AXA’s Tesla crash test controversy apology

AXA Switzerland is kicking itself for the day it presented a crash test using a Tesla sans battery cells in order to demonstrate the risk of battery fires in electric vehicles (EVs). The purpose of the test was to demonstrate the risk of battery fires in EVs.

 

AXA Switzerland conducts crash testing on an annual basis to simulate accidents in a controlled setting as part of its accident research and prevention efforts. These tests take place in a safe environment. The emphasis shifted to sport utility vehicles in 2020, then to travel trailers or camper vans in 2021, and finally to electric mobility in 2022. The most recent demonstration, which featured pyrotechnics, was intended to demonstrate that damage to the undercarriage of an electric vehicle (EV) might potentially result in damage to the battery, which could then spark a fire.

“Our goal with this year’s crash tests was to draw attention to insights from our statistics and – at the same time – raise awareness of the risks that can potentially arise with crashes occurring rechargeable cars,” explained AXA Switzerland, which noted that the fire being a mere representation was articulated straightforwardly throughout the event. “Our aim with this year’s crash tests was to bring attention to observations from our numbers and – simultaneously – raise awareness of the risks that can potentially arise with accidents involving battery-powered cars

“Regrettably, we realized after the fact that the test and information handling steps could be confusing, specially for those who were not present at the crash tests and were therefore unable to place them in the correct context, given that they were not party to the related analysis,” the author writes. “This was especially true for those who were not present at the crash tests and were therefore unable to place them in the correct context, given that they were not party to the related commentary.”

According to AXA Switzerland, the Tesla test vehicle did not make use of any battery cells. This was done in accordance with safety precautions designed to protect spectators during the simulation of an accident scenario in which a battery-powered vehicle catches fire. The fire, which was put out under carefully managed circumstances, had been set on purpose to illustrate how “very complex” the nature of EV fires can be.

In addition, the insurance company admitted the following: “The crash test using a Tesla vehicle did not generate the type of damage to the undercarriage that would be likely to begin a battery fire as the photographs would appear to show.” As a result, the hypothesis pertaining to this accident scenario was not confirmed by the test that was carried out.

“We need to have made explicit mention of this fact in our communication measures after the test, specifically in our press release and the related photographs that were made available to the public,” the author writes. “We apologize for this oversight.” In hindsight, the test that was used to illustrate a hypothetical risk scenario ought to have been organized somewhat differently.

According to the statistics compiled by AXA Switzerland, electric vehicles do not see an increase in the risk of catching fire in comparison to conventional automobiles. The company stated that it is now compelled to concede that, in the absence of any context, the related photographic material seems to portray something else, despite the fact that this finding was specifically indicated in the release that was issued in August.

According to a statement made by AXA Switzerland, “We wish to offer our heartfelt apologies and really regret the confusion that this has caused.” “We will study the accident tests that took place in 2022 once more, this time in greater detail, in order to learn the lessons that we can take from them, and we will apply these insights in our future efforts to assist boost road safety.”