5 ms·
Because Teslas emit a ton of PM 2.5. They're heavy compared to ICE cars, and thus wear out brakes, tires, etc. faster. "PM2.5 emissions were only 1-3% lower f
by wffurr 7y ago
Because Teslas emit a ton of PM 2.5. They're heavy compared to ICE cars, and thus wear out brakes, tires, etc. faster.
"PM2.5 emissions were only 1-3% lower for EVs compared to modern ICEVs. ... Non-exhaust emissions already account for over 90% of PM10 and 85% of PM2.5 emissions from traffic. ... Future policy should consequently focus on setting standards for non-exhaust emissions and encouraging weight reduction of all vehicles to significantly reduce PM emissions from traffic."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297889793_Non-exhaust_PM_emissions_from_electric_vehicles https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297889793_Non-exhau...
- polyomino 7y agohttps://sci-hub.tw/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297889793_Non-exhaust_PM_emissions_from_electric_vehicles https://sci-hub.tw/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/... looks like they're just assuming electric vehicles behave like light trucks because they're heavier than most passenger vehicles and therefore attribute 67% more emissions due to brake wear and don't account for regenerative breaking. (They estimate 2% more emissions from tire wear than lighter vehicles).
- mikepurvis 7y agoYeah, extrapolating on the brake thing seems especially hinky and ill-informed. If you want to have a discussion about brakepad emissions from a Tesla, you should probably be working from real data about how often the brakes are actually applied, or perhaps extrapolate it from service records about mileage numbers on cars when the brake pads are serviced/changed. I expect Tesla would happily hand you a bunch of this anonymized data since it's likely to paint them in a positive light.
- m463 7y agoanecdotally, teslas routinely get 100,000 to 200,000 miles on their brake pads because of regenerative braking. There are ways to get brake wear - switch the regen setting to LOW, or do a track day :)
- Robotbeat 7y agoThey didn't actually measure the emissions, and they ignored the benefit from regenerative braking (Tesla brakes basically never need to be replaced unless you drive very aggressively).
- gwbas1c 7y agoBrakes last much longer on electric cars due to regenerative braking.
- rconti 7y agoYeah, I wish we could read the full article. It might just be that brake pad material is a miniscule fraction of PM2.5 compared to tires, so the regen doesn't much matter. Or maybe they're just doing math to write the article, rather than experimenting, and assuming that there's no regen on an EV?
- wffurr 7y agoI requested the full text from the authors via ResearchGate.
- polyomino 7y agohttps://sci-hub.tw/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297889793_Non-exhaust_PM_emissions_from_electric_vehicles https://sci-hub.tw/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/...
- rconti 7y agoThanks. Only had time to really briefly skim it. A bit all over the place. For one, they linked it directly with weight. But then they mentioned regen and decided to model it at 0 brake wear on EVs. Then they talked about EVs being made of lightweight materials such as aluminum, and the difference would be even larger if they WEREN'T. (what?) It also models particular resuspension in the air as a function of vehicle weight, arguing that heavier vehicles are typically less aerodynamic -- which is probably not the case with EVs. Anyway, interesting.
- vkou 7y agoHybrids have regenerative braking, too, so it's not uniquely an EV benefit.
- jly 7y agoA large part of the air pollution from cars comes from nitrogen and sulfer oxides, which are byproducts of combustion.
- goalieca 7y agoBut that's not to say that 2.5 and 10 that aren't terrible for your lungs.
- nwah1 7y agoJust looked up that a new Honda Civic weighs approximately 3000 pounds. A Toyota Camry weighs between 3200 and 3500 pounds. A Tesla Model 3 weighs around 4000 pounds. A significant difference, to be sure, but not dramatic. And battery technology is improving rapidly. Combined with the fact that there's no exhaust, on balance EVs are already superior for health, as long as the local power plant is anything other than coal.
- godelski 7y agoHonda Civic range: 384-496mi Tesla Model 3 range: 310mi (which is on the upper end) Sure, this will get better as battery tech improves. Everyone knows that. But we're not talking about the future, we're talking about right now.
- melling 7y agoI’m not sure who brought up the point of range. The Model 3 either meets your driving range needs or it doesn’t.
- godelski 7y agoThe gp was talking about electric cars being heavier. Then the parent said "not that much heavier", so I'm saying "we're not comparing equal things". Unsurprisingly, things aren't just an overly simple comparison. Though it isn't complex either.
- jsight 7y agoThey do tend to wear out tires faster, but brakes? If anything they put much less wear on brakes due to regenerative braking.
- Amygaz 7y agoYou forgot to link that link, which explains that no research was done, no peer-review was done, and that the authors didn’t report their conflict of interest: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231016308548 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135223101...
- mturmon 7y agoThere seems to be a subtext to this paper. A subsequent correction/addendum to the same journal reads: > The authors regret that as Victor Timmers did not carry out the research under the auspices of the University of Edinburgh, nor in collaboration or consultation with any personnel at the University of Edinburgh, the affiliation of “University of Edinburgh” has now been removed from this work at the request of the Institution. In addition, subsequent to the publication of the Paper, Victor Timmers has disclosed a potential Conflict of Interest with regard to the work, namely: “non-financial support from Innas B.V, during the conduct of the study”. > The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. --- Innas B.V appears to be the same consulting firm where the first author works. Reading the paper full-text, you see a lot of policy recommendations and one wonders what the standing of the authors is for full-on policy recommendations, based on the very limited data in the paper. Namely, the analysis is really just using vehicle weight as a scale factor on a primitive PM2.5/PM10 "emissions/kg" relationship. Re-suspension of road dust dominates these particulates (in their model, anyway), and EVs and ICVs both do this, so any PM reductions by EVs are dominated by road dust kicked up by their larger weight. Here's a much more detailed review paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231018302711?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135223101... And here's a non-review that examines ozone emissions, but from a much more serious modeling point of view: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231019302183#bib33 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135223101...
- jesuschroist 7y agoI'm not sure if it is usual in this field of research, but it seems strange to me to account 'Resuspension' for as emission. And as you say, this single contribution heavily distorts the picture.
- wffurr 7y agoIt seems sensible if you're wanting to account for air quality on or near roads, which is the primary concern w.r.t. human health and socioeconomic impact. The top comment in the thread was about Teslas improving human/lung health through air quality in cities which is heavily affecting by the resuspension affect.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]