← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

As Barbados accelerates the importation of electric and hybrid vehicles, encouraged by government policy, there are concerns about the safety risks. The government has a duty to ensure that citizens are not exposed to hidden dangers due to increasing popularity. We have been sold that hybrid and EV tech is the wave of the future, BUT, government must ensure relevant data collection and analysis to inform risk mitigation and other relevant measures are implemented.

The following five points (summarised with the assistance of by AI) from the article below highlight key concerns that must be addressed IF the government is serious about safeguarding the public’s interest.

Higher Fatality Risk in Hybrids

  • Data from the UK shows motorists are three times more likely to die in hybrid crashes compared to petrol cars, despite hybrids being far fewer in number.
  • This suggests a disproportionate safety risk that should not be ignored when promoting hybrid adoption.

Complexity of Hybrid Systems

  • The combination of petrol engines, batteries, and electric motors makes hybrids harder to control and more prone to mechanical or electrical failures.
  • This complexity increases the likelihood of accidents and complicates post‑crash scenarios.

Battery and Fire Hazards

  • Hybrid batteries can be damaged by engine heat, making them more liable to ignite.
  • Fires in hybrids are harder to extinguish, may release toxic gases, and require specialised training and equipment for first responders.

Emergency Response Preparedness

  • Barbados’s fire service, police, and medical responders would need specialised training and gear to safely handle hybrid and EV crashes.
  • Without preparation, accidents could pose greater risks to passengers and rescuers alike.

Aging Fleet Risks

  • Hybrids often clock high mileage (e.g., taxis) due to fuel efficiency. As they age, battery degradation and performance decline increase safety risks.
  • Barbados must plan for long‑term maintenance, inspection, and regulation of imported hybrids to avoid compounding hazards.

Road safety experts were calling for an inquiry on Saturday night as it was revealed motorists are three times more likely to die in hybrids than in petrol cars.

A total of 122 people died in hybrid car crashes last year, compared with 777 in accidents involving petrol cars, according to Department for Transport figures analysed by The Mail on Sunday.

But as hybrids are outnumbered by almost 20 to 1 on Britain’s roads by petrol models, that means hybrids are three times more likely to be involved in a fatal crash.

Experts believe the higher death rates could be explained by hybrids’ combination of petrol engines and batteries and electric motors, which can be harder to control and more prone to fires.

The RAC Foundation, a transport research organisation, called for a ‘dedicated investigation branch’ to look into the trend. ‘It’s high time we had a specialist resource to address road safety risk’, director Steve Gooding said.

The cars’ batteries may also be to blame. They can be damaged by the heat of the engine, which burns at extremely hot temperatures, making them more liable to set ablaze.

The high electric current running through the car also increases the risks for passengers involved in crashes. First responders need special training and equipment due to the different nature of hybrid fires, and the potential for toxic gas to be released.

Some experts blame the number of miles that hybrids can clock up, with many taxi drivers using them due to their fuel efficiency. But as they age, the risks posed by the cars grows as the batteries wear down and performance wanes. 

Death rates in hybrids ‘three times higher than petrol cars’ as road safety experts call for inquiry | Daily Mail Online


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

9 responses to “EVs and Hybrids: Risks beneath the hype”


  1. It seems that the human is constructed to perpetually fear the unknown, anything that’s new, even the reality of death as a constant stranger to the living.

    Has anybody studied the number of deaths caused by cell towers? A few years ago that too was a fear, the subject of pressure groups. Now it’s been normalized.

    For we go through this every time. On the one hand, we want to save the planet taking us all to a haven of environmental bliss, while on the other, no one wants to die, even as we are to believe more lives are saved by saving the Great Mother.

    But driving EVs represents a single data point. Why not consider that beyond EVs, vehicles which can also fly are another innovation not far off, if only to avoid traffic jams on roadways.

    And when we so reach for the skies, meteorites which have been consistently bombarding earth for billions of years may again, given our anarchic world, have the last word.


  2. What we have to consider, being pragmatic, is to cultivate an appetite for what we consume from the world given our circumstances. Our resources both physical and intellectual. In seems there is a tendency for us to engage in wholesale adoption and deal with any consequences should they occur. It begs the question: why do we allocate billions to the national budget?


  3. No! Consumption, adoption?

    Nada! Pacha is on record here for the exact opposites.

    That is, the imposition of our will on the rest of the world.

    And that is the fundamental difference between your general disposition and ours. Between pragmatism and anarchy. For in an anarchic world the outlier has a chance of overcoming the centre. Pragmatism offers no such opportunity.

    Some call it arrogance, however this writer opts for arrogance ahead of submission, acceptance, adoption, every time.

    Did Barbados not impose a model of chattel slavery on the world as a centre for the first global project? Why can’t that be extended elsewhere? Pragmatism makes us forever destined to be poor. Milquetoast!


  4. @Pachamama, I wish for humility for you in 2026 and less abrasiveness to others.

    @David, you are very correct about your concerns.The issue of disposal, load on grid at night when most vehicles will be charging has not been taken into consideration according to a source at Emera and the high replacement cost of batteries. Oil production aint going anywhere soon.

    On the note of the cell tower risk concern is no different to the tobacco companies who sponsored the research which offered deliberate inconclusive findings to appease smokers. When last have you seen the required emission levels? How many companies who placed the non ionize radiating antennas on their roof without consultation? 5G/6G is even more concentrated non ionize radiation. Only time will reveal the true impact of cell phone non ionize radiation as most stick the phones to their head for long hours ignoring Specific Absorption Ratio and the warning distance for safe from body.


  5. The above is a simplistic offering, the model referenced was located at a time and given wings of colonial times.


  6. The professional historians would beg to disagree. They generally see slavery as a highly sophisticated construction not dissimilar to capitalism, feudalism, communism.

    During slavery for example, Barbados was a global centre for the development of cane varieties. Willie Lynch was considered a global expert in altering the minds of the Afrikan to be beasts of burden. Lynch, even went to the Carolinas to work with slave owners there to transfer this “technology”.

    There is a wide literature on this way of social organization. Eric William did not write Capitalism and Slavery by happenstance.


  7. As one who would prefer to keep my chances of being burnt alive to a minimum, I am in favour of a thorough investigation, analysis and regulation to mitigate. It does not have to be a choice between being burnt alive in a vehicle or being burnt alive by nature.

    Some people are prone to extremism. I prefer common sense, which never resides at the extremities.


  8. I was never a lover of the Ev boom. If its milage you after, they are numerous small diesel cars capable of over 50mpg. Some like the volkswagen blue can achieve as high as 65mpg. I don’t think we can judge the true running cost of any of these EVS yet either, as most are still running on their original batteries. In a few years when persons are on their 2nd or 3rd battery, then one can arrive at a real running and replacement cost over a longer period for their vehicle.

    What I can say Is that I have seen some companies saying their batteries are good for 150k miles. Well I can tell you they are plenty cars in Barbados which have done over this milage with just general maintenance as their expenses. I was told by someone who is into this technology that a vehicle with a battery rated at 150k miles, will hardly give that in our stop and start driving conditions. On a highway at 100km or so with no stop and go happening, that would of course be a different story.

    To each their own, I going keep supporting OPEC for now though with the old fossil fuel drinker.

The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading