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

521–530 of 635 posts

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#521

Post by margalabargala »

michaelteter wrote: post #506
crazygringo wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the solution is natural rubber, which costs slight more than synthetic rubber but lasts longer. So its better for consumers, cheaper all around, and 1,000x better for the environment Is it? I'm Googling but can't find any evidence for that. Natural rubber tires still produce tons of dust, I can't find any reference to it being less harmful in our lungs, and even natural tire rubber seems to biodegrade on the order…

> I'm Googling but can't find any evidence for that. I'm sorry, but the parent poster said they have been studying in this domain for 4+ years (including PhD research), and you present doubt because your Google searches are unconvincing? What would it take to convince you? You do realize that what you find on the first 10 pages of Google (or other) search engines could be junk or intentionally targeted misinformation…

A careful reading will reveal that the parent poster merely said they spent 4 years doing PhD research, and during that time, also indirectly looked at things somewhat related to tire research.

I don't know how much time you've spent in academia, but when I wrote my thesis, there were a couple "indirect" things like that that I could sound knowledgeable on but really knew no more about than someone could learn in an hour of internet reading if they really tried.

A source is what it would take to convince me, not an internet commenter claiming to have googled something during their school years.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#522

Post by hgomersall »

baggy_trough wrote: post #423
hgomersall wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not an externality. That's what you pay for.

Other people, not just you, also benefit from your increase in flexibility.

Do they? I guess occasionally my family and a few friends benefit when we can meet somewhere they haven't bothered to support with proper public transport. I'm not sure I'd class that as an externality.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#523

Post by teo_zero »

ehnto wrote: post #445
wizofaus wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would think having a vehicle be entirely electric must allow more options in terms of car body shape and even tyre shape/material that could possible reduce noise (and particulate) pollution even further. And certainly if we could reduce the vehicle weight (I gather the current generation of EVs typically weigh 25%+ more than their ICE equivalents - and cars have generally been getting heavier over the last couple…

I have no trouble hearing EVs approaching, they sound identical to modern ICE, which is to say 90% road noise. Some ICE cars are noisier by choice of course but modern commuter cars are very quiet at the exhaust typically, the road noise is the dominant noise. I have cars driving past me at about 50kph right now, I am barely hearing the engine for about 3 seconds or less as it passes, and the road noise continues to…

Driving both a gasoline car and an EV, I can surely tell you that pedestrians get out of the way when I approach with the former much more often than with the latter. So they are no identical. Of course where I live there's no law-mandated minimum noise level for EVs.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#524

Post by wizofaus »

wizofaus wrote: post #455
geraldwhen wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US public transit is ruled by homeless and criminals. Constant stabbing, sexual assault, robbery, and stalking. I will not take my kids on any transit where they might be assaulted by a naked homeless man. America will never have safe public transit because it lacks the will to handle the mentally ill and addicts.

If the city you live in has been entirely designed around private motor vehicles and lacks any decent transit network (LA being the obvious example), no amount of investment into helping the mentally ill and drug addicts is going to make transit an attractive option for more than a tiny percentage of the population. Thankfully in Australia's biggest cities our public transport systems are generally clean and safe to…

(Ooh, I actually just looked it up - you are actually allowed to take dogs on trains here, though they're supposed to be muzzled. Never seen anyone do so though, and I'm quite sure they wouldn't be allowed on buses).

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#525

Post by adrianN »

somerandomqaguy wrote: post #508
adrianN wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EVs are significantly less noisy on residential streets though. You know, where people live.

Only below 18mph or 30kph. > As required by the PSEA, (1) this rule proposes to establish FMVSS No.141, Minimum Sound Requirements for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles, which would require [quiet vehicles] to produce sounds meeting the requirements of this standard. This proposed standard applies to EVs and to those HVs that are capable of propulsion in any forward or reverse gear without the vehicle's ICE operating. The…

In residential areas 30 is the usual speed limit where I live.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#526

Post by ramblenode »

yokem55 wrote: post #383
wizofaus wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd only add "...because they're incredibly useful, AND government policy has consistently favoured such a mode of transport over all other alternatives". The amount spent by governments on maintaining road infrastructure dwarfs all other transport spending, the amount of land dedicated to parking and driving space is mindboggling, and of course the amount spent on ensuring the global oil industry has been able to re…

You aren't wrong that government support of automotive transport is immense. But that government support comes from decades of popular electoral support for those policies from all across of the political spectrum. Why? Because cars give people more convenient and independent transportation then just about any other mode. And people push their politicians and representatives to support that kind of transportation. If…

> Why? Because cars give people more convenient and independent transportation then just about any other mode.

This is kind of a chicken and egg problem.

The value of a car is proportional to the extent of the road network. There is no value (for most cars) in isolation.

The original push for government investment in car-friendly infrastructure and highways was from industrialists, technocrats, and military minds. It was top-down planning, not bottom-up. After those major infrastructure investments (and divestments from commuter rail), the car was an obvious choice. Everything after that was self-reinforcing: more cars -> more roads -> more cars -> more roads. Of course if you already own a car then it is a sunk cost and you will prefer the government spend more on car infrastructure to benefit you, further perpetuating the investment cycle.

If the initial circumstances had been different (maybe progress in electrification proceeded a little faster and oil refining a little slower) then public transit and urban planning might have developed differently and the car would not be as important as it is now (practically a necessity in most of the US).

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#527

Post by matsemann »

jayd16 wrote: post #304
badtension wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why so many people are cautious about "EVs to save us all", to put it mildly. We are so focused on climate change and greenhouse gases that we do not see a lot of other issues and may exacerbate some of them in the process of decarbonisation.

This sentiment is just contrarianism, I think. I've lived in Los Angeles my whole life and the difference that clean air standards make is obvious. The black dust isn't just tire and brake dust. It's also soot and it used to be much much worse. Nothing is a silver bullet but I'll be much happier when we're done with ICE noise and exhaust.

The problem is that you get what you give incentives for.

Right now, there's a big push to move to EVs. However, in the long run you might end up with more cars total. As the old cars aren't going away for a while. So you're kinda pushing a even heavier car dependence on society. All for a small net gain of reducing a few ICE vehicles.

If the same subsidies were also applied to (electric) bikes, public transit etc it would instead actually shift behavior.

EVs aren't saving society. They're saving the car industry.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#528

Post by matsemann »

aperson_hello wrote: post #376
badtension wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why so many people are cautious about "EVs to save us all", to put it mildly. We are so focused on climate change and greenhouse gases that we do not see a lot of other issues and may exacerbate some of them in the process of decarbonisation.

Decarbonization will have negative externalities. Yes, even environmental ones. I'd argue that those externalities are necessary and delay to mitigate them is going to be worse than fixing them later.

The point is that reducing car usage / dependency would solve both. Just switching to EVs doesn't really solve that much, except it saves the car industry.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#529

Post by matsemann »

michaelteter wrote: post #482
badtension wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why so many people are cautious about "EVs to save us all", to put it mildly. We are so focused on climate change and greenhouse gases that we do not see a lot of other issues and may exacerbate some of them in the process of decarbonisation.

> That's why so many people are cautious about "EVs to save us all" Certainly no, that's not why people are "cautious". They are hesitant about EVs because they fear running out of "gas" mid-trip. Most people don't give a shit about anything except their plans and needs (and not necessarily unreasonbly so). You can just look around at what kinds of cars most people purchase to reason what their priorities are (or are…

Range anxiety was solved years ago. I don't know of anyone with an EV (which is most car owners here in Norway) that actually feel this is a problem. You can charge at basically every gas station in the country, and new cars have 400km ++ range.

Re: Tire dust makes up the majority of ocean microplastics

#530

Post by throwaway5959 »

dublin wrote: post #414
jayd16 wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sentiment is just contrarianism, I think. I've lived in Los Angeles my whole life and the difference that clean air standards make is obvious. The black dust isn't just tire and brake dust. It's also soot and it used to be much much worse. Nothing is a silver bullet but I'll be much happier when we're done with ICE noise and exhaust.

Due to their vastly greater mass and torque, EVs produce far more tire pollution than ICE vehicles do. In addition to that, tire dust is a far larger part of the overall pollution from operating a car than even the emissions from an ICE car. "Research done by UK-based independent testing company Emissions Analytics showed that used tyres produce 36 milligrams of particles each kilometre, which is nearly 2,000 times h…

Well, there are no emissions from an EV, so obviously the tire pollution will be larger than the nonexistent tailpipe emissions. I’m surprised this has to be stated.
Post reply on HN