From: ash on
On 9 June, 06:03, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote:
> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
> doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
> Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
> continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.
>
> "GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk
>
> General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
> the heated washer system.
>
> The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
> Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.
>
> GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
> problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".
>
> These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
> US carmaker said.
>
> As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
> module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
> Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."
>
> More:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm
>
> --
> UK Radical Campaigns.http://www.zing.icom43.net
> A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Hey Doug, I agree with you totally. These electrical fires are a
nightmare in vehicles. You really need to do your homework - people in
glass houses.....

Quote - I have just had the misfortune (or perhaps fortune) to
discover that my li-ion battery has suffered a thermal event! This
evening I noticed that the plastic casing of the battery pack had a
small dimple in it that look like it had melted a bit. On removing the
outer casing and taking a look at the cells inside I was horrified to
see that one of the cells had burnt at one corner! Thankfully the
damage was limited to just that one cell and obviously the battery
pack has not (yet) gone into a castastrophic runaway thermal breakdown
(or huge fire to you and me!).

I have of course placed the battery as far from my house as possible
(it's in the shed and it's staying there!) while I contact
electricbikesales.co.uk to claim under the 6 month warranty. I shall
keep you posted as to how things go with them. I'm not sure I want a
replacement li-ion though!

I consider myself lucky that I have discovered the problem prior to
the pack causing a fire. I had read that li-ions must be treated with
a healthy respect and thus thankfully always stored my battery outside
of the house and never left the battery charging unattended either.

Let this serve as a wake up call to all li-ion owners! Store those li-
ions outside your house when not in use. They are not house pets!


http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/electric-bicycles/195-dangers-li-ion-batteries.html
From: Doug on
On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" <ContactGT_rem_o...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Doug" <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote in message
>
> news:9b8f8619-e343-4e5e-aaef-7d7082bd506a(a)z10g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> > fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> > who then is to blame?
>
> That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
> they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
> of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
> accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
> people!
>
> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
> everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.
>
if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some
of them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore
does not warrant a response.

I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.
From: Adrian on
Doug <jagmad(a)riseup.net> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

> On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" <ContactGT_rem_o...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points
>> that everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.

> if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
> because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some of
> them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore does not
> warrant a response.
>
> I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.

What did I say his reply would be...?

He's so utterly predictable.
From: Tony Dragon on
Doug wrote:
> On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" <ContactGT_rem_o...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Doug" <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:9b8f8619-e343-4e5e-aaef-7d7082bd506a(a)z10g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
>>> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
>>> who then is to blame?
>> That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
>> they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
>> of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
>> accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
>> people!
>>
>> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
>> everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.
>>
> if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here,

Why should he mean that, is it because you can try to separate motorists
(who might also cycle) & 'real cyclists'?

> I don't always reply
> because there are too many of them responding to my posts.

If you don't like people responding, don't post.

> Also some
> of them ask silly questions

You mean ones you can't answer.

> or are insulting,

You mean like calling a group of people 'killers'?

> etc, which therefore
> does not warrant a response.
>
> I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.
>
> --
> UK Radical Campaigns
> www.zing.icom43.net
> A driving licence is a licence to kill.


--
Tony Dragon
From: Derek C on
On Jun 9, 6:03 am, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote:
> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
> doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
> Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
> continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.
>
> "GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk
>
> General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
> the heated washer system.
>
> The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
> Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.
>
> GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
> problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".
>
> These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
> US carmaker said.
>
> As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
> module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
> Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."
>
> More:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm
>
> --
> UK Radical Campaigns.http://www.zing.icom43.net
> A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Do you fancy moving yourself and your electric bike to the States,
where there are plenty of Buicks, Cadillacs and Chevrolets Doug? They
seem to welcome nutters over there.