Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation

General Motors Tells Chevy Bolt Owners To Park Outside Because Batteries Could Catch Fire (cbsnews.com) 157

General Motors is telling owners of some older Chevrolet Bolts to park them outdoors and not to charge them overnight because two of the electric cars caught fire after recall repairs were made. A Slashdot reader shares a report: The company said Wednesday that the request covers 2017 through 2019 Bolts that were part of a group that was recalled earlier due to fires in the batteries. The latest request comes after two Bolts that had gotten recall repairs caught fire, one in Vermont and the other in New Jersey, GM spokesman Kevin Kelly said. Owners should take the steps "out of an abundance of caution," he said. The steps should be continued until GM engineers investigate and develop a repair, he said. The cars should be parked outdoors after charging is complete, GM said in a statement. "We are moving as quickly as we can to investigate this issue," the company said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

General Motors Tells Chevy Bolt Owners To Park Outside Because Batteries Could Catch Fire

Comments Filter:
  • Uh... A car might burst into flames and the solution you offer is to *checks notes* park it outside?

    • Well, it is certainly better than parking a fireball inside!
    • Re:Ok... what? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Thursday July 15, 2021 @12:42PM (#61585457)

      Uh... A car might burst into flames and the solution you offer is to *checks notes* park it outside?

      It is a temporary recommendation while they investigate the problem and look for a permanent solution.

      Another possible mitigation is to undercharge. Lithium batteries catch fire when they are full or perhaps overcharged. That could be what caused the two fires in TFA.

      I normally charge my EV to 80% capacity. But even 50% is plenty for day-to-day use.

      • Shouldn't the manufacturers do as Tesla do, or at least, what I've read about them? The BMS never charges above 80% and never lets it go below 20% except in emergencies.

        • I have a Tesla. 80% is not a hard limit.

          80% is the recommended limit for daily use, but you can go to 100%.

          I have occasionally charged to the full 100% immediately before going on a long trip.

          Likewise, 20% is not a hard limit. You will get a pop-up warning on the display when you drop below 20%, but the car will continue to run.

          • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

            There actually is a buffer between when the car shuts down and when you would get cell damage. For example, the 100D battery lets you use 98.4 kWh and keeps a 4kWh buffer (presumably on the bottom). But we're talking about a buffer that's O(4%) of the total capacity, not 40%. :-)

      • I normally charge my EV to 80% capacity.

        Is it a Pixel Car? :-) Pixel phones can automatically stop charging at 80% to improve battery longevity [xda-developers.com]

      • by madbrain ( 11432 )

        My 2017 Bolt EV doesn't have any charging rate option. So that's not a feasible workaround.

        Unplugging the car in the middle of the night when it's fully charged in the garage, and moving it to the driveway, is also not so great.

        • by rndmtim ( 664101 )

          Your Bolt has a "hilltop reserve" - the purpose of this is to not charge the battery to 100% if the first few miles (like at my house in Schoharie, at 2000 feet) is going downhill. I regularly leave my house at 90% and basically gain miles on my way to the highway for 10 miles. Anyway, their patch was to not fill the battery past 90%, and hilltop reserve does the same thing. Hilltop reserve can be set to be always on, only at home, or only away. So when they offered the recall I told them to fuck off and I

          • by rndmtim ( 664101 )

            Also... working in the biz I never really trusted these. I've got 15kW of solar with SolarEdge's StorEdge inverter, and it was supposed to use the LG Chem RESU battery - but I never trusted them enough to mount it in my garage. I put my charger on the outside of my garage and I park it at least 8 feet away. That's probably far enough, though Tesla NCA batteries can flame out of a Megapack about that far, and the next one over is metal clad... unlike my garage... if you've got metal siding that's probably go

      • by rndmtim ( 664101 )

        That was the recall's solution - 90% max state of charge. The fact that this is happening after the recall means that they've no idea how to make these safe with any state of charge.

    • by Ostracus ( 1354233 ) on Thursday July 15, 2021 @01:00PM (#61585525) Journal

      Well I suppose one could park it in the ex's garage. But that seems a bit mean.

    • Statistics (Score:5, Insightful)

      by JBMcB ( 73720 ) on Thursday July 15, 2021 @01:13PM (#61585591)

      This happened with two vehicles out of 88,000 produced. That's a failure rate of 0.000022% It could be the batteries were damaged somehow. It could be the dealership botched the firmware upgrade. It could be something else.

      Given the current statistics, the odds of you dying in a car crash on the way to the dealership are orders of magnitudes higher than the vehicle catching fire.

      So, yeah, parking outside is an overabundance of caution, and perfectly acceptable.

      As a side note, an acquaintance of mine had his Audi burst into flames while driving on the freeway. He smelled something electrical, saw yellow light coming from behind the steering column, pulled over to the side of the road and jumped out of the car. Thirty seconds later the entire car was on fire.

      So yeah, it happens. He, at least, got a brand new Volkswagen Jetta out of the ordeal.

      • by sjames ( 1099 )

        The more problematic part is their advice not to charge overnight. That can easily make the difference between a solid daily commuter and a car that's useless by mid-week.

      • You should check your math. 2/88000 = .000022 or .0022%. Still 1 in 44,000 is not "high odds". OTOH, this is the reported rate. The actual rate could be somewhat higher.

        • You're right. .0022% failure rate. I would think, though, that if your relatively new vehicle burst into flames, that would be something that would be reported, at least to the dealership, if not the manufacturer, or NHTSA. Especially if it's inside a home or garage and triggers an insurance investigation.

        • 12/65000 = 0.01%.

          There are roughly 65,000 2017-2019 Bolt EV's on the road subject to this recall *MAX*
          Twelve Bolt EV's have burned due to this defect. 2 recently *after* the final software fix
          Source: I have a 2019 Bolt EV and have been following pretty damn close.

          This article quotes 50,000: https://www.reuters.com/busine... [reuters.com] Mentions 12 vehicles total: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
      • If a firmware upgrade can cause a fatal failure like a fire then the engineering team is far over the horizon of incompetence

      • by torkus ( 1133985 )

        Statistics are hard - maybe start with math?

        2/88000 * 1/100 = 0.0022% (not 0.000022%)

        esurance quotes the accident rate at 1:366 per 1000 miles driven

        Assuming your dealership is 50 miles away: 50/1000 * 1/366 * 1/100 = .013%

        National security council says there's 13.5 million crashes a year, of which 36k result in at least one fatality: 36e3/135e5 *.013% = 0.000035%

        TL;DR this if two orders of magnitude MORE likely to happen than dying in a car accident on the way to the dealership. Even if your math wasn't

      • This happened with two vehicles out of 88,000 produced. That's a failure rate of 0.000022%

        Err no. That's not correct at all. There are ~65,000 2017-2019 Bolt EV's which have this defect. *12* have burned due to this defect. (2 post-recall fix).

        That's 0.01%

    • by tsqr ( 808554 )

      This is actually a pretty common approach to mitigating the risk of the owner's car burning down their house, while the manufacturer comes up with a fix and distributes parts and instructions to dealerships.

      • Except it's an EV and most chargers are in enclosed garages, not outdoors. Most EVs charge at home at night. So this means you can either no longer charge it, or must invest in an outdoor charger. And even then, my insurance would go up if I had my car parked outdoors.

        • by jabuzz ( 182671 )

          You might think that, but in the UK at least you would be wrong. Parking your car in a garage overnight puts your premiums up not down for two reasons.

          First statistically you are more likely to prang your car whilst entering or exiting a garage than parking in a driveway.

          Second should your house be broken into, the trespassers will immediately have access to your vehicle, which would not be the case if your car was parked on the street, where there is no obvious connection to your house.

          • by madbrain ( 11432 )

            Not sure where you live, but in my area it's the opposite. Cars routinely get banged up while parked outside. One neighbor on my street had their car totaled a month ago. That can't happen in the garage. Yes, I had had minor scuffs in the garage because we have a 2-car garage, but the driveway is at an angle and roughly only wide enough for 1.5 cars, so it makes for some interesting parking challenges. Both our cars are Chevy BTW, one 2015 Volt and one 2017 Bolt. Both parked and charging in the garage overn

        • The cord on the charger is pretty long. It reaches from inside my garage to a car parked on the driveway.

          • by madbrain ( 11432 )

            Depends which charger and where it's installed, and what kind of garage. Neither of my 2 Juicebox 25ft cables reach outside.

        • by tsqr ( 808554 )

          My guess is, most people would find the inconvenience of finding a temporary workaround to their chargeng routine and the minor impact to the cost of car insurance to be trivial compared to the inconvenience and cost of having their house burn down. There's also the possibility that your homeowners insurance would deny coverage when they discovered that you'd been warned by the manufacturer. I guess it depends on how lucky you think you are.

          • That's exactly the reason why Chevy should buy back the car. The inconvenience of parking outside is not minor .

            • by tsqr ( 808554 )

              That's exactly the reason why Chevy should buy back the car. The inconvenience of parking outside is not minor .

              Doubtful that Chevrolet would do that unless they lost a lawsuit. I suppose that's possible, given the unpredictability of juries. Might be tough to prove damages that substantial.

              • In my view it's simply not fit for purpose. If I knew the car had to be parked outside, I would never had bought it. So yes, likely that's going to court.

                • by tsqr ( 808554 )

                  In your view, sure. The same claim could be made for any auto recall. Good luck with that.

  • GM can't compete. (Score:4, Informative)

    by kallisti5 ( 1321143 ) on Thursday July 15, 2021 @12:34PM (#61585415)
    I have a 2019 Bolt EV. Chevy's handling of this has been abysmal.

    Between their lacking tech (i've had zero damn OTA updates, and their mobile apps are trash), dusty wheezing dealerships, and botching this software fix (Physical defect in a *warrantied* battery)... definitely my last Chevy.
    The Bolt EV is a *SIMPLE* damn EV. Nowhere near the tech Ford is doing with their V2G stuff. GM can't even get a *BASIC* EV right.

    If I was a GM shareholder, I'd be selling ASAP.
    • by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Thursday July 15, 2021 @12:45PM (#61585473)

      Well for an EV you don't need a Car Company you need a Tech Company. So GM knows little about software.
      Dealerships have been a scam for generations, and because EV tend to not need so much maintenance, they are not going to bend over backwards to support you.

      Ford, and VW before going EV, actually did a closer look at Tesla and what they did and how they did it. So they put more effort into Tech, as well targeted towards Upper Middle Class cars to be electrified, vs building off of their smaller builds.

      • yeah.. completely agree.
        Coming into my Bolt EV, I wasn't expecting the monthly software updates and feature enhancements like Tesla (I value right-to-repair a higher priority)... but at minimum I was expecting a few OTA bug fixes before GM tried to forget about my vehicle. We haven't even gotten that.

        Mix in OnStar's shady business practices, the non-functional apps, clueless dealerships about EV's, AND this massive botched recall. I'm 100% in the "never again GM" camp.

        There are other "cheap" EV's on t
        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by bmasephol ( 709904 )
          You do realize that GM didn't make the battery/monitoring systems for the Bolt EV, LG Chem did. This is why you don't get updates, because GM would have to have LG Chem do updates for something that is already "finished" Do your research before you buy something otherwise limit your expectations. I'm a 2019 Bolt EV owner, but have the later produced model where my battery was manufactured at a different plant than the one with the problem batteries. There are other "cheap" EVs on the market which have h
          • Why should we as a consumer care about that detail?
            If LG Chem did the software and it is failing, then GM should really be putting the Pressure on them to fix it, and then when they get the fix from LG Chem apply it over the air to their cars.

            As far as the consumer should care, this Car was made by GM and is supported by GM. Thus if there is a problem with the GM car, it is GM issue. If they need to reach out to their vendor and beat them with a stick to get the fix out fast enough, that is GM responsibi

          • Psst. Come here.
            You do realize it's a Chevy vehicle... right? As a consumer, I don't give a crap.

            Chevy deciding to over-outsource production to LG is their problem.

            If management wasn't prepared to throw money at LG for updates, or didn't manage the LG relationship well... it's still GM / Chevy's problem.

