Weaponized - The Use of EVs in Terrorism

[@AlainODea]

Really worthwhile and thoughtful discussion. Thank you for preparing and posting this.

[@Tarukai788]

Thank you for the clear and concise thoughts and relay of info regarding these awful attacks. An updated EV fire fighting video would be pretty great!

[@dustincousins]

Thanks for the work. Side note, it has been a while since I watched one of your vids, not sure when you changed your hair style, but it looks great! Keep up the good fight :^)

[@lizburgess4398]

That was my question on the day. Why did no one mention that both trucks were EVs. What was the significance? Thank you!

[@gmv0553]

No you are wrong!​@@mikewallace8087

[@oliv9768]

@@mikewallace8087 ‘ @gmv0553 ’ - realized that he / she inserted the, proverbial, foot in mouth, backtracked, and expeditiously deleted. As a result, yours and my reply diverted under another entry. 👀. My reply : “ HARRIS COUNTY, Texas -- A Ford F-150 Lightning truck [ underscored ] driven by the suspect in a deadly attack during New Year celebrations in New Orleans has ties to the Houston area, sources confirmed to ABC Houston affiliate KTRK. ” Research - is free of charge ( no pun intended ). 👍🏽🍺”

[@colinwiseman]

Personally, I feel the point of them both being EVs is irrelevant. It could have been two motorbikes, two cycle bikes, two skateboards, etc. EVs are popular and that, to me, is the only connection.

[@mrxmry3264]

@@colinwiseman "... both being EVs is irrelevant." i agree, but i will not be surprised when anti-EV groups use this as anti-EV propaganda. you know they will.

[@gamesfreak26]

Thank You for covering this. It is really thoughtful discussion on the topic.

[@robfelts8076]

Informative and thought provoking as always!

[@ob1tx]

I don't understand why electric trucks were selected other than the perpetrators hoping for a secondary battery fire. Some online media that is on the blue side immediately blamed the battery on the Cybertruck explosion even though the video shows an explosion in the bed, very disappointing. I suppose the New Orleans attack wanted a quiet and powerful vehicle, but the red side sure jumped on the "illegal immigrant" bandwagon. Very disappointing reporting. I'm so happy you do your research to share the real truth, thank you 😊

[@fintrollpgr]

Possibly because of the polarisation around EV's? Same way mass-shooters tend to choose AR-15 type guns because of the media frenzy that will follow. It's all about visibility. Trucks/cars however are in general easier to get and capable of causing way more damage in a lot less time than a firearm, something an army veteran would possibly understand and why a vehicle was used.

[@alancapes5644]

The video, its title and cover image are vlick-baity and a negative depiction of EVs. The take aways from these horrid events are that it made no difference in NO, and proved EVs are more fire safe in the case of LV.

[@CalebTheFew06]

@@ob1tx i believe the Lightning was used because of its instant acceleration, and heavy weight.

[@Dexter037S4]

@@alancapes5644 The Cybertruck is still the worst vehicle ever made, bar none.

[@cali-electro-dad]

Thanks Kate!

[@cali-electro-dad]

@mikewallace8087 ...for the very thought-provoking and well-presented piece of journalism. (Was that not implied? Did someone skip breakfast?) Edit: spelling.

[@jeffrey_live1748]

Mr "Free Speech" threatening suit for talking about his truck 🙄

[@transportevolved]

First, you don’t understand the first amendment Mikewallace. Second, please refrain from attacking our audience on this channel.

[@kensmith5694]

@@mikewallace8087 You know nothing of the person you are reacting to. It is your right to say things that are really dumb. It is my right to point it out.

[@wingsounds13]

@@kensmith5694 sadly, some people seem proud and determined to announce their ignorance to the world.

[@chelseashurmantine8153]

This was really good. Agreed, nothing a terrorist does makes sense, and the media talks about ev’s in such a weird way, even the fact, like you said, the coverage highlighted constantly that they were EVs. I couldn’t tell you what kind of vehicle drove through the antifa rallies in North Carolina but I know what drove through New Orleans. At least that it was an EV. It’s weird.

