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

211–220 of 783 posts

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

#211

Post by matsemann »

genewitch wrote: post #158
Toutouxc wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More like 20 minutes, but ok, not everyone likes that.

what happens when there's more people that need 20 minutes? it takes me less than five to pull up, fill up, and go. when the gas station is packed, i might have to wait 4-5 minutes for my turn. Now quadruple this. "super extra 1gigawatt charging" isn't coming to my area, potentially ever. Afaik there's two "super chargers" in my metro area, both at dealerships. i've actually never seen a Tesla charger in person.

With home charging, I'm almost never charging anywhere else. Maybe a few times a year when doing a longer trip. I just drive, and plug the charger in some times when I get home. I literally never think about range or having to drive a detour to fill it up.

But you have to do that probably weekly. And then also spend a lot of money while doing it. It seems you believe those driving EVs are "suckers", but do you realize you probably spend hours and hours more in a year going to the station and pump compared to most EV owners never having to do that in their daily life?

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

#212

Post by throwawaysoxjje »

dotancohen wrote: post #203
MindSpunk wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't engine brake with the clutch, you engine brake by downshifting and using the higher engine RPM in lower gears to brake the car via wasted compression.

And that downshifting involves a clutch operation, moving the engine into a higher RPM. That most certainly wears down the clutch, talking as someone who's replaced quite a few of them.

Are you really shifting so much that your clutch slip in the middle of the shift effects clutch lifetime?

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

#213

Post by matsemann »

mjevans wrote: post #142

Ban the stop and go hell of rush hour. Cars rolling at freeway speed without stopping pollute way less than drivers stuck behind idiots who can't just go forward down the road at the speed limit. The human suffering and ecological impact reduced if only there would be a focus on enforcing speed minimums...

It's just traffic. The arrogance of thinking everyone else is the problem is kinda weird. You're just as responsible for the congestion and pollution.

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

#214

Post by unglaublich »

cperciva wrote: post #176
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.

This is how diesel-electric locomotives work too.

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

#215

Post by Thorrez »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #89
altairprime wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If all of us renters were forced to convert to electric there’d never be an open charger in any city again for the next five years, because no landlord will voluntarily afford that cost, and no municipal region can pass a ballot measure to afford that cost. California’s impending ban of combustion car sales hinges wholly on a magical DC-charging network that doesn’t exist in U.S. cities yet (i.e. at parking meters),…

Level 1 charging overnight on a standard 120V outlet, while not ideal, is surprisingly adequate. Granted, many people rely on street parking or otherwise don't have a parking spot that is right beside their dwelling, but for rented houses or complexes with private garages/parking areas the size of the lift isn't necessarily "get upgraded service and a bunch of 240V EVSE put in".

None of the apartments I've lived at had a 120V outlet near my parking spot that I could use.

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

#216

Post by throwawaysoxjje »

arnonejoe wrote: post #123
ajross wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To some extent, but not really. Effectiveness of regenerative braking depends on having an extremely large battery that can sink enough current to stop the car. An EV can do that, hybrids at best help the brakes out some. You just can't charge the battery fast enough doing anything but a very slow rolling stop. My model Y can effect a very reasonable stop in traffic without touching the brake pedal except to hold the…

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’ve got regenerative breaking on my EV without one pedal driving, it acts just like my other car does.

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

#217

Post by ZeroGravitas »

genewitch wrote: post #158
Toutouxc wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More like 20 minutes, but ok, not everyone likes that.

what happens when there's more people that need 20 minutes? it takes me less than five to pull up, fill up, and go. when the gas station is packed, i might have to wait 4-5 minutes for my turn. Now quadruple this. "super extra 1gigawatt charging" isn't coming to my area, potentially ever. Afaik there's two "super chargers" in my metro area, both at dealerships. i've actually never seen a Tesla charger in person.

Why is your civic infrastructure so crippled? I'm not sure if I'd trust driving over bridges or drinking water in a municipality which is incapable of installing electric plugs.

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

#218

Post by 01100011 »

OptionOfT wrote: post #135
frollogaston wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And manual transmission cars kinda, though the energy is still wasted of course

Depends on how you drive. I never engine braked on my manual. Brakes are easy to replace. Clutches are not.

Yep, years ago I had a friend with a VW Beetle and he'd never use the brakes unless he had to. I thought it was cool and carried the story with me. One day I mentioned it to a mechanic friend and that was his exact response. I've never changed a clutch, but I've changed plenty of brakes and yeah, not hard or expensive.

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

#219

Post by 01100011 »

brtkwr wrote: post #4

An an EV owner, I can testify that the tyre wear more than makes up for the reduction in brake dust. I’ve had to change tyres every 10K miles.

I wonder if you got unlucky with tires. Seems some mfgs are playing with new recipes and eco friendly ingredients causing the tires to dramatically miss their stated lifetime. My last tires were Michelin Defender somethings from Costco and they lasted about half the expected mileage even with regular rotation and proper inflation.

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

#220

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

bruce511 wrote: post #172
tsimionescu wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 strate…

Yes. Only 80% crude oil they pull a tanker up, fuel the plant directly on the tanker and roll another one right in.

Literally the most unrefined and dirty way to create power, as long as the tourists don’t see it, and the EV owners that think they’re making a different don’t know, g2g.

Post reply on HN