Live data from Hacker News

Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

e360.yale.edu

371–380 of 465 posts

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#371
post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dress warm, studded tires. People are so averse to any non ideal weather for cycling. Texas, Arizona and Nevada people say it's too hot, West coasters say too much rain, other places say snow and ice. All excuses that can be solved by better personal preparation mixed with safer better maintained cycling infrastructure. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU

You do you, I personally would never bike on roads I would hesitate to drive on, which is what we have here in the winter, especially not an ebike that is going as fast as a car but without any of the protections, in traffic with cars and trucks that will run right over me if I wipe out on some ice.

Exactly, which is why we advocate for safe, separated, regularly shoveled bike lanes.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would love to buy a 100km range EV with easily accessible/rentable +~300km booster batteries for the occasional long drive. I guess an occasional ICE rental could fill the gap but they often nail you on long distances

I don’t think you realise how cheap batteries are…

What? They were talking about weight. Price was not a factor.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#373
post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Granted, I would still rather them designed for lighter weight. But that’s a separate issue w suv culture which is bad for society and environment in general. Totally would buy a 3000 pound EV around the size of a euro hatch.

Agreed about SUV culture. American consumers demand giant cars. It is a safety arms race and also cultural preference.

I'm not convinced of the "safety". SUVs (and larger cars in general) have higher risk of roll over. Not to mention you're a bigger target on the road; how often are accidents head-on collisions compared to a corner clip that sends the other spinning. Don't majority of "accidents" happen in parking lots?

Last year I was driving a lot of different cars for work. I was really excited once when I got a RAV4 because I've lived most Toyotas I've driven and I've never tried any of their SUVs. The car doesn't come with blindspots mirrors and it is actually impossible to see a car sitting in your blindspots.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#374
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My model 3 is 5 years old and I'm still on my original set of tires (though in recent years I do put on winter tires for a few months a year). I don't usually drive like crazy (and it's an SR+ which is the least powerful model).

I could be wrong and be using outdated information, but aren't Tesla's stock tires also low rolling resistance tires? Which does mean less road friction and less wear, but also means lower maximum traction which is a tradeoff most anybody could make if they wanted.

I think the stock Michelin Primacy MXM4 are a low rolling resistance tire.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve only had to change them one time on any car newer than 1990, after ~200k miles/10 years of use. For most people that qualifies as life of the vehicle, but there was plenty of life left.

The drum brakes or the rotors? Certainly not the disk brake pads!

Yeah, the pads lasted that long. It was a manual and I did engine break pretty often.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regenerative braking has much less tire wear than traditional braking because it's done much more slowly and smoothly. Also, none of these discussions use up-to-date information on EV tires. Consumers aren't willing to replace their tires much more often for an EV except at the high end of the market, tire manufacturers are already making tires last much longer for EV purposes. New designs are already shedding less d…

Regenerative braking has much less tire wear than traditional braking because it's done much more slowly and smoothly. Absent any evidence, I don't believe that claim. Unless you're skidding, I don't see how braking slowly and smoothly over a longer period causes any less tire wear than braking more rapidly for a shorter time. Additionally, since this is intrinsically tied to EVs, they weigh more and thus increase ti…

> Absent any evidence, I don't believe that claim

Acceleration and deceleration is calculated the same way: m/s^2. If you decelerate faster you put more stress on the system in a non-linear way - the square of it actually. This is why sport and race cars have huge brakes. The tire friction will also augment non-linearly - it will hold a certain acceleration and then quickly give up (slipping point), but the energy has to be transferred and partly absorbed all the time.

> they weigh more and thus increase tire wear in all conditions

Then get a lighter one if that is your concern. Defaulting to ICE is the wrong idea because they have much more externalities (like one ton of fuel per year that needs actually around 1.5 if you include the extraction and transport).

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have an EV and you care about health and the environment, use regenerative braking as much as humanly possible. Hint: driving fast or tailgating both increase the odds you'll have to use the friction brakes.

I always assumed EVs use regenerative braking as much as possible on their own.

No experience with EVs, but Toyota hybrids use regenerative braking a lot. They also teach me to accelerate gently. Quite the opposite of Tesla with their "ludicrous mode" encouraging extreme acceleration. But I have no idea how well those brake.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have an EV and you care about health and the environment, use regenerative braking as much as humanly possible. Hint: driving fast or tailgating both increase the odds you'll have to use the friction brakes.

The comment you replied to mentioned EV tire wear, not brake dust. The heavy weight of EVs due to the batteries is always going to cause more tire pollution. E.g., Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs, which compares to the regular F-150's curb weight that ranges from anywhere between 4,021 lbs and 5,014 lbs. The Rivian R1T is 7,148 lbs.

That's more an argument against SUVs and heavy pickup trucks than against EVs, though.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#379
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That hasn't shown up in the fatality statistics for motorcycles. Sometimes more dangerous is just more dangerous.

I’d appreciate it if there was an attempt to actually engage here, this is hardly the gotcha you might think. Most fatalities of motorcycles are due to collisions with cars, not other bikes nor pedestrians. Diligence won’t save you if a driver unexpectedly swerves into you. Undoubtedly there are stupid people and people who are more likely to take more risks will be more likely to engage in motorcycle riding; creatin…

I used to be an EMT in the US. I also was an avid motorcycle rider for many, many years. And an avid bicycle rider for even longer.

It is dramatically easier to screw yourself up on bicycles and motorcycles than cars. It’s frankly shocking how stupid someone can be in a modern car and survive.

It doesn’t require another car to kill someone on a motorcycle or bicycle, but the squids tend to filter themselves out pretty quickly. Many of them actively collide with cars due to their own recklessness and/or stupidity, making the statistics somewhat hard to interpret.

Was the 80 year old driving the RV ‘the cause’ of the head on collision, or the 22 year old with the 1.5l super bike illegally passing over a double yellow at 50 over the speed limit around a corner?

I can provide graphic details of who ended up winning in that situation, regardless.

If everyone had to ride instead of drive (including drunks, soccer moms, burnt out graveyard shift workers, medical workers on their second 24 hour shift, retirees, etc), you’d see a lot more dead folks overall.

Because even though cars are also more dangerous to other people, for the most part, those other people are in cars in the US, and the danger still generally cancels out.

Even head on collisions at highway speeds are more survivable than anyone should reasonably be able to expect.

Vehicle vs ped calls are still the worst though.

Protip: don’t get out of your car after an accident on the highway unless you’re really really sure you can see all other traffic. Chances are you can’t, especially at night. Especially when the drunk coming the wrong way on the highway never turned on their headlights. Wait for the firefighters to physically block the road with their rigs first. That was a gnarly call.

Re: Dust from car brakes more harmful than exhaust, study finds

#380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know nothing about me or where I come from. You're not making the point you think you are. You can lead a horse to water. It's not my job to encourage intellectual rigor. It's political leadership's. Pushing that burden onto imaginary everyday philosophers you've conjured up is futile.

Said "imaginary everyday philosophers" created the anti-intellectual backlash by, among other things, saying things like what you're saying here. Asking them to either shut up or actually make an effort to bridge the divide isn't futile, it's our only hope.

your perspective is seen through a lens , his comment is true , western education systems suck and don't produce bright individuals by design
Post reply on HN