4 ms·

I'm glad people are looking at how to reduce the impact of tire dust. I expect we can make big improvements because it's not something we've optimized for yet.

I'm glad people are looking at how to reduce the impact of tire dust. I expect we can make big improvements because it's not something we've optimized for yet. Not mentioned in the article is that EVs also dramatically reduce brake dust because the brakes are hardly used compared to an ICE car.

stavros 3y ago
Do they? How does that work? Why does it matter in what way the friction on the axle is generated? Whether I am grinding two metal on metal to generate friction or I'm charging a coil shouldn't matter to how much dust the tire generates, for the same amount of deceleration, should it? Unless people are just slamming on their brakes and leaving tire marks when they have the option of coming to a gentle stop, which I don't think anyone would do? EDIT: Apparently I misread "brake dust" for "tire dust", sorry!
- ninkendo 3y ago
  We can assume that modeless was referring to the dust generated by the brake pads themselves, I should think…
- neallindsay 3y ago
  I think you missed that they are talking about brake dust.
- jstanley 3y ago
  They said EVs reduce brake dust, not tyre dust. It's true that tyre dust would be created just the same.
  - adrianN 3y ago
    More actually since EVs are heavy. They also tend to accelerate faster than combustion cars.
- idiotsecant 3y ago
  Parent post brought up brake dust, which is not what this article is about. EVs definitely put less wear on brakes but that has nothing to do with microplastics.
  - stavros 3y ago
    I think it got edited, it said "tire dust" when I made my comment (unless I'm mistaken, but I did check twice to make sure). EDIT: Looks like I just misread the "tire dust" on the first sentence and filled it in the second sentence as well, huh.
  - inferiorhuman 3y ago
    That said brake dust is an environmental problem.
    - ilyt 3y ago
      But most of it does biodegrade so it is short time problem vs very long time problem.
      - inferiorhuman 3y ago
        Copper, which was (is?) the most problematic part doesn't.
- bitdivision 3y ago
  I think GP is referring to the dust generated by brake pads. Since EVs can use regenerative braking, there should be less use of the brake pads, and therefore less brake dust. I would assume that the tyre dust will remain the same
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
kylebenzle 3y ago
I worked on this indirectly for 4 as as part of a pdh at Ohio State. We have had the solution to this problem since then but because natural rubber is slightly less profitable for the companies (it lasts too long and it too high quality) they use synthetic rubber. Tire dust is a problem becuase we WANT it to be a problem the solution is available but it is impossible to get funding because the tire companies don't want to use it. Thats it, that is how capitalism works. Make millions upon millions of people sick so that 3 companies can make slightly higher profits. [1] https://hcs.osu.edu/our-people/dr-katrina-cornish https://hcs.osu.edu/our-people/dr-katrina-cornish
- _dark_matter_ 3y ago
  Can you link to this research? Is there any tire company using this technology? If the people cared we could either pay a premium for them, or regulate
  - kylebenzle 3y ago
    Yes! All the big tire companies, Goodyear, Michelin and Firestone have a "natural rubber" development department and every couple years they come out with a "green tire" which they quickly drop and forget about. As for the "technology" of natural rubber, yes again, ALL military aircraft tires are only natural rubber, people know, when it matters use ONLY natural rubber. Again, we use choose to use and pollute with synthetic rubber because it is more profitable for the companies to sell us more tires that ware out more quickly. They know this and its on purpose. [1] https://hcs.osu.edu/our-people/dr-katrina-cornish https://hcs.osu.edu/our-people/dr-katrina-cornish
    - olalonde 3y ago
      This is a naive and incorrect view of economics. Tire manufacturers employ synthetic rubber because that's what consumers want (probably because it's cheaper even when accounting for the lower longevity?). They do not just get to dictate which products enter the market. Which makes me highly doubt your claim that natural rubber tires are both superior AND cheaper. If you are right about that, I'm sure there are VCs who would be more than happy to fund you...
lb1lf 3y ago
Surely brake dust must be negligible compared to tire and asphalt dust? I recently replaced the brake pads on my Land Cruiser; 70,000km (45,000 miles) since they were last replaced. This is a large, heavy 4x4, yet the amount of brake liner worn from the pads must have been on the order of a pound, if not less.
- ilyt 3y ago
  > Surely brake dust must be negligible compared to tire and asphalt dust? Brake dust is kinda different problem. Yeah it puts particles in the air, but most of it is pretty biodegradable (carbon and iron), and rest of it could probably be made that - technically loss of efficiency here could be compensated for, which is far harder for tyres.
jillesvangurp 3y ago
Also EVs have no tail pipe emissions. At all. An ICE vehicle converts 100% of it's fuel into toxic tail pipe emissions. The tire dust is marginally the same for the same weight. We are not talking a new set of tires every other month for EVs. And there is very little brake dust indeed. So, what are we really talking about here exactly? Well that's more complicated. Articles like this don't come out of the blue. There's an extremely well funded effort by fossil fuel and ICE car manufacturing companies to spread FUD about EVs. They are looking at double digit percentage drops in demand for their product in the decade ahead. That's going to impact them financially in a big way and they have a huge financial interest in slowing that down. And their tool of choice is misinformation. Little white lies, lots of half truths, twisted facts, lies by omission, etc. That's not to say tire particles in ocean water aren't an issue. But the reality is that most of those particles come from ICE vehicles right now.

