From Legal Insurrection

Posted by Leslie Eastman 

As my colleague Mary Chastain reported in her post on the Waymo facility filled with riderless electric vehicles (EVs) and powered scooters that was set on fire during the Los Angeles riots, I have often noted that lithium battery fires are intense and challenging to extinguish.

There is another example to add to the collection of incidents related to lithium batteries. Last week, a British-managed, Liberian-flagged vessel named Morning Midas was traveling from Yantai, China, to Lázaro Cárdenas, Mexico, carrying approximately 3,000 vehicles (750 to 800 of which were either fully electric or hybrid vehicles).

On route, while the ship was roughly 300–340 miles southwest of Adak, Alaska, a fire broke out on board. Smoke was initially observed emanating from the deck loaded with electric vehicles. The crew of 22 immediately attempted to suppress the fire using onboard systems but were unable to control it.

The cargo vessel has now been abandoned. And while no cause has been officially assigned, the lithium batteries are the prime suspect.

Photographs show the vessel still smoking hundreds of miles from the nearest coastline days after the initial distress signal was received. Thick columns of smoke can be seen billowing into the sky.

Incredibly, all 22 crew members were safely evacuated onto a lifeboat on Tuesday afternoon and later rescued by a nearby merchant vessel.

They remained aboard the rescue ship as of Thursday, the vessel’s management company, London-based Zodiac Maritime, said.

…The cause of the fire remains under investigation but lithium-ion batteries, widely used in electric vehicles, are known to present firefighting challenges due to their high combustibility once ignited.

Salvage crews are on their way.

A salvage team is expected to arrive early next week at the scene of a cargo ship that was carrying about 3,000 vehicles to Mexico when it caught fire in waters off Alaska’s Aleutian island chain.

A tug carrying salvage specialists and special equipment is expected to arrive at the location of the Morning Midas around Monday, the ship’s management company, London-based Zodiac Maritime, said Thursday. The crew will assess the ship’s condition, and a separate tug with firefighting and ocean towage capabilities is being arranged, the company said in its statement. In the meantime, officials are using the ship’s onboard satellite-connected systems to monitor it.

Legal Insurrection readers may recall that in 2023, I covered a similar fire aboard a ship called Fremantle Highway. The vessel spent a week burning on the North Sea while carrying thousands of cars, nearly 500 of which were reported to be electric vehicles (EVs), before finally being tugged into a Dutch port for salvaging (allaying fears that it could sink and impact shipping lanes).

After much wrangling and European regulatory drama, the boat was salvaged, renamed, and sold to China. The connection to the EVs and their lithium batteries on board was completely minimized.

A year after the devastating fire aboard the Japanese-owned car carrier Fremantle Highway, the salvaged portions of the vessel are set to start a new life. A court battle over the status of the salvaged vessel has been settled with the Dutch authorities agreeing to issue an export license for the hulk now known as Floor.

…The Floor has been moved to a North Sea anchorage and is waiting for a salvage tug which will tow it to Xiamen, China. Dutch media reports indicate the vessel has been acquired by Qingshan Shipyard Group which will complete the repairs in China.

A year after the devastating fire, the authorities are yet to release a final report. Initial speculation was that the electric vehicles caused the fire but later reports have downplayed that speculation Reports have said it appeared the fire began in other cargo areas.

Chemistry does not change, no matter how much the narratives are manipulated. Lithium battery fires will remain a significant fire response challenge unless their inherent chemistry changes.

By Gary Abernathy

This article was originally published by The Empowerment Alliance and is re-published with permission.

The “One Big Beautiful Bill” – designed to put most of President Trump’s campaign promises into action – squeaked through the House of Representatives on May 22 and was immediately greeted by expressions of horror from activists and corporations invested in so-called “alternative” energy.

The big business interests that drive the solar and wind boom have for years operated at a huge advantage. Most startups historically identify a need and create a quality product or service to meet the demand in the hope of becoming profitable within a few years. By contrast, the “renewables” industry has had the backing of the United States government in the form of tax incentives designed to virtually guarantee success. Even with so much government largesse, it’s astounding how many solar companies have been so badly managed that they have gone out of business.

Still, with Uncle Sam cheering them on, solar companies have converted more than a million acres of cropland and pastures to unsightly collections of solar panels. The rapid deployment often stirred controversy, pitted neighbor against neighbor, and sent state lawmakers scurrying to craft new and evolving rules and regulations.

Many people viewed the encroachment of solar as a blight on generational farmland, as ugly glass and metal panels replaced corn, soybean, wheat and other crops. Some landowners, though, eagerly grabbed the lifeline offered by solar companies in the form of per-acre sale or lease prices that were far above average market values, in many cases allowing them to escape mountains of farming debt.

As I wrote in a Washington Post column a few short years ago about a public hearing I attended on the topic of solar developments in southern Ohio, “The testimony was sometimes heart-wrenching. Some members of multigenerational farm families who have made deals with the solar companies spoke with tears in their eyes. Farming is in their blood, and in a perfect world they would continue the family tradition. But for them, it’s been a long time since the world was perfect.”

 The kicker, of course, is that solar companies were able to offer such lucrative deals almost entirely because of subsidies and tax incentives offered by the Obama administration, curtailed somewhat by the first Trump administration, but reinvigorated on steroids by the Biden administration’s misleadingly named Inflation Reduction Act.

In a follow-up Post column in 2021, I noted that suspicions about the solar installations were increasing. “Questions are growing about neighboring property values and environmental issues,” I wrote. “What about responsible land practices such as plant maintenance, erosion protection and water runoff? When the solar fields are dismantled someday, will the soil be safe for reuse? Solar companies are providing answers, but trust is not always evident.”

For solar, the return of Trump and GOP congressional control means the gravy train might be rolling to a stop. The budget passed by the House ended many tax credits for companies installing rooftop solar panels, but, more importantly, the bill “also ends the investment and electricity production credits for clean energy facilities that begin construction 60 days after the legislation is enacted or enter service after Dec. 31, 2028. Those credits have played a key role in the rapid expansion of utility-scale solar projects in the U.S.,” as CNBC reported. Solar stocks immediately plunged.

But political considerations are always in play, and it’s telling that the House budget bill “left the manufacturing tax credit relatively unscathed.” That’s almost certainly because of the fact that domestic solar component manufacturing is well underway, including in many red states where members of Congress aren’t anxious to pull the plug on jobs that benefit local communities – even if they are based on the artificial tax subsidies from a government picking winners and losers.

When it comes to energy, the House bill will likely see some revisions in the Senate. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) was probably smart, politically, when he said he would push for a slower phase-out of clean energy subsidies.

“For companies that have made major capital deployment decisions, we need to respect that or people are going to start thinking that the United States has massive changes in policy every two years in this space, and that will be devastating to the U.S.’s current position as the innovation leader,” Tillis said.

As Doc Holliday said in the movie “Tombstone,” that’s the damnable misery of it. Subsidies have backed the manufacture of solar initiatives in state after state, so while there are endless unknowns about the future, jobs are here now, at least in the short term. Abruptly shutting them down would give Democrats an election issue that a slow phaseout might help to avoid, or at least alleviate.

An “all-of-the-above” approach to energy is a popular political slogan, and indeed, alternatives will continue to be part of our energy mix. But recent blackouts, brownouts and general grid failures around the world due to an overreliance on solar demonstrate that the various resources that make up “all of the above” are not created equal. They do not generate equal energy, or give consumers the same dollar-for-dollar value.

The success of “alternatives” should be based on merit. Are they affordable? Are they effective? Are they reliable? Are they in demand? Our system of capitalism decides winners and losers. When government bureaucrats try to make those calls, taxpayers end up footing inflated bills for inferior products. That outcome should be an alternative no one supports.

Gary Abernathy is a longtime newspaper editor, reporter and columnist. He was a contributing columnist for the Washington Post from 2017-2023 and a frequent guest analyst across numerous media platforms. He is a contributing columnist for The Empowerment Alliance, which advocates for realistic approaches to energy consumption and environmental conservation. Abernathy’s “TEA Takes” column will be published every Wednesday and delivered to your inbox!

This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.