Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds • Hacker News Board

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

#121

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Sat, Feb 15, 2025, 5:45 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #117

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/

> I think this is missing out on the big issue These are two distinct issues. Tyre pollution is threatening the wastewater but at least in urban areas where the most pollution occurs thanks to stop'n'go can be counteracted by expanding water treatment (we have to do so anyway to get rid of pharmaceuticals). Brake dust however is a massive threat for anyone living near a highly congested road.

Water treatment is a bit late for the river environments as the rain washes pollutants into them.

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

#122

Post by oynqr » Sat, Feb 15, 2025, 5:46 PM UTC

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #39

thatcat wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can gear down in a manual transmission ICE to achieve similar reduction effects, but I doubt they will bring back manuals.

I have a newer automatic ICE and they use cylinder deactivation for engine braking on low speed coasting.

Isn't cylinder deactivation for when you are at constant speed at low throttle?

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

#123

Post by AnthonyMouse » Sat, Feb 15, 2025, 5:46 PM UTC

isx726552 wrote: post #78

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 why a move to natural latex rubber tires is necessary. Companies have experimented with them[1][2] but a world-wide switchover should be in the works. [1] https://www.continental-tires.com/about/sustainability/activ... [2] https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/04/eco-friendly-tires-brid...

"Natural" isn't really the main thing. Whether you make something synthetically or extract it from a plant doesn't tell you if it's toxic or not. There are plenty of non-toxic synthetic substances and toxic plants. And synthetic things are usually cheaper to make.

What we need is less toxic synthetics.

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

#124

Post by mschuster91 » Sat, Feb 15, 2025, 5:46 PM UTC

Moto7451 wrote: post #90

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,…

It’s also the reward of increased regulations on tailpipe emissions. We now have a new target to clean up. It’s not as if this is new, it just used to be we had lead fuel, poorly burned fuel, tire dust, asbestos in brakes, and many other problematic forms of pollution. We’re just going down the list. Also, what you’re looking at is an overweighted responsibility on people/consumers to own the solutions to pollution.…

> No matter what car you buy today it is emitting less pollution than ten, twenty, and especially thirty to fifty years ago.

Sure, but a single bus would emit way less than the 60-150 cars (yes, large buses here have a total capacity of about 150 people [1]) it replaces. And if you have a bikable city like about every city in the Netherlands is, there's zero emissions.

> Meanwhile we still burn bunker oil (the leftovers from petroleum distillation) in shipping. It’s as if we swore off doing anything better for the planet if it inconveniences a large company.

We do, but even there there is progress! In fact, the regulations on sulphur content going into effect showed that this actually had climate impacts on the scale of an ultra-large geoengineering project [2]. On top of that, bunker fuel is banned in many countries' 12-mile-zone or at the very least near ports, ships have to burn diesel there.

[1] https://infoportal.mobil.nrw/technik/bussemitkonventionellem...

[2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01442-3

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

#125

Post by mschuster91 » Sat, Feb 15, 2025, 5:47 PM UTC

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…

> And because they're not a regulated vehicle, nobody has third party insurance.

At least here in Germany, assuming it's not a tuned bike, it's covered by your regular liability insurance.

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

#126

Post by epistasis » Sat, Feb 15, 2025, 5:49 PM UTC

bluescrn wrote: post #28

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/

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,…

We are just barely beginning to investigate the harms from PM2.5 particles.

It seems like every month we discover some new and harmful effect, or that it was worse than initially estimated from smaller sample sizes, etc.

I don't think it's a conspiracy, just the way that discovery happens.

We also have a tendency to completely oversight the harm of new tech in comparison to older tech. People get super worked up about the supposedly super toxic lithium ion batteries, but have little concern for the far greater amount of mining necessary to build the frame of a car.

So it's good to have a baseline of the amount of harm done with current tech to compare to and center our reactions to these large population scale effects.

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

#127

Post by mschuster91 » Sat, Feb 15, 2025, 5:49 PM UTC

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #121

mschuster91 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this is missing out on the big issue These are two distinct issues. Tyre pollution is threatening the wastewater but at least in urban areas where the most pollution occurs thanks to stop'n'go can be counteracted by expanding water treatment (we have to do so anyway to get rid of pharmaceuticals). Brake dust however is a massive threat for anyone living near a highly congested road.

Water treatment is a bit late for the river environments as the rain washes pollutants into them.

Dunno about how the US does it, but in Germany, urban areas have the road wastewater go into the sewers so it passes treatment plants.

In rural areas tire dust isn't as much of a problem because cars there keep their speed - it's acceleration and deceleration that produce tire dust.

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

#128

Post by n8henrie » Sat, Feb 15, 2025, 5:50 PM UTC

porphyra wrote: post #120

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/

The Tesla Model 3 Long Range weighs 1823 kg. The BMW M340i xDrive weighs about 1818 kg. Seeing as these two cars are similar in size, capacity, and performance (0-60 mph in 4.2 s), it is nice to see that the electric option weighs about the same as an ICE car of similar specs.

The "0-60 mph in 4.2 s" is doing a lot of the heavy lifting in this comparison.

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

#129

Post by kazinator » Sat, Feb 15, 2025, 5:50 PM UTC

How many kilograms of brake dust does the average IC car produce in a year, versus gasoline burned?

March of Dimes Syndrome here.

We're entering the end of the gasoline car era. Anti-car activists need something else in order to continue kvetching, so it's down to tire and brake dusts, battery recycling and whatnot.

When that is solved, it will be about the harms of exterior paint, and inhaling the "new car smell".

Transportation that is not powered by one's own muscles can never be virtuous.

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

#130

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Sat, Feb 15, 2025, 5:50 PM UTC

mezzie2 wrote: post #92

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In cities such as Copenhagen, it's very common to see parents transporting small children (and a large number of pets from what I saw) using cargo-bikes. Not having universal healthcare seems like a strange argument against active travel as it's well known that active travel can drastically improve people's health and reduce the need for healthcare - it would seem more important to choose to look after your health if…

Small children and 2 weeks of groceries for a family of 4-5? For 10ish miles one way? On the low end? The healthcare point is because it means that a lot of elderly Americans have medical conditions that are unattended to, injuries that never healed properly, etc. It's common, particularly in the working class, to have your body be functionally wrecked by the time you're 55 (particularly for men). If we want the elde…

> I just find that the idea that we can just get rid of cars/that everybody who uses them just doesn't know any better overlooks a substantial amount of the population and their needs, and you need to address the needs first if you actually want to move away from the car.

I think the opposite tactic is better. Make it easier for young, fit, able-bodied people to get around without cars first and allow the increasing numbers of cyclists etc. to bolster improving the infrastructure. When you make it easier for the fit people to cycle, it also becomes easier for older/disabled people to cycle. The more people we got onto bikes, the less people we have driving and increasing congestion.

Ultimately, the U.S. has gone all-in on personal cars and designed cities around them. This pretty much excludes other forms of transport and increases the distances between homes/shops/healthcare etc.