            You can't argue Chevy / GM isn't incompetent because "it's LG's fault". It's Chevy's fault for getting in a relationship with an external vendor who couldn't deliver a safe / reliable product.
          • by madbrain ( 11432 )

            I don't care who made the battery. GM and their dealership sold me the 2017 Bolt EV. They are responsible for it being it safe. They should recall or buy it back.

      • by sjames ( 1099 )

        These days, an ICE vehicle is loaded with software as well. If an auto manufacturer can't deal with software, they should switch to making go-carts.

      • Car companies have been using ever-increasing amounts of software in their cars for 30 years. They know plenty about software.
        What Tesla brought to the table was a commitment to building electric-only vehicles that caught the public imagination. Unfortunately one of their ideas that caught on was the touchscreen interface. Car companies like it because it's a lot cheaper than designing and producing lots of custom switchgear, but it's a user interface disaster.

        • by madbrain ( 11432 )

          Tesla was hardly the first to come up with touch screens in cars, though. My 2001 Toyota Prius had one too. It still had other controls, though.

          Touch screens are really horrible user interface when driving, especially small ones, but even large ones. Fortunately on Chevys or Toyotas, they are not the exclusive controls.

    • The Bolt EV is a *SIMPLE* damn EV.

      You're acting like this is a problem.

    • by kackle ( 910159 )

      i've had zero damn OTA updates ...

      You say that like it's a bad thing.

    • by madbrain ( 11432 )

      I have a 2017 Bolt EV. Bought for my husband after he crashed his 2011 Prius in Jan of 2017. It was the first month of production so I didn't expect miracles on a 1.0 product. Certainly OTA updates were never promised.

      I expected bug fixes in the dealer firmware updates though, and those never came. The entertainment system has many bugs. The ones that bother me the most are in the FM presets not sticking, for god's sake. Should be some really basic QA.

      On the other hand, the Android auto works well, and the

    • Between their lacking tech (i've had zero damn OTA updates...

      If there was ever a sign this is a software-engineering oriented site rather than a physical-engineering site, this is it!

      I want my products, especially mechanical ones (regardless of electronic control systems), to be engineered and vetted enough before release that they don't need in-the-field updates.

      I see lack of OTA update as a feature, not a flaw. If I had the power I'd outlaw them. They are security holes and they promote behaviors like re

  • by rickb928 ( 945187 ) on Thursday July 15, 2021 @12:38PM (#61585427) Homepage Journal

    I got a similar warning from Ford for my 1996 Explorer, a problem with a brake system switch that could short, before the fuse, cause a fire. Some had.

    Easy fix.

    But bad batteries, well, not good PR indeed...

  • No longer do you have to drive a Pinto to have your vehcile catch fire...
    • by Locutus ( 9039 )
      Wasn't it GM who also made the Corvair which was deemed not safe at any speed?

      Maybe GM learned from killing the EV1 that a better way to rid themselves and their customers of their EVs is to just burn them up in peoples driveways.
      LoB
      • Wasn't it GM who also made the Corvair which was deemed not safe at any speed?

        That was Nader’s claim. In fairness to the or air it was better than he claimed, especially later variants.

  • by psergiu ( 67614 ) on Thursday July 15, 2021 @12:51PM (#61585497)

    I would like to thank the North Texas Chevy dealerships that in 2019 prevented me from buying a Bolt by either having no Bolts available or having a single one in a corner of the showroom with a completely dead battery.

    • I would like to thank the North Texas Chevy dealerships that in 2019 prevented me from buying a Bolt by either having no Bolts available or having a single one in a corner of the showroom with a completely dead battery.

      Let's be honest for a moment; why did Chevrolet expect sales of EVs to be even remotely welcome in the middle of crude country?

      I'd be surprised if gas-powered skateboards aren't a legal mandate in Texas by now. Vibrators would already be gas-powered, but those pussy doctors keep bitching about ventilation...

    • "WARNING: USES ELECTRICITY! May not be chargeable in the winter and summer."
  • Will have a carburator and a stick shift.

    • So, you're buying something older than the 1994 base model Isuzu Pickup (Last passenger vehicle in the US to have a carburetor).

