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

361–370 of 635 posts

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#361

Post by matthewfcarlson »

wyre wrote: post #315
avalys wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an interesting theory, but I'm not sure you can prove it. What's a way in which the USA "subsidizes" suburbs?

Roads, utilities, emergency services…

Per mile, small urban roads were millions of usd a mile (see department of transports annual report and it varies by region). Maintenance is even worse. It’s the 5th highest expense for most cities (US census survey of local and state governments 2020).

Of course the suburbs don’t make sense, you have a half mile of road out to a neighborhood and another half mile of street in the neighborhood itself. The percentage of property taxes going to the road is probably just a few percent points. With only a few hundred houses, it would take decades to raise the 1-3 million to replace the road.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#362

Post by jacobolus »

macinjosh wrote: post #351
wyre wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roads, utilities, emergency services…

That we pay for with our taxes? How much property tax does one in a high rise apartment pay? My suburban neighborhood also has a metro tax district that funds the roads sewers etc.

Initial infrastructure is often paid for with up-front cash transfers from the federal/state government and long-term loans, then the long-term maintenance is supposed to be funded by local taxes but in many cases is set up to be more expensive than the long-term available tax base, so infrastructure just starts falling apart and then either taxes go up or maintenance is put off and people left holding the bag are screwed, or external cash bailouts make up the difference.

In either case, the suburbanites (especially near the beginning of the construction cycle) and initial construction companies are getting a huge subsidy from everyone else (and from future generations) to promote an inherently unsustainable and destructive living arrangement.

It's a kind of Ponzi scheme, and like any other Ponzi scheme, at some point the music stops and then the whole system is in an extremely precarious place.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#363

Post by Symbiote »

CableNinja wrote: post #80
undersuit wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People should walk as far as they are willing to walk.

As i mentioned in my other post. Thats not far for most people. More than 1/4 mile and people will not hesitate to get the car

Are you serious? That's 400m. One lap of the athletics track. Should take about 4 minutes at walking speed.

Aren't there shopping malls in the US longer/wider than this?

I think I walk further than that between buildings to get to the canteen at lunch time. I tell people I live "really close" to a metro station and it's 380m away.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#364

Post by Kirby64 »

goalieca wrote: post #114
djaychela wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but you should be comparing like with like here. A similar sized ICE vehicle will have similar sized tyres to the Tesla.

A similar sized ICE vehicle by weight will be much larger in volume. I compare a Tesla sedan with an actual ICE sedan and not a 3 row minivan.

Comparing a Tesla sedan to common ICE sedans...

Tesla Model 3 uses 235/45R18 tires. The tires that come with the car have a treadwear of 500, so ~50k miles of use. Quite middle of the road in terms of treadwear, and you can get much stickier (and much lower life) tires such as the Pilot Sport 4S.

4 competitors for the sedan in the luxury class:

BMW 330i uses 225/45R18

Audi A3 uses 225/40R18

Lexus ES250 uses 235/45R18

Mercedes C300 uses 225/45R18

Tire size seems all nearly identical to me. Some small variance, but broadly extremely close.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#365

Post by bmitc »

ltbarcly3 wrote: post #345
bmitc wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This sentiment is just contrarianism, I think. I really don't think it is. We're thrusting ourselves into just new problems. Yes, we move away from old problems that gas-powered cars have, but we move into new problems. For one, EVs perpetuate the idea of the car, which is perhaps the most dangerous part. Then, there's all sorts of new things like building out the infrastructure required for EVs and mining the new…

> It isn't contrarianism to point out that a solution is not the solution everyone thinks it is. Literally nobody thinks that EV's will reduce microplastics. What are you even talking about? EV's have the potential to dramatically reduce our reliance on gasoline. Current EV technology is far from perfect, but do you think people will just stop having personal transportation? Do you think it's better to keep using gas…

> Literally nobody thinks that EV's will reduce microplastics. What are you even talking about?

Not that, for starters.

Is there data that proves inconclusively that electric vehicles AND the new infrastructure and mining and every other systematic thing that comes along with them and doesn't currently exist is actually (not just hopes and dreams) less impactful on the environment? Because as far as I can tell, your comment relies on that, and I haven't seen that data. I could care less about holding on to gas-guzzling cars. I would just like to understand things better before jumping headlong into a "solution" that may or may not be any better. And there are massive incentives for companies to jump into EVs, so there is a lot of conflict of interest with EVs. Can corporations and investors be trusted when they stand to make a fortune?

