps you can enlighten me?
>
> Tom 2G
About as relevant to a soaring discussion group as a fire in an energy storage facility, unless you just want to rant about technology that you dislike. No one is forcing you to by an EV, battery storage, or an FES glider. Most can make our own decisions regardless of someone propagandizing for the luddite community. You started the thread, right?

On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:22:54 PM UTC-7, GliderCZ wrote:
> On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:20:23 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:56:31 AM UTC-7, GliderCZ wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > > > This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
> > > >
> > > > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
> > > >
> > > > https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
> > > >
> > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
> > > This just in! Rash of spectacular fires sparks doubts about decades-old energy policies!
> > >
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwwWkvzlco8
> > > https://lailluminator.com/2023/08/25/fire-at-marathon-refinery-in-st-john-parish-burns-for-seven-hours/
> > > https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/05/20/refinery-fires-east-texas-pollution/
> > I am unaware of any propane-powered motorgliders; perhaps you can enlighten me?
> >
> > Tom 2G
> About as relevant to a soaring discussion group as a fire in an energy storage facility, unless you just want to rant about technology that you dislike. No one is forcing you to by an EV, battery storage, or an FES glider. Most can make our own decisions regardless of someone propagandizing for the luddite community. You started the thread, right?
And, in the paper this morning: "Hyundai, Kia recall more than 3M cars over fire risk". Three million is a lot of cars, and they are warning owners to park their cars outside! So far, over 21 fires and 22 "thermal events".

Well, I'm not going to buy any car that uses brake fluid until they develop something safer.

On Saturday, September 30, 2023 at 9:50:15 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:22:54 PM UTC-7, GliderCZ wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:20:23 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:56:31 AM UTC-7, GliderCZ wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > > > > This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
> > > > >
> > > > > https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
> > > > >
> > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
> > > > This just in! Rash of spectacular fires sparks doubts about decades-old energy policies!
> > > >
> > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwwWkvzlco8
> > > > https://lailluminator.com/2023/08/25/fire-at-marathon-refinery-in-st-john-parish-burns-for-seven-hours/
> > > > https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/05/20/refinery-fires-east-texas-pollution/
> > > I am unaware of any propane-powered motorgliders; perhaps you can enlighten me?
> > >
> > > Tom 2G
> > About as relevant to a soaring discussion group as a fire in an energy storage facility, unless you just want to rant about technology that you dislike. No one is forcing you to by an EV, battery storage, or an FES glider.. Most can make our own decisions regardless of someone propagandizing for the luddite community. You started the thread, right?
> And, in the paper this morning: "Hyundai, Kia recall more than 3M cars over fire risk". Three million is a lot of cars, and they are warning owners to park their cars outside! So far, over 21 fires and 22 "thermal events".
>
> Well, I'm not going to buy any car that uses brake fluid until they develop something safer.
They're NOT battery fires (sorta topic of this thread), but ABS module fires, whether car is running or off.
Granted, a large recall.
Since the recall is mostly SUV's, they are potential tow vehicles.

Le vendredi 29 septembre 2023 à 06:20:23 UTC+2, 2G a écrit :
> I am unaware of any propane-powered motorgliders; perhaps you can enlighten me?
> Tom 2G

Nope, but there are prototypes flying with hydrogen cells... Remember Hindenburg...

https://youtu.be/LH2UOC2TMng?si=Bh6RqXZmi7WpLW0L

On Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 1:29:36 PM UTC-7, S Fi wrote:
> https://youtu.be/LH2UOC2TMng?si=Bh6RqXZmi7WpLW0L
How about an introduction, so I have some reason to watch the video? The usual stuff: an abstract of the presentation, credibility of the source, something about your credibility, why it's worth 30 minutes of my time.

On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:22:54 PM UTC-7, GliderCZ wrote:
> On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:20:23 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:56:31 AM UTC-7, GliderCZ wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > > > This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
> > > >
> > > > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
> > > >
> > > > https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
> > > >
> > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
> > > This just in! Rash of spectacular fires sparks doubts about decades-old energy policies!
> > >
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwwWkvzlco8
> > > https://lailluminator.com/2023/08/25/fire-at-marathon-refinery-in-st-john-parish-burns-for-seven-hours/
> > > https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/05/20/refinery-fires-east-texas-pollution/
> > I am unaware of any propane-powered motorgliders; perhaps you can enlighten me?
> >
> > Tom 2G
> About as relevant to a soaring discussion group as a fire in an energy storage facility, unless you just want to rant about technology that you dislike. No one is forcing you to by an EV, battery storage, or an FES glider. Most can make our own decisions regardless of someone propagandizing for the luddite community. You started the thread, right?

With all due respect, you are not the moderator of RAS. In fact, the group is NOT moderated, which leaves it to each of us to decide what is and what is not relevant. Most readers here do not have a professional background in electrical engineering - I do. Thus, I have an insight into battery safety that most others do not. Furthermore, what I decide to buy and don't buy certainly is none of your business and is irrelevant to the topic. I suggest that you, simply, don't read topics you are uninterested in - that is what I do.

Tom 2G

+1 for 2G.

Dan
5J

On 10/8/23 18:16, 2G wrote:
> On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 9:22:54 PM UTC-7, GliderCZ wrote:
>> On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:20:23 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
>>> On Thursday, September 28, 2023 at 9:56:31 AM UTC-7, GliderCZ wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 5:44:27 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
>>>>> This complex uses the SAFEST lithium chemistry: LFP:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/27/tesla-lithium-battery-fire-bouldercombe-energy-storage-site-project-rockhampton
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/tesla-battery-fire-at-queensland-renewable-energy-project/102905302
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH2UOC2TMng
>>>> This just in! Rash of spectacular fires sparks doubts about decades-old energy policies!
>>>>
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwwWkvzlco8
>>>> https://lailluminator.com/2023/08/25/fire-at-marathon-refinery-in-st-john-parish-burns-for-seven-hours/
>>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/05/20/refinery-fires-east-texas-pollution/
>>> I am unaware of any propane-powered motorgliders; perhaps you can enlighten me?
>>>
>>> Tom 2G
>> About as relevant to a soaring discussion group as a fire in an energy storage facility, unless you just want to rant about technology that you dislike. No one is forcing you to by an EV, battery storage, or an FES glider. Most can make our own decisions regardless of someone propagandizing for the luddite community. You started the thread, right?
>
> With all due respect, you are not the moderator of RAS. In fact, the group is NOT moderated, which leaves it to each of us to decide what is and what is not relevant. Most readers here do not have a professional background in electrical engineering - I do. Thus, I have an insight into battery safety that most others do not. Furthermore, what I decide to buy and don't buy certainly is none of your business and is irrelevant to the topic. I suggest that you, simply, don't read topics you are uninterested in - that is what I do.
>
> Tom 2G