the breakthrough that makes EVs safer than ICE cars
Did Toyota write this? EVs already are much safer than ICEs, the headline reads like it's trying to gaslight people into thinking otherwise.
this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2026
1 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
86178 readers
3067 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Except their weight which leads to insane amounts of energy transfer and also none of the intrastructure, like guardrails, is built to handle that much weight so low down.
The way to safer is to reduce the amount of cars.
Maybe a bit irrelevant but why is the article calling it “China’s battery“? I feel like if the researchers were from any other countries academy of science, say France, the title would have simply been something like “scientists discover new ways for fireproof battery”. Maybe it’d say French scientists or so, but not simply “France’s battery”?
Because cool China is so totally innovative unlike the boring west! We gotta hype them up, no one else ever does cool stuff only China brand is cool.
They have been trying to murder the US and EU auto industry and dumping biblical shittons of money into battery technology. the EU and the US aren't trying to compete.
Its still an advancement for all mankind, even if my countries leadership wont let me have one.
They have been trying to murder the US and EU auto industry and dumping biblical shittons of money into battery technology. the EU and the US aren’t trying to compete.
China invests in R&D, Trump slashed scientific research.
Not only in R&D but market development.. Like, finding out what people want and selling it to them, exporting them.. The Americans are trying to push pickups on europe...
Actually it’s the other way around.
The internet is all about “China Bad” so calling it China Battery is a way to depreciate this obviously positive discovery.
“Should we just not talk about this awesome new tech?”
“No, let’s put China in front of this totally awesome thing so people will think it’s bad while we hype it up as such a great invention in the article. Oh and don’t mention working conditions, state subsidies, mineral extraction, or any of the usual anti-China talking points, that might make them think it’s not bad”
Sodium is absolutely less of a fire risk which is good and is made of less rare earth minerals which is also a bonus.
The major downside is the energy density. If I am not mistaken it is about half of current litium ion batteries. Which would result in a halving of range for the same weight.
On top of that, if they ever get them into production, the solid state Lithium ion batteries are not only more energy dense than current batteries, they are also safer due to the lack of flammable liquid electrolites.
In conclusion with what I know, I doubt most cars will use sodium ion batteries. I would see them as great home batteries for solar installations. And maybe batteries for farm equipement or construction vehicles although the weight might become an issue.
Sodium batteries are only 30% less energy dense, but cost half as much as lithium and work better in lower temperatures. Most cars will use sodium chemistry and the shift is already taking place.
See the "working better in lower temperatures" is what im interested in. I would love an EV if we had the infrastructure to support it, but as they are right now there is little incentive to build the infrastructure because it's often too cold where I live and everything is so far apart.
Your government needs to just build whole country nuclear and stop its other spending, once you've got cheap abundant energy then its inevitable.
The "they catch fire" argument is fucking bonkers anyway.
If there's one thing petrol cars are famous for, it's being filled with flammable liquids that can and do leak everywhere and combust upon collision.
You can ignore them. Same with all the disingenuous cunts who complain about wind turbines "spoiling the view" who ignore the coal and gas power stations that have littered the skyline for over a century.
Ah, Lemmy. You never disappoint with sharing hilariously inaccurate information in comments!
ICE vehicles have far more fires. EVs are more intense, but significantly less frequent
Uhm, the statistics are flawed. Not the fire itself is the problem, but how many people are killed by it. If an ICE vehicle burns, you usually have enough time to get out. If an EV burns, good luck.
I thought I was careful not to claim any stats. The only thing we know is that EV fires are less frequent but more intense.
Probably not much data out there because it's so infrequent. You are much more likely to die from collisions I imagine.
I think Teslas cast a dark halo in this area as well. Newer vehicles, but it wouldn't surprise me of their drivers carelessness mirrored their largest shareholder.
Its worth knowing and researching to reduce fire incidence, but combustion engines have bigger problems.