[@lizburgess4398]

@chelseashurmantine8153 my granddaughter was staying with us, and I missed some of the early coverage. But, once I could watch, I didn't hear it mentioned. My husband noticed it was a Lightning while watching the aftermath. We drive an EV and hate all the misinformation and misinformation surrounding them.

[@simson4t]

It was interesting that the otherwise very anti EV right wing media has almost completely dismissed the EV aspect, it was the next day when I realized that the ford was a Lightning.

[@Russwig]

Thanks for that. Keep Evolving!!!

[@JP-sw5ho]

I'd love to see your updated video on EV firefighting

[@aussie2uGA]

Did a truck catch fire? The lightning cashed into people and the tesla had explosives set off. Neither one caught fire or had their battery packs ignite.

[@Bmeri3]

Firstly, I’m a paying supporter of this channel but I’m having a hard time understanding the point of this video. The events in question shouldn’t be getting anymore oxygen than they already have. I don’t think there is an EV or truck owner should be doing to prevent these situations. If a person goes out of there to use something in a way in which it was not intended, that’s completely on them, not the owner or creator of the thing. Hammers are for driving nails. Using one for murder is not on the creator or owner. Other than giving one to a known violent psychopath, the holder or designer of the hammer shouldn’t take any special action. I think guns greatly outweigh the need for something that should be actioned on, not trucks, EVs or vehicles with high fronts. Is this video click bait?

[@olebloom1641]

Your speculation makes sense.

[@garydmercer]

Gasoline vehicles have been used in terrorism for years. How many car bombs have occurred in history? Plenty. The negative sensationalistic anti-Ev press ( paid off by the oil industry) had a hay day using this to spread more fear about EVs blowing up and catching fire etc. Disgraceful to make the EV the focus of these terrible acts instead of the men that committed these deplorable crimes and their twisted ideologies. Sick. Glad the cybertruck contained the blast thanks to its stainless steel skin. Any pickup truck could have been used to crash through a crowd of people---so the fact it was focused on the fact that an EV truck was used in New Orleans is just evident that the Press is biased against EVs. I don't blame Tesla from threatening to sue the press for the negative EV press from these two tragic events. The press needs to be held accountable for spreading misinformation regarding EVs.

[@colinwiseman]

Well said.

[@transportevolved]

The purpose of this video was to build context, not create antagonism. Perhaps you could rewatch it, as we feel maybe you missed that nuance?

[@simson4t]

I didn't see the EV aspect mentioned as scaremongering. It was mostly mentioned as a possible connection between the two events. And let's be honest it was strange that two terrorist events happening on New Year's Eve and both committed with an electric truck. These are not so common yet. Now we know that it was just weird coincidence.

[@steveread4021]

Well said. We are going to need more voices speaking sense and proportion going forward.

[@danielmadar9938]

Thanks

[@aussie2uGA]

Both EV’s rented from Turo. Both drivers trained at Ft Bragg. Lots of “coincidences” beyond they were EV’s.

[@AdrianoCasemiro]

Happy new year to you and the TE crew. I'm pretty sure we all are going to need a bit of luck and a lot of wit in these days.

[@DaxVJacobson]

You can bet Turo has updated their TOS, so tea or Tee errorism is no longer allowed!

[@rp9674]

I think the coverage in Southern California has been fair, on conventional media

[@JanielDavidAlfaros]

