3 ms·

EVs aren't zero emission on the road, either; roughly half of the pollution of an ICE car is not from the exhaust, but from the tires breaking down and releasin

EVs aren't zero emission on the road, either; roughly half of the pollution of an ICE car is not from the exhaust, but from the tires breaking down and releasing tiny (likely carcinogenic) particles, and heavy electric vehicles wear down their tires faster than a lighter car.

0_____0 2y ago
The conversation around microplastics rarely includes this info - a significant fraction of microplastics in an urban environment are from car tires, potentially the single largest source IIRC.
uoaei 2y ago
At a rate proportional to the fourth power of the weight per-axle[1]. So considering how much more EVs weigh compared to their ICE counterparts, we can only hope that compact and lightweight EVs become more prominent. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  EVs don't weigh that much more than ICE cars, e.g. Tesla Model 3 weighs around the same as a Ford Taurus. Moreover, EV or not is the irrelevant part of the equation. Model Y is ~4300 lbs, Ford Explorer is ~4500, Ford Excursion is ~7000, so which one do you want your neighbors driving? "Everyone should ride a 100 lb motorcycle" is the sort of hypothetical alternative that the people currently driving a big SUV are just going to scoff at and vote out anyone who attempts to force it. You'd be much more likely to succeed by e.g. trying to find a different tire composition that reduces particulates.
  - redwall_hp 2y ago
    I drive a 3000lb Honda Fit. A 2002 Camry, which is a perfectly reasonable family sedan, tops out at about 3300lb. The 2024 is up to a beefy 3600. The answer is none of your options, emphatically. I want to see extreme taxation (to the tune of the fourth-power of axle weight) and increases in liability for operating a vehicle over 3999lb.
    - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
      Then all the cars will weigh exactly 3999 lbs, which is about what they do right now (average new car is within 100 lbs of that), and everything will cost more because your tax will hit all the small businesses that use light trucks for legitimate needs instead of grocery runs. Also, it's a de facto ban on long-range EVs (EV battery weight is proportional to range), which seems counterproductive if you care anything about climate change, because then the vehicles that see the highest number of miles continue to run on petroleum. Stop trying to regulate random indirect metrics and concentrate on the actual problems. Is it traffic and too many vehicle miles? Then build higher density housing and subways. Is it air quality? Then address particulate emissions using general rules rather than specific ones -- regulate rate at which car tires can expel particulates. If they have to reduce the weight of the car to reduce the cost, fine, but if they can find another way, that's good too. If you don't like the status quo, identify why and address that, don't just pick some isolated aspect of it and try to ban it without contemplating what incentives the rules are going to create. That's how we got into this mess.
- Filligree 2y ago
  Would it be unreasonable to put a third axle on?
cagenut 2y ago
thats not what the word emissions means
tomjakubowski 2y ago
"zero emission" usually refers to greenhouse gases
- tmountain 2y ago
  Which is unfortunate because any metric in a vacuum can be misleading regarding contribution to the aggregate.
IshKebab 2y ago
Particulates are only a local air quality issue. They don't cause global warming. This barely-an-issue is only ever brought up by people trying to naysay EVs. I've never once heard it mentioned before EVs became popular, despite heavy ICE cars being extremely common.

0_____0 2y ago

The conversation around microplastics rarely includes this info - a significant fraction of microplastics in an urban environment are from car tires, potentially the single largest source IIRC.

uoaei 2y ago

At a rate proportional to the fourth power of the weight per-axle[1]. So considering how much more EVs weigh compared to their ICE counterparts, we can only hope that compact and lightweight EVs become more prominent. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law

AnthonyMouse 2y ago
EVs don't weigh that much more than ICE cars, e.g. Tesla Model 3 weighs around the same as a Ford Taurus. Moreover, EV or not is the irrelevant part of the equation. Model Y is ~4300 lbs, Ford Explorer is ~4500, Ford Excursion is ~7000, so which one do you want your neighbors driving? "Everyone should ride a 100 lb motorcycle" is the sort of hypothetical alternative that the people currently driving a big SUV are just going to scoff at and vote out anyone who attempts to force it. You'd be much more likely to succeed by e.g. trying to find a different tire composition that reduces particulates.
- redwall_hp 2y ago
  I drive a 3000lb Honda Fit. A 2002 Camry, which is a perfectly reasonable family sedan, tops out at about 3300lb. The 2024 is up to a beefy 3600. The answer is none of your options, emphatically. I want to see extreme taxