There’s a Sky journalist who is absolutely obsessed with proving that the babies at Kfar Aza were not beheaded. Instead, they were shot, or maybe had their throats slit
And there does seem some confusion - contradictory reports from soldiers, journos
But he doesn’t realise it’s not a very good look. Like someone angrily shouting “that’s completely wrong, Jimmy Savile only raped 216 children, NOT 407!”
Tangentially, I'm two episodes into the Savile drama. Steve Coogan is uncanny - he is a brilliant impressionist, of course - but it does take a short while to get round the cognitive dissonance of Coogan being a comic actor, playing such a truly devilish human. He gets him bang on though, truly sinister.
Withholding full judgement till I've watched the whole thing though. My instinct is that Savile, like a lot of psychopaths, is actually quite one-dimensional and doesn't quite bear a four hour character study. The real interest is in how his enablers are depicted. As I say - jury out till I've watched it all.
I've watched it all. It's well-done for sure but what is the point? It is far inferior to Dan Davies's book, In Plain Sight, which is superb.
How much did the BBC drama touch on the fact, that he was very much in plain sight of many of the BBC management of the time?
I find it totally horrific for the victims, that the BBC would even go there with a drama that they presumably indend to sell worldwide.
There was quite a lot of focus on the BBC with some actual personal characterised and some invented (which they, rather tastelessly in my view, said was "for dramatic purposes"). Some of the victims took part in it.
It was well-done but much better to read the book. Some of the documentaries, e.g. the Netflix one, are far better too.
The responsibility for Hamas's action lies entirely with Hamas - but this Israeli editorial calls out Netanyahu as an enabler.
https://www.haaretz.com/ty-WRITER/0000017f-da25-d42c-afff-dff7a1c10000 ...His life’s work was to turn the ship of state from the course steered by his predecessors, from Yitzhak Rabin to Ehud Olmert, and make the two-state solution impossible. En route to this goal, he found a partner in Hamas.
“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.”..
It's more likely he enabled by appointing incompetent political cronies and lackies to key positions in the IDF and Mossad, who were asleep at the wheel.
The oped calls that out, too. It's not either/or.
Netanyahu is the worst possible leader for Israel at such a time and has been for a while. If there is anything even remotely good to come out of this I hope it is his departure from the political scene. But even a saint could not ignore what has happened. Hamas have genocidal intent towards Israel and all Jews everywhere. They are 21st century Nazis and must be defeated. If people didn't realise this before now - it has been clearly set out in their speeches and charter for ages - Saturday's massacres should have disabused them.
I posted last night a plan which would allow innocent civilians to escape Gaza while Israel takes steps to defeat Hamas. There is some talk of the US trying to establish just such a humanitarian corridor but I read this morning that Hamas have told Gazans not to try and escape. They do not care about their own people and are perfectly happy for them to be killed so long as they can blame this on Israel. They are utter scum. As are those who excuse, enable and justify them in the West.
Like the ex-leader of the Labour Party and far too many members of the party under him.
Starmer deserves every gold star going for the fact that he has turned the party away from the sewer it had become under Corbyn. Even if he achieves nothing else in his political life that will be to his credit. His speech yesterday showed him to be a serious politician with the flaws and failings of normal politicians. Boring he may be but look at what we have to compare him to at last week's Tory conference.
Sometimes you get organisations whose ideology is just a cover for what they really enjoy doing, murder, torture and rape.
The Khmer Rouge, IS, Sturmbrigade Dirlewanger were of that ilk. So is Hamas.
I think the anti-Jewish ideology is key to what they are doing.
I am no Starmer fan, and even less a Streeting fan, but Mrs Foxy is. After yesterday's speech Labour has her vote.
I live on one of the 7 Tory held seats with a large majority in Leics that encircle the city. On current polling some of these turn improbably red. I will wait for the candidates flyers before deciding but really hard to see the seat as other than Tory hold.
I was in the overspill hall with a first-conference friend. I thought the speech was policy-light, quite stirring at times but a bit long. She was absolutely electrified and says she'll tell all her friends that he's great. I think we veterans sometimes underestimate what exposure to a good speech will do to a newcomer to serious politics.
And the effect of being in the room when everyone around you is applauding.
The development of an immunity to that effect, as far as politicians is concerned, is to be encouraged.
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
So there is a risk that a car owner who has third party only cover will not be compensated for the loss at all?
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
I’m fascinated by the idea of just giving your money away. Peter Green suggested Fleetwood Mac should do it in the sixties, and the rest of the band refused. He was mentally ill, but on this I think he spoke sense. I’d like to do it but make the excuse that I haven’t got enough yet, when compared to most people on earth I’m fabulously wealthy. Caught in the trap of keeping up with the Jones’s
Billionaire businessman Chuck Feeney who co-founded Duty Free Shoppers chain then gave away his fortune to charity because 'it's more fun to give while you live' dies at rented San Francisco Apartment aged 92 trib.al/naFH1Jy
If I ever became that rich I reckon I’d give it away. I’d leave enough to my kids to make sure they’re alright. Give them a head start. But what’s the point in dying with £100m in the bank? Or a billion?
And giving is a positive pleasure
There was an excellent item about him on the BBC WS, but I can't find it.
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
The Liverpool car park fire event is inconvenient to the Luton car park owners I feel. I think going forward Car Park owners will have to insure against this catastrophic, but rare possibility. It of course will be passed on in slightly higher parking fees.
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
The Liverpool car park fire event is inconvenient to the Luton car park owners I feel. I think going forward Car Park owners will have to insure against this catastrophic, but rare possibility. It of course will be passed on in slightly higher parking fees.
Why would the car park owners have to do this now when they haven't had to in decades past?
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
So there is a risk that a car owner who has third party only cover will not be compensated for the loss at all?
From the RAC:
What does third party insurance cover?
A third party car insurance policy ensures that if you cause an accident, any damage to the other person’s vehicle or property will be paid for by your insurer.
However, damage to your vehicle will not be covered, and you will need to pay the bill yourself to get things fixed. You are also unable to make a claim if your car is damaged by fire or stolen
Who has 3rd party only these days - every quote I've seen has had comp cheaper as 3rd party is assumed to have more risk.
Anyone know what is happening with Covid booster eligibility?
I thought you had to be over 65 and there is no private option but have seen this:
"There will be a Covid Vaccination clinic running at Tesco Car Park on Saturday 20th March between 12.30pm to 3.30pm. You, or anyone in your household over the age of 18 years, will be able to have your vaccine. There is no need to book an appointment, just turn up."
Is this just for those few who have had no vaccine at all or whether they are referring to boosters?
My GP has offered me one for around now, but I had one booster in August ahead of chemo - so I need to find out if it is a new variant.
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
The Liverpool car park fire event is inconvenient to the Luton car park owners I feel. I think going forward Car Park owners will have to insure against this catastrophic, but rare possibility. It of course will be passed on in slightly higher parking fees.
Why would the car park owners have to do this now when they haven't had to in decades past?
Potentially, because it's a foreseeable event now.
I’m fascinated by the idea of just giving your money away. Peter Green suggested Fleetwood Mac should do it in the sixties, and the rest of the band refused. He was mentally ill, but on this I think he spoke sense. I’d like to do it but make the excuse that I haven’t got enough yet, when compared to most people on earth I’m fabulously wealthy. Caught in the trap of keeping up with the Jones’s
Billionaire businessman Chuck Feeney who co-founded Duty Free Shoppers chain then gave away his fortune to charity because 'it's more fun to give while you live' dies at rented San Francisco Apartment aged 92 trib.al/naFH1Jy
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
I’ll leave the investigation to the fire brigade, but Twitter has very much already decided what type of car was involved in the incident.
I was in that car park less than a week ago.
If it turns out that of the hundreds of cars there one of the small percentage of EVs caught fire while parked this will significantly add to concerns over their mass adoption. Hundreds of cars destroyed and untold damage to the recently constructed car park - my word this is shocking. I assume no human casualties? - which if so would be lucky.
What of car parks under apartment buildings?
What if the fire started with an ICE vehicle? Should they be banned?
I must admit I hadn't even thought of the EV angle. I was thinking more that this looked like arson - especially after the similar fire in Liverpool. I was wondering if there is a more militant faction of (for example) XR that is taking things into their own hands.
Has anyone got numbers on this? The best I have are that EV fires are very rare, and ICEV fires are more common - but I have nothing very authoritative.
ROSPA did this review some time ago, and risk profiles are different. EVs, aiui, have eg a risk of delayed fires - which sounds like one possible mechanism for an airport parking fire.
OTOH some outlets such as GB News and the Daily Mail push scare stories.
The firefighting requirements are quite different for battery-powered cars vs automotive petrol tanks.
Even if this fire didn’t originate with an EV, the presence of them close by may have contributed both to the severity of the blaze, and the inability of firefighters to bring it under control quickly.
I suspect that there needs to be an update to the standards for car park sprinkler systems, to take account of the increasing prevalence of large batteries that can sustain combustion autonomously. Battery fires can’t be put out with foam, CO2, or water, as the batteries themselves contain compounds of oxygen. The only option is to put hundreds of gallons of water on the fire, and wait for things to cool down.
I never ever went to an EV fire. Did all the training, watched all the videos, went through the Thermal Runaway training package, had a couple of laps at Bruntingthorpe in a BMW EV during a training day. At the time I retired nearly 2 years ago, there wasn't really a unified strategy on extinguishing an EV fire around the country. The Germans and Dutch were considering utilising open topped shipping containers filled with water and forklifting EVs into them if they could, especially if thermal runaway was on the cards, but mostly it's just bollock loads of water on them and let them do their thing. As far as I'm aware, there haven't really been any issues in my old CFB.
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
So there is a risk that a car owner who has third party only cover will not be compensated for the loss at all?
From the RAC:
What does third party insurance cover?
A third party car insurance policy ensures that if you cause an accident, any damage to the other person’s vehicle or property will be paid for by your insurer.
However, damage to your vehicle will not be covered, and you will need to pay the bill yourself to get things fixed. You are also unable to make a claim if your car is damaged by fire or stolen
Who has 3rd party only these days - every quote I've seen has had comp cheaper as 3rd party is assumed to have more risk.
Also, the standard always used to be “3rd party, fire & theft” didn’t it? In which case those who had bought “3rd party” insurance would probably be covered.
The responsibility for Hamas's action lies entirely with Hamas - but this Israeli editorial calls out Netanyahu as an enabler.
https://www.haaretz.com/ty-WRITER/0000017f-da25-d42c-afff-dff7a1c10000 ...His life’s work was to turn the ship of state from the course steered by his predecessors, from Yitzhak Rabin to Ehud Olmert, and make the two-state solution impossible. En route to this goal, he found a partner in Hamas.
“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.”..
It's more likely he enabled by appointing incompetent political cronies and lackies to key positions in the IDF and Mossad, who were asleep at the wheel.
The oped calls that out, too. It's not either/or.
Netanyahu is the worst possible leader for Israel at such a time and has been for a while. If there is anything even remotely good to come out of this I hope it is his departure from the political scene. But even a saint could not ignore what has happened. Hamas have genocidal intent towards Israel and all Jews everywhere. They are 21st century Nazis and must be defeated. If people didn't realise this before now - it has been clearly set out in their speeches and charter for ages - Saturday's massacres should have disabused them.
I posted last night a plan which would allow innocent civilians to escape Gaza while Israel takes steps to defeat Hamas. There is some talk of the US trying to establish just such a humanitarian corridor but I read this morning that Hamas have told Gazans not to try and escape. They do not care about their own people and are perfectly happy for them to be killed so long as they can blame this on Israel. They are utter scum. As are those who excuse, enable and justify them in the West.
Like the ex-leader of the Labour Party and far too many members of the party under him.
Starmer deserves every gold star going for the fact that he has turned the party away from the sewer it had become under Corbyn. Even if he achieves nothing else in his political life that will be to his credit. His speech yesterday showed him to be a serious politician with the flaws and failings of normal politicians. Boring he may be but look at what we have to compare him to at last week's Tory conference.
Sometimes you get organisations whose ideology is just a cover for what they really enjoy doing, murder, torture and rape.
The Khmer Rouge, IS, Sturmbrigade Dirlewanger were of that ilk. So is Hamas.
Not sure that’s true about the Khmer Rouge. Undoubtedly it contained, attracted psychos and sadists but many of them REALLY believed in the ideological necessity of what they were doing
Also you can be a sadist AND an ideologue
Arguably these people are worse. Because they act rationally and thoughtfully, with cold calculation. Simple nutters quickly make mistakes
How will they build 1.5m new homes? In a recent announcement by major house builder Vistry (includes brands Countywide and Bovis) sales were down 28% in the first half and they have decided to hunker down - concentrating their resources on social housing projects and return capital to shareholders. Whilst would be great if all 1.5m new houses were social housing this is unlikely to happen - especially in "new towns" where a mix of housing is required. With interest rates expected to be high for some time sales of new houses for owner occupation will be depressed.
Smash the monopoly/oligopoly of house builders by moving away from our current convoluted planning system which grants entire estates to a single developer to build who can turn on or off construction at will to deliberately manage prices.
Instead move to a Japanese-style system where if land is zoned for housing anyone can build on it without asking any permission first from neighbours or Council or anyone else since permission has already been granted via it being in the right zone.
This must have been how we did it a few decades ago as the estate I live on was built by three different housebuilders.
That's what happened here: there were three different housebuilders for the village. Interestingly, they were not given large zones of the village to develop, leading to all the houses looking the same. Instead, they were given streets, or even different plots on the same street. Until this changed when the last part of the village was built, this led to quite a difference in styles in any one place.
For instance, there are no houses like mine on this street. But if I go three hundred metres away, I can find a couple that are identical.
That must have enormously increased construction costs.
Apparently not, from what I've been told.
Several housebuilders for a large development is common practice. Amongst other things it reduces risk by giving developers a portfolio, and there are specialists in different types of property eg retirement homes, sheltered developments ,medium rise timber frame etc.
I think a big issue here is proposed magic bullet solutions that are already done or doable in the existing system.
The cost point would normally be needing a minimum size of development to justify the overheads, including eg a sales office. If there is a 1500 dwelling development, developers would need areas of perhaps a couple of hundred houses to get nearly all the economies of scale.
Building a large development faster won't normally sell dwellings at a much faster rate, because the determinant is people living close enough to move whilst staying recognisably local for the rest of their lives, schools, family etc. Flitting 100 or 500 miles is a small minority, and - talking to half a dozen developers when I was marketing a piece of land - most buyers come from within easy transport distance.
From running around the new bits of our village that is being built, there are seemingly lots of oriental-looking prospective buyers. And there has been an anecdotal increase in Chinese kids in local schools. Two ex-Hong Kong residents have purchased new houses (I've no probs with that).
Don't know if that's just a phenomena local to here.
(Tried to write the above without sounding a little bit racist...)
I haven't noticed Chinese - except for my new neighbour family directly across who moved in this summer, and has recently been back to China to spend time with family. So I'd speculate 1st generation, and possibly via Nottingham University and stayed.
Seem like good, quiet, neighbours.
NU has a lot of Chinese students, and campuses in both China (Ningbo) and Malaysia who presumably come here sometimes. The Chinese one has a replica of the Portland Building. 6500 students "based in China", whatever that means. https://www.nottingham.edu.cn/en/index.aspx
Poles, however - we have in spades. My local GP has their instructions in 2 languages - English and Polish.
"Poles, however - we have in spades." That's what makes a spade a spade. Else they'd be trowels
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
So there is a risk that a car owner who has third party only cover will not be compensated for the loss at all?
If you have 3rd party only AND no-one has been negligent then you have no redress that I can see. The chance that there is no negligence from anyone in this case is small. Plaintiff lawyers (who have starving wives and barefoot children to provide for) will be touting for gainful employment already.
I am no Starmer fan, and even less a Streeting fan, but Mrs Foxy is. After yesterday's speech Labour has her vote.
I live on one of the 7 Tory held seats with a large majority in Leics that encircle the city. On current polling some of these turn improbably red. I will wait for the candidates flyers before deciding but really hard to see the seat as other than Tory hold.
I was in the overspill hall with a first-conference friend. I thought the speech was policy-light, quite stirring at times but a bit long. She was absolutely electrified and says she'll tell all her friends that he's great. I think we veterans sometimes underestimate what exposure to a good speech will do to a newcomer to serious politics.
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
I am aware of specific fire hazards from both EV and ICE. Neither are that easy to put out. And yes car fires are commonplace. Mainly as a result of poor maintenance. Although the RHD Vauxhall Zafira from 06 to 14 was known to spontaneously combust on its own. And let's not forget the Ford Pinto scandal whereby a relatively low speed rear impact would rupture the fuel tank and the vehicle would explode.
I’ll leave the investigation to the fire brigade, but Twitter has very much already decided what type of car was involved in the incident.
Twitter also very much decided what Clarkson's superinjunction was about.
Clarkson Superinjunction?
Good job that Luton Airport has mass transit straight from the railway station, with I think a 30 minute journey from St Pancras (or St Pancreas as we diabetics call it).
On that note, the GLP1 weight loss drugs might have a very large impact in diabetes.
Halting a clinical trial early is either very bad, or (as in this case) very good news indeed.
https://twitter.com/meremrtl/status/1711867548256334171 Novo has halted its FLOW trial, which was evaluating the impact of semaglutide on renal impairment in type 2 diabetes patients with chronic kidney disease. The decision comes after an independent Data Monitoring Committee reThatcommended the early cessation of the trial due to meeting pre-specified efficacy criteria in an interim analysis. This suggests a strong positive outcome and could be a significant catalyst for the stock.
Primary outcome measure: "Time to first occurrence of a composite primary outcome event defined as persistent eGFR decline of greater than or equal to 50 percentage from trial start, reaching ESRD, death from kidney disease or death from cardiovascular disease."
Kidney disease is very costly for the NHS to treat.
There is a massive problem with diabetes drugs right now - or rather with the supply. Now that someone has discovered that they are a good weight loss drug there is a world wide shortage of some of them. All being bought up by fat Americans at 5 times the price that is paid for them as diabetes drugs.
This is from my neighbour who is a diabetes nurse. She is having real issues and having to put people back on insulin because of the shortage.
That I think will be Type 2 Diabetes and GLP - the NHS is already quite good (at least according to my anecdata) at addressing early Type 2, and putting it 'into remission' (ie patients come off the treatment due to diet / exercise changes).
It's ironic that insulin is sometimes used to promote weight GAIN.
On a separate note, developments in blood glucose monitoring are making a big difference too.
You remember the monitoring system that most of us first saw when Theresa May showed her monitoring sensor on her arm in sleeveless dresses? There are now 200k people or so using that system in the UK - the cost-benefit analysis stacked up.
I think May is a late onset type 1 diabetic.
She deserves credit for strongly advocating for sensor monitoring and its roll out. All type 1 are now eligible, and it has really good engagement with the younger type 1, giving them a genuine reason to fiddle with their phones!.
Increasingly the "closed loop" systems that adjust an insulin pump are being rolled out too. Not quite an electronic pancreas, but heading there.
The most grateful are probably the parents of diabetic children. Many link their phones to the sensor alarms on the children, and can finally get a night's sleep. Many had been checking their kids weren't hypo several times a night. Now their phone does.
I have probably been to over a hundred ICE vehicle fires, though. Cars, trucks, buses, bikes, a light aircraft, a few boats. Lots of arson, but ICE cars catch fire quite easily on their own.
Turns out there was another brutal massacre on October 7. Kibbutz Be’eri. 100 dead minimum: same procedure - kill every Jew they could, no matter what age
There is one video which just shows the bloody aftermath. A river of blood. I shan’t link
One of the many chilling aspects of these crimes is the way they offer a glimpse of what a brutal pogrom must have been like, or indeed one of the “relatively minor” but hideous atrocities of the Holocaust
In particular I’m reminded of this: the Kovno garage massacre. Click at your discretion
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
So there is a risk that a car owner who has third party only cover will not be compensated for the loss at all?
From the RAC:
What does third party insurance cover?
A third party car insurance policy ensures that if you cause an accident, any damage to the other person’s vehicle or property will be paid for by your insurer.
However, damage to your vehicle will not be covered, and you will need to pay the bill yourself to get things fixed. You are also unable to make a claim if your car is damaged by fire or stolen
Who has 3rd party only these days - every quote I've seen has had comp cheaper as 3rd party is assumed to have more risk.
I assume there is a category of people who simply assume third party only is always cheapest, so don't price compare. But, as you say, it very often isn't. I believe about 90% of car insurance is comprehensive now, and a lot of the 10% would be real old bangers.
The practical difference between third party, fire and theft (as opposed to third party only) can be meaningless if you have an old banger though. I've owned a couple when younger where it would essentially never have been worth claiming for repairs as the excess was more than the car was worth.
Anyone know what is happening with Covid booster eligibility?
I thought you had to be over 65 and there is no private option but have seen this:
"There will be a Covid Vaccination clinic running at Tesco Car Park on Saturday 20th March between 12.30pm to 3.30pm. You, or anyone in your household over the age of 18 years, will be able to have your vaccine. There is no need to book an appointment, just turn up."
Is this just for those few who have had no vaccine at all or whether they are referring to boosters?
My GP has offered me one for around now, but I had one booster in August ahead of chemo - so I need to find out if it is a new variant.
Had mine yesterday. Pfizer, latest variant they said
I’ll leave the investigation to the fire brigade, but Twitter has very much already decided what type of car was involved in the incident.
Twitter also very much decided what Clarkson's superinjunction was about.
Clarkson Superinjunction?
Good job that Luton Airport has mass transit straight from the railway station, with I think a 30 minute journey from St Pancras (or St Pancreas as we diabetics call it).
On that note, the GLP1 weight loss drugs might have a very large impact in diabetes.
Halting a clinical trial early is either very bad, or (as in this case) very good news indeed.
https://twitter.com/meremrtl/status/1711867548256334171 Novo has halted its FLOW trial, which was evaluating the impact of semaglutide on renal impairment in type 2 diabetes patients with chronic kidney disease. The decision comes after an independent Data Monitoring Committee reThatcommended the early cessation of the trial due to meeting pre-specified efficacy criteria in an interim analysis. This suggests a strong positive outcome and could be a significant catalyst for the stock.
Primary outcome measure: "Time to first occurrence of a composite primary outcome event defined as persistent eGFR decline of greater than or equal to 50 percentage from trial start, reaching ESRD, death from kidney disease or death from cardiovascular disease."
Kidney disease is very costly for the NHS to treat.
There is a massive problem with diabetes drugs right now - or rather with the supply. Now that someone has discovered that they are a good weight loss drug there is a world wide shortage of some of them. All being bought up by fat Americans at 5 times the price that is paid for them as diabetes drugs.
This is from my neighbour who is a diabetes nurse. She is having real issues and having to put people back on insulin because of the shortage.
That I think will be Type 2 Diabetes and GLP - the NHS is already quite good (at least according to my anecdata) at addressing early Type 2, and putting it 'into remission' (ie patients come off the treatment due to diet / exercise changes).
It's ironic that insulin is sometimes used to promote weight GAIN.
On a separate note, developments in blood glucose monitoring are making a big difference too.
You remember the monitoring system that most of us first saw when Theresa May showed her monitoring sensor on her arm in sleeveless dresses? There are now 200k people or so using that system in the UK - the cost-benefit analysis stacked up.
I think May is a late onset type 1 diabetic.
She deserves credit for strongly advocating for sensor monitoring and its roll out. All type 1 are now eligible, and it has really good engagement with the younger type 1, giving them a genuine reason to fiddle with their phones!.
Increasingly the "closed loop" systems that adjust an insulin pump are being rolled out too. Not quite an electronic pancreas, but heading there.
The most grateful are probably the parents of diabetic children. Many link their phones to the sensor alarms on the children, and can finally get a night's sleep. Many had been checking their kids weren't hypo several times a night. Now their phone does.
My reply. Quotes broken: Yes - late onset T1 like the Commons Speaker.
That is an interesting phenomenon - I know of one T1 diagnosis for a friend's grandad who was 88 at diagnosis.
It should be a reliable account since the person reporting it to me has a degree in Sports Science and runs a gym, so familiar with health-type questions. I have not audit trailed it, though.
I've never read the Children with Diabetes email group material on this, but that would be the place to find experiences.
How will they build 1.5m new homes? In a recent announcement by major house builder Vistry (includes brands Countywide and Bovis) sales were down 28% in the first half and they have decided to hunker down - concentrating their resources on social housing projects and return capital to shareholders. Whilst would be great if all 1.5m new houses were social housing this is unlikely to happen - especially in "new towns" where a mix of housing is required. With interest rates expected to be high for some time sales of new houses for owner occupation will be depressed.
Smash the monopoly/oligopoly of house builders by moving away from our current convoluted planning system which grants entire estates to a single developer to build who can turn on or off construction at will to deliberately manage prices.
Instead move to a Japanese-style system where if land is zoned for housing anyone can build on it without asking any permission first from neighbours or Council or anyone else since permission has already been granted via it being in the right zone.
This must have been how we did it a few decades ago as the estate I live on was built by three different housebuilders.
That's what happened here: there were three different housebuilders for the village. Interestingly, they were not given large zones of the village to develop, leading to all the houses looking the same. Instead, they were given streets, or even different plots on the same street. Until this changed when the last part of the village was built, this led to quite a difference in styles in any one place.
For instance, there are no houses like mine on this street. But if I go three hundred metres away, I can find a couple that are identical.
That must have enormously increased construction costs.
Apparently not, from what I've been told.
Several housebuilders for a large development is common practice. Amongst other things it reduces risk by giving developers a portfolio, and there are specialists in different types of property eg retirement homes, sheltered developments ,medium rise timber frame etc.
I think a big issue here is proposed magic bullet solutions that are already done or doable in the existing system.
The cost point would normally be needing a minimum size of development to justify the overheads, including eg a sales office. If there is a 1500 dwelling development, developers would need areas of perhaps a couple of hundred houses to get nearly all the economies of scale.
Building a large development faster won't normally sell dwellings at a much faster rate, because the determinant is people living close enough to move whilst staying recognisably local for the rest of their lives, schools, family etc. Flitting 100 or 500 miles is a small minority, and - talking to half a dozen developers when I was marketing a piece of land - most buyers come from within easy transport distance.
From running around the new bits of our village that is being built, there are seemingly lots of oriental-looking prospective buyers. And there has been an anecdotal increase in Chinese kids in local schools. Two ex-Hong Kong residents have purchased new houses (I've no probs with that).
Don't know if that's just a phenomena local to here.
(Tried to write the above without sounding a little bit racist...)
I haven't noticed Chinese - except for my new neighbour family directly across who moved in this summer, and has recently been back to China to spend time with family. So I'd speculate 1st generation, and possibly via Nottingham University and stayed.
Seem like good, quiet, neighbours.
NU has a lot of Chinese students, and campuses in both China (Ningbo) and Malaysia who presumably come here sometimes. The Chinese one has a replica of the Portland Building. 6500 students "based in China", whatever that means. https://www.nottingham.edu.cn/en/index.aspx
Poles, however - we have in spades. My local GP has their instructions in 2 languages - English and Polish.
"Poles, however - we have in spades." That's what makes a spade a spade. Else they'd be trowels
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
So there is a risk that a car owner who has third party only cover will not be compensated for the loss at all?
If you have 3rd party only AND no-one has been negligent then you have no redress that I can see. The chance that there is no negligence from anyone in this case is small. Plaintiff lawyers (who have starving wives and barefoot children to provide for) will be touting for gainful employment already.
If someone has got third party only (which is less than 10% of policies) then the car will almost certainly be an old banger worth a couple of grand maximum. Suing over that is not going to generate enough income for this lawyer to buy his missus a KitKat, let alone get the kids a pair of flip-flops as well.
Not to say there won't be legal action, but that would be between insurers over whether one unlucky insurer picks up the bill or it's spread between them.
My overriding thought after hearing from both Sunak and Starmer now is “can we just have a GE now please?”
I know I probably have to reconcile myself to another 9-10 months of this plodding phoney war but it feels like the choice has now been offered and I’d rather just get on and do the choosing.
Turns out there was another brutal massacre on October 7. Kibbutz Be’eri. 100 dead minimum: same procedure - kill every Jew they could, no matter what age
There is one video which just shows the bloody aftermath. A river of blood. I shan’t link
One of the many chilling aspects of these crimes is the way they offer a glimpse of what a brutal pogrom must have been like, or indeed one of the “relatively minor” but hideous atrocities of the Holocaust
In particular I’m reminded of this: the Kovno garage massacre. Click at your discretion
One thing I've learnt this attack is how important scale is for terrorist attacks.
In one respect, it's a huge failure for Hamas. 1:1 victims:terrorists must make it the least efficient attack in history. And they've lost all of their best fighters.
Boring and useless I can see, but anybody who thinks Starmer is honest or has integrity simply hasn't been paying attention, after the way he sucked up to Corbyn and his supporters for years then ditched them because it was in his electoral interests to do so.
Just as lawyers make whatever argument suits their case at any moment, even if it contradicts what they said last week. That's a profession that makes prostitutes or journalists look honest by comparison. And of course great training for dishonest, weathervane politics - it's obviously no coincidence that Blair and Clinton were both lawyers.
It's projection.
People are projecting onto Starmer what they want to be true.
Are you saying that in reality he is unstable, bad and exciting?
Apparently the car park hasn’t been open long, and cost £20m to construct. Presumably that’s not coming from one poor sod’s car insurance, but will be the airport claiming on their own for the cost of cleaning up and rebuilding it - and maybe even the loss of revenue for several months while they do?
There’s a Sky journalist who is absolutely obsessed with proving that the babies at Kfar Aza were not beheaded. Instead, they were shot, or maybe had their throats slit
And there does seem some confusion - contradictory reports from soldiers, journos
But he doesn’t realise it’s not a very good look. Like someone angrily shouting “that’s completely wrong, Jimmy Savile only raped 216 children, NOT 407!”
Stop such boring nonsense. If you can't find enough to satiate yourself with the events that are actually happening why not look at the politics. Like them booing Ben Gvir as he travels down South
Turns out there was another brutal massacre on October 7. Kibbutz Be’eri. 100 dead minimum: same procedure - kill every Jew they could, no matter what age
There is one video which just shows the bloody aftermath. A river of blood. I shan’t link
One of the many chilling aspects of these crimes is the way they offer a glimpse of what a brutal pogrom must have been like, or indeed one of the “relatively minor” but hideous atrocities of the Holocaust
In particular I’m reminded of this: the Kovno garage massacre. Click at your discretion
Turns out there was another brutal massacre on October 7. Kibbutz Be’eri. 100 dead minimum: same procedure - kill every Jew they could, no matter what age
There is one video which just shows the bloody aftermath. A river of blood. I shan’t link
One of the many chilling aspects of these crimes is the way they offer a glimpse of what a brutal pogrom must have been like, or indeed one of the “relatively minor” but hideous atrocities of the Holocaust
In particular I’m reminded of this: the Kovno garage massacre. Click at your discretion
One thing I've learnt this attack is how important scale is for terrorist attacks.
In one respect, it's a huge failure for Hamas. 1:1 victims:terrorists must make it the least efficient attack in history. And they've lost all of their best fighters.
I am no Starmer fan, and even less a Streeting fan, but Mrs Foxy is. After yesterday's speech Labour has her vote.
I live on one of the 7 Tory held seats with a large majority in Leics that encircle the city. On current polling some of these turn improbably red. I will wait for the candidates flyers before deciding but really hard to see the seat as other than Tory hold.
I’m not a Starmer fan, nor a natural Labour voter, but I think it’s time for a change of government, the current lot have no ideas left and need time away. I live in a very safe Tory seat in SW wilts, so it probably doesn’t matter who I vote for, and I respect our MP, but he won’t be getting my vote this time round.
Hey, the majority was as low as 10,000 in 2010, could be a nailbiter.
More interesting is whether the LDs can finally reclaim second place - there's swathes of seats Labour could cement themselves as the main opposition which had been LD territory.
I’ll leave the investigation to the fire brigade, but Twitter has very much already decided what type of car was involved in the incident.
Twitter also very much decided what Clarkson's superinjunction was about.
Clarkson Superinjunction?
Good job that Luton Airport has mass transit straight from the railway station, with I think a 30 minute journey from St Pancras (or St Pancreas as we diabetics call it).
On that note, the GLP1 weight loss drugs might have a very large impact in diabetes.
Halting a clinical trial early is either very bad, or (as in this case) very good news indeed.
https://twitter.com/meremrtl/status/1711867548256334171 Novo has halted its FLOW trial, which was evaluating the impact of semaglutide on renal impairment in type 2 diabetes patients with chronic kidney disease. The decision comes after an independent Data Monitoring Committee reThatcommended the early cessation of the trial due to meeting pre-specified efficacy criteria in an interim analysis. This suggests a strong positive outcome and could be a significant catalyst for the stock.
Primary outcome measure: "Time to first occurrence of a composite primary outcome event defined as persistent eGFR decline of greater than or equal to 50 percentage from trial start, reaching ESRD, death from kidney disease or death from cardiovascular disease."
Kidney disease is very costly for the NHS to treat.
There is a massive problem with diabetes drugs right now - or rather with the supply. Now that someone has discovered that they are a good weight loss drug there is a world wide shortage of some of them. All being bought up by fat Americans at 5 times the price that is paid for them as diabetes drugs.
This is from my neighbour who is a diabetes nurse. She is having real issues and having to put people back on insulin because of the shortage.
That I think will be Type 2 Diabetes and GLP - the NHS is already quite good (at least according to my anecdata) at addressing early Type 2, and putting it 'into remission' (ie patients come off the treatment due to diet / exercise changes).
It's ironic that insulin is sometimes used to promote weight GAIN.
On a separate note, developments in blood glucose monitoring are making a big difference too.
You remember the monitoring system that most of us first saw when Theresa May showed her monitoring sensor on her arm in sleeveless dresses? There are now 200k people or so using that system in the UK - the cost-benefit analysis stacked up.
I think May is a late onset type 1 diabetic.
She deserves credit for strongly advocating for sensor monitoring and its roll out. All type 1 are now eligible, and it has really good engagement with the younger type 1, giving them a genuine reason to fiddle with their phones!.
Increasingly the "closed loop" systems that adjust an insulin pump are being rolled out too. Not quite an electronic pancreas, but heading there.
The most grateful are probably the parents of diabetic children. Many link their phones to the sensor alarms on the children, and can finally get a night's sleep. Many had been checking their kids weren't hypo several times a night. Now their phone does.
I once had to hunt down a Type 1 diabetic while he engaged in a one night stand - he'd left all his kit behind.
Hard work explaining to her friends at 2am that I was a friend, I had his stuff, and I needed the address for safety reasons.
I have probably been to over a hundred ICE vehicle fires, though. Cars, trucks, buses, bikes, a light aircraft, a few boats. Lots of arson, but ICE cars catch fire quite easily on their own.
I’ll leave the investigation to the fire brigade, but Twitter has very much already decided what type of car was involved in the incident.
Twitter also very much decided what Clarkson's superinjunction was about.
Clarkson Superinjunction?
Good job that Luton Airport has mass transit straight from the railway station, with I think a 30 minute journey from St Pancras (or St Pancreas as we diabetics call it).
On that note, the GLP1 weight loss drugs might have a very large impact in diabetes.
Halting a clinical trial early is either very bad, or (as in this case) very good news indeed.
https://twitter.com/meremrtl/status/1711867548256334171 Novo has halted its FLOW trial, which was evaluating the impact of semaglutide on renal impairment in type 2 diabetes patients with chronic kidney disease. The decision comes after an independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended the early cessation of the trial due to meeting pre-specified efficacy criteria in an interim analysis. This suggests a strong positive outcome and could be a significant catalyst for the stock.
Primary outcome measure: "Time to first occurrence of a composite primary outcome event defined as persistent eGFR decline of greater than or equal to 50 percentage from trial start, reaching ESRD, death from kidney disease or death from cardiovascular disease."
Kidney disease is very costly for the NHS to treat.
For all those of you who don't speak statistician, let me translate
Jargon Primary outcome measure: "Time to first occurrence of a composite primary outcome event defined as persistent eGFR decline of greater than or equal to 50 percentage from trial start, reaching ESRD, death from kidney disease or death from cardiovascular disease."
Simple English They were measuring the time it took for the kidneys to go so badly wrong you start looking at coffins
Jargon Novo has halted its FLOW trial, which was evaluating the impact of semaglutide on renal impairment in type 2 diabetes patients with chronic kidney disease. The decision comes after an independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended the early cessation of the trial due to meeting pre-specified efficacy criteria in an interim analysis. This suggests a strong positive outcome and could be a significant catalyst for the stock.
Simple English The effect was so dramatic the people monitoring our work let us go home early
I am no Starmer fan, and even less a Streeting fan, but Mrs Foxy is. After yesterday's speech Labour has her vote.
I live on one of the 7 Tory held seats with a large majority in Leics that encircle the city. On current polling some of these turn improbably red. I will wait for the candidates flyers before deciding but really hard to see the seat as other than Tory hold.
I’m not a Starmer fan, nor a natural Labour voter, but I think it’s time for a change of government, the current lot have no ideas left and need time away. I live in a very safe Tory seat in SW wilts, so it probably doesn’t matter who I vote for, and I respect our MP, but he won’t be getting my vote this time round.
Hey, the majority was as low as 10,000 in 2010, could be a nailbiter.
More interesting is whether the LDs can finally reclaim second place - there's swathes of seats Labour could cement themselves as the main opposition which had been LD territory.
Apparently the car park hasn’t been open long, and cost £20m to construct. Presumably that’s not coming from one poor sod’s car insurance, but will be the airport claiming on their own for the cost of cleaning up and rebuilding it - and maybe even the loss of revenue for several months while they do?
Oof yes the cost of the car park on top of the cars. An insurance nightmare !
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
Anyone know what is happening with Covid booster eligibility?
I thought you had to be over 65 and there is no private option but have seen this:
"There will be a Covid Vaccination clinic running at Tesco Car Park on Saturday 20th March between 12.30pm to 3.30pm. You, or anyone in your household over the age of 18 years, will be able to have your vaccine. There is no need to book an appointment, just turn up."
Is this just for those few who have had no vaccine at all or whether they are referring to boosters?
My GP has offered me one for around now, but I had one booster in August ahead of chemo - so I need to find out if it is a new variant.
Apparently the car park hasn’t been open long, and cost £20m to construct. Presumably that’s not coming from one poor sod’s car insurance, but will be the airport claiming on their own for the cost of cleaning up and rebuilding it - and maybe even the loss of revenue for several months while they do?
The building will itself be insured as, presumably, the builder will be, and the architect to the extent design was a factor.
There will no doubt be a legal bun-fight over who is ultimately responsible and over contributory negligence. But that will largely be at the level of a few big insurance companies, and they are fairly well used to that sort of process as it isn't really uncommon for an incident to occur where a fair bit of damage occurs for a lot of people.
Oh the trailer for "The Crown" season 6 has dropped. It's a teaser not a full trailer, so a bit dull. "Walking thru corridors whilst reminiscing" levels of dull. But there y'go.
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
Will it eck lead to looking at putting out fires. Who's going to spend money on that? We already know how to put fires out. It's just a car fire in a car park. Happens every day. The Luton one was just a bit bigger. You need to calm down, old fella.
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
I agree - rationality please - but this will play out as political. Look at the posters on here, fans and current owners of EVs defending them like a religion.
As I've said before, I'd quite like an EV and have no axe to grind and coming from a position of ignorance am becoming increasing concerned about the rush towards mass adoption.
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
Indeed so - and if there’s people who understand about learning from incidents and accidents, I suspect the airport won’t need to look too far away from home to find them!
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
Good grief
No one is posting photos
No one is even posting LINKS to the worst images
What links are given come with warnings
You can’t really ask for much more insulation from reality than that. This is the dominant news story of the day - perhaps the year - and the latest appalling events are highly significant
No one is stopping you discussing the risks of electric vehicles starting fires in car parks; no one is stopping you scrolling past comments that make you flinch
Apparently the car park hasn’t been open long, and cost £20m to construct. Presumably that’s not coming from one poor sod’s car insurance, but will be the airport claiming on their own for the cost of cleaning up and rebuilding it - and maybe even the loss of revenue for several months while they do?
Oof yes the cost of the car park on top of the cars. An insurance nightmare !
My overriding thought after hearing from both Sunak and Starmer now is “can we just have a GE now please?”
I know I probably have to reconcile myself to another 9-10 months of this plodding phoney war but it feels like the choice has now been offered and I’d rather just get on and do the choosing.
I would be very content for a May 24 election and Starmer in no 10
Some may be surprised by that, but frankly is in the country's best interest to have a GE asap
I am no Starmer fan, and even less a Streeting fan, but Mrs Foxy is. After yesterday's speech Labour has her vote.
I live on one of the 7 Tory held seats with a large majority in Leics that encircle the city. On current polling some of these turn improbably red. I will wait for the candidates flyers before deciding but really hard to see the seat as other than Tory hold.
I’m not a Starmer fan, nor a natural Labour voter, but I think it’s time for a change of government, the current lot have no ideas left and need time away. I live in a very safe Tory seat in SW wilts, so it probably doesn’t matter who I vote for, and I respect our MP, but he won’t be getting my vote this time round.
Hey, the majority was as low as 10,000 in 2010, could be a nailbiter.
More interesting is whether the LDs can finally reclaim second place - there's swathes of seats Labour could cement themselves as the main opposition which had been LD territory.
1800 Tory majority on Electoral Calculus, it needs just a little tactical voting, but for who?
This is why the 3 way fight in Mid Beds is interesting. I am glad both Lab and LD are going for it. We need to know how things break.
Rank stupidity them both going for it. They will pay as the Tories sneak through the middle and Sunak claims a “famous victory”.
But if Labour wins while the Tories and LDs get a decent vote share won't Labour be "sneaking through the middle"?
Sure, but given they started so far behind that would still be a stunning result. The problem with both Lab and Lib going for it is that it gives Sunak a free ‘out’ - he can claim a stunning victory even if the result is actually mediocre.
I am no Starmer fan, and even less a Streeting fan, but Mrs Foxy is. After yesterday's speech Labour has her vote.
I live on one of the 7 Tory held seats with a large majority in Leics that encircle the city. On current polling some of these turn improbably red. I will wait for the candidates flyers before deciding but really hard to see the seat as other than Tory hold.
I’m not a Starmer fan, nor a natural Labour voter, but I think it’s time for a change of government, the current lot have no ideas left and need time away. I live in a very safe Tory seat in SW wilts, so it probably doesn’t matter who I vote for, and I respect our MP, but he won’t be getting my vote this time round.
Hey, the majority was as low as 10,000 in 2010, could be a nailbiter.
More interesting is whether the LDs can finally reclaim second place - there's swathes of seats Labour could cement themselves as the main opposition which had been LD territory.
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
Good grief
No one is posting photos
No one is even posting LINKS to the worst images
What links are given come with warnings
You can’t really ask for much more insulation from reality than that. This is the dominant news story of the day - perhaps the year - and the latest appalling events are highly significant
No one is stopping you discussing the risks of electric vehicles starting fires in car parks; no one is stopping you scrolling past comments that make you flinch
It’s not possible to stop your brain reading something- known phenomenon. Ruining PB for me. YMMV.
Apparently the car park hasn’t been open long, and cost £20m to construct. Presumably that’s not coming from one poor sod’s car insurance, but will be the airport claiming on their own for the cost of cleaning up and rebuilding it - and maybe even the loss of revenue for several months while they do?
Oof yes the cost of the car park on top of the cars. An insurance nightmare !
Doing some research on the Liverpool car park fire mentioned earlier, it took 11 months before they even started cleaning up the mess, as all the insurance companies were working out how the costs should be covered for the various losses involved.
Presumably each individual car’s insurance paid out pretty quickly, and then argued the case later? I’d be pretty peeved, if my car was involved in a fire and it took a year to get a new one!
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
So there is a risk that a car owner who has third party only cover will not be compensated for the loss at all?
Yes, but virtually all 3rd party policies are actually 3rd party, fire and theft.
Oh the trailer for "The Crown" season 6 has dropped. It's a teaser not a full trailer, so a bit dull. "Walking thru corridors whilst reminiscing" levels of dull. But there y'go.
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
It *is* political. The right have been waging war against EVs because they are change and they are environmentalism. Its directly tied into the pro-Sunak anti-environmentalism nonsense.
If EVs caught fire and burned harshly that is bad. But fuel cars car fire and burn fiercely. Car fires on the motorway usually require the road to be resurfaced underneath them. A car fire in a car park is bad because it concentrates the head and sets other cars on fire.
Again, Liverpool was nothing to do with EVs yet saw fuel cars exploding into flame every 30 seconds and sending rivers of liquid fire across the whole floor until it collapsed and spread the fire to other floors.
So whatever risk you and the rest of the reactionary right are trying to put on EVs *is already there* with fuel cars.
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
We don't agree often but on this I certainly do
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
Good grief
No one is posting photos
No one is even posting LINKS to the worst images
What links are given come with warnings
You can’t really ask for much more insulation from reality than that. This is the dominant news story of the day - perhaps the year - and the latest appalling events are highly significant
No one is stopping you discussing the risks of electric vehicles starting fires in car parks; no one is stopping you scrolling past comments that make you flinch
It’s not possible to stop your brain reading something- known phenomenon. Ruining PB for me. YMMV.
The Hamas atrocities are front page news on every newspaper. With far more horrible detail than anything given here. I presume you are avoiding them as well?
I have some limited sympathy for you. I have friends who are finding this all so unbearable they’ve stopped looking at news entirely. Perhaps you should do that? Log off the site for a bit? That is friendly advice. Take a break?
Because we can’t cease discussing headline news on here because some PBers get distressed. News is what we do. And, unfortunately, details matter
Anyone know what is happening with Covid booster eligibility?
I thought you had to be over 65 and there is no private option but have seen this:
"There will be a Covid Vaccination clinic running at Tesco Car Park on Saturday 20th March between 12.30pm to 3.30pm. You, or anyone in your household over the age of 18 years, will be able to have your vaccine. There is no need to book an appointment, just turn up."
Is this just for those few who have had no vaccine at all or whether they are referring to boosters?
My GP has offered me one for around now, but I had one booster in August ahead of chemo - so I need to find out if it is a new variant.
Its not a new variant.
My wife and I had our covid vaccine last week and we were told it addressed the new variant
Ironically, I picked my daughter up from the Euston train yesterday and took her home, last night she phoned and said she had tested positive for covid having attended a conference in London over the weekend
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
When I worked in the oil industry, the safety experts were unanimous. If you tried to invent petrol today, you wouldn’t be allowed to sell it to the public.
H224 - Extremely flammable liquid and vapour. H319 - Causes serious eye irritation. H315 - Causes skin irritation. H340 - May cause genetic defects. H350 - May cause cancer. H361 - Suspected of damaging the unborn child. H304 - May be fatal if swallowed and enters airways. H336 - May cause drowsiness or dizziness.
Also explosive
Even soap would be banned. It is alkaline, irritant and would never pass the Draize test.
Apparently the car park hasn’t been open long, and cost £20m to construct. Presumably that’s not coming from one poor sod’s car insurance, but will be the airport claiming on their own for the cost of cleaning up and rebuilding it - and maybe even the loss of revenue for several months while they do?
What struck me looking at pictures of the car park was that it was pretty much a bare steel frame design.
Old multi-stories had reinforced concrete. We know that bare steel is seriously weakened in a hot fire.
Is there a problem with this design? Surely this must have been considered - maybe this was just hotter than the assumed worst case?
Is it smaller gaps between cars because they have got bigger, or is it more efficient car parks with fewer gaps for columns?
The old dingy car parks I remember had only half a dozen spaces next to each other before a full size gap for a large concrete pillar.
Lots of questions for an enquiry, mostly not to do with EV or not EV.
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
We don't agree often but on this I certainly do
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
Yeah. Have totally switched off from it. I don't need to know this in my life. It isn't going to help my sanity in any way. Nor is arguing about it. It's all wrong. That's all.
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
We don't agree often but on this I certainly do
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
Some of us are staying well away from the general internet this week, definitely social media but even the more mainstream news sites.
Discussing political protests, speeches, car parks, and cricket, is very much preferable to reading about the atrocities of war and the millions of people who have an unchanging viewpoint on the wider ME conflict.
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
It *is* political. The right have been waging war against EVs because they are change and they are environmentalism. Its directly tied into the pro-Sunak anti-environmentalism nonsense.
If EVs caught fire and burned harshly that is bad. But fuel cars car fire and burn fiercely. Car fires on the motorway usually require the road to be resurfaced underneath them. A car fire in a car park is bad because it concentrates the head and sets other cars on fire.
Again, Liverpool was nothing to do with EVs yet saw fuel cars exploding into flame every 30 seconds and sending rivers of liquid fire across the whole floor until it collapsed and spread the fire to other floors.
So whatever risk you and the rest of the reactionary right are trying to put on EVs *is already there* with fuel cars.
Any crash that spills a significant amount of diesel onto a road for more than a couple of hours requires it be resurfaced afterwards due to structural damage; no fire required: https://movingon.blog.gov.uk/2020/03/09/diesel-spills/
EV fires get press attention because EVs are new and potentially scary, but diesel & petrol carry risks too.
Oh the trailer for "The Crown" season 6 has dropped. It's a teaser not a full trailer, so a bit dull. "Walking thru corridors whilst reminiscing" levels of dull. But there y'go.
I can't wait. The Crown is my favourite historical documentary.
I stopped at series 4. The Charles and Diana psychodrama wasn’t of interest to me. It’s a story we’ve all heard told a hundred times before.
I also felt it failed to give what was one of the most pivotal decades in our political history the full treatment it deserved. Gillian Anderson didn’t quite land her portrayal of Thatcher, and not enough was made of how transformational (for good or ill) her time in office really was.
I thought the first three series were riveting though. I don’t know what series 5 was like because I was so put off by series 4. I could be convinced to give it a go if it was a return to form.
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
We don't agree often but on this I certainly do
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
Apparently the car park hasn’t been open long, and cost £20m to construct. Presumably that’s not coming from one poor sod’s car insurance, but will be the airport claiming on their own for the cost of cleaning up and rebuilding it - and maybe even the loss of revenue for several months while they do?
What struck me looking at pictures of the car park was that it was pretty much a bare steel frame design.
Old multi-stories had reinforced concrete. We know that bare steel is seriously weakened in a hot fire.
Is there a problem with this design? Surely this must have been considered - maybe this was just hotter than the assumed worst case?
Is it smaller gaps between cars because they have got bigger, or is it more efficient car parks with fewer gaps for columns?
The old dingy car parks I remember had only half a dozen spaces next to each other before a full size gap for a large concrete pillar.
Lots of questions for an enquiry, mostly not to do with EV or not EV.
The new approach for multi storey car parks is to place the pillar between already absurdly small parking spaces rather than building any additional space around it. Parking in these especially constricted spaces requires advanced level driving skills, even if dome absolute c**t in a Chelsea tractor hasn't already parked up to the very edge of the adjoining space. Like a lot of aspects of modern life it reminds me of those experiments where they cram colonies of rats into ever more constricted spaces until they start eating each other.
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
Will it eck lead to looking at putting out fires. Who's going to spend money on that? We already know how to put fires out. It's just a car fire in a car park. Happens every day. The Luton one was just a bit bigger. You need to calm down, old fella.
I was actually involved in the legislation following the Woolworths fire and it was a defining moment in fire safety for modern upholstered furniture
Your attempt to downplay a fire of this magnitude is surprising in view of your fire service but what if this fire had taken lives
It is not 'just a car fire' anymore than Woolworths fire was just a fire in a furniture shop
If the fire was started by a car (of any design) does the owner's insurance company cop the cost for the damage/destruction of, say, the 1000 other cars in the car park and the rebuilding cost of the car park itself?
This is a huge subject, and answers may take years. But a couple of relevant principles:
The starter of the fire is only liable if there is negligence, or perhaps some other tort, which is its own and large area of law.
An important test for the scope and extent of liability is foreseeability.
An insurer is of course only liable with regard to that which he has taken liability for.
In cases such as this there can be multiple bodies liable. (X is negligent and his car starts a fire. But also Y is negligent/breach of statutory duty because they failed to install a suitable sprinkler system etc). All parties always hope that at least one of those culpable is insured for it.
So there is a risk that a car owner who has third party only cover will not be compensated for the loss at all?
If you have 3rd party only AND no-one has been negligent then you have no redress that I can see. The chance that there is no negligence from anyone in this case is small. Plaintiff lawyers (who have starving wives and barefoot children to provide for) will be touting for gainful employment already.
If someone has got third party only (which is less than 10% of policies) then the car will almost certainly be an old banger worth a couple of grand maximum. Suing over that is not going to generate enough income for this lawyer to buy his missus a KitKat, let alone get the kids a pair of flip-flops as well.
Not to say there won't be legal action, but that would be between insurers over whether one unlucky insurer picks up the bill or it's spread between them.
