Surprise! Media is misreporting the source of a Dutch cargo ship fire
Early this morning, the Fremantle Highway, a large cargo ship, caught fire in the North Sea, off the coast of Ameland in the Netherlands. The fire has killed one person on board and injured several more, though all 23 crew members have at this point been evacuated from the ship.
The cargo ship was carrying 2,832 gas-powered cars, complete with a large amount of volatile energy stored in their gas tanks, and 25 electric ones, from Germany to Egypt. Naturally, the media seems to have taken one statement from the Dutch Coast Guard and misinterpreted it, jumping to exactly the premature conclusion that you probably did when you saw this headline pop up on our site.
An early article about the cargo ship fire quoted Lea Versteeg, a spokesperson for the Dutch Coast Guard, as having made this statement over the phone:
It’s carrying cars, 2,857, of which 25 are electrical cars, which made the fire even more difficult. It’s not easy to keep that kind of fire under control and even in such a vessel it’s not easy.
We’re not sure who made the phone call, but since it’s in the Associated Press article, we suspect they might be the first who got this statement directly from Versteeg’s mouth.
NOS, the Dutch public broadcaster, cites a “Coast Guard spokesperson” as saying that presumably the fire was started by an EV. But unlike AP, NOS does not name the spokesperson nor does it have a direct quote from said spokesperson. So we really don’t know whether NOS talked to a spokesperson, or is cribbing from the Versteeg quote above – and changing its meaning in the process.
Reuters echoed NOS’s statement in its original article on the fire, but in a more recent article, it has now walked that back, stating “the coastguard said on its website that the cause of the fire was unknown, but a coastguard spokesperson had earlier told Reuters it began near an electric car” (emphasis ours).
But what the Versteeg quote above seems to mean is that in a ship full of vehicles, each of which is carrying their own at least partially full energy storage container (whether that be a gas tank or a battery), it’s going to be hard to put out a fire because there is a lot of fuel available for that fire. Further, given that there is a mix of fuels, it’s hard to pick a single tactic to put all of them out at once, because firefighting methods are different for different types of fires.
What the quote clearly doesn’t mean is that the Coast Guard is blaming this fire on an electric car.
And how do we know that? Well, we called them and asked them. And they told us that, no, they have not made a statement to that effect, because they don’t know the cause of the fire yet, and that this seems to be speculation in the media.
We also checked the Dutch Coast Guard’s liveblog about the firefighting efforts, and their Twitter page, and neither said anything about electric cars. In fact, the liveblog has now been updated to say, “The cause of the fire is still unknown.” And it makes sense that the Coast Guard would not know yet what the source of the fire is, and it would be unprofessional of them to say so, given that the fire isn’t even contained yet.
So we must conclude that this is being misreported. An official statement in writing says the cause is unknown. There is nothing from officials in writing mentioning the speculation about electric cars. We don’t have a direct quote, and we don’t have a name for the spokesman who said it. The misreported information seems like it could have come from a misinterpretation of a direct quote that we do know of, and at least one of the sources has now walked it back. It was confirmed to us over the phone that the Coast Guard has not come to this conclusion and that this is all media speculation.
One thing we do know is that cargo ship fires are not uncommon, with hundreds happening last year. We also know that another cargo ship carrying ~1,200 gas cars (and zero electric) caught fire earlier this month in New Jersey, killing two. And we know that gasoline is literally supposed to combust, that’s its entire purpose, and it does, commonly, since gas cars are several times more likely to catch fire than EVs are.
And yet, you probably have a strong association in your subconscious between fires and electric cars.
This association is why events like the aforementioned reporting on the 1,200-car ship had to specifically mention that “there were no electric cars on board.” Because the last time a ship made headlines for burning, it was one that had a lot of electric cars on board (and notably also several gas-powered Lamborghini Aventadors, which have been recalled for fires). And despite burning ships being a not-uncommon event, this one made so many headlines precisely because of the nature of the electric cars on board.
That event also had several early reports laying blame on said electric cars, but that was also early speculation, by media, never by official authorities, and the cause of that fire is still unclear to this day. But the association remains.
There is a concept in journalism that is summarized as “Man Bites Dog.” The saying goes that you would never report on a dog biting a man, because that’s a common occurrence, but if a man bites a dog, well, that’s interesting and rare, so that belongs in the paper.
What this means is that news tends to magnify rare events, and de-emphasize common ones. And in our media-saturated landscape, where everyone is constantly being bombarded by headlines that they don’t have the time or inclination to analyze (thank you to the ~.1% of people who saw the headline and actually clicked and read through to this sentence), this leads people to have a warped view of the commonality of certain events.
Unfortunately, in writing this article, we have become part of the problem. By posting about fires in an electric vehicle publication, we have created an association in the minds of anyone who sees this headline between electric cars and fires.
Which is why persistent associations like these are so hard to shake. Even the debunking itself can reinforce the association, through a concept known as the “backfire effect.”
Unfortunately, there is no single magic bullet to combat this. What we can do is encourage people to be critical but not cynical about the information you read, check several sources (that preferably do not look like they’re all cribbing from the same single statement), try to avoid sources that are clearly tabloids or have a clear ideological bias (e.g., Daily Mail, a climate denying publication, which wrongly put EVs in its headline on this story), and try to maintain perspective, especially when encountering purported problems with new technologies. (That is, if people bring up a problem with something new, does that problem also exist with the old thing it’s replacing? Have you merely accepted the devil you know, and are afraid of the devil you don’t know?)
