In reply to SV reX :
That's reasonable, I think Insurance isn't supposed to absolve you from being responsble for what you are insuring.
I wonder what rationale there was for the site being considered a flood risk.
In reply to SV reX :
That's reasonable, I think Insurance isn't supposed to absolve you from being responsble for what you are insuring.
I wonder what rationale there was for the site being considered a flood risk.
In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :
Elevation. That's all.
iIRC, the old site was 8' above sea level, and the new one was 13' above sea level. There was only a 5' difference. Neither site was within 5 miles of the coast or had ever flooded.
I not saying whether it is reasonable or unreasonable. (Perhaps a bit arbitrary). I'm saying that insurance companies already have rules that make people move cars. I see no reason why they couldn't require it for EVs.
I total every EV I can. Neither insurers or repair shops want to deal with them outside of minor cosmetic damage. Add in companies like Tesla keep everything so proprietary it costs 2x that of a normal car to repair them.
In reply to ddavidv :
That helps new EV sales quite a bit. Elon thanks you.
Well, they are disposable. I'm just accelerating the inevitable.
SV reX said:I not saying whether it is reasonable or unreasonable. (Perhaps a bit arbitrary). I'm saying that insurance companies already have rules that make people move cars. I see no reason why they couldn't require it for EVs.
Perhaps, but there's a difference in what you can get away with requiring between commercial and consumer customers. I also imagine that cities aren't going to like the idea of an impending hurricane meaning that suddenly there are 20,000 people fighting for street parking in the parts of town that have hills.
In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :
Well, that wouldn't be much of a problem in Florida. Almost every place a hurricane would make landfall, there are no hills.
They could put them in parking garages, but more and more garages won't accept ev's.
have the insurance companies done any tests to see how big a problem this is and how much "click bait" it is ,
they have enough data of flooded EVs and what percentage caught on fire .
FYI, Rivian batteries can be submerged in a meter of water for 30 minutes without water ingress. That's the length of the test, I think it's meant to imply an indefinite duration. Also, they have a wading depth of more than 43" which is pretty spectacular.
In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :
So, limited parking spaces are more important than saving lives or preventing houses from burning down? I don't buy that.
Cities don't have any problem issuing evacuation orders when there is a risk.
If there is an identifiable risk insurance companies and/or government authorities will absolutely have the ability to require EVs be relocated regardless of whether the consumer is commercial or residential.
Keith Tanner said:FYI, Rivian batteries can be submerged in a meter of water for 30 minutes without water ingress. That's the length of the test, I think it's meant to imply an indefinite duration. Also, they have a wading depth of more than 43" which is pretty spectacular.
I would have to track down the standard, but 30 min as an indefinite duration feels short, that might be from my previous background doing flood prevention though.
A 24hr measurement is standard for buildings. In my experience, standards seem to look to other standards for baselines
In reply to Mr_Asa :
24 hour measurement for what? Buildings being under water? Resisting fire?
Ive never heard of anything close to that.
SV reX said:In reply to Mr_Asa :
24 hour measurement for what? Buildings being under water? Resisting fire?
Ive never heard of anything close to that.
FEMA 93B? Id have to look for it, haven't used it in over a year. One of those "this is not required, bur if you plan for it use this" things
Edit: this might be it? Can review later. Gotta get on the road
https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_technical-bulletin-3_1-2021.pdf
SV reX said:So, limited parking spaces are more important than saving lives or preventing houses from burning down? I don't buy that.
Cities don't have any problem issuing evacuation orders when there is a risk.
If there is an identifiable risk insurance companies and/or government authorities will absolutely have the ability to require EVs be relocated regardless of whether the consumer is commercial or residential.
If you're trying to evacuate a town, the last thing you need is to have thousands of people fighting over a limited supply of elevated parking spots. They're slowing down their own evacuation and they're making a big traffic jam that's slowing down that of everyone else in the area. And if they had to drive multiple miles to find somewhere to park it, how are they getting back to their house to finishing loading stuff into their other car? You'll have someone else driving along behind them so that when they do find parking they'll have a ride to get back. That's more traffic and more people who are delaying their own evacuation.
Do this multiple times a year when the hurricanes change course and it's nothing more than a mild rain and you'll end up with a "boy who cried wolf" scenario.
Insurance companies can give bare "take it or leave it" rules to corporate customers and the corporate customers have no option other than to look for a different carrier. Do that to consumers and in the long term you wind up with newspaper articles about how the big evil insurance company is screwing over individuals (elderly grandmothers, poor single moms, other sympathetic cases), you get popular outrage, and then the government steps in and regulates the insurance company to stop them from doing it. "Your claim is denied because your car was parked in the garage" is not something that is going to be perceived by the population at large as reasonable.
Mr_Asa said:Keith Tanner said:FYI, Rivian batteries can be submerged in a meter of water for 30 minutes without water ingress. That's the length of the test, I think it's meant to imply an indefinite duration. Also, they have a wading depth of more than 43" which is pretty spectacular.
I would have to track down the standard, but 30 min as an indefinite duration feels short, that might be from my previous background doing flood prevention though.
A 24hr measurement is standard for buildings. In my experience, standards seem to look to other standards for baselines
I can see how buildings might be longer, given that there are things in and around buildings that can absorb water and change their behavior. I'd be more certain about rubber and metal not evolving much past the initial submersion as opposed to wood and dirt. But I'll ask why they chose 30 minutes.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
I would ass-ume that the rest of the vehicle isn't good for 30 minutes submerged.
If you want fun, look for interior switchgear, sending units, basically anything electrical for a Hummer H1 and note how many are listed as NOT being compatible for an HMMWV. The military vehicles had weather sealed everything because they were basically designed to be able to cross rivers with snorkels for the truck and scuba gear for the occupants. Not so for the civilian rigs.
The civilian rigs did keep the really nice breather manifold, so all of those portal gears and differentials and everything were vented to the airbox. Wish more trucks did that.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Buildings, generally, are longer because most leak prevention seals suck and you have to take that into account.
Again, i forget the exact figure, but I want to say that per linear foot of seal, the FEMA approved standard was 0.5gal per... hour?
I'd be very interested in knowing where they got both the depth and the time from, thank you.
In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :
My friend specifically said the batteries were submerged for 30 minutes in the test. Probably because that's what 1) prevents terrible battery accidents and 2) maintains function. But for a wading depth of 43", they've gotta have some pretty impressive door seals. Rivian overengineered the R1 pretty heavily - ever seen the suspension?
This came up because there was a Rivan that got picked up in the Ashville floods and carried 100-150' and he's still driving it. I have not seen a picture of the interior, and I'd be tempted to change the fluids in the differentials.
In reply to aircooled :
Local high end apartment with underground parking will not allow EV parking inside.
Just saw this on FB
In reply to Spitsix :
I wonder how high the water needs to get for it to float?
Mr_Asa said:SV reX said:In reply to Mr_Asa :
24 hour measurement for what? Buildings being under water? Resisting fire?
Ive never heard of anything close to that.
FEMA 93B? Id have to look for it, haven't used it in over a year. One of those "this is not required, bur if you plan for it use this" things
Edit: this might be it? Can review later. Gotta get on the road
https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_technical-bulletin-3_1-2021.pdf
Ok, so it's not a "standard for buildings" but a level of certification that can be attained for specific non-residential buildings in specific flood zones.
You'll need to log in to post.
