[Wen/Dao Ge said that the car listens to the wind] In December last year, a Volvo plug-in hybrid car in Chengdu spontaneously ignited. At that time, the Volvo S90 T8 parked in the basement suddenly smoked without charging. Before that, in November, a Volvo XC60 T8 plug-in hybrid car exploded in Nanjing, and the side door, front hood and C-pillar of the vehicle were seriously damaged.
But it is such a Volvo car with frequent safety accidents in new energy vehicles, but the CEO of the company said, "For safety reasons, electricity will not be replaced."
According to foreign media electrive, Jim Rowan, CEO of Volvo, said in an interview recently that frequent disassembly and installation may pose a risk to safety, making the battery pack more vulnerable to damage and fire hazards when vehicles collide, which is inconsistent with Volvo’s consistent adherence to the concept of safety first.
In fact, as another form of energy supplement for new energy vehicles, the existence of electricity exchange itself is full of controversy, but the focus of controversy is mostly on costs, standards and other aspects, and the debate on safety rarely appears.
But the CEO of Volvo said that "electricity exchange will not be adopted for safety reasons" is not the connotation of those car companies that adopt this technology? In recent years, a number of car companies have entered the circuit, including FAW, SAIC, Changan, BAIC, GAC, Dongfeng, Geely and Weilai.
As we all know, Volvo has always liked to flaunt safety, but Volvo’s new energy vehicles have frequently experienced safety accidents. At the end of September this year, Volvo Cars recalled 4,720 plug-in hybrid models because of the hidden danger of thermal runaway of power batteries in imported Volvo XC90, domestic Volvo S60, domestic Volvo S90 and domestic Volvo XC60.
Ou Yangming Gao, academician of China Academy of Sciences and executive vice chairman of China Electric Vehicle committee of 100, publicly stated that the thermal runaway of the battery was the main cause of the fire accident. Then, were the spontaneous combustion and explosion accidents of Volvo new energy vehicles that happened last year related to this?
What’s more, in terms of new energy vehicle sales, Volvo’s performance is not good, and its monthly sales volume is about 1,000 vehicles. Is it really qualified to guide the new energy vehicle track?
Is it safe to recall Volvo’s new energy because of thermal runaway?
Volvo is a brand with safety as its label, but in the field of new energy vehicles, safety includes not only the body structure and materials, but also the stability of battery pack is an important standard for the safety of new energy vehicles.
Therefore, we will see that "no spontaneous combustion" will definitely become a publicity focus when most new energy vehicle models are listed. From Jim Rowan’s point of view, he also recognized the safety of the battery pack, otherwise, he would not take "frequent disassembly and installation may cause risks to safety, making the battery pack more vulnerable to damage and fire and other dangers in the event of collision" as the reason for refusing to change electricity.
But the safety of the battery pack can’t be eliminated without disassembly and installation, at least for Volvo. According to public reports, in December last year, a Volvo plug-in hybrid car in Chengdu spontaneously ignited. At that time, the Volvo S90 T8 parked in the basement suddenly smoked without charging. Before that, in November, a Volvo XC60 T8 plug-in hybrid car in Nanjing exploded, and the side door, front hood and C-pillar of the car were seriously damaged.
In addition, in September this year, Volvo recalled 4,720 plug-in hybrid vehicles for the record, and the reason for the recall was that some plug-in hybrid vehicles had internal short circuits in the power battery module, and when the power battery was in a high energy state, the battery module might overheat, which in extreme cases led to thermal runaway of the power battery, posing a safety hazard.
Academician Ou Yangming Gao said that the main cause of electric vehicle fire is product quality. "If the battery is overheated, thermal runaway will occur, and uneven battery pack temperature, over-charging, over-discharging, external short circuit, internal short circuit, etc. will all lead to overheating. In addition, battery water ingress, poor sealing and collision will also lead to overheating."
In other words, Volvo plug-in hybrid models that do not have the conditions for power exchange have already experienced the risk of "fire" in Jim Rowan’s mouth. It doesn’t seem to be an impeccable statement not to change electricity for safety reasons. Compared with pointing out the new energy vehicle track, Volvo should probably consider how to increase the sales of new energy vehicles.
Sales of new energy vehicles are bleak.
It is undeniable that Volvo’s slogan in the transformation of new energy vehicles has been very loud. "Full electrification in 2025" and "divesting internal combustion engine business" are the best statements of Volvo’s transformation. However, a cruel reality is that Volvo’s new energy vehicles have performed very poorly in the China market.
Data show that in November this year, Volvo sold a total of 1,114 new energy vehicles in the China market, including 917 plug-in hybrid vehicles and only 197 pure electric vehicles. But this is not a mistake made by Volvo, because its previous performance was even worse. In October, Volvo sold only 917 new energy vehicles in China, of which only 80 were pure electric vehicles.
Even if the timeline is longer, Volvo has come this year. Volvo’s cumulative sales in the domestic market in the first three quarters were 117,700 vehicles, down 11.2% year-on-year, of which the sales of new energy vehicles only accounted for 7%. The data shows that Volvo has not had a smooth transition to a new energy car track.
Of course, the reason is not that Volvo didn’t change electricity, but that "oil to electricity" is really difficult to mix in the China market. But coincidentally, all the new energy vehicles currently sold by Volvo are derived from fuel vehicles, which is the so-called "oil to electricity" products. The biggest feature of this kind of products is that compared with the brand-new model of pure electric platform, it has large servicing quality, small battery capacity, short cruising range, high power consumption level and poor space performance …
From the perspective of Volvo’s pure electric products, the performance is also relatively average. From the product itself, the Volvo C40 RECHARGE listed this year is very average compared with Tesla Model3 and other models at the same price. The Volvo C40 RECHARGE has a cruising range of 550km, a maximum power of 231Ps and an acceleration of 7.2 seconds per 100 km, while the Tesla Model3 rear-wheel drive version has three parameters of 556km, 264Ps and 6.1 seconds respectively, and even the Tesla Model3 rear-wheel drive version (276,900) is cheaper than the Volvo C40 RECHARGE long-life version (309,000). In contrast, the conclusion is that Volvo’s electric vehicles are less competitive.
There is a saying: the market will not deceive people. If Volvo’s new energy vehicle products are really excellent, then its sales volume will naturally be good. From the performance of Volvo, not only has it been recalled due to thermal runaway, but the product is also a product of "oil to electricity". How can a "safety" save Volvo’s new energy vehicles? Perhaps Volvo should consider how the new energy vehicles are safer and how the products are better instead of considering whether to use the power-changing mode.
关于作者