stavros 3y ago

Do they? How does that work? Why does it matter in what way the friction on the axle is generated? Whether I am grinding two metal on metal to generate friction or I'm charging a coil shouldn't matter to how much dust the tire generates, for the same amount of deceleration, should it? Unless people are just slamming on their brakes and leaving tire marks when they have the option of coming to a gentle stop, which I don't think anyone would do? EDIT: Apparently I misread "brake dust" for "tire dust", sorry!

ninkendo 3y ago
We can assume that modeless was referring to the dust generated by the brake pads themselves, I should think…
neallindsay 3y ago
I think you missed that they are talking about brake dust.
jstanley 3y ago
They said EVs reduce brake dust, not tyre dust. It's true that tyre dust would be created just the same.
- adrianN 3y ago
  More actually since EVs are heavy. They also tend to accelerate faster than combustion cars.
idiotsecant 3y ago
Parent post brought up brake dust, which is not what this article is about. EVs definitely put less wear on brakes but that has nothing to do with microplastics.
- stavros 3y ago
  I think it got edited, it said "tire dust" when I made my comment (unless I'm mistaken, but I did check twice to make sure). EDIT: Looks like I just misread the "tire dust" on the first sentence and filled it in the second sentence as well, huh.
- inferiorhuman 3y ago
  That said brake dust is an environmental problem.
  - ilyt 3y ago
    But most of it does biodegrade so it is short time problem vs very long time problem.
    - inferiorhuman 3y ago
      Copper, which was (is?) the most problematic part doesn't.
bitdivision 3y ago
I think GP is referring to the dust generated by brake pads. Since EVs can use regenerative braking, there should be less use of the brake pads, and therefore less brake dust. I would assume that the tyre dust will remain the same
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

kylebenzle 3y ago

I worked on this indirectly for 4 as as part of a pdh at Ohio State. We have had the solution to this problem since then but because natural rubber is slightly less profitable for the companies (it lasts too long and it too high quality) they use synthetic rubber. Tire dust is a problem becuase we WANT it to be a problem the solution is available but it is impossible to get funding because the tire companies don't want to use it. Thats it, that is how capitalism works. Make millions upon millions of people sick so that 3 companies can make slightly higher profits. [1] https://hcs.osu.edu/our-people/dr-katrina-cornish https://hcs.osu.edu/our-people/dr-katrina-cornish

_dark_matter_ 3y ago
Can you link to this research? Is there any tire company using this technology? If the people cared we could either pay a premium for them, or regulate
- kylebenzle 3y ago
  Yes! All the big tire companies, Goodyear, Michelin and Firestone have a "natural rubber" development department and every couple years they come out with a "green tire" which they quickly drop and forget about. As for the "technology" of natural rubber, yes again, ALL military aircraft tires are only natural rubber, people know, when it matters use ONLY natural rubber. Again, we use choose to use and pollute with synthetic rubber because it is more profitable for the companies to sell us more tires that ware out more quickly. They know this and its on purpose. [1] https://hcs.osu.edu/our-people/dr-katrina-cornish https://hcs.osu.edu/our-people/dr-katrina-cornish
  - olalonde 3y ago
    This is a naive and incorrect view of economics. Tire manufacturers employ synthetic rubber because that's what consumers want (probably because it's cheaper even when accounting for the lower longevity?). They do not just get to dictate which products enter the market. Which makes me highly doubt your claim that natural rubber tires are both superior AND cheaper. If you are right about that, I'm sure there are VCs who would be more than happy to fund you...

lb1lf 3y ago

Surely brake dust must be negligible compared to tire and asphalt dust? I recently replaced the brake pads on my Land Cruiser; 70,000km (45,000 miles) since they were last replaced. This is a large, heavy 4x4, yet the amount of brake liner worn from the pads must have been on the order of a pound, if not less.

ilyt 3y ago
> Surely brake dust must be negligible compared to tire and asphalt dust? Brake dust is kinda different problem. Yeah it puts particles in the air, but most of it is pretty biodegradable (carbon and iron), and rest of it could probably be made that - technically loss of efficiency here could be compensated for, which is far harder for tyres.

jillesvangurp 3y ago

Also EVs have no tail pipe emissions. At all. An ICE vehicle converts 100% of it's fuel into toxic tail pipe emissions. The tire dust is marginally the same for the same weight. We are not talking a new set of tires every other month for EVs. And there is very little brake dust indeed. So, what are we really talking about here exactly? Well that's more complicated. Articles like this don't come out of the blue. There's an extremely well funded effort by fossil fuel and ICE car manufacturing companies to spread FUD about EVs. They are looking at double digit percentage drops in demand for their product in the decade ahead. That's going to impact them financially in a big way and they have a huge financial interest in slowing that down. And their tool of choice is misinformation. Little white lies, lots of half truths, twisted facts, lies by omission, etc. That's not to say tire particles in ocean water aren't an issue. But the reality is that most of those particles come from ICE vehicles right now.