    • by Ksevio ( 865461 )

      Are you sure it's safe to put a big tank of flammable liquid in your garage? Maybe you should go with a horse instead

  • by eepok ( 545733 ) on Thursday July 15, 2021 @01:23PM (#61585639) Homepage

    The fires originated in the battery cells. The cells were manufactured by an LG Chem factory in Ochang, South Korea, from May of 2016 to May of 2019. Their failure floats up to Chevy and Chevy has to do the recall.

    Some 2019 Bolts and all 2020 and 2021 versions have cells made at an LG Chem plant in Holland, Michigan, and are not included in the recall.

    It's worth noting that the extreme demand for LIon batteries for everything-- phones, cars, flashlights, electric bikes/scooters/skateboards inevitably results in extreme demands on factories and workers who then cut corners and make inferior product. And all of those uses have had their own fire incidents. There's little that a end-manufacturer (Chevy) can do to guarantee that every single battery cell is perfect short of vertically integrating the battery manufacturing process into their existing business model. But then, of course, they take on even more liability.

    • There's little that a end-manufacturer (Chevy) can do to guarantee that every single battery cell is perfect short of vertically integrating the battery manufacturing process into their existing business model.

      Yep, better to just let them off the hook. I think you can also say the same about every other machine manufactured in the last 20 years.

    • by Mal-2 ( 675116 )

      Fuck it, that's what subrogation is for -- placing the blame and balancing the books, long after the harmed parties have been paid. It's not a great system, but it's actually one of the less broken ones.

  • My take away is that one ought to install both a heat-detector and a CO detector in their garage.

    Do note though that experts advise against installing a "smoke" detector due to nuisance tripping. Instead, that should go just inside the house.

  • "because two of the electric cars caught fire after recall repairs were made."

    So, cars were working and charging fine before "repairs" were done?

    Hey Chevy...perhaps you need to recall your incompetent service technicians instead of telling customers to park outside and not use the main method of charging an electric vehicle.

    I can't imagine anyone put more than 30 seconds worth of thought into this plan. What a clusterfuck.

    • by Mal-2 ( 675116 )

      No, they recalled due to fires. The service performed due to this recall did not adequately address the problem in all cases. The problem did not start because of the service, or why would there have been a recall in the first place?

  • by Some Guy ( 21271 ) on Thursday July 15, 2021 @02:03PM (#61585775)

    Where's all the outrage, people freaking out, and thousands of negative stories?

    Oh, I see. It's GM, not Tesla.

    Carry on.

  • There is life in the ICEV yet. Consumer confidence needs to be built on the EV technology. At the same time we see development of low CO2 fuels for ICEVs, such as biomass fuels and synthesized hydrocarbons.

    We need to look into all options on solving this problem. EVs should not be assumed to be the only path.

  • Not any more. I'm not going to buy into it. My old internal combustion engine in my Wrangler refuels for a 354 mile range in 5 minutes and does not catch on fire while doing so. My wife's Corolla S was the vehicle I was going to trade in, not the Wrangler. It's our "fun" vehicle. This is going to put brakes on EVs. It won't be long until Home Insurance is going to add a premium if you own an EV.
  • Attached garages are a dirt cheap way for builders to add empty square footage so they do. NEVER forget building is desperately competitive and that most buyers are like excited thoughtless rabbits. (Interestingly, when garages were add-ons to pre-automobile homes they were often safely distant like acetylene gas generators for gas lighting still very common in the early days and of which contractors and customers were well aware.)

    Vehicle fires are more common than most imagine and many garages store other

  • SSL. Mechanic here who never buys anything early one and waits several years to buy used when all the defects have manifested themselves.
    Let the early adopter pay to debug. EVs are (in their refinement cycle) roughly where ICE was in the 1920s. Don't get excited over tech, ANY tech. Excitement is chlidish therefore stupid and vehicle purchases (unless you're wealthy) should be coldly pragmatic choices.

    In another decade they will be so much better we'll laugh at what we consider cutting edge.

  • Imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.

Truly simple systems... require infinite testing. -- Norman Augustine

Working...