Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 635 posts

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#141

Post by swores »

djaychela wrote: post #87
Synaesthesia wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The important point is there are far greener alternatives than EV's. EV's cost a lot of resources to build, which means a lot of environmental destruction and carbon output. Plus as we see they still contribute to this tyre dust problem. They are not the holy grail. Rail, public transport, e-bikes and better city design is.

This argument about EV resource use for construction is fossil fuel industry FUD. The difference is outweighed within a year or two of driving versus an ICE vehicle.

It can be simultaneously true that EVs are absolutely a big improvement over ICE vehicles, and that switching all vehicles to EVs doesn't solve 100% of the problems - therefore it's good to both continue pushing to move to EVs, and to push for alternatives as suggested by GP.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#142

Post by wcarss »

dragontamer wrote: post #71
undersuit wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Do we want 100-people in a neighborhood driving 100x cars to a store? Or would we rather have 1x large truck deliver a (heavier) package to 100x different people? Why can't the majority of the people walk to a store and the rest can be serviced by a smaller truck?

My overall point is that the "last mile" we're just screwed unless we fundamentally redesign our neighborhoods and shape of our cities. Its pretty damn obvious that as the USA is laid out right now, we don't have any good last-mile solutions outside of 100x different people driving to the same store and picking up what they want. And its not like houses are going to pick themselves up and move to a store, and given z…

If people think grocery stores existing within walking distance of their homes will lower their home values, due to some rise in shoplifting in the news implying crime in their area, then the war for any sensible policy decisions is lost.

That's like ten carts before a horse or some brawndo has what plants crave shit. I can walk to the grocery store where I live -- my house is worth more because it has decent access to amenities.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#143

Post by SoftTalker »

audunw wrote: post #7

It’s great to bring this problem up. But the focus on EVs is a distraction. > EVs tend to shed around 20 percent more from their tires due to their higher weight and high torque compared to traditional internal combustion engine-powered vehicles. It’s covered in this panel discussion on Fully Charged: https://youtu.be/LeHakmL6eEc?si=ebBAn8RSDhmmLfHI Fleet operators don’t see any significant difference in tire wear. E…

Sounds like a lot of hand-waving to rationalize a downside of EVs: they are heavy and chew up tires.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#144

Post by galangalalgol »

highwaylights wrote: post #123
dragontamer wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EVs have higher torque but that doesn’t matter unless to drive like a mad-man Its not torque that matters. Its simply friction and normal force. And that's directly caused by weight. Tire Wear is something like (weight^4), so small increases in weight will have huge increases to wear-and-tear. --------- I think the real issue is that 3000lbs to 4500lbs, while a significant increase in tire wear, is still small comp…

Or people just get their groceries delivered. Way more convenient, not expensive anymore (I get unlimited deliveries for a fairly paltry annual fee), and saves on journeys as the truck just loads up on lots of people’s deliveries all at once. It also scales better - if more people are having groceries delivered then each trucks stops become more closely clustered (unless the computers involved are just doing a poor j…

As the tire wear varies with the square of the weight we are comparing:

100x(car weight + grocery weight)^2 Vs (Truck weight + 100x grocery weight)^2

I couldn't find an empty weight for a box truck that could carry that much but assuming 10klbs total, and that grocery weight is negligible to the car, it looks like thebtruck is slightly better. It doesn't seem like a clear win.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#145

Post by qwytw »

audunw wrote: post #7

It’s great to bring this problem up. But the focus on EVs is a distraction. > EVs tend to shed around 20 percent more from their tires due to their higher weight and high torque compared to traditional internal combustion engine-powered vehicles. It’s covered in this panel discussion on Fully Charged: https://youtu.be/LeHakmL6eEc?si=ebBAn8RSDhmmLfHI Fleet operators don’t see any significant difference in tire wear. E…

> Too many of them are bigger than they need to be. But that also goes for new ICE vehicle models.

That's a very American centric claim. The gap between ICE and EV weight is relatively much higher in many other places where smaller cars are more popular.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#146

Post by spqr0a1 »

kylebenzle wrote: post #21
chmod600 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chemically speaking, how is natural rubber different from plastic while still having such similar properties?

Great question! Its super simple, it is ONLY the length of the hydrocarbon chain, a better quality natural rubber has really long chains (10,000+ atoms long) that last a LONG time and are VERY stretchy. Synthetic rubber (or plastic) is shorter (1,000 atoms long) and doesn't last as long. Thats it, it is the exact same "product" just a chain that gets longer and longer and changes its physical properties as it grows.

It's more than just the chain length. The most common synthetic rubbers are styrene-butadiene copolymers. Natural rubber is polyisoprene. While it is true that shorter chain synthetic polyisoprene is available, it is a much smaller part of the market than styrene-butadiene.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#147

Post by [deleted] »

swores wrote: post #129
Stinky_Lisa wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last mile can be resolved with drones and bikes. I wouldnt even be opposed to consider going back to horses.

Are horses actually environmentally friendly? I know that having a pet dog can be one of, if not the most, un-environmentally friendly things a person can do due to the amount they eat, so I could imagine horses having the same problem and not being as good as electric cars yet alone electric bikes, but I don't know anything about horses so maybe they're very efficient eaters? I do know that back before cars, places…

[deleted]

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#148

Post by avalys »

d0gbread wrote: post #121
avalys wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not driving is not a solution. The reason zoning in the US requires developments to take cars into account, is that people in the US want cars. And if someone builds a new residential or commercial development that doesn't recognize this reality, it creates problems for everyone as people have nowhere to put the cars that they definitely want to use. Yes, there are some people who live in cities and are happy to have…

Chicken and the egg. You can't really make people not want cars without better alternatives, which requires investments that aren't being made. I want a car, because I need a car. But put in a few bullet trains and offshoots, a business model for vehicles that enables access to a $100/month consumer fleet of shared vehicles so I can grab a truck, minivan, whatever as needed, and I will happily skip ownership.

This is a fantasy. In general, people don't want a shared vehicle. If they did, everyone would own a 5-year-old Toyota Camry, and not luxury pickup trucks, sports cars, Mercedes and BMWs, etc.

The idea that these people are just sheep blinded by marketing is ludicrous. You might spend $5 on a beer instead of $4 because of marketing. You buy a $60,000 new vehicle over a $15,000 used one because it's a good product that you actually want.

Post reply on HN