This of course is all true. My point about lawyers is not that they are queueing up to litigate about 20 year old cars. Their wives and children have greater expectations than that, and like so many things that go wrong they won't be backwards in coming forwards.
And, BTW, in terms of the insurance industry as a whole this disaster is just the sort of thing they exist for - and much, much larger ones, for this one is not gigantic. On the whole they are very good at it, though I wonder if one or two who have specialised in the rather niche market that is Gaza are checking the small print.
My overriding thought after hearing from both Sunak and Starmer now is “can we just have a GE now please?”
I know I probably have to reconcile myself to another 9-10 months of this plodding phoney war but it feels like the choice has now been offered and I’d rather just get on and do the choosing.
I would be very content for a May 24 election and Starmer in no 10
Some may be surprised by that, but frankly is in the country's best interest to have a GE asap
That’s where I am too. I want to give Labour a go now. I’m not sure how well they will do, but we need a change and Starmer feels like a decent sort.
The Tories also need time in opposition to work out if they are GOPUK or actually have some sane people left.
Another 12 months of Sunak flailing about isnt going to be much fun.
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
Will it eck lead to looking at putting out fires. Who's going to spend money on that? We already know how to put fires out. It's just a car fire in a car park. Happens every day. The Luton one was just a bit bigger. You need to calm down, old fella.
I was actually involved in the legislation following the Woolworths fire and it was a defining moment in fire safety for modern upholstered furniture
Your attempt to downplay a fire of this magnitude is surprising in view of your fire service but what if this fire had taken lives
It is not 'just a car fire' anymore than Woolworths fire was just a fire in a furniture shop
Apparently the car park hasn’t been open long, and cost £20m to construct. Presumably that’s not coming from one poor sod’s car insurance, but will be the airport claiming on their own for the cost of cleaning up and rebuilding it - and maybe even the loss of revenue for several months while they do?
What struck me looking at pictures of the car park was that it was pretty much a bare steel frame design.
Old multi-stories had reinforced concrete. We know that bare steel is seriously weakened in a hot fire.
Is there a problem with this design? Surely this must have been considered - maybe this was just hotter than the assumed worst case?
Is it smaller gaps between cars because they have got bigger, or is it more efficient car parks with fewer gaps for columns?
The old dingy car parks I remember had only half a dozen spaces next to each other before a full size gap for a large concrete pillar.
Lots of questions for an enquiry, mostly not to do with EV or not EV.
The new approach for multi storey car parks is to place the pillar between already absurdly small parking spaces rather than building any additional space around it. Parking in these especially constricted spaces requires advanced level driving skills, even if dome absolute c**t in a Chelsea tractor hasn't already parked up to the very edge of the adjoining space. Like a lot of aspects of modern life it reminds me of those experiments where they cram colonies of rats into ever more constricted spaces until they start eating each other.
Is that really a new thing? Back when I had a car I used to hate going to the old underground car park under Finchley Road Waitrose. Every space is so tight you run a 30% risk of a scrape with every visit
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
It *is* political. The right have been waging war against EVs because they are change and they are environmentalism. Its directly tied into the pro-Sunak anti-environmentalism nonsense.
If EVs caught fire and burned harshly that is bad. But fuel cars car fire and burn fiercely. Car fires on the motorway usually require the road to be resurfaced underneath them. A car fire in a car park is bad because it concentrates the head and sets other cars on fire.
Again, Liverpool was nothing to do with EVs yet saw fuel cars exploding into flame every 30 seconds and sending rivers of liquid fire across the whole floor until it collapsed and spread the fire to other floors.
So whatever risk you and the rest of the reactionary right are trying to put on EVs *is already there* with fuel cars.
You are overreacting to this when you should welcome an independent investigation into this serious fire and for lessons to be learnt and regulation applied if necessary
Anyone know what is happening with Covid booster eligibility?
I thought you had to be over 65 and there is no private option but have seen this:
"There will be a Covid Vaccination clinic running at Tesco Car Park on Saturday 20th March between 12.30pm to 3.30pm. You, or anyone in your household over the age of 18 years, will be able to have your vaccine. There is no need to book an appointment, just turn up."
Is this just for those few who have had no vaccine at all or whether they are referring to boosters?
My GP has offered me one for around now, but I had one booster in August ahead of chemo - so I need to find out if it is a new variant.
Anyone know what is happening with Covid booster eligibility?
I thought you had to be over 65 and there is no private option but have seen this:
"There will be a Covid Vaccination clinic running at Tesco Car Park on Saturday 20th March between 12.30pm to 3.30pm. You, or anyone in your household over the age of 18 years, will be able to have your vaccine. There is no need to book an appointment, just turn up."
Is this just for those few who have had no vaccine at all or whether they are referring to boosters?
My GP has offered me one for around now, but I had one booster in August ahead of chemo - so I need to find out if it is a new variant.
Its not a new variant.
My wife and I had our covid vaccine last week and we were told it addressed the new variant
Ironically, I picked my daughter up from the Euston train yesterday and took her home, last night she phoned and said she had tested positive for covid having attended a conference in London over the weekend
I don't doubt what they said, but its a question of which new variant and what vaccine were you given.
There was a change of plan by the UKHSA to bring forward covid boosters in response to a new variant a few months ago, and that is what is meant by "addressing the new variant". However, the vaccines, while tweaked from the initial ones in 2020, have not been updated for this new variant, and indeed there is no need, as the existing protection offered is fine. Boosters do just what it says on the tin - it will give a short lived uptick in your antibodies to help against infection, but will subside over time. This is normal, and the timing of a booster (campaign) is designed to hit the peak of the disease season (hence Oct/Nov for flu).
No-one really should care about testing positive now, other than to guide their actions in respect of others. I might not want to visit people with weaker immune systems. for instance, although that advice ought to be the same for coughs, colds and other bugs too.
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
We don't agree often but on this I certainly do
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
Some of us are staying well away from the general internet this week, definitely social media but even the more mainstream news sites.
Discussing political protests, speeches, car parks, and cricket, is very much preferable to reading about the atrocities of war and the millions of people who have an unchanging viewpoint on the wider ME conflict.
Not least because so much on Social Media is fake or outright lies.
Real atrocities have been committed, but these are times when proper regulated media come into their own, with at least some respect for transmitting only confirmed stories. The truth is horrific enough.
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
Will it eck lead to looking at putting out fires. Who's going to spend money on that? We already know how to put fires out. It's just a car fire in a car park. Happens every day. The Luton one was just a bit bigger. You need to calm down, old fella.
I was actually involved in the legislation following the Woolworths fire and it was a defining moment in fire safety for modern upholstered furniture
Your attempt to downplay a fire of this magnitude is surprising in view of your fire service but what if this fire had taken lives
It is not 'just a car fire' anymore than Woolworths fire was just a fire in a furniture shop
And please do not patronise me
Twisted is an *actual firefighter*.
What do you imagine is going to be the defining moment in fire safety for either cars or car parks? Because the issue in this one as in Liverpool is a lot of vehicles with flammable liquid parked next to each other. Ignite one and you ignite them all, whether there are sprinklers in place or not.
As Twisted points out - car fires happen daily. And yet we have not as yet gone after the highly dangerous practice of carrying flammable liquids around. And despite the salivating over dangerous EVs, the source of ignition in Luton was a diesel vehicle...
Is it really so important that our leading politicians are a bit of a giggle? It's not what I look for, I must admit, but perhaps I'm an outlier.
It’s an asset in campaigning to be relatively charismatic. It probably helps in negotiating too. Obviously you are trivialising it as “a bit of a giggle” to downplay it as your man doesn’t have much charisma; luckily enough, neither does his opponent now, so that weakness is nullified.
Yes but campaigning is about getting the job. What kinabalu is talking about is actually doing the job.
Can we really say that the most charismatic PMs of the last 70 years have been the best? Even someone like Thatcher was not exactly the life and soul of the party.
I think the country is ready for boring for a while. Whether they are ready for Labour policies is another matter but we will just have to see how that goes and hope for the best.
'Spreadsheet Phil' was a boring Chancellor - he was also one of the worst ever. Theresa May was a boring PM - she was also one of the worst ever. Lack of charisma should not be confused with capability.
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
Will it eck lead to looking at putting out fires. Who's going to spend money on that? We already know how to put fires out. It's just a car fire in a car park. Happens every day. The Luton one was just a bit bigger. You need to calm down, old fella.
I was actually involved in the legislation following the Woolworths fire and it was a defining moment in fire safety for modern upholstered furniture
Your attempt to downplay a fire of this magnitude is surprising in view of your fire service but what if this fire had taken lives
It is not 'just a car fire' anymore than Woolworths fire was just a fire in a furniture shop
And please do not patronise me
Fella, it's a car fire in a car park. No one died. No great legislation will come out of it. Cars parked next to each other in a multi storey structure are going to burn in the event one of them goes up. No new firefighting techniques will come out of it, but "lessons will be learned" around the lack of sprinklers. Get over it.
In non war news, what the feck is wrong with Vanilla?
It now has multiple issues. Photos are nearly always tiny to the point of invisibility. But not always? It sometimes makes me sign in and out, constantly
And the quoting problems are ridiculous. Sometimes it mangles hour old comments and shoves them in an entirely new comment. Why?
It’s becoming frustratingly difficult to use. I blame Elon Musk
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
We don't agree often but on this I certainly do
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
Will it eck lead to looking at putting out fires. Who's going to spend money on that? We already know how to put fires out. It's just a car fire in a car park. Happens every day. The Luton one was just a bit bigger. You need to calm down, old fella.
I was actually involved in the legislation following the Woolworths fire and it was a defining moment in fire safety for modern upholstered furniture
Your attempt to downplay a fire of this magnitude is surprising in view of your fire service but what if this fire had taken lives
It is not 'just a car fire' anymore than Woolworths fire was just a fire in a furniture shop
Anyone know what is happening with Covid booster eligibility?
I thought you had to be over 65 and there is no private option but have seen this:
"There will be a Covid Vaccination clinic running at Tesco Car Park on Saturday 20th March between 12.30pm to 3.30pm. You, or anyone in your household over the age of 18 years, will be able to have your vaccine. There is no need to book an appointment, just turn up."
Is this just for those few who have had no vaccine at all or whether they are referring to boosters?
My GP has offered me one for around now, but I had one booster in August ahead of chemo - so I need to find out if it is a new variant.
Anyone know what is happening with Covid booster eligibility?
I thought you had to be over 65 and there is no private option but have seen this:
"There will be a Covid Vaccination clinic running at Tesco Car Park on Saturday 20th March between 12.30pm to 3.30pm. You, or anyone in your household over the age of 18 years, will be able to have your vaccine. There is no need to book an appointment, just turn up."
Is this just for those few who have had no vaccine at all or whether they are referring to boosters?
My GP has offered me one for around now, but I had one booster in August ahead of chemo - so I need to find out if it is a new variant.
