Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic • Hacker News Board

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#241

Post by Reason077 » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 8:01 PM UTC

domoritz wrote: post #111

bornfreddy wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One would also expect that EVs wouldn't emit that many particles from brakes since the brakes typically wear much more slowly than with ICE cars.

But they are heavier. Not saying it offsets the effect but it's just not straight forward to assume either way.

EVs have very low brake wear because you simply aren’t using the friction brakes at all most of the time.

A lot of EVs even have smart “blended” brake pedals that preferentially apply regen braking when you press the pedal. Only in particularly hard stops will the friction brakes get used.

An easy way to test/observe this is simply to check for wear on the brake pads of EVs compared to combustion vehicles of similar mileage.

Tires, on the other hand, do tend to wear out quicker in an EV. Partly due to weight and also due to higher performance/acceleration compared to combustion models.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#242

Post by com » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 8:01 PM UTC

Saline9515 wrote: post #228

com wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But those cars, as has been explained to you, don’t do nearly as many trips per year. Mobility in families is actually higher, since each individual has sturdy legs, and highly likely, a bike after they’re about 5 years old. Kids often travel to school, after school events etc on foot, bike or public transport, not dependent as in many car-centric places on parents and their cars. Grandma is as likely to bike over fo…

Yes, but they still own them. In Paris, and many commenters here argue that you shouldn't own one.

That’s certainly not being posited in this particular thread.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#243

Post by const_cast » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 8:02 PM UTC

bslalwn wrote: post #226

const_cast wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The prices of cars have “skyrocketed” because the price is now closer to what they actually cost. Meaning, less is being externalized. Cars are inequality-creators because the drivers offload the cost to everyone, including those who don’t drive. Car centric decisions, air pollution, interstates and freeways, parking lots. It’s very much akin to tobacco. Tobacco used to be cheap - when the tobacco wouldn’t pay for yo…

>The prices of cars have “skyrocketed” because the price is now closer to what they actually cost. Meaning, less is being externalized. This is false. There are no “externalities” that are now getting paid. You don’t pay for the right to drive upfront, you already have a permit for that, and that permit is what pays for road maintenance, etc. Maybe the current price is not fair, but that permit hasn’t increased in pr…

> Which wasn't a problem when everybody could afford to drive before Europe ruined everything.

It was still a problem, because a lot of those people died or had reduced quality of life. The reality is driving is very dangerous. In the US, it's the primary cause of death for many age groups.

And the pollution kills. And it kills pedestrians. And car-dependence is a lot like heroin. You depend on cars, so you build things further, so you must drive more. It's a self-eating beast.

Once cars started becoming less polluting and less deadly, i.e. _less cost was externalized_, they got more expensive.

If you truly think Europe is "ruined" because morbidly-obese people aren't puttering around in stinky automobiles for 2-3 hours a day, then I don't know what to tell you. To me, it's nice to have beautiful cities were people can walk. It's nice to go to work and not have a sudden urge to kill yourself.

These people can always move to the Land of the Free, of course. Suburban concrete hellscape after suburban concrete hellscape. I'm referring to the US, of course. The land of varicose veins, fatty liver disease, suicide and smog. Ah, beautiful.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#244

Post by kgwgk » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 8:02 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #15

it’s always shocked me how diesel reliant Europe is, smells absolutely terrible coming from the states

There are many more gasoline cars than diesel cars in the European Union. The latter are used more though and heavy vehicles are also diesel so there is a higher consumption of diesel than gasoline.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#245

Post by goatlover » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 8:03 PM UTC

const_cast wrote: post #212

4ndrewl wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, that is mostly how it happens. Wars/riots and strikes are the only proven mechanism for effecting systemic change to power structures. It's how you got most of your freedoms.

I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, it’s literally, objectively true. The only reason Carnegie built 1500 public libraries is because he knew otherwise there was a good chance some vigilantes would take things into their own hands and he and his family would hang. Yes, it sucks that the only way to reach the rich and powerful is to harm women, children and property. But at least the rich and powerful of old kn…

> Yes, it sucks that the only way to reach the rich and powerful is to harm women, children

I would consider that evil, much as I want the current administration and it's allies to have some healthy respect (and thus restraint) for the power of the people.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#246

Post by rangestransform » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 8:03 PM UTC

netsharc wrote: post #62

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.

