I have seen plenty of (gasoline) car accidents (shortly afterward). None resulted in any major fire, even those with multiple deaths. Perhaps you are talking about dramatized versions in the movies? EVs can catch fire without being involved in a collision. And minor accidents can cause fracture and shorting in the battery pack that would almost invariably lead to explosive fire. Again, I believe a clear pattern will emerge once we have more samples of EV accidents.
The number of EV's is fire in relation to the number of EV's on the road, is much higher then the number of fires of conventional cars in relation to the number on the road. There are maybe a few hundred thousand EV's but there are hundreds of millions conventional cars. So telling that the majority of incidents are not EV's is not relevant and wrong. The risk in an EV is much higher in case of fire or explosion. Has nothing to do with the amount of energy but with the KIND of energy. Batteries are far more dangerous then fuel tanks.
Actually they demo'd a gasoline fire (vice the diesel we were actually fighting) at Navy firefighting school. The entire point was to impress how explosive the gas (that we had to carry for the P-250 dewatering pumps) was, and it did that. I could ask you the same question,for gas fires and lithium ion battery fires? Anyone that claims that gasoline isn't a highly flammable and explosive liquid has clearly never seen it doing both those things!
You both are doing an outstanding job of proving my point that human brains can't intuitively grasp small probability numbers at all, and what's more we're blind to that fact. Let's do the math. There are about 250M cars and trucks in use in the U.S. and just shy of 1M electric vehicles. That means electric cars make up 1/250=.4% of U.S. cars. My cited source, which no-one seems to disagree with, stated there are 174,000 vehicle fires a year in the U.S. That would mean if electric cars caught fire at the same rate as regular cars, we would have seen 174,000*.004=696 electric vehicle fires per year. Are we seeing 696 electric car fires a year? Every one of the handful has been breathlessly reported, nothing even close to 700. See what I mean. You were sure, because they received such significant coverage, that electric cars were catching fire at a much greater rate than regular cars, but the math, once you take the time to do it, shows that's incorrect. In fact, rare events like airplane crashes or EV fires receive this coverage precisely because they're rare events, unlike the 35,000 deaths in regular old crashes that don't even blip for us. As Stalin said, "A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic." The interesting thing is even now your brains are fetching around to support the hypothesis that you initially arrived at erroneously. You're thinking about all the reasons why those numbers can be wrong, rather than examining the faulty reasoning that led you to your initial conclusion. Am I right?
I don't know ...... I haven't been following the electric cars. I'm more interested in TSLA options. But I do know that Automobile gasoline fires are surprisingly rare.
Did you not just read the math I did for you! Automobile gasoline fires may be surprisingly rare, electric car fires are substantially rarer. Why the holy hell would you opine about something that you admittedly haven't been following, then insist you're right, then essentially say "I know you proved I was incorrect but I'm still right because I say so", and finally proceed to invest in options on a company whose main product you by your own admission haven't been following? One wonders how you manage to cross the street without getting hit by a bus, let alone invest!
The statistics I quoted were all for the U.S. You used the worldwide number of vehicles and the U.S. number of vehicle fires and EVs, which clearly will lead to erroneous results. But again, good job demonstrating how tenaciously you cling to an idea that you arrived at with no data when confronted with actual data. You're a walking case study for the phenomenon! Whenever you find yourself saying "I think" for a low probability event in the absence of any data or calculations, you're not thinking at all. You're wild ass guessing and most probably guessing wrong. If you all approach trading with this same lack of rigor.... that's like handing a toddler a box of matches and a can of gasoline (which I guess wouldn't be a problem to those folks who "think" gasoline isn't really that flammable).
Just to show that you are not as smart as you pretend and we are not as stupid as you pretend: There are around 750,000 buses in the US which carry much more passengers then an average Tesla. So to calculate the risk the number of passengers should be include too. Fire in a bus can risk 30-50 lives while fire in a Tesla can never be more than 5. Also the total mileage of all the cars should be taken in account. The average yearly mileage of conventional cars, trucks and buses is a multiple of the average yearly mileage of an EV. Everybody who is driving really a lot will have to take a conventional car, as he will lose too much time to charge the car again. Take all that in account and the risk will change drastically in favor of conventional cars, trucks, buses.
The majority of ET option threads, including this one, are not related to investing. They are about speculative short term option trades. Those sort of trades do not require a great deal of knowledge about the company. Market volatility and being a tech favorite is key.