3 ms·

My concern with this is that it will likely take at a minimum 1-2 years for tire manufacturers to research new compounds that eliminate this chemical. Then it w

My concern with this is that it will likely take at a minimum 1-2 years for tire manufacturers to research new compounds that eliminate this chemical. Then it will take probably another year, at best, before manufacturing plants are transitioned over to build this new compound and we start to see the new compound trickle down into new tires. Then it will take 2-4 years to propagate that compound across the entire product line and/or industry. Once the compound is readily available across the industry, then we can rest assured that new tires will be "safe". But tires have a usable life of 2-5 years depending on the type of tire. So it will take many more years before people with "non-safe" tires purchase new ones that are "salmon-safe". Remember also that some people (generally as a result of financial concern) may drag tire use out to 8 or even 10 years. This puts a timeline for "safe tires" at 10-20 years from now! I hate to shout "doomsday", but the Salmon may not have that long. Salmon only live 2-3 years on average before spawning. According to this article, 90% of them are dying due to this chemical during their trip up Puget Sound urban rivers to spawn. Salmon are already operating at low population rates. So we may not have decades to sit and figure this out. As a more immediate alternative, I would like to see if there is a way to neutralize or catch this 6PPD chemical with some type of "filter" in the road runoff pipes or a road-coating that could be installed in critical areas. This would seem like a more immediate solution that wouldn't require global or national "buy-in" from tire manufacturers. And of course all this assumes that tire manufacturers care enough to save the salmon. This is the type of thing that regulation is useful for instead of relying on tire manufacturers to "do the right thing".

munificent 6y ago
> This puts a timeline for "safe tires" at 10-20 years from now! No, it puts a maximum end date for 100% removal at 10-20 years. Incremental progress can happen much sooner. What you describe is basically the speed that most large-scale changes occur at. It's just how it goes. > I hate to shout "doomsday", but the Salmon may not have that long. Salmon only live 2-3 years on average before spawning. The salmon will bounce back. It is a real concern and problem that we need to fix, but we are not on the brink of extinction and don't need to panic. > According to this article, 90% of them are dying due to this chemical during their trip up Puget Sound urban rivers to spawn. 90% in some streams. That's the worst case number, but there are many streams in Washington, many of which are not in urban areas.
- carlmr 6y ago
  I think it would be acceptable to regulate more harshly where the salmon live. Make regulations that force getting the new tires as soon as possible if you live within 100 miles of a river with salmon or your commute touches this zone. That way you could get the results in 2-3 years with a minimal extra cost because only a small part of the US and Canada have to renew their tires earlier.
  - toast0 6y ago
    What's your proposed enforcement mechanism? Where I live in the puget sound region, there's no regular inspections on vehicles, because my county doesn't require emission checks, and WA doesn't have a periodic safety inspection, so a tire check program would be a totally new thing. It seems to me that trying to figure out if that chemical can be replaced with something else, and if that something else is safe would be priority one. Priority two would be trying to filter the urban runoff somehow (which is probably a positive for many other pollutants). Getting people to switch their tires a little sooner seems like too much effort for too little gain; tires are going to wear out or get too old and be replaced anyway, and there's a lot of cars from out of the area. Maybe, you could do a rebate program to encourage people in the area to update a little sooner.
    - carlmr 6y ago
      >WA doesn't have a periodic safety inspection, so a tire check program would be a totally new thing. Ok, wow, that's so unexpected. In Germany we have mandatory safety and emissions inspections every two years. That also explains why there were so many parts of tires on roads in WA, last time I was there. >Maybe, you could do a rebate program to encourage people in the area to update a little sooner. That would probably get us 80% of the way there, especially if you tell people why they should switch.
- ncmncm 6y ago
  Several Pacific Northwest US salmon species are on the brink of extinction. Tire pollution is one of several independent attacks on them. When they're gone, we won't quarrel over which really did them in.
chrisbrandow 6y ago
There is not likely to be a way to catch enough runoff to prevent this.

munificent 6y ago

> This puts a timeline for "safe tires" at 10-20 years from now! No, it puts a maximum end date for 100% removal at 10-20 years. Incremental progress can happen much sooner. What you describe is basically the speed that most large-scale changes occur at. It's just how it goes. > I hate to shout "doomsday", but the Salmon may not have that long. Salmon only live 2-3 years on average before spawning. The salmon will bounce back. It is a real concern and problem that we need to fix, but we are not on the brink of extinction and don't need to panic. > According to this article, 90% of them are dying due to this chemical during their trip up Puget Sound urban rivers to spawn. 90% in some streams. That's the worst case number, but there are many streams in Washington, many of which are not in urban areas.

carlmr 6y ago
I think it would be acceptable to regulate more harshly where the salmon live. Make regulations that force getting the new tires as soon as possible if you live within 100 miles of a river with salmon or your commute touches this zone. That way you could get the results in 2-3 years with a minimal extra cost because only a small part of the US and Canada have to renew their tires earlier.
- toast0 6y ago
  What's your proposed enforcement mechanism? Where I live in the puget sound region, there's no regular inspections on vehicles, because my county doesn't require emission checks, and WA doesn't have a periodic safety inspection, so a tire check program would be a totally new thing. It seems to me that trying to figure out if that chemical can be replaced with something else, and if that something else is safe would be priority one. Priority two would be trying to filter the urban runoff somehow (which is probably a positive for many other pollutants). Getting people to switch their tires a little sooner seems like too much effort for too little gain; tires are going to wear out or get too old and be replaced anyway, and there's a lot of cars from out of the area. Maybe, you could do a rebate program to encourage people in the area to update a little sooner.
  - carlmr 6y ago
    >WA doesn't have a periodic safety inspection, so a tire check program would be a totally new thing. Ok, wow, that's so unexpected. In Germany we have mandatory safety and emissions inspections every two years. That also explains why there were so many parts of tires on roads in WA, last time I was there. >Maybe, you could do a rebate program to encourage people in the area to update a little sooner. That would probably get us 80% of the way there, especially if you tell people why they should switch.
ncmncm 6y ago
Several Pacific Northwest US salmon species are on the brink of extinction. Tire pollution is one of several independent attacks on them. When they're gone, we won't quarrel over which really did them in.

chrisbrandow 6y ago

There is not likely to be a way to catch enough runoff to prevent this.