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

Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 595 posts

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#151

Post by afthonos »

EasyMark wrote: post #117
epolanski wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it's one of the biggest promoters of inequality. I am an European who studied at OSU in Columbus for a semester and it was absurd to me how on one side there was lots of work downtown, yet you could live 20 miles of it and it would take you two hours by public transport to get there, an odyssey. People without a car, insurance, poorer parts of the society were cut off from the job market for not having a way to c…

Suburbs are fine. We are in 2025, not 1925, there is no reason why work from home isn't an option for information workers and others who don't need to be physically on premises. You are completely ignoring how much that cuts down on traffic and would lower the cost of real estate, so more people who aren't millionaires could live downtown. We also have electric cars that have basically zero emissions, there is a tech…

I understand a large amount of car pollution these days is due to the tires.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#152

Post by flomo »

chadd wrote: post #106
Saline9515 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that, among casualties, you create an environment that is hostile for families and disabled people.

i'm not sure this is true, for instance NYC ranks as the second most disabled-friendly city https://www.amny.com/lifestyle/new-york-city-ranks-2nd-in-a-...

Surprising, considering the NYC subway has been ignoring the ADA as much as possible.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#153

Post by Krssst »

carlosjobim wrote: post #121
usrusr wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lighter cars, really, that's it. Make vehicles that match the transportation case in question instead of palaces on wheels that carry battery sized for solving some once in a year use case. And/or make them go slower.

It would be incredible if somebody invented a light car, that would transport one or two people and some groceries. Maybe with two wheels instead of four to take up less space. Hmmm why has nobody invented this?

While bicycles are quite convenient for commuting, I am not sure if there is a way for transporting groceries for an entire week for multiple people. Is there such a way? The only solution I see is doing groceries every day.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#154

Post by isametry »

flomo wrote: post #81
SequoiaHope wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a time in between, where electric streetcars (trains) were a common mode of transport. But those got torn up for cars. That’s a real tragedy in hindsight.

That's the myth. Streetcars were actually torn up because busses were much cheaper, there was no conspiracy. The streetcars were also old and cold and ppl hated them. (I lived in a streetcar part of SF, and loved it, fwiw. But the only reason it's still there is a tunnel.)

Trains are expensive upfront, which might favor buses when expanding into new areas. But if the infrastructure is already there, a train line will always be more economical in the long run than the equivalent bus line.

So ripping out existing serviceable train tracks is stupid (or alternatively: evil) if you think in the long term.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#155

Post by andrepd »

ethagknight wrote: post #34
10-1-100 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also worth noting that with modern emissions standards (and transition to EVs), over 50% of handful particulates come from tires, brakes, road surface wear, and resuspended dust: https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/non-exhaust-particulate... I don't think there's any healthy level of private cars coexisting with humans in a city, without even considering the more immediate harms from crashes, etc.

I flipped through the summary of that report, and I would think there is almost surely no way this is true, unless focusing on worst case assumptions like aggressive driving styles and very poorly maintained vehicles. Your conclusion that there is not “any healthy level of private cars coexisting” is heavy handed. There is a balance, but I suspect it’s more of a jealousy/equality issue. Heavily taxed and high quality…

It's not "jealousy"... I've lived in a city where having a car was virtually mandatory, and I've lived in a city where you could safely bike everywhere. There's NO QUESTION which one I prefer.

Even my most reactionary and car-loving extended family members had this opinion when they visited :)

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#156

Post by bslalwn »

epolanski wrote: post #77
grg0 wrote: post #31

Cars in cities, let alone designing cities around cars, is one of the greatest tragedies of modern life.

And it's one of the biggest promoters of inequality. I am an European who studied at OSU in Columbus for a semester and it was absurd to me how on one side there was lots of work downtown, yet you could live 20 miles of it and it would take you two hours by public transport to get there, an odyssey. People without a car, insurance, poorer parts of the society were cut off from the job market for not having a way to c…

[flagged]

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#157

Post by Saline9515 »

masklinn wrote: post #134
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The improvement in air quality is overwhelmingly a result of banning diesel cars. It is, of course, possible to ban diesel cars rather than all cars. The people who live in the city don't want cars because it's the people who can't afford to live in the city who need them to get there.

> it's the people who can't afford to live in the city who need them to get there. What are you talking about. Paris's public transport reaches out 60km away from the city, and that's not including mainline trains (including high speed). The people who can't afford to live in the city have taken public transport to get there for 50 years.

A lot of economic activity requires cars. Delivery, workers coming with equipment, waste management, and so on. Every construction worker in Paris will tell you that it's very difficult to work there, and that they have doubled their prices as a result.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#158

Post by AnthonyMouse »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #70
trollbridge wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But spews forth more rubber (and plastic, since that's what tyres are made from these days), which is an ongoing problem for Tesla EVs when owners discover their tyres don't last nearly as long because they're transmitting power both when starting and stopping, not just when starting.

I don’t understand this concept. I would expect an ICE and an EV vehicle with the same weight, speed, deceleration, tires, etc to have the same wear on tires. The difference being the energy to stop an ICE being transferred to the brake pads and rotors, rather than recharging the EV’s battery. What am I missing? Why wouldn’t the tires experience the same forces in both scenarios?

> I don’t understand this concept.

It's because it's wrong. If you decelerate the same vehicle at the same rate, the tires can't even tell whether the deceleration is from regenerative braking or friction braking, so the only difference is less brake dust with regenerative braking.

If anything it's the opposite because regenerative braking is more effective when braking is gradual, giving the driver a direct convenience and financial incentive to brake less aggressively (better range, buy less gas or charging), which generates less tire wear.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#159

Post by fhackenberger »

Saline9515 wrote: post #124
microtonal wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could just make a city car-free. There are so many benefits besides fewer particles in the air. People can walk and cycle safely. Kids can play in the streets. The atmosphere is so much nicer, since people are not isolated by walls around them. I have lived in a city with a (nearly) car-free city center (+ separate bike lines for many roads outside the center) for most of my adult life [1] and it is just glori…

Kids can't play in streets as now the new predators are cyclists who don't slow down or get down of their bikes. Besides, cars are a staple for families, and hardly substituable. Good luck doing groceries for 6 without one.

Cargo bike?

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#160

Post by gruturo »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #70
trollbridge wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But spews forth more rubber (and plastic, since that's what tyres are made from these days), which is an ongoing problem for Tesla EVs when owners discover their tyres don't last nearly as long because they're transmitting power both when starting and stopping, not just when starting.

I don’t understand this concept. I would expect an ICE and an EV vehicle with the same weight, speed, deceleration, tires, etc to have the same wear on tires. The difference being the energy to stop an ICE being transferred to the brake pads and rotors, rather than recharging the EV’s battery. What am I missing? Why wouldn’t the tires experience the same forces in both scenarios?

> I don’t understand this concept.

Because it's completely wrong. The tires indeed experience the same force and don't care where the energy is dumped. As other posters wrote, the increased tire pollution from EVs is because they tend to be heavier, and because their considerable extra torque is likely to be (ab)used by their drivers. Yours truly included, guilty as charged, though I do practice restraint... often.

Post reply on HN