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

551–560 of 783 posts

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

#551

Post by rayiner »

altairprime wrote: post #39
rayiner wrote: post #16

We should obviously ban combustion engine cars, at least starting with cities. I can’t think of a single clearer win for air quality.

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),…

That's a good point! I hadn't thought about that. The benefit of EVs seem highest in the city,[1] but the charging infrastructure isn't there in urban areas.

[1] My wife, being from the west coast, used to walk around NYC in flip flops, and would come home with her feet black from brake dust and soot and god knows what else.

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

#552

Post by 1234letshaveatw »

ceejayoz wrote: post #520
1234letshaveatw wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure you feel the same way about cutting down on cell phones right? How about we just let people keep their cars (preferably EVs), but feel free to go live in a dense cell block and eat bug juice if that is what floats your boat.

It's hard to share a cell phone. If there are opportunities to make them more environmentally friendly (longevity, production processes, better batteries, etc.) we should absolutely try to do those things. EVs are better than ICE cars, but shared-use buses/trains/etc. are often even better. We can do more than one thing.

It's really not hard to share a cell phone, you and eg your spouse could alternate days and have one phone for example. It is just a tradeoff you are not willing to make. But, not having a car is a tradeoff YOU are willing to make so your are ok with pushing it on others.

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

#553

Post by rayiner »

xyst wrote: post #168
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),…

Car based transportation is just not scalable. Other countries have figured this out. Norway in particular. Working transportation models exist and this country has the funds to make it happen. However because of American Exceptionalism, we have very limited options.

> Car based transportation is just not scalable.

We have scaled it! We're a country of 330 million people where almost everyone drives.

> However because of American Exceptionalism, we have very limited options.

It's only "American Exceptionalism" insofar as Americans are rich compared to Europeans. Upper middle class people across Europe also live in suburbs and drive to places. American wealth/land space simply enables middle and lower middle class people to do the same thing.

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

#554

Post by RegnisGnaw »

taeric wrote: post #543
RegnisGnaw wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole "pas pedal" becomes faster/slower (one pedal driving) is coming to an end. Its being banned as default in the world's largest EV market (and largest EV export country).

I'm curious what you mean? I'm fairly confident the post you are responding to was only talking about newer transmissions. Which, I can't imagine those are going away?

The post is talking about most people drive with BEV , which is one pedal driving. My Tesla does one pedal driving my default.

China has banned "one pedal driving" as a default.

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

#555

Post by joezydeco »

gambiting wrote: post #198
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...

It does. My Volvo XC60 T8 PHEV is a 400bhp 2.2 tonne SUV and after over 5 years of ownership the pads are about 20% worn. And I don't drive like a granny either. The car just does most of its braking with the EV motor.

Same here, XC40P8 and the pads are 10% used after 2.5 years.

But I understand the factory tires are a bit stickier to create a quieter ride which may be throwing more rubber dust into the air. High torque launches don't help either. ;-)

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

#556

Post by 1234letshaveatw »

p_j_w wrote: post #518
1234letshaveatw wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure you feel the same way about cutting down on cell phones right? How about we just let people keep their cars (preferably EVs), but feel free to go live in a dense cell block and eat bug juice if that is what floats your boat.

> feel free to go live in a dense cell block and eat bug juice if that is what floats your boat. That this is considered a valid response to someone suggesting we need more mass transit is a sign that our discourse has fallen off a cliff. You can and should do better.

Why is it that these "do better" suggestions always feel like an attempt to shut discussion down. Being anti-car does not make you some moral authority

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

#557

Post by sergiotapia »

neogodless wrote: post #408
Hilift wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Artificial engine sounds" is the next step in that evolution pipeline. Or just blast advertisements.

See the Ioniq 5 N. But those sounds are piped inside... not blasted to the neighbors...

I love the look of the Ioniq so much, I wanted to reward the guts it took to create such a unique looking car! I wanted to buy the new one but I just couldn't not get a Tesla because of FSD. Cars without FSD are fighting for second place imho.

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

#558

Post by tshaddox »

Graziano_M wrote: post #95
tshaddox wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The externalities are all the costs of medical problems and deaths due to pollution, as well as reduced property values due to polluted areas being less desirable. For the former I’d say a ban is appropriate, unless you’re suggesting to somehow literally clean the polluted air and pay for it with a gas automobile tax.

I mean even campfires and smoking in public have negative externalities which cause cancer. The marginal cost of each is tiny and probably hard to price, but it has a price. Adding this price would slightly offset the cost but more importantly act as a disincentive for buying a polluting vehicle.

Smoking in public is widely banned. Campfires in populated areas are usually limited to very specific recreational areas. Home wood fires in populated areas are often banned and should be as long as there are reasonable alternatives.

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

#559

Post by mpyne »

thanhhaimai wrote: post #110
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'm not sure I can agree with this. I have 2 EVs, and the tire looks almost brand new after like 10k miles. I think the driving habits matter more than whether the car is EV or not.

I own one EV, at 40k miles, and have had to change the tires only once so far, and even that was more because of damage to one that required replacement than due to excessive tire wear.

I can vouch for the very low brake pad usage as well.

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

#560

Post by guywithahat »

bartread wrote: post #386

In four years of plug-in hybrid ownership, and maybe 50k miles, I haven’t even had to replace pads, and the car wasn’t new when I bought it. I even commented on the longevity at the dealership the last time I took it for a service, and they said they see it a lot with hybrids. The regen braking really does make a huge difference.

Is 50k a lot? I drove my ford fiesta 120k without changing the pads. I'm certain the motor helps, but assuming it's a relatively lightweight vehicle I don't think you should be changing pads that much unless you're an aggressive driver
Post reply on HN