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

Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

e360.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 465 posts

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#101

Post by MengerSponge »

jeffbee wrote: post #69
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's fake as there's plenty of reports that EVs do go through tyres quicker. A quick search brings up many articles on the phenomenon e.g. https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-unexpected-problem-with-evs-t...

There's nothing categorical about EVs that make them eat tires. The aggregate data about average EV tire life is skewed by the relative popularity of and poor choices made by Tesla.

If you include e-bikes and e-scooters as EVs, sure. If you mean cars and trucks, the F150 Lightning, the EV6, the Ioniq 5, the EX30, and every other vehicle is heavier than its ICE counterpart. The motors are inherently torquier too.

disclaimer: I drive an electric car but would sell it in a heartbeat if I could use transit or bikes to safely and efficiently get to work, the grocery, and the doctor.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#102

Post by what-the-grump »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #43
foobazgt wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is fake news. The backing study for this claim did all sorts of wonky unrealistic testing to come to this conclusion. If you own an EV, you viscerally know it's BS given that you're the one paying for the actual tire replacements on your real-world driven vehicle.

I don't think it's fake as there's plenty of reports that EVs do go through tyres quicker. A quick search brings up many articles on the phenomenon e.g. https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-unexpected-problem-with-evs-t...

You have a 4500+ lb car with 0-60 acceleration of 2.x to 4.x seconds and crazy torque, if you drive EVs like a teenager you will eat your tires after 10-12k miles.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#103

Post by hansvm »

foobazgt wrote: post #17
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #7

I think this is missing out on the big issue - tyre pollution which contains really nasty chemicals that inevitably get washed into rivers and waterways. Also, car-shaped EVs often use regenerative braking which will reduce the amount of brake dust pollution, but with their increased weight and powerful torque, they produce a lot more tyre pollution than ICE vehicles. https://earth.org/tyre-pollution/

This is fake news. The backing study for this claim did all sorts of wonky unrealistic testing to come to this conclusion. If you own an EV, you viscerally know it's BS given that you're the one paying for the actual tire replacements on your real-world driven vehicle.

Maybe, but the average Tesla tire lasts half as long as my tires typically do, and the extra weight from the battery combined with the high onset torque are likely culprits (the former of which you can't fix with current battery technology when comparing otherwise apples-to-apples ICEs vs EVs if the EVs have non-negligible range, and the latter of which would require artificial limiting on the electric motor (which companies don't want to do because it's a selling point)).

For some rough numbers under normal/factory configurations to consider:

- A semi truck converts around 0.9 milliliters of tire to dust per kilometer.

- A Tesla Model Y clocks in at 0.3 ml/km

- A Honda Fit clocks in at 0.1 ml/km

Even with an overestimate of semis being responsible for 10% of total miles driven in the US, if everyone drove a Model Y then passenger cars would be responsible for 3x more tire dust than semis, and if everyone drove a Honda Fit then you'd be down to 1x.

Are there bigger concerns out there? Probably. Is the solution to bias toward ICE instead of EV? Probably not. It's not worth burying our heads in the sand when making those decisions though.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#104

Post by philjohn »

amazingamazing wrote: post #27
digdugdirk wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a great idea. And since it'll be limited to in town use, something narrower might be useful - maybe give it two wheels instead of four? That'd be huge for reducing weight and increasing range. And for suitable geographic areas, it might even be possible to make one light enough that it could be powered by the rider, no external power source required! Then, with the reduction in width required for these futuris…

You show me one of these that can be ridden [comfortably] in 2 degrees Fahrenheit with snow and ice everywhere and you have my money!

Meanwhile light city EV's exists - such as the Volkswagen e-Up. Much more fun to drive than it has any right to be.

Hoping that the ID.1 will be half as good, if it ever sees the light of day.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#105

Post by jeffbee »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #91
jeffbee wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing categorical about EVs that make them eat tires. The aggregate data about average EV tire life is skewed by the relative popularity of and poor choices made by Tesla.

> There's nothing categorical about EVs that make them eat tires Apart from the increased weight and torque

Torque and pedal response are just choices made in software. The weight is not as important, given the example of the Bolt EUV that weighs ~1700kg and has normal tire life.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#106

Post by dijit »

light_hue_1 wrote: post #96
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also in the UK and I certainly subscribe to r/fuckcars as I'm a keen cyclist and never got around to learning to drive. I find it annoying that media outlets (BBC - I'm looking mainly at you!) will refer to EVs as being car-shaped and then, as you said, demonise e-bikes by lumping them in with the illegal e-motorbikes (see the recent Panorama program for a clear case of not making clear the distinction between e-moto…

I cycled for like 30 years before we had kids and needed a car. The ebikes that the post refers to are a menace and should be banned. Both as a cyclist and a driver. I've almost been plowed over by some idiot sitting on what should be a motorcycle but riding on the bike path. And I've almost had my kids run over. Also, as a driver you just don't expect someone to be going so crazy fast in the bike lane. I've had peop…

I find it hard to take the debate seriously because the default stance of everyone against electric 2-wheelers is not manual bikes, its cars.

And, cars are multiple orders of magnitude more dangerous than anything on 2-wheels.

I’m sure you’re right that theres room for improvement, but instead of building infrastructure (we literally shaped cities for cars after all)- we would rather ensure that cars are incumbent forever despite the harm we see them causing.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#107

Post by jeffbee »

MengerSponge wrote: post #101
jeffbee wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing categorical about EVs that make them eat tires. The aggregate data about average EV tire life is skewed by the relative popularity of and poor choices made by Tesla.

If you include e-bikes and e-scooters as EVs, sure. If you mean cars and trucks, the F150 Lightning, the EV6, the Ioniq 5, the EX30, and every other vehicle is heavier than its ICE counterpart. The motors are inherently torquier too. disclaimer: I drive an electric car but would sell it in a heartbeat if I could use transit or bikes to safely and efficiently get to work, the grocery, and the doctor.

They aren't inherently torquier. That's a design point.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#108

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

oliwarner wrote: post #71
bluescrn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting that nobody every talked about tyre/brake dust until it became clear that cars aren't going away as we phase out fossil fuels, they're just going electric. Is this a serious environmental concern compared to the climate/emissions issue, or just the 'r/fuckcars mentality'? Meanwhile, here in the UK, one of the more interesting alternatives - personal light EVs (ebikes/scooters) are being utterly demonized,…

Firstly, this is another positive for EVs. They do have brakes but most have regenerative braking too, which is clean. Secondly, ebikes are rampantly misused in pedestrian areas, often used without helmets, often upclocked, many used for delivering, or kids. And because they're not a regulated vehicle, nobody has third party insurance. There are legal ebikes and nobody has any more of a problem with them than normal…

However, even illegal e-bikes (or unregistered e-motorbikes to be more accurate) are preferable in my view to the problems associated with car traffic. At least when an e-bike rider does something stupid and crashes, they will typically end up hurting themselves which can be an important learning moment. Car drivers don't have the same "skin-in-the-game" to ensure that they're paying attention.

It's harm reduction - let's encourage the most irresponsible car drivers to be irresponsible e-bike (legal or not) riders and we should end up with far less congestion, pollution and collisions.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#109

Post by homebrewer »

marcosdumay wrote: post #36
bluescrn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting that nobody every talked about tyre/brake dust until it became clear that cars aren't going away as we phase out fossil fuels, they're just going electric. Is this a serious environmental concern compared to the climate/emissions issue, or just the 'r/fuckcars mentality'? Meanwhile, here in the UK, one of the more interesting alternatives - personal light EVs (ebikes/scooters) are being utterly demonized,…

The exhaust used to be really nasty until just a little while ago. Nobody was focusing on the less harmful emissions. Now we mostly fixed it, so it's time to look at the other stuff.

> Now we mostly fixed it

Only in developed countries. The age of a typical car in my region is over 15 years. Basically, most of what you bought in 2005-2010, drove for a decade or more, and then sold for scrap eventually ends up in countries like mine. Moreover, most people take catalytic converters off their cars and sell them for $80-100 for platinum recycling.

I think most "developing" countries have the same problem. So the world at large hasn't really solved it and won't solve it any time soon.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#110

Post by AnthonyMouse »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #60
bluescrn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting that nobody every talked about tyre/brake dust until it became clear that cars aren't going away as we phase out fossil fuels, they're just going electric. Is this a serious environmental concern compared to the climate/emissions issue, or just the 'r/fuckcars mentality'? Meanwhile, here in the UK, one of the more interesting alternatives - personal light EVs (ebikes/scooters) are being utterly demonized,…

Also in the UK and I certainly subscribe to r/fuckcars as I'm a keen cyclist and never got around to learning to drive. I find it annoying that media outlets (BBC - I'm looking mainly at you!) will refer to EVs as being car-shaped and then, as you said, demonise e-bikes by lumping them in with the illegal e-motorbikes (see the recent Panorama program for a clear case of not making clear the distinction between e-moto…

> However, if we get as many people to use e-bikes or e-scooters, then the size and weight issues pretty much disappear.

I still don't understand how they expect to solve the occupant safety issue though. Cars travel at high speeds but have crumple zones and airbags. E-bikes travel at the same speeds but if you crash, you die. And 2-wheeled vehicles are easier to crash.

The fatality rate for motorcycles is astonishingly bad and changing the propulsion type wouldn't really affect that.

Post reply on HN