There are many reasons, but here, we’ll discuss three of them: Islam is a theology centric/theocentric religion rather than philosophy centric : The problem with theology centric religions is that they are totally based on beliefs without any experiential or scientific evidence, and they are mostly designed in such a way that when their beliefs comes in contradiction with beliefs of other people, it creates bigotry. This includes all Abrahamic religions and some non-Abrahamic religions. On the other hand, philosophy centric religions like Buddhism and Confucianism are more focused on improving a person’s real life rather making him believe in stuff that has no proof and causing unnecessary bigotry. The core principles of Islam are not non-violent : Even after being theocentric, some religions like Zoroastrianism and Baha’i have non-violence as one of their core fundamentals. People often think that Fundamentalism is the problem, but no, it’s not. Fundamentalism is not a problem if your fundamentals are humanitarian. The core principles of islam includes strict monotheistic beliefs, the 5 pillars of islam (Shahada, Haj, Zakat, Salah and Sawm) as well as waging war on non-believers, taking s(e)x slaves from conquered lands, k!lling apostates, homosexuals, blasphemers, adulterers etc. With these kinds of sick and vile fundamentals, fundamentalists of these ideology are surely to cause problem in our society. The life of prophet Muhammad : If you read about the life of muhammad from the books of famous islamic scholars like Al-Tabri, you’ll come to know that muhammad was not a kind of guy whom you’d compare with Jesus, Buddha or Confucius. He was not a mystical hippie who claimed to be a God and then got crucified by a bunch of romans, he was not a guy who in depression, started meditating under a tree and then spent rest of his life preaching. He was a conquering warlord, who unfortunately succeeded. I would rather compare Muhammad to Nero or Gengis Khan than to Buddha or Jesus. He was a real historical figure who conquered lands, traded slaves, had concubines, conducted massacres and made his own kingdom. In this case, what muslims are essentially following, is an ideology that teaches how to wage war on non-believers (a.k.a other kingdoms) rather than an ideology that takes you closer to God (If you’re a theist) or improves your life. No matter how they whitewash it, truth is not going to change. We just need to remember two things: To make up false narratives, you have to work very hard. But for truth, you don’t have to, because it’s already there, waiting for someone pure hearted to propagate it. AND Fundamentalism is not a problem if your fundamentals are truly humanitarian. The only problem with Islamic fundamentalism are the fundamentals of Islam

[@downix]

I would imagine the coolant in the Cybertruck would make the battery very difficult to turn into an incendiary.

[@transportevolved]

Most EV battery packs today have coolant flowing through them.

[@downix]

​@transportevolved But not all coolant is flame resistant. In checking, the G48 coolant used in the Cybertruck can become flammable if heated to the flash point, but otherwise, it is a flame retardant.

[@simson4t]

Not at all. The problem with lithium batteries that they contain all three components of fire. The electrolyte is flammable and when they go into thermal runway they generate their own heat and oxygen. Coolant doesn't matter, you can drop it in water it will burn underwater. But battery back is not a problem in my opinion. They are so well protected that to ignite them would need such a big explosion, that the added effect of the battery would be negligible.

[@downix]

@simson4t depends on the battery. A Lithium Iron Phosphate lacks the oxygen, for example.

[@davidgoodwin4148]

"I predicted this" but not really. My thought was that a mass shooter would ride hail some kind self driving taxi. That incident would cause fleet operators to put some basic detection equipment in the vehicle. (Which everyone would be annoyed with due to false alarms [golf clubs etc etc]). Back then I didn't have peer to peer rentals in mind but because I assumed more driving automation by now with less ownership. The 2nd amendment would be curtailed by manufactures and fleet operators like the 1st admendement is on corporate social media. I did see that it would be EVs but it was due to fleet operators showing efficiency not renter choice. I also assumed it wouldn't be addressed until after an incident. So we will see which companies choose or are legislated into changes (there is no "freedom car" adementment.. maybe the 10th). All this come from a cyberpunk point of view. The megacorps will take action not because they are good rather because "it's good business practice" which can favor humans by coincidence or for public relations purposes. As we prepare for another pink capitalism month remember that megacorps are amoral.

[@jb5music]

Why do you keep creepily looking off to the right... down and to the right... then looking back? Your creepily annoying.

[@avsystem3142]

And you can't even compose a single grammatically correct sentence.

[@aussie2uGA]

You’re, not your…

[@shanefiddle]

My go-to news channel on the interwebs: this one! Thank you for all you do!

