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

Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

keck.usc.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 661 posts

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#211

Post by ezfe »

achenatx wrote: post #139
dotcoma wrote: post #128

But don’t they cause higher pm2.5 and pm10 pollution from braking due to the fact that EVs are heavier than vehicles powered by internal combustion ?

1 pedal braking means evs often dont need new brake pads for 150K miles One problem they are experiencing is rust and glazing on the pads from disuse. They are heavier than the equivalent sized ICE so have more tire wear, but dont have to be that large in an absolute sense. Most are large luxury cars.

You’re right but one pedal drive is the wrong term. Regen braking is what you’re thinking of.

One pedal drive can still use the brake pads, regen braking is what saves brake usage regardless of one pedal drive being on or not.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#212

Post by SloppyDrive »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #176
SloppyDrive wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Post crash connectivity (as well as complex video classification) are part of the ncap standards now. And with the way we are moving to centralized one system architectures, the device that does video processing can be the same soc that does smart infotainment. Smart connectivity essentially comes "for free" if the manufacturer wants to hit 5 safety stars, so its not going away, and will come to ICE cars as they mode…

Connect and infotainment must be firewalled from the engine computer for security reasons. It’s not like two raspberry pis are that expensive.

Not remotely true; Look up "one chip" designs.

Yes, there are some security threats, but solving them is more valuable than trying to design a car around true firewalls.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#213

Post by drzaiusx11 »

pvab3 wrote: post #124
Der_Einzige wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know a LOT of people personally who swap their exhaust in and out just for emissions inspections. That's the meta.

a lot of people have custom exhausts, particularly catback systems that don't affect emissions. A lot of people are definitely not rolling coal.

I live in a progressive state and unfortunately encounter "coal rolling" regularly. I also assume that's the point. Someone has to "own all the libs" as it were

However, I do agree that there aren't enough folks "rolling coal" in aggregate to really move any needles on planet-scale environmental impacts though. Just VERY unpleasant to be caught behind.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#214

Post by socalgal2 »

renewiltord wrote: post #143
apatheticonion wrote: post #11

Having spent a significant amount of time in Bangkok - the city center (and many urban hubs) is an amazing walkable place with pedestrian walkways suspended above major roads, lots of frequent public transit (metro, skytrain) that honestly makes my home city of Sydney feel like a developing country. The only downside is that traffic creates a lot of pollution, and the engine noise (not honking, there's very little of…

Western countries will never match the new East Asian cities. All cities decay as the residents begin to oppose change. All residents begin to oppose change as they age and become wealthier. So whatever you become before the population gets rich is what you will remain. There will be no new fast subway in San Francisco and there will be no maglev in NYC. There will be no autonomous buses in Sydney and London will be…

That doesn't make much sense to me. HK added transit long after it was a big city. Tokyo added transit. Heck, all the cities of Europe started long before transit became a thing and then added it later.

I agree it seems hard in NYC, SF, etc but other cities have added transit

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#215

Post by drzaiusx11 »

wholinator2 wrote: post #134
pvab3 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a lot of people have custom exhausts, particularly catback systems that don't affect emissions. A lot of people are definitely not rolling coal.

Yeah, it's definitely a small percent of people. But i do wonder how many there really has to be to have an outsized effect. One of those lifted kid killers blowing black smoke for the entire duration of the bicycle pack is definitely more than 3 of my tiny honda civics, i wonder how many it really is, and how much those modifications increase the "resting emissions rate"even when not blowing shit. Should be illegal,…

I'd wager it's largely disruptive and dangerous in a highly localized way due to the small percentage of folks doing it. Doesn't make it an acceptable practice though. One person "rolling coal" can temporarily blind 3 or 4 cars back and several across depending on wind conditions, etc.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#216

Post by ff2400t »

Yeah, this kind or Validate my own Beliefs that EV won't solve the fossil fuel burning. But they can at least make energy used by vehicle independent of the source used to generate the energy. Basically, the government and private sector can switch to renewable energy at some point even if they are using Fossil fuels today.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#217

Post by tzs »

margalabargala wrote: post #157
fafac wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tires and their dust don't care whether you're braking by regen or friction. The reason there's more dust is from the increased weight of the EV not because of regen braking. You can coast in EV as well, that is not exclusive to ICE.

> The tires and their dust don't care whether you're braking by regen or friction. I'm aware. The point I'm making is that EVs apply more braking than ICE vehicles do, due to the specifics of the implementation of regen braking that all manufacturers have chosen. > You can coast in EV as well Not without literally putting it in neutral. If you just take your foot off the accelerator, any modern EV will apply some amo…

> I'm aware. The point I'm making is that EVs apply more braking than ICE vehicles do, due to the specifics of the implementation of regen braking that all manufacturers have chosen

Hyundai and Kia EVs have a 5 level setting for what happens when you lift up on the accelerator, either partially or fully.

At level 0 the regeneration is so low that I don't notice a difference between that and being in neutral. It slows down way less than an ICE does when not in neutral.

> If you just take your foot off the accelerator, any modern EV will apply some amount of regenerative braking. It's not really possible to hold the accelerator pedal at the exact position where you are not applying motor power but also have 0kW of regen braking, certainly for any extended period of time.

Tire wear is not a linear function of acceleration. Is there any reason to believe that variations from not being able to hold your foot perfectly steady, assuming you aren't have spasms, will be big enough and/or last long enough to make a non-trivial difference?

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#218

Post by fuckyah »

unglaublich wrote: post #199
princevegeta89 wrote: post #3

No surprises. No matter how we look at it, EVs are much friendlier and safer to the environment. Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again, but in today's world we are rapidly moving away from it and towards nuclear/hydel/wind methods for generating power. I hope ICE cars completely become a thing of the past in the next couple of decades to co…

Even if the electricity source would burn similar fuel, just the fact that you don't pullote right in the middle of population centers makes a huge difference. In reality, it's not only that, but _also_ that they use cleaner methods of energy production.

[dead]

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#219

Post by bruce511 »

yanhangyhy wrote: post #78

i moved to beijing in 2015.. and i have to buy a air purifier, prepare masks for winter. pepople talks about air polutions so much, it feels like we are struggle, not living a life. i remember one day, it was so bad, i have to wear gas mask to go outisde, i know it's rare, and people are staring, but yes, its that hard. it's 2026 now, you barely see bad days in Beijing, most people wear mask only for the flu, not for…

Both ICE and EV cars require a support infrastructure. As sales trends change, so the emphasis on support infrastructure changes, and that accelerates the trend.

For example EVs depend on charging, so we're seeing more public charge points, as well as more home chargers, work chargers and so on.

ICE depends on gas stations (which is the tip of the gasoline distribution industry.) It also depends on ICE mechanics. As demand for those services drop off, so they'll become harder to find. (To be clear, that's not happening soon, there are a LOT of ICE cars out there...)

But 50 years from now most of that ICE infrastructure will have disappeared.

Re: Adoption of EVs tied to real-world reductions in air pollution: study

#220

Post by magicalhippo »

MBCook wrote: post #64
princevegeta89 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends. They get a virtually continual supply of standby power that can last for months if left untouched. So from a technology standpoint that enables them to do many things - from being connected to the network, aware of their location on the map, recording camera footage and other remote capabilities. ICE cars do have some of these but the huge battery packs on EVs make these very feasible.

Do they? I was under the impression most EVs cut off the connection to the high voltage battery almost all the time they’re not in use. They rely on a 12 V battery or a 48 V battery like a normal car. The only thing I’m aware of that special is that if that low voltage battery gets low enough the car will detect it and recharge it from the high voltage battery, temporarily connecting it for that purpose.

> They rely on a 12 V battery or a 48 V battery like a normal car.

Which leads to "fun" situations when that battery runs out, like not being able to get into your car or start it. However not much power is needed, so a tiny portable jump pack is enough to get things going.

Both me and my sister has experienced this, me a Nissan Leaf and her a VW ID.4, good times.

Post reply on HN