121–130 of 320 posts
Electric vehicles are heavier, which means they must spend more brake pads to stop. But they also use regenerative breaking, which reduces pad wear. So I'm not sure if they make it worse or not.
The danger with electric vehicles is actually that the break pad is in risk of rusting since you don't use it enough
Earlier quoted context omitted.
drum breaks have the breaks enclosed so the particles won't be in the air
If you've ever worked on a vehicle with drum brakes, you would see the foolishness in your statement. Brake dust goes everywhere, whether it be drums or disc brakes. Older drum brakes were even more hazardous because the brake linings were built with asbestos, at least until the 1990s for US-made brake products. Aftermarket and foreign-made brake pads apparently still have asbestos in them. I'm not too worried about…
Engineers won't be permitted to spend any time or dollars solving this till there is a law capping particulate emissions.
Just want to point out that most electric and hybrid vehicles use regenerative braking most of the time and only use real brakes at very slow speeds or in emergencies. So it might be totally misleading to say that electric vehicles are the problem, when they are probably the solution.
Not only does regenerative braking itself reduce PM emissions, the reduced demand on friction brakes is enabling some EVs, such as the Volkswagen ID3 and ID4, to switch to drum brakes. Due to their enclosed nature, drum brakes greatly reduce PM emissions compared to disc brakes.
The bottom line is that proximity to traffic is horrible for your health and your air quality. Electric cars can help with some of the problems but don't solve all of them. The people with the least amount of money end up having to move to apartments near highways and so they often suffer the worst impacts, but I've seen very nice and expensive apartments and houses very close to (or directly on) busy streets. Noise is usually the obvious and immediate consideration, and I doubt many people are aware of the risks they expose themselves and their families to just by opening a window in the summer.
Just want to point out that most electric and hybrid vehicles use regenerative braking most of the time and only use real brakes at very slow speeds or in emergencies. So it might be totally misleading to say that electric vehicles are the problem, when they are probably the solution.
The article has weird reasoning. If we remove tailpipe emissions, which are by far the largest, then brake/tire wear emissions become visible and are next in the list to deal with. But we won't deal with the latter before the former is dealt with.
air filtration isn't expensive nor hard... last generation cleaned water, perhaps we should clean the air. start small, indoors and transportation, reduce exposure simple stuff and just gotta do it.
We can't filter our way out of this problem. If we can build cars better to reduce their harms and there are ways to place particle collectors near streets and houses to reduce the environment impacts of traffic I'm all for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well cursing in an EV is the equivalent of putting an ICE car in neutral. Modern ICE do that as well. To answer your question it still slows down due to wind resistance and friction.
If you put a modern ICE car in neutral while moving, you’ll use as much gas as you would while sitting in a parking lot idling. However if you just coast in gear with the engine braking slowing you down, a modern car will turn off the fuel to the engine, so zero gas is used.
This will come from all ground transportation sources, right? Busses, trains, trams, subways etc. Probably the heavier the vehicle the more particles are likely to be produced?
Being on or near a train platform and you can see brake dust caked on everything. Probably dust combined with grease. It's worse looking than roads.
I had some boxes stored in a storage cage in my apartment car park and after 6 months sitting there, they were all coated in a thick black dust. Since there was no wind or rain to move it around, it just settles and builds up.
Just want to point out that most electric and hybrid vehicles use regenerative braking most of the time and only use real brakes at very slow speeds or in emergencies. So it might be totally misleading to say that electric vehicles are the problem, when they are probably the solution.
The article has weird reasoning. If we remove tailpipe emissions, which are by far the largest, then brake/tire wear emissions become visible and are next in the list to deal with. But we won't deal with the latter before the former is dealt with.
im gonna need a source on your claim. heres a source that claims the opposite
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/0...
> our brakes and tires isn’t benign, either. Tests by Emissions Analytics, an engineering consulting company based in England, found tires produce about 2,000 times more particle pollution by mass than tailpipes.
Just want to point out that most electric and hybrid vehicles use regenerative braking most of the time and only use real brakes at very slow speeds or in emergencies. So it might be totally misleading to say that electric vehicles are the problem, when they are probably the solution.
Not only does regenerative braking itself reduce PM emissions, the reduced demand on friction brakes is enabling some EVs, such as the Volkswagen ID3 and ID4, to switch to drum brakes. Due to their enclosed nature, drum brakes greatly reduce PM emissions compared to disc brakes.