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

Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

modernengineeringmarvels.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 783 posts

Re: Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

#171

Post by NewJazz »

rgmerk wrote: post #163
arnonejoe wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I test drove an EV and the regenerative braking was difficult to get used to. You have to constantly ride the gas pedal. I would buy an EV if it weren't for this feature.

Firstly, most EVs that have strong regenerative braking ("one-pedal") setups allow you to adjust the strength or turn it off. Tesla, as usual, is the outlier in this respect. Secondly, I rented an EV for a week and by the end of it actually preferred the strong regen setting. It was convenient in stop-start traffic, and on a twisty road, you could use it to tighten the nose as you entered the corner.

As another data point, I've owned PHEVs and EVs for gosh 6 years now and I still prefer the "weak" regen with the Chevy paddle brake to modulate. Sometimes when I have a clear path, e.g. a down hill on a highway, I just throw it in neutral for a pure coast and shift back into drive when I need to.

Re: Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

#172

Post by bruce511 »

tsimionescu wrote: post #115
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. Well, I like that the people that think like this also probably live I places where you are actually driving a coal powered car. Like the clowns in Hawaii that have extra subsidies for EVs… their power comes directly from burning crude oil. I’m an automotive EE, and and the truth about EVs is in a rush to push them out the door, the media and politicians have set the tech back at least a decade by pretending it…

While I think there is some merit to what you're saying, you're forgetting two major diferences between driving am ICE car and an EV charged on fossil fuel electricity. First, EV engines are far, far more energy efficient than ICEs. Secondly, fossil fuel power plants are far more efficient at converting fossil fuels to energy than ICEs are (since the energy efficiency of a thermal engine is proportional to its volume…

I'll add that Hawaii currently generates 20%+ of their electricity from non-fossil fuels. Plus they are actively reducing fossil generation with a view to removing it completely.

Changes on this scale take time. But to make the islands much less dependent on fossil fuels, a two-pronged strategy is in play. Reduce fossil fuel generation, but also reduce the dependence on fossil fuel in transport.

As a long-term strategy, reducing the cost of importing all that fuel, over vast distances, seems to be a huge win for the islands. In every way (politically, economically, socially, environmentally) generating their own energy is a win.

Re: Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

#173

Post by loeg »

jeffbee wrote: post #20
jader201 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it’s not a joke. EVs are heavier vehicles, and it’s common for EV owners to have to change tires much more frequently. https://www.cars.com/articles/do-evs-wear-through-tires-more...

It's only common because Tesla is popular. Other brands put reasonable tires on.

The tires that came on my Kia EV9 are bad in several dimensions (Kumho Crugen HP71) -- poor longevity, poor winter performance. People seem to get 15-20,000 miles out of them. (I replaced them with CrossClimate2s.)

Re: Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

#174

Post by dontlaugh »

bruce511 wrote: post #155
arnonejoe wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I test drove an EV and the regenerative braking was difficult to get used to. You have to constantly ride the gas pedal. I would buy an EV if it weren't for this feature.

I don't think this comment should be down-voted since it is indeed a real point of difference and it is worth discussing. The key takeaway is that there are differences to driving an EV to driving an ICE vehicle. Equally those differences are in fact easy to adjust to given a bit of practice. Of course cars have always had different control options. Automatic and Manual gearboxes spring to mind. When I first learned…

Many electric cars are also overpowered. For those with a more reasonable ~100kw, gentleness hardly matters.

Re: Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

#175

Post by NewJazz »

mikestew wrote: post #169
slt2021 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

remember, your regenerative braking comes at cost of tire life. If driving Tesla, you can reduce the regenerative breaking from Maximum setting to Medium. this will reduce regeneration and will increase the "breaking distance" when you just let go of accelerator pedal. but it will increase your tire life significantly. also make sure to buy the "commuter tire" models - tires with high mileage warranty (50k miles+) an…

remember, your regenerative braking comes at cost of tire life. No, it doesn’t. The tires don’t care if it’s the car’s motor slowing things down, or some friction material grabbing a disc.

I guess they are saying that the sharper braking curve that is default on Teslas is going to cause more wear than a slower braking curve. The logic makes sense, but I have some doubt's that sharp regen breaking is more to blame for tire wear vs. Sharp manual braking and acceleration.

Re: Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

#176

Post by cperciva »

nine_k wrote: post #41

I suppose the same should apply to hybrid cars, which outnumber pure EVs significantly [1]. The effect comes from converting the kinetic energy back to the battery charge via generation instead of wasting it via friction, which is the whole point of hybrids. [1]: https://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/how-many-electric...

which is the whole point of hybrids

Part of the point, not the whole point. Regenerative breaking is absolutely a win; but there can also be a significant benefit from allowing the ICE to remain in the RPM "sweet spot" rather than moving around a larger range.

Re: Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

#177

Post by NewJazz »

slt2021 wrote: post #146
avalys wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? What do you imagine is the tradeoff between regenerative braking and tire life? Are you suggesting that stopping the car with conventional iron brakes is somehow easier on the tires?

the level of regenerative braking directly impacts your accelerator pedal behavior. by reducing regeneration, you will increase tire life by virtue of modifying your acceleration behavior. Its hard for me to explain, but I just suggest trying the medium regenerative setting and you will see it yourself. You will feel it, because the most of the tire wear happens when car decelerates. On less regeneration your car wil…

most of the tire wear happens when car decelerates

Is this generally true? I imagine it depends on the car/driver to a certain extent, but still I'd be curious what numbers are out there.

Re: Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

#178

Post by loeg »

KingMob wrote: post #139
Graziano_M wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m against a ban. That sort of pollution is an externality and we could price it in.

Based on the long history of trying to price in externalities, bans are probably more effective. Just look at how many games are played with carbon "credits", and how little real impact they've had.

> Just look at how many games are played with carbon "credits", and how little real impact they've had.

Credits are indeed a scam but they are not a mandatory component of a carbon externality tax.

Re: Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

#179

Post by cyberax »

Kirby64 wrote: post #121
RowanH wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair EV's can have some very high initial torque delivery, and are heavy = tyre shredding beasts. I know I know, people aren't supposed to be taking off from every light at full chat, but, given the capability some people can't help themselves.

The biggest problem for new EV drivers, in my view, is that EVs generally have extremely good traction control systems that prevent chirping due to the ability to cut back power to the motors much more quickly than you can with a gas engine. What this means is that you can push tires to the absolute limit and not chirp them (which, is best for traction anyways) which absolutely roasts them. Most people associate chir…

I went through my first set of tires in 10k miles. By doing car racing (on official tracks!) every month or so.

Though it might fall under the "being idiot" category.

Re: Electric cars produce less brake dust pollution than combustion-engine cars

#180

Post by bob1029 »

> alluding to the black discolorations on alloy wheels

There are ceramic brakes that produce very little particulate matter by comparison to semi-metallic. The only downside is performance can degrade more in extreme driving conditions (sustained racing with heavy braking). For a daily driver, it's a quieter and cleaner material.

Post reply on HN