|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
generalcanada
Senior Member
I know we have beat the e-bike thing to death here, but this is a great interview with the Toronto fire chief about that ebike fire on NYE last year
T3G
Senior Member
In general, sure.
I fail to see how it would help in this particular scenario, though.
Northern Light
Superstar
For those who don't take the time to view.
The interview first off shows video of the explosion from within the subway car and you get a very clear sense of the suddenness and substantial toxic smoke, which appears with great speed.
Then the discussion veers to Toronto Fire's investigation.
While they were unable to discern a definitive cause of the device failure........they noted.
1) The manufacturer advised that this device was not to be used in winter (it was)
2) The manufacturer advised this device was not to be used for commercial purposes (it was) (food delivery)
3) The Battery was not certified.
4) The Battery contained a courtesy charger (that you could use through USB to charge your phone). This was deemed to be a high risk point of entry to the battery for water and/or road salt, and very high risk.
***
TFS Deputy chief comes away w/the strong view that all batteries should be subject to mandatory certification for sale in North America (or at least Canada) and clearly is not enthused by courtesy USB charging ports as a design feature.
The fact that bike/battery was used contrary to manufacturer instructions, one of which was 'No winter use' is why the TTC ban for now is winter, as this was deemed a higher-risk period.
Steve X
Senior Member
I also think those temporary tracks will wear too quickly with the weight of those super heavy Flexity's.
The problem with the use for commercial purposes is the daily wear and tear that would occur on the device with barely any maintenance. The device is bound to break in a shorter lifespan than for leisure time purposes. The device being unregulated clearly doesn't help.
Coolibop
Active Member
Again (hopefully our discussion won't be deleted without notice this time), while the risk for water/salt ingress in winter is indeed greater, this does not eliminate the possibility of battery failure at other times of the year (As Councillor Saxe highlighted in a board meeting last year)... Corrosion can take months to manifest to a point of failure, hence, strict market controls should be implemented as soon as possible.
The issue lies in the construction of the batteries. There are numerous certified batteries on the market without a 'no winter' clause and featuring additional external charge ports, which are sometimes fully exposed to the elements (e.g., e-motorcycles, mobility scooters). I have not seen evidence suggesting these certified products (designed to withstand the elements) pose significant concerns.
As an additional challenge, I take it those using e-bikes the most on transit are delivery couriers who tend to be price sensitive and are at a higher risk of opting for cheaper (and potentially more dangerous) products.
Coolibop
Active Member
We should not be allowing battery packs from manufacturers (on transit) with such liability clauses: how someone uses it should be irrelevant when it comes to safety.
By default, batteries should be built with rigorous standards so how it is used (e.g. varying weather, amount of use) is a non-issue.
TTCdinosaur
Active Member
Do you think the TTC will get more or less funding after we become the 51st state?
T3G
Senior Member
I think if we become the 51st state, we are going to have far more pressing issues at hand than transit funding!
ARG1
Senior Member
Would help if we had a decent enough transit network that didn't suffer from slow zones, or a regional rail network that still didn't run hourly headways on routes not called Lakeshore. Sure we're on our way to get there, but any discussion on congestion charges like the one in NYC should be dismissed until at least all of our current ongoing projects are completed.
81-717
Active Member
I appreciate your confidence, but can I ask how you can be so sure?
Reading Munro's latest post, he says:
Here we go back to square one again, so sick and tired of hearing the exact same caveat being parroted over and over again every few months like clockwork for the past 2.5 years
(hopefully not this time though)Northern Light
Superstar
Good question, I'll give the 'overt' answer, which is that the City contract to purchase will close by month's end, that is then a legally binding deal w/the manufacturer, made in good faith, based on the federal dollar commitment.
Reading Munro's latest post, he says:
Here we go back to square one again, so sick and tired of hearing the exact same caveat being parroted over and over again every few months like clockwork for the past 2.5 years
He's not wrong that every 'I' is not dotted and 'T' crossed.
Could a future government attempt to walk this back...........sure......its not impossible. A previous provincial government literally filled in a subway tail track tunnel that had already been dug.
But that's a very expensive choice, and a very unpopular one.............
****
I feel confident in my assertion, but I've repeatedly said here, nothing is certain until its in the past. (even then, there are things we might revisit factually).....
Last edited:
81-717
Active Member
Even aside from that, the post made it sound like even the current government hasn't actually made the commitment everyone said it made.
Northern Light
Superstar
Its been made, there was a press conference for goodness sake.
In law, by the way, an oral contract is legally binding. (assuming you can prove it.............a room full of invited cameras and microphones helps)
RapidTransit
Active Member
If the contact hasn't been signed or completed, then it's not a binding contract.
Plus the ppl making the announcement is not the same as the people signing the paper work. Plus both sides would have to agree, which they haven't.
Based on what you said , technically TTC has an agreement with the 4 short listed manufacturers already.
I'll go with Steve Munro on this and what was already discussed at the TTC Board meeting , which again contradicts your above statements.
Thanks for the laugh.