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

341–350 of 465 posts

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

#341

Post by benlivengood »

Schiendelman wrote: post #307
Scoundreller wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I put these EV specific tires on my ICE to get super-duper tread life? (and have the tire companies been conspiring to make tires disposable?)

Yes, and yes. Though with a lower mass vehicle you may have reduced grip.

Grip is proportional to downforce times the coefficients of friction. Since downforce comes mostly from vehicle weight the maximum available acceleration/deceleration (grip) is nearly identical across lighter and heavier vehicles for a given tire compound and tread pattern.

The complexity comes from things like sidewall stiffness (controls available grip near the lateral limit of traction, must be designed for vehicle mass), suspension geometry (tire camber affects maximum grip), tire width (affects contact patch size relative to mass of the vehicle, tire pressure, camber, and sidewall stiffness), and suspension spring rate and dampening (wheel hop, changing camber angle from body roll).

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

#342

Post by WillPostForFood »

aaron_m04 wrote: post #254
Scoundreller wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EVs can be pretty bad for tire wear, not just due to vehicle weight, but the amount of torque available (and consistently available) that leaves most ICE vehicles in the dust. Depends on driving style of course

If you have an EV and you care about health and the environment, use regenerative braking as much as humanly possible. Hint: driving fast or tailgating both increase the odds you'll have to use the friction brakes.

The comment you replied to mentioned EV tire wear, not brake dust. The heavy weight of EVs due to the batteries is always going to cause more tire pollution.

E.g., Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs, which compares to the regular F-150's curb weight that ranges from anywhere between 4,021 lbs and 5,014 lbs. The Rivian R1T is 7,148 lbs.

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

#343

Post by lightedman »

superjan wrote: post #300
dehrmann wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always assumed EVs use regenerative braking as much as possible on their own.

They do. But if you brake too agressively, they switch to friction brakes. It pays off to avoid this: more mileage, marginally lower charging expense, lower cost on brake maintenance and fewer complaints from passengers.

"It pays off to avoid this: more mileage, marginally lower charging expense, lower cost on brake maintenance and fewer complaints from passengers."

Regen braking wears the hell out of your battery. That few hundred you saved on brake changes just cost you a tens of thousands of dollars on a premature battery replacement.

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

#344

Post by lightedman »

djaychela wrote: post #33

> with their increased weight and powerful torque, they produce a lot more tyre pollution than ICE vehicles. This has been shown not to be true in a number of studies.

It is absolutely true when you add in the road wear and particulate matter from that caused by heavier EVs.

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

#345

Post by kiba »

ghaff wrote: post #310
Gibbon1 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a note. If the manufacturers can get solid state batteries to the point where they are economic then EV's will be as heavy or perhaps lighter than gas cars. Actually a 50% increase in energy density is enough. And solid state batteries have twice the energy density. So likely lighter. Jevons paradox says cheap EV's are maybe not so great. Consider if a cheap car cost a $100k most people wouldn't own cars. They'd…

Many people live in locations where walking, the bus, or subway are never going to be practical and/or do regular activities that need personal transportation. If a car cost $100K I'd almost certainly still own one.

These locations are probably not financially sustainable. I would also say it's not impossible to make them urban friendly.

For example, I think of stroad as opportunities to implement public transportation by getting of a lane or two. It is also easier to add bike lanes since you aren't constrained by how wide the streets are.

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

#346

Post by Symbiote »

iterateoften wrote: post #12

Having lived next to a semi-main street through a smallish California coastal city without much rain it is pretty eye opening how much black dirt and junk just coat everything next to the road. Walk down the street and touch a bush or any plant leaf and get a nice black hand in the process. The plants are covered, parked cars get covered and the inside of my apartment was covered. It wasn’t until I moved out that I s…

I once lived in a building between a very busy railway line (mixture of electric and diesel trains, passengers and freight) and an average road (cars and one bus route).

The windows facing the railway would get coated in a black grit. Slightly oily particles, just sticky enough to stick to the glass.

The windows facing the road would get coated in a dark brown slime.

According to the air quality maps of the city, the road is slightly more polluting than the railway, although the railway is carrying 100,000 passengers a day.

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

#347

Post by dzhiurgis »

dehrmann wrote: post #291
aaron_m04 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have an EV and you care about health and the environment, use regenerative braking as much as humanly possible. Hint: driving fast or tailgating both increase the odds you'll have to use the friction brakes.

I always assumed EVs use regenerative braking as much as possible on their own.

Most don’t. Not all have heatpumps either. In fact anything outside Tesla is still garbage.

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

#348

Post by dzhiurgis »

lightedman wrote: post #343
superjan wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do. But if you brake too agressively, they switch to friction brakes. It pays off to avoid this: more mileage, marginally lower charging expense, lower cost on brake maintenance and fewer complaints from passengers.

"It pays off to avoid this: more mileage, marginally lower charging expense, lower cost on brake maintenance and fewer complaints from passengers." Regen braking wears the hell out of your battery. That few hundred you saved on brake changes just cost you a tens of thousands of dollars on a premature battery replacement.

Source for your ridiculous claim?

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

#349

Post by voidfunc »

iterateoften wrote: post #12

Having lived next to a semi-main street through a smallish California coastal city without much rain it is pretty eye opening how much black dirt and junk just coat everything next to the road. Walk down the street and touch a bush or any plant leaf and get a nice black hand in the process. The plants are covered, parked cars get covered and the inside of my apartment was covered. It wasn’t until I moved out that I s…

I used to live on a major three lane one direction artery in the city and was right at the intersection so cars constantly braking and idling. So much black dust on everything.

I used to joke someday I was going to be diagnosed with terminal lung cancer and the Doctor would ask me how many packs a day I smoked and I'd tell him none and he wouldn't believe me.

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

#350

Post by dzhiurgis »

jgalt212 wrote: post #329
aaron_m04 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have an EV and you care about health and the environment, use regenerative braking as much as humanly possible. Hint: driving fast or tailgating both increase the odds you'll have to use the friction brakes.

The problem is that not all cars correctly illuminate the brake lights when regenerative braking is in effect.

This is why Tesla’s are best selling EVs. Only cynics and idiots buy anything else. Either way I am deeply sorry for them.
Post reply on HN