[@bowtoy]

So the most important part was that they didn't use the electric part of these electric vehicles as a terrorist act. They just used the vehicles. Could have been a gasoline vehicle just the same. There were nothing about these attacks that required an electric vehicle. Really got to disagree with your theory that the one in Vegas was hoping to blow up the truck battery. It would be easier to explode a gas tank on a regular ice vehicle. Your theory assumes that the guy was an idiot which isn't out of the realm of possibility, but you're assuming it.

[@transportevolved]

Ah but a gas tank explosion is a one time thing. We think they’d planned some longer term effects based on the propensity for fires to reignite later on if not properly handled

[@williamclark6466]

Thank you for this respectful, solemn coverage of these horrific stories.

[@henrydexter]

I appreciate the factual and well thought through approach that the TE team uses. Thank-you

[@avsystem3142]

I'm not sure what the point of this video is. The fact that those vehicles happened to be EV's isn't relevant at all to the events. If you think otherwise please explain.

[@lukerobson3043]

At least they did not use hydrogen fuel cell vehicles like the Ukrainians have

[@representin614]

One of my concerns with these very large EV trucks is that bollards and concrete planters that have been installed to protect pedestrians and buildings were not designed for these types of vehicles. Homeland security should be studying this very carefully and making recommendations.

[@kensmith5694]

The planter things were designed for very serious trucks hitting them so they are likely a refuge if you see an incident going down. The bollards are a different matter. Some really are only "decorative". Some are a steel pipe well anchored into the ground. I think that 90% of the time a car that is going off road is not intentional and is going to be at and angle to a row of bollards. The bollards to increase the safety a lot. Near me, there are some roads where a line of bollards divides the bicycle lane from the cars. Those would only be hit at an angle

[@avsystem3142]

Security bollards are designed to stop very large vehicles, including semi-trucks. There are plenty of ICE vehicles that weight more than the EV's used. In the instance of New Orleans, the security barriers were not deployed, they were down for some type of repair.

[@representin614]

@ a large diesel truck simply doesn't have the acceleration of an EV and can't reach the same speeds in a confined urban environment. Kinetic energy grows exponentially with velocity. 1/2mV^2

[@kensmith5694]

@@representin614 A diesel can put on significant energy in the space that was available. BTW: Squared is technically not exponential growth. 2^X is exponential X^2 isn't

[@avsystem3142]

@@representin614 If a terrorist is driving a large truck he doesn't need speed.

[@newscoulomb3705]

I defer to the assumption that most people (even terrorists) are pragmatic. In the first case, the Ford F-150 Lightning, for better or worse, has the performance characteristics required to accelerate around barriers and into a crowd of people. In the second case, the Cybertruck was chosen both for its symbolic connection to Elon Musk (also why he chose the Trump Hotel) and the attention Cybertruck news stories garner. I really don't think it goes deeper than that, and I don't think the Cybertruck was chosen in order to create a bomb. The individual who perpetrated that attack knew how to create explosive devices as part of his military training, and he would have known full well that the materials he chose and the shape and composition of the Cybertruck would not have made an effective explosion. Much like the Cybertruck is how a 10 year old would draw a truck, his bomb was built as though a 10 year old designed it (fireworks and all). Perhaps he was hoping the Cybertruck's battery would catch on fire, which is why he included gasoline in the mix, but his main purpose appeared to be drawing attention to his concern over "gravity drones."

[@kensmith5694]

Thanks Kate Neither of the attacks in any way changed my opinion of EVs or Elon Musk. In only a few more days we will all have to start getting used to saying "president Musk" I guess but we can still buy and drive EVs The topics are not related.

[@ScrappyDoodad]

The Cyber Truck was chosen not because of the drive train type but because of the Cyber Truck's image and it's connecting to Elon The other one is not clear enough to know if the EV status as an EV is connected, it could be unrelated other aspects of this life, like a curiosity

[@lbcck2527]

From the comments it is very unfortunate your channel attracts further mis & disinformation along with another level of hate.