From Policy to Practice: Closing the EV Fire Safety Gap on Car Carriers
Why EV fire preparedness has become a real safety issue at sea
Across the maritime industry, car carrier operators consistently highlight safety as a core value. It is clearly stated in safety policies, sustainability reports, and onboard management systems.
However, the rapid growth of electric vehicles (EVs) in vehicle cargo has introduced a new type of risk—one that does not behave like conventional vehicle fires and cannot be managed by traditional assumptions alone.
This has created a growing gap between appearing prepared and being prepared.
Closing that gap is now a critical challenge for operators transporting EVs at scale.
EV fires are fundamentally different
Operational experience and incident analysis show that EV fires differ from internal combustion engine (ICE) fires in several key ways:
Thermal runaway can continue even after visible flames are suppressed
High heat, toxic gas release, and re‑ignition risk may persist for hours
Battery cells can reignite after cooling if not correctly managed
Confined car‑deck environments limit access, visibility, and cooling options
In practice, this means that a situation can look under control while still posing a serious and evolving risk to crew, vessel, and cargo.
The CO₂ paradox: effective suppression, incomplete control
CO₂ systems remain an essential part of car carrier fire protection. They are highly effective at knocking down flames and reducing oxygen in enclosed spaces.
However, experience from EV‑related incidents indicates an important limitation:
CO₂ does not stop the internal chemical reaction inside lithium‑ion batteries.
This means:
Flames may disappear
Heat generation may continue
Re‑ignition can occur once oxygen is reintroduced
Crew may be exposed during re‑entry or follow‑up actions
Managing EV incidents therefore requires more than suppression alone.
Why crew preparedness matters more than equipment alone
Most safety systems onboard are designed to be activated by people under pressure.
When EV incidents occur, crews must:
Recognise early warning signs specific to EVs
Decide when and how to approach safely
Control boundaries and prevent escalation
Monitor hot spots over time
Manage post‑incident risks long after flames are gone
Without clear, EV‑specific tactics, crews are left to improvise in a high‑risk environment.
This is where safety culture moves from written policy to operational reality.
Closing the gap: from systems to tactics
Leading operators are now shifting their focus from “Do we have fire systems?” to:
Do our crews understand EV‑specific fire behaviour?
Are our response tactics realistic for car‑deck conditions?
Can we manage cooling, monitoring, and re‑ignition risk safely?
Is our SMS aligned with how EV incidents actually unfold?
This shift does not replace existing fire systems—it strengthens them by ensuring they are used correctly, confidently, and safely.
What effective EV fire preparedness looks like in practice
A robust approach to EV fire safety on car carriers typically includes:
Tactical training focused on EV recognition, access strategy, boundary cooling, and post‑incident control
Specialised EV fire control and cooling solutions designed for confined vehicle decks
Clear, deck‑level response playbooks aligned with the vessel’s SMS, drills, and Fire Safety Systems
Continuous monitoring and decision support after initial suppression
The goal is simple but critical:
Ensure crews are not only equipped — but prepared.
Safety, credibility, and stakeholder confidence
Beyond crew safety, effective EV fire preparedness supports:
Reduced operational uncertainty during incidents
Faster stabilisation and recovery
Stronger alignment between stated safety policy and onboard reality
Improved dialogue with class, insurers, and flag authorities
Demonstrable risk management in an evolving cargo landscape
In an industry where safety claims are increasingly scrutinised, preparedness has become a strategic differentiator.
From commitment to capability
Electric vehicles are now a permanent part of car carrier operations. The question is no longer if EV incidents must be managed—but how well.
Bridging the gap between commitment and capability requires:
Understanding how EV fires behave
Accepting the limitations of traditional assumptions
Empowering crews with the right tactics, tools, and training
When that happens, safety culture becomes more than a statement—it becomes something crews can rely on when it matters most.
SepcoTech works with operators who want to align safety policy with onboard reality. We are always open to exchanging perspectives on how EV risks are being managed across fleets.