Huh, imagine EVs that have removable add-on batteries that you'd only plug in for the longer trips.. Like the Thinkpads with the "bigger battery" humps: https://sm.pcmag.com/t/pcmag_ap/photo/l/lenovo-thi/lenovo-th...

This is a stupid idea because you’d have to make fasteners and high voltage interfaces that can survive an order of magnitude more cycles than they have to for a fixed pack. It would also be significantly more difficult to use the pack as a stressed member of the car structure. It’s better to just have less batteries and use them more efficiently through weight savings.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#247

Post by epolanski » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 8:04 PM UTC

FredPret wrote: post #97

epolanski wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived in downtown Rome, Italy. By far the biggest pollution you get in your house, it's...dust from brakes. It's a tragedy. Not saying diesel ain't bad, but even now that diesels have been largely banned or reduced to euro 6, it has changed nothing about brake dust. My flat would fill with it in a single day. It's everywhere. And I lived on a third floor, not even at street level.

How do you know the dust was specifically brake dust?

Good point.

I'm quite sure it was brake dust because during COVID 19 lockdowns everything was the same (heating etc) but streets were void of cars.

Then I've read some scientific article about brake with pics and it looked exactly as what I got inside my house.

I can't conclude 100% it was it (or just it), but it seems to be the most probable cause along tires.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#248

Post by rangestransform » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 8:06 PM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #146

thehappypm wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“They weigh more” is something I kinda have a problem with. People act like EVs are these behemoths, but your typical EV is hardly an outlier. The Tesla Model 3, for example, weighs as much as a Honda CRV. Yes, that’s a different car class; but nobody looks at a CRV and complains about its weight and the environmental impact of that weight on air quality nearly the same way.

You don't even have to go to a different class. A Model 3 weighs about as much as a BMW 3 series and both weigh slightly less than the average new car.

This is as much of a criticism of bmw as a compliment to Tesla, the new M5 weighs more than a similarly fast lucid air

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#249

Post by const_cast » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 8:06 PM UTC

goatlover wrote: post #245

const_cast wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, it’s literally, objectively true. The only reason Carnegie built 1500 public libraries is because he knew otherwise there was a good chance some vigilantes would take things into their own hands and he and his family would hang. Yes, it sucks that the only way to reach the rich and powerful is to harm women, children and property. But at least the rich and powerful of old kn…

> Yes, it sucks that the only way to reach the rich and powerful is to harm women, children I would consider that evil, much as I want the current administration and it's allies to have some healthy respect (and thus restraint) for the power of the people.

Of course it's evil, it's just that historically that's what we've done and historically that's what effective.

It's largely good that we, as a people, have become more civilized and don't resort to that. The unexpected downside of that, though, is that we are much more susceptible to being exploited. It's a sort of naivety trade-off.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#250

Post by cycomanic » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 8:07 PM UTC

flomo wrote: post #199

skort wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen this "car free utopia" idea dismissed as an idea by and for "elites" (see Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy's comments on people who ride the subway in NYC) plenty of times as a tactic to avoid doing anything about reducing dependence on cars. It's quite a counterproductive argument in my opinion. Even if there are well paid tech workers who are able to enjoy a "car-free lifestyle", why should it end ther…

Because the truth is nobody has any real idea how to retrofit the last 70 years of American suburbia so that mass transit is actually effective and useful for people. "Transit-oriented development" really only helps downtown workers and doesn't get you to the grocery store or daycare. (And even in NYC, the subway is not great out in Queens/etc, so people own cars.) But it is nice to live in the Mission and take the t…

I find it fascinating how the debate around cars in cities evolves. Initially counter arguments always are that reducing cars is not desirable "nobody wants less cars in cities, people need to do their weekly groceries, nobody wants to bike in bad weather...". Once these points are refuted it always evolves into "yes it would be great, but it can't be done, because it's too expensive, politically controversial...". It's almost like there is an irrational fear of less cars in cities.

Regarding it can't be done I encourage anyone to read up on how the investment into public transport transformed Bogota. Which is both much poorer and in a much more challenging geographical environment than most US cities. So if they can do it, why can't US cities?