Its not a new variant.
My wife and I had our covid vaccine last week and we were told it addressed the new variant
Ironically, I picked my daughter up from the Euston train yesterday and took her home, last night she phoned and said she had tested positive for covid having attended a conference in London over the weekend
I don't doubt what they said, but its a question of which new variant and what vaccine were you given.
There was a change of plan by the UKHSA to bring forward covid boosters in response to a new variant a few months ago, and that is what is meant by "addressing the new variant". However, the vaccines, while tweaked from the initial ones in 2020, have not been updated for this new variant, and indeed there is no need, as the existing protection offered is fine. Boosters do just what it says on the tin - it will give a short lived uptick in your antibodies to help against infection, but will subside over time. This is normal, and the timing of a booster (campaign) is designed to hit the peak of the disease season (hence Oct/Nov for flu).
No-one really should care about testing positive now, other than to guide their actions in respect of others. I might not want to visit people with weaker immune systems. for instance, although that advice ought to be the same for coughs, colds and other bugs too.
There is a definite uptick in cases and it isn't a trivial illness, though vastly less risky than the first wave. Then the virus was more lower tract than upper, and falling on an immune naive population. Between vaccination and infection nearly everyone has some immunity now.
The powers that be are clearly worried though. Masks are compulsory in clinical areas again in many hospitals, and we are all having mask fit training for the new FFP3 masks and respirators that have appeared in the stock rooms.
I hope it is just the precautionary principle, but someone senior is worried.
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
We don't agree often but on this I certainly do
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
Some of us are staying well away from the general internet this week, definitely social media but even the more mainstream news sites.
Discussing political protests, speeches, car parks, and cricket, is very much preferable to reading about the atrocities of war and the millions of people who have an unchanging viewpoint on the wider ME conflict.
Not least because so much on Social Media is fake or outright lies.
Real atrocities have been committed, but these are times when proper regulated media come into their own, with at least some respect for transmitting only confirmed stories. The truth is horrific enough.
Quite so, Foxy.
And PB kind of comes into its own too, because we tend to know each other, give trolls short shrift, and the standard of commentary is generally high.
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
We don't agree often but on this I certainly do
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
Yeah. Have totally switched off from it. I don't need to know this in my life. It isn't going to help my sanity in any way. Nor is arguing about it. It's all wrong. That's all.
I've been pretty much avoiding it too. I turn off the news, which is not normal.
It is interesting that the Ukraine - Russia conflict seems less upsetting somehow (obviously not for anyone directly involved, but personally), despite there being just as many atrocities and a much higher casualty count.
Perhaps it is just the pointlessness of it. Why bother with something that cannot be ended without it actually getting worse?
At least with Ukraine there is an obvious end game and there's something that can be done about it.
A Russian tank being blown up is a step closer to the desired end.
A Gaza apartment being blown up is just more of the same.
Is there somewhere else PBers can post links/descriptions of murdered women and children? Call me a lily-livered shill if you will , but I find I can be aware of what’s happening without hearing of the detail.
TIA.
We don't agree often but on this I certainly do
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
How many children are “watching PB”?!
I wasn't talking about PB but Sky and BBC
@Anabobazina was talking about PB. He wants us to stop talking about Gaza/israel because it upsets him. Or if we do talk about it we can only do it in very general ways or he gets tearful
It’s fairly ridiculous. Every news and social media is discussing it in depth. Yes it is hard and distressing. But it is the news
The Luton airport fire demonstrates just how dangerous EVs are. Normal petrol and diesel cars do not have anything flammable - no tanks full of explosive liquids - and so are immune to fire.
Time to Ban EVs. For the children.
I haven't heard anyone suggest evs be banned, and may I say a rather extreme response to an incident that could have implications for evs and how to ensure safety is addressed and even regulated effectively
And what implications if it was a petrol engined car ?
The car park fire in Liverpool in 2018 destroyed a whole car park full of cars. Started by an LPG vehicle, once temperatures got high enough the fire spread from car to car, with one igniting every 30 seconds at the worst and rivers of flaming fuel spreading the conflagration even further.
So yes. I can understand why the blame is being put on EVs this time. There is a risk they might catch fire and be hard to put out...
The anti-EV hysteria from the right is so bad as to actually be funny.
I quite regularly see ICE cars merrily burning away on the hard should because a failed fuel hose pumps benzene all over the hot manifold. E10 bio-ethanol rich petrol eats non compatible (older and generally ULEZ non compliant) vehicle fuel lines. Best to ban all petrol cars and vans I guess.
Did you have concerns about this before EVs were invented?
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
This fire, whether an ICE vehicle or an EV started it, will lead to an enquiry which will look at all aspects of the consequences including the different fire fighting capabilities to extinguish an ICE car fire from an EV one and to the safety of serious car fires in confined car parks
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
Will it eck lead to looking at putting out fires. Who's going to spend money on that? We already know how to put fires out. It's just a car fire in a car park. Happens every day. The Luton one was just a bit bigger. You need to calm down, old fella.
There are some fun EV specific issues with putting fires out, which are still fairly new and novel. The vast amounts of water required and the potential for re-ignition are quite a headache in situations were solutions and protocols have been designed around dealing with ICE fires.
I've a friend who does a lot of technical work on lithium ion battery fires. From talking to him, although he's always a bit cagey, I get the impression that a lot of technical people would like to ban EVs from high risk environments such as ferries, but there is massive political pressure not to do so. The politicans fear such a ban would kill EV adoption stone dead because the public would wrongly perceive them as dangerous fire hazards. I think his private view is that at some point there will be a major catastrophe which kills a literal boatload of people, after which "lessons will be learned".
In non war news, what the feck is wrong with Vanilla?
It now has multiple issues. Photos are nearly always tiny to the point of invisibility. But not always? It sometimes makes me sign in and out, constantly
And the quoting problems are ridiculous. Sometimes it mangles hour old comments and shoves them in an entirely new comment. Why?
It’s becoming frustratingly difficult to use. I blame Elon Musk
If this means we'll be spared the tedious holiday snaps in future then I, for one, say "bravo" to the boffins at Vanilla HQ.
Apparently the car park hasn’t been open long, and cost £20m to construct. Presumably that’s not coming from one poor sod’s car insurance, but will be the airport claiming on their own for the cost of cleaning up and rebuilding it - and maybe even the loss of revenue for several months while they do?
What struck me looking at pictures of the car park was that it was pretty much a bare steel frame design.
Old multi-stories had reinforced concrete. We know that bare steel is seriously weakened in a hot fire.
Is there a problem with this design? Surely this must have been considered - maybe this was just hotter than the assumed worst case?
Is it smaller gaps between cars because they have got bigger, or is it more efficient car parks with fewer gaps for columns?
The old dingy car parks I remember had only half a dozen spaces next to each other before a full size gap for a large concrete pillar.
Lots of questions for an enquiry, mostly not to do with EV or not EV.
That’s a really interesting fire study, thanks for posting. Two huge car park fires in five years, might suggest that fire suppression standards are inadequate for containing them. Yesterday’s incident was a brand new structure, so would meet whatever are the current standards.
Today’s cars (in general) are considerably bigger than those of a few decades ago, as opposed to the spaces getting smaller. I think the steel (as opposed to concrete) construction is now easier and cheaper to build, for a given number of parking spaces.
From the car points of view, I wonder if there will be standards of fireproofing required for battery packs in future, just as standards for fuel tanks have improved over time. It would make sense (purely from a safety POV) to have small battery packs surrounded by fireproof material, such that any fire is contained to a small part of the whole battery. Obvious this adds weight and cost, so there’s a tradeoff to be had depending on how much of a problem is seen to exist.
Comments
It was well-done but much better to read the book. Some of the documentaries, e.g. the Netflix one, are far better too.
The development of an immunity to that effect, as far as politicians is concerned, is to be encouraged.
There was also a 3 parter about him last year:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/series/m0013hlk
What does third party insurance cover?
A third party car insurance policy ensures that if you cause an accident, any damage to the other person’s vehicle or property will be paid for by your insurer.
However, damage to your vehicle will not be covered, and you will need to pay the bill yourself to get things fixed. You are also unable to make a claim if your car is damaged by fire or stolen
Who has 3rd party only these days - every quote I've seen has had comp cheaper as 3rd party is assumed to have more risk.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Richer
Are you seriously comparing an easily-extinguished car fire on the hard shoulder to a car parked in a multi-storey carpark which autonomously combusts (if this is what happened) with up to 1500 other cars and maybe dozens of people present?
At the time I retired nearly 2 years ago, there wasn't really a unified strategy on extinguishing an EV fire around the country. The Germans and Dutch were considering utilising open topped shipping containers filled with water and forklifting EVs into them if they could, especially if thermal runaway was on the cards, but mostly it's just bollock loads of water on them and let them do their thing. As far as I'm aware, there haven't really been any issues in my old CFB.
Also you can be a sadist AND an ideologue
Arguably these people are worse. Because they act rationally and thoughtfully, with cold calculation. Simple nutters quickly make mistakes
Do you have any thoughts about how Mr Starmer and Ms Reeves would address the ~£100bn current annual hole in Government finances?
It's the hysteria that should be avoided.
She deserves credit for strongly advocating for sensor monitoring and its roll out. All type 1 are now eligible, and it has really good engagement with the younger type 1, giving them a genuine reason to fiddle with their phones!.
Increasingly the "closed loop" systems that adjust an insulin pump are being rolled out too. Not quite an electronic pancreas, but heading there.
The most grateful are probably the parents of diabetic children. Many link their phones to the sensor alarms on the children, and can finally get a night's sleep. Many had been checking their kids weren't hypo several times a night. Now their phone does.
There is one video which just shows the bloody aftermath. A river of blood. I shan’t link
One of the many chilling aspects of these crimes is the way they offer a glimpse of what a brutal pogrom must have been like, or indeed one of the “relatively minor” but hideous atrocities of the Holocaust
In particular I’m reminded of this: the Kovno garage massacre. Click at your discretion
https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/kovno-garage-massacre-lithuania-1941/
The practical difference between third party, fire and theft (as opposed to third party only) can be meaningless if you have an old banger though. I've owned a couple when younger where it would essentially never have been worth claiming for repairs as the excess was more than the car was worth.
I think May is a late onset type 1 diabetic.She deserves credit for strongly advocating for sensor monitoring and its roll out. All type 1 are now eligible, and it has really good engagement with the younger type 1, giving them a genuine reason to fiddle with their phones!.
Increasingly the "closed loop" systems that adjust an insulin pump are being rolled out too. Not quite an electronic pancreas, but heading there.
The most grateful are probably the parents of diabetic children. Many link their phones to the sensor alarms on the children, and can finally get a night's sleep. Many had been checking their kids weren't hypo several times a night. Now their phone does.
My reply. Quotes broken:
Yes - late onset T1 like the Commons Speaker.
That is an interesting phenomenon - I know of one T1 diagnosis for a friend's grandad who was 88 at diagnosis.
It should be a reliable account since the person reporting it to me has a degree in Sports Science and runs a gym, so familiar with health-type questions. I have not audit trailed it, though.
I've never read the Children with Diabetes email group material on this, but that would be the place to find experiences.
Not to say there won't be legal action, but that would be between insurers over whether one unlucky insurer picks up the bill or it's spread between them.
I know I probably have to reconcile myself to another 9-10 months of this plodding phoney war but it feels like the choice has now been offered and I’d rather just get on and do the choosing.
In one respect, it's a huge failure for Hamas. 1:1 victims:terrorists must make it the least efficient attack in history. And they've lost all of their best fighters.
And they are about to lose all the rest
Hard work explaining to her friends at 2am that I was a friend, I had his stuff, and I needed the address for safety reasons.
Jargon
Primary outcome measure: "Time to first occurrence of a composite primary outcome event defined as persistent eGFR decline of greater than or equal to 50 percentage from trial start, reaching ESRD, death from kidney disease or death from cardiovascular disease."
Simple English
They were measuring the time it took for the kidneys to go so badly wrong you start looking at coffins
Jargon
Novo has halted its FLOW trial, which was evaluating the impact of semaglutide on renal impairment in type 2 diabetes patients with chronic kidney disease. The decision comes after an independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended the early cessation of the trial due to meeting pre-specified efficacy criteria in an interim analysis. This suggests a strong positive outcome and could be a significant catalyst for the stock.
Simple English
The effect was so dramatic the people monitoring our work let us go home early
TIA.
There will no doubt be a legal bun-fight over who is ultimately responsible and over contributory negligence. But that will largely be at the level of a few big insurance companies, and they are fairly well used to that sort of process as it isn't really uncommon for an incident to occur where a fair bit of damage occurs for a lot of people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykn9pD9H56U
Those who are reacting by calling it a right wing plot or similar are not recognising that incidents like this create regulation which in turn protects the public from danger
It is why I referred to the 1979 Woolworths fire which led to the Furniture and Furnishings Fire Safety Regulation of 1988
This is not political, but is an example of how we should learn from serious incidents and improve for the benefit of all
As I've said before, I'd quite like an EV and have no axe to grind and coming from a position of ignorance am becoming increasing concerned about the rush towards mass adoption.
Good grief
No one is posting photos
No one is even posting LINKS to the worst images
What links are given come with warnings
You can’t really ask for much more insulation from reality than that. This is the dominant news story of the day - perhaps the year - and the latest appalling events are highly significant
No one is stopping you discussing the risks of electric vehicles starting fires in car parks; no one is stopping you scrolling past comments that make you flinch
Some may be surprised by that, but frankly is in the country's best interest to have a GE asap
If I did bet it would be a labour win in both
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-46290095
Presumably each individual car’s insurance paid out pretty quickly, and then argued the case later? I’d be pretty peeved, if my car was involved in a fire and it took a year to get a new one!
If EVs caught fire and burned harshly that is bad. But fuel cars car fire and burn fiercely. Car fires on the motorway usually require the road to be resurfaced underneath them. A car fire in a car park is bad because it concentrates the head and sets other cars on fire.
Again, Liverpool was nothing to do with EVs yet saw fuel cars exploding into flame every 30 seconds and sending rivers of liquid fire across the whole floor until it collapsed and spread the fire to other floors.
So whatever risk you and the rest of the reactionary right are trying to put on EVs *is already there* with fuel cars.
I listened to ITV report of the massacre at the Kfar Aza kibbutz and literally wept
I could not relate it to my wife, and whilst we need responsible reporting the tendency to upset is a concern not least for the number of children who may be watching
I have some limited sympathy for you. I have friends who are finding this all so unbearable they’ve stopped looking at news entirely. Perhaps you should do that? Log off the site for a bit? That is friendly advice. Take a break?
Because we can’t cease discussing headline news on here because some PBers get distressed. News is
what we do. And, unfortunately, details matter
Ironically, I picked my daughter up from the Euston train yesterday and took her home, last night she phoned and said she had tested positive for covid having attended a conference in London over the weekend
Old multi-stories had reinforced concrete. We know that bare steel is seriously weakened in a hot fire.
Is there a problem with this design? Surely this must have been considered - maybe this was just hotter than the assumed worst case?
Is it smaller gaps between cars because they have got bigger, or is it more efficient car parks with fewer gaps for columns?
The old dingy car parks I remember had only half a dozen spaces next to each other before a full size gap for a large concrete pillar.
Lots of questions for an enquiry, mostly not to do with EV or not EV.
PS
Tests have been run for fire suppression systems on ferries comparing what happens with EV and Petrol:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10694-023-01473-w
F1: alarmingly, an F1 bigwig has said something sensible. Well, FIA bigwig.
He wants fewer races and more teams.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/67051341
I don't need to know this in my life. It isn't going to help my sanity in any way.
Nor is arguing about it.
It's all wrong. That's all.
Discussing political protests, speeches, car parks, and cricket, is very much preferable to reading about the atrocities of war and the millions of people who have an unchanging viewpoint on the wider ME conflict.
EV fires get press attention because EVs are new and potentially scary, but diesel & petrol carry risks too.
I also felt it failed to give what was one of the most pivotal decades in our political history the full treatment it deserved. Gillian Anderson didn’t quite land her portrayal of Thatcher, and not enough was made of how transformational (for good or ill) her time in office really was.
I thought the first three series were riveting though. I don’t know what series 5 was like because I was so put off by series 4. I could be convinced to give it a go if it was a return to form.
How many children are “watching PB”?!
MBS is right on the money, and the other groups are not happy that Andretti/Cadillac passed the FIA criteria for an F1 entry.
Your attempt to downplay a fire of this magnitude is surprising in view of your fire service but what if this fire had taken lives
It is not 'just a car fire' anymore than Woolworths fire was just a fire in a furniture shop
And please do not patronise me
And, BTW, in terms of the insurance industry as a whole this disaster is just the sort of thing they exist for - and much, much larger ones, for this one is not gigantic. On the whole they are very good at it, though I wonder if one or two who have specialised in the rather niche market that is Gaza are checking the small print.
The Tories also need time in opposition to work out if they are GOPUK or actually have some sane people left.
Another 12 months of Sunak flailing about isnt going to be much fun.
So bad it actually put me off shopping there
I am not anti ev
There was a change of plan by the UKHSA to bring forward covid boosters in response to a new variant a few months ago, and that is what is meant by "addressing the new variant". However, the vaccines, while tweaked from the initial ones in 2020, have not been updated for this new variant, and indeed there is no need, as the existing protection offered is fine. Boosters do just what it says on the tin - it will give a short lived uptick in your antibodies to help against infection, but will subside over time. This is normal, and the timing of a booster (campaign) is designed to hit the peak of the disease season (hence Oct/Nov for flu).
No-one really should care about testing positive now, other than to guide their actions in respect of others. I might not want to visit people with weaker immune systems. for instance, although that advice ought to be the same for coughs, colds and other bugs too.
Real atrocities have been committed, but these are times when proper regulated media come into their own, with at least some respect for transmitting only confirmed stories. The truth is horrific enough.
What do you imagine is going to be the defining moment in fire safety for either cars or car parks? Because the issue in this one as in Liverpool is a lot of vehicles with flammable liquid parked next to each other. Ignite one and you ignite them all, whether there are sprinklers in place or not.
As Twisted points out - car fires happen daily. And yet we have not as yet gone after the highly dangerous practice of carrying flammable liquids around. And despite the salivating over dangerous EVs, the source of ignition in Luton was a diesel vehicle...
The evidence for this?
"Note that it was women who pulled the 'invader' off." 👀~AA
https://twitter.com/BestForBritain/status/1712034457547366457/photo/1
This one is a new variant so qualifies as a new jab not a booster.
It now has multiple issues. Photos are nearly always tiny to the point of invisibility. But not always? It sometimes makes me sign in and out, constantly
And the quoting problems are ridiculous. Sometimes it mangles hour old comments and shoves them in an entirely new comment. Why?
It’s becoming frustratingly difficult to use. I blame Elon Musk
'view of your fire service'
The powers that be are clearly worried though. Masks are compulsory in clinical areas again in many hospitals, and we are all having mask fit training for the new FFP3 masks and respirators that have appeared in the stock rooms.
I hope it is just the precautionary principle, but someone senior is worried.
And PB kind of comes into its own too, because we tend to know each other, give trolls short shrift, and the standard of commentary is generally high.
My own comments are particularly good.
It is interesting that the Ukraine - Russia conflict seems less upsetting somehow (obviously not for anyone directly involved, but personally), despite there being just as many atrocities and a much higher casualty count.
Perhaps it is just the pointlessness of it. Why bother with something that cannot be ended without it actually getting worse?
At least with Ukraine there is an obvious end game and there's something that can be done about it.
A Russian tank being blown up is a step closer to the desired end.
A Gaza apartment being blown up is just more of the same.
It’s fairly ridiculous. Every news and social media is discussing it in depth. Yes it is hard and distressing. But it is the news
I've a friend who does a lot of technical work on lithium ion battery fires. From talking to him, although he's always a bit cagey, I get the impression that a lot of technical people would like to ban EVs from high risk environments such as ferries, but there is massive political pressure not to do so. The politicans fear such a ban would kill EV adoption stone dead because the public would wrongly perceive them as dangerous fire hazards.
I think his private view is that at some point there will be a major catastrophe which kills a literal boatload of people, after which "lessons will be learned".
Compare https://twitter.com/rec777777/status/1711995499585171789
So was that another EV fire which just couldn't be extinguished and destroyed the multi storey car park at Luton Airport?
How much longer are people like
@Keir_Starmer
going to try and force us into this Net Zero madness?
And https://twitter.com/SeanSeankennedy/status/1712000869405692376
What’s the chances of the Luton Airport fire being started by an EV I’m going very high
@Conservatives @SadiqKhan @AutoPap
Contrast https://twitter.com/LordCxsh/status/1712007637112344967
"The start of the fire at Luton airport. Started from a Range Rover yesterday evening." - a DIESEL Range Rover
Mouth-foaming right-wing morons.
Today’s cars (in general) are considerably bigger than those of a few decades ago, as opposed to the spaces getting smaller. I think the steel (as opposed to concrete) construction is now easier and cheaper to build, for a given number of parking spaces.
From the car points of view, I wonder if there will be standards of fireproofing required for battery packs in future, just as standards for fuel tanks have improved over time. It would make sense (purely from a safety POV) to have small battery packs surrounded by fireproof material, such that any fire is contained to a small part of the whole battery. Obvious this adds weight and cost, so there’s a tradeoff to be had depending on how much of a problem is seen to exist.