EV Fires & Parking Garages: What Canadian Buildings Need to Know (2020–2025)

EV fire risk Canada is rising in visibility as adoption grows. While EVs burn less often than gas cars, EV fires parking garage incidents are high‑consequence: hotter, longer, and harder to cool. This 2020–2025 guide for Canadian buildings compares EV vs. ICE fire rates, highlights NFPA 88A/13 updates, and shows practical upgrades to harden underground parkades.

Updated: September 2, 2025 • FC Fire Prevention

EV fire risk Canada — why this matters now

• EV adoption is real: In 2024, about one in seven new vehicles sold in Canada was a ZEV. See also Statistics Canada.
• Lithium‑ion fires are up overall: Toronto Fire logged 76 battery‑related fires in 2024 (many micromobility/devices). Trend = harden buildings where batteries are present—like parkades.

EV vs. ICE: frequency vs. consequences

Independent datasets indicate EVs are less likely to catch fire than ICE vehicles. Sweden’s civil contingencies data (MSB), summarized by IEEE Spectrum, shows markedly lower per‑vehicle fire rates for EVs vs. ICE (2022). Planning focus for buildings is not frequency—it’s the very different fire dynamics if an EV ignites in an enclosed garage.

What’s different about EV fires

• Thermal runaway & reignition: Damaged cells can self‑propagate; packs may reignite hours or days later if not fully cooled. See the USFA EV Fire/Rescue guide (2025).
• Water demand: Field cases document sustained flows and large volumes to cool packs (e.g., Stamford, CT: ~600 gpm for ~42 minutes; Rancho Cordova, CA: ~6,000 gal; Alabama I‑65: ~36,000 gal; Tesla Semi, CA: ~50,000 gal).
• Toxic/off‑gassing in confined spaces: Lithium‑ion fires can release hazardous gases such as hydrogen fluoride (HF). See Larsson et al., Scientific Reports and Massachusetts DPH brief.

Why underground and enclosed parking garages are high‑consequence

• Confined volume & access: Low headroom, long hose stretches, and ramps slow attack; heat and smoke bank under slabs.
• Ventilation limits: Many older garages weren’t designed for the smoke output of modern multi‑vehicle fires.
• Exposure to critical rooms: Electrical rooms, sprinkler risers, and fire pumps are often adjacent—creating a potential domino effect.
• Charger clustering: Grouped EVSE bays can let one fire impinge on neighbors before control is established.

Codes and standards that changed (and why you should care)

• NFPA 88A (2023): All new parking structures require sprinklers per NFPA 13 (open and enclosed). Also see NFSA summary and USI Insurance brief (PDF).
• NFPA 13 (2022): Parking structures moved from OH1 to OH2 (higher density). See Viking white paper and SFFD technical note.
• FM Global (2021): Many policies now treat garages as HC‑3 (still higher density). See NFSA and USI brief.

Canada’s National Codes are model codes adopted provincially. Confirm local adoption and any amendments with your AHJ.

Signals from recent incidents & policies

• Luton Airport car park (UK, 2023): Official report indicates the blaze started with a diesel vehicle, not an EV. Still illustrates how modern car fires can overwhelm legacy protections.
• Seoul proposals (2024): In response to EV garage fires, the city proposed discouraging entry of EVs charged above 90% SoC to underground lots (KBS; Korea Herald).

EV fire risk Canada: 2020–2025 data snapshot

What FC Fire Prevention recommends for Canadian parkades

A) Assess the hazard

• Map EV/EVSE bays, charger clustering, and proximity to electrical rooms, fire pumps, sprinkler risers.
• Verify your sprinkler upgrades and inspections (OH2 minimum in garages; higher where stackers/special hazards exist).
• Review ventilation and life safety system checks and water supply (hydrants, standpipes, hose valves) to sustain long‑duration cooling flows.

B) Engineer for the incident you don’t want

• Ventilation & smoke control: Confirm capacity and controls for high smoke loads; prioritize extraction paths for lower levels (see NFPA 88A).
• Detection: Consider thermal/off‑gassing detection focused on charger rows to catch overheating early.
• Layout & separation: Space EV bays and avoid placing them tight to critical rooms; ensure clear responder access lines.

C) Write the response playbook

• Train staff with current EV fire tactics (expect extended cooling; defensive posture when appropriate). See USFA summary.
• Pre‑plan with your local fire department: access, water supply, staging, and post‑incident isolation steps.
• After an EV fire: store outdoors and away from exposures; arrange monitored tow/holding and re‑check with TIC for heat rise. Update your fire safety plan and document lessons learned.

Need an EV‑ready parkade plan? We audit sprinklers, water supply, ventilation, and EVSE layout; update your fire safety plan; and coordinate pre‑plans with your local fire service. For expert help with EV fire risk Canada, book an EV risk review with FC Fire Prevention.

EV fire FAQs (Canada)

Are EVs more likely to catch fire than gas cars?
Current data indicates no. EVs show lower per‑vehicle fire rates than ICE. The difference is in suppression complexity and duration (MSB via IEEE Spectrum).

How much water can an EV fire take?
It varies by pack size, damage, and access. Documented field cases range from a few thousand to tens of thousands of gallons (~6,000 gal; ~36,000 gal; ~50,000 gal).

Do I have to retrofit my existing open garage with sprinklers?
NFPA 88A (2023) requires sprinklers in new parking structures. Provincial adoption varies; work with your FPE and AHJ to determine what applies at your site (NFSA).

References

1. Canada Energy Regulator: ZEVs in Canada—latest trends (2025)
2. Statistics Canada: One in seven new vehicles sold in 2024 were ZEVs
3. City of Toronto: Lithium‑ion fire stats (2024)
4. IEEE Spectrum: EV vs. ICE fire frequency (MSB, Sweden)
5. USFA: Electric Vehicle Fire/Rescue Response Operations (2025)
6. NFPA blog: EVs & Parking Structures (NFPA 88A/13)
7. Viking: Protecting Parking Garages (OH2)
8. SFFD: Sprinkler protection for EV parking
9. NFSA: Fire protection for parking garages
10. USI: Parking structures—updates to fire safety standards (PDF)
11. Larsson et al. (2017): HF emissions from Li‑ion battery fires
12. Massachusetts DPH: Toxicology of Li‑ion battery fire
13. Bedfordshire FRS: Luton Car Park report (diesel origin)
14. KBS: Seoul 90% SoC proposal • Korea Herald coverage