Again, my point is to reach an understanding. I do not currently understand why EVs are some bastion of hope when it comes to cars. The best data that I have seen does not account for disposal of batteries nor the mining, long term maintenance and upkeep and continual use of EVs, infrastructure, etc. when it comes to EVs. And if they are better, then where is the crossover point when all this is considered? Is it 10 years? 50 years?

And yes, I do think re-enforcing the car is not a good idea. You can think it's unrealistic, and sure, in the short term it probably is. But we shouldn't just throw our hands up and reach for a new "solution" that just brings new problems.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#366

Post by fnordpiglet »

seadan83 wrote: post #292
fnordpiglet wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we means society at large that requires a large portion of society if not more than a simple majority. That doesn’t exist for ending the use of automobiles. If the goal is the reduce the impact of automobiles, assumed from the thread being discussed, it’s not sufficient to help those who want to walk to walk to the grocery store. That’s a wonderful thing to do. But to reduce the impact of tire microplastics, the m…

You make some interesting points. I'm just trying to say this conversation thread is starting to talk past one another. The 'we' was referring to the full population of people and basically stated a significant subset of that 'we' are willing to entertain (what are currently non-viable) solutions. In other words, a problem exists for 100 people, and about 15 of them are willing to change their behavior that would hel…

Yeah and it’s absurd we don’t make things more accommodating. However case in point I live almost exactly 0.5 miles from a Safeway. There are bike lanes throughout my part of the city and nice sidewalks with accessible ramps. I’ve literally never seen anyone ride their bike to the store. Probably there are also hills and folks don’t want to ride uphill with groceries but it’s also just not registering as an option in most people’s mind. Nothing stops them at all. It’s just not their habit or preference. But I am glad the infra exists, just I see people use it more for pleasure than necessity.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#367

Post by Retric »

macinjosh wrote: post #353
Retric wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

American style suburbs are worse for raising a family than living in a city. Long commutes practically remove one or more parents from the equation 5 days a week. Long bus rides compromise sleep and exercise etc. All for a back yard that’s rarely used and worse in just about every way than a nice park. What they are is a cheap imitation of the wealthy enclaves near cities that only work because so few people can affo…

My superior air quality, lower crime rate, and better schools disagree with your assessment.

Don’t confuse socioeconomics for inherent advantages. Adjusted for income people live longer in cities, they are thus objectively safer.

Wealthy parts of cities have vastly better schools and less crime than the average suburbs, but the American middle class abandoned cities. Air pollution again can go either way, suburbs often have surprisingly terrible air quality made worse by long commutes.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#369

Post by V__ »

baggy_trough wrote: post #236
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is not an inherent property of cars. It is only true because we invested all our transit dollars in highways. Cars are not inherently better and roads are not free. If we invest more in public transit we can reduce our need for cars.

I'd like to know why you think cars are not inherently better as it seems very obvious that they are. That is why people overwhelmingly prefer to use them.

People prefer a lot of things, it's almost never an indicator for what is better or worse. By most metrics, cars are a worse alternative. However, if the infrastructure has already been built around cars, it's hard to change that.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#370

Post by rodgerd »

teruakohatu wrote: post #239
richjdsmith wrote: post #23

With the continued shift to EVs, petrol taxes just don't make sense as a form of taxation to pay for roads. I think we should be shifting entirely to a gross curb weight tax for all vehicles. The fourth power law states that the greater the axle load of a vehicle, the stress on the road caused by the motor vehicle increases in proportion to the fourth power of the axle load. Meaning heavier EVs cough hummer , are doi…

> With the continued shift to EVs, petrol taxes just don't make sense as a form of taxation to pay for roads. In New Zealand soon EVs will face Road User Charges, which mean they pay a per km tax as all diesel vehicles do today. The tax is based on the class of vehicle and so EVs won't be charged more than a diesel cars.

Unfortunately the RUC in New Zealand is strongly regressive, with massive subsidies for heavy vehicles.
Post reply on HN