And that goes double for journalists. This is your job, that phone call took all of a minute of my time to clear that up. The tweet was another couple minutes to find because I had to search in Dutch. The liveblog was a few minutes because it’s slammed with more traffic than the Dutch Coast Guard usually has to deal with.
None of this took longer than the amount of time it takes to write an article… but it did take longer than it takes to react with a 140-character quip via tweet. And thus, the lie travels halfway around the world while truth is still putting on its shoes.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
JackRabbit, the maker of pint-sized electric microbikes, is back with a new product designed to quickly recharge their batteries from pure, uncut photons mainlined into an e-bike directly from the sun. In true independent charging form, the Solar Charging Kit from JackRabbit keeps riders rolling even when there’s not a convenient AC outlet in sight.
Unveiled this week, the Solar Charging Kit consists of a single folding solar panel and a tiny voltage converter that is configured to output 42.0V, which is the exact voltage required by JackRabbit’s little e-bike batteries. There’s also an added USB-A and a USB-C charging port for powering other devices in addition to charging JackRabbit batteries.
“This Solar Charging Kit plugs directly into your bike,” explained the company, “letting you recharge without needing an outlet, but with a speed comparable to the charger that comes with the OG/OG2 (42V, 2A).”
That would mean the panel outputs around 80W of solar power, which the company says can recharge its batteries in just three hours. That fairly quick recharging speed is helped by the fact that JackRabbit’s batteries are a mere 151 Wh, or around a third of the size of most e-bike batteries.
If that sounds small, then you’re right – it is. But JackRabbit is all about going micro, offering barely 25 lb rideables that are easy to store and bring on adventures, even when they aren’t actually being ridden.
With small batteries that fit under the 160Wh limit for many airlines in the US, the batteries can be quickly charged and taken to the widest number of locations. And for riders that want to go further than a single 10-mile (16-km) battery will allow, extra batteries are small enough to fit a pants pocket. The company also offers much larger Rangebuster batteries, though they won’t pass by TSA and make it onto an airplane in your personal item.
It sounds like the Solar Chargking Kit should be able to charge up JackRabbit’s large RangeBuster batteries, though likely in more than three hours.
The $349 Solar Charging Kit is a bit pricier than building something similar yourself, but it’s also safer and more convenient than hacking together your own battery charger since it’s designed to work with JackRabbit’s batteries right out of the box.
Technically it’s only inteded for JackRabbit’s micro e-bikes (themselves technically seated scooters, even if they look and feel more like a typical bike), but it’d probably work for just about any 36V e-bike that requires 42.0V to charge.
This isn’t the first time we’ve seen solar charging kits for electric bikes, and it’s a trend that is certainly appreciated by outdoors and camping enthusiasts, festival goers, or anyone who finds themself and their bike spending extended periods in the great, sunny outdoors.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Solar generated 11% of EU electricity in 2024, overtaking coal which fell below 10% for the first time, according to the European Electricity Review published today by think tank Ember.
EU gas generation declined for the fifth year in a row, and total fossil generation fell to a historic low.
“Fossil fuels are losing their grip on EU energy,” said Dr Chris Rosslowe, senior analyst and lead author of the report. “At the start of the European Green Deal in 2019, few thought the EU’s energy transition could be where it is today; wind and solar are pushing coal to the margins and forcing gas into structural decline.”
The European Electricity Review published today by global energy think tank Ember provides the first comprehensive overview of the EU power system in 2024. It analyzes full-year electricity generation and demand data for 2024 in all EU-27 countries to understand the region’s progress in transitioning from fossil fuels to clean electricity.
Wind and solar continue their meteoric rise in the EU
The EU power sector is undergoing a deep transformation spurred on by the European Green Deal. Solar generation (11%) overtook coal (10%) for the first time in 2024, as wind (17%) generated more electricity than gas (16%) for the second year in a row.
Strong solar growth, combined with a recovery of hydropower, pushed the share of renewables to nearly half of EU power generation (47%). Fossil fuels generated 29% of the EU’s electricity in 2024. In 2019, before the Green Deal, fossil fuels provided 39% of EU electricity, while renewables provided 34%.
Solar is growing in every EU country and more than half now have either no coal power or a share below 5% in their power mix. Coal has fallen from being the EU’s third-largest power source in 2019 to the sixth-largest in 2024, bringing the end into sight for the dirtiest fossil fuel. EU gas generation also declined for the fifth year in a row (-6%) despite a very small rebound in power demand (+1%).
The EU is reaping the benefits of reduced fossil fuel dependency
The surge in wind and solar generation has reduced the EU’s reliance on imported fossil fuels and its exposure to volatile prices since the energy crisis. Ember’s analysis found that without new wind and solar capacity added over the last five years, the EU would have imported an additional 92 billion cubic meters of fossil gas and 55 million tonnes of coal, costing €59 billion.
“While the EU’s electricity transition has moved faster than anyone expected in the last five years, further progress cannot be taken for granted,” continued Rosslowe. “Delivery needs to be accelerated particularly in the wind sector, which has faced unique challenges and a widening delivery gap. Between now and 2030, annual wind additions need to more than double compared to 2024 levels. However, the achievements of the past five years should instil confidence that, with continued drive and commitment, challenges can be overcome and a more secure energy future be achieved.”
Walburga Hemetsberger, CEO of SolarPower Europe said: “This milestone is about more than just climate action; it is a cornerstone of European energy security and industrial competitiveness. Renewables are steadily pushing fossil fuels to the margins, with solar leading the way. We now need more flexibility to kick-in, making sure the energy system is adapting to new realities: more storage and more smart electrification in heating, transport and industries.”
Read more: China installed a record capacity of solar and wind in 2024 – in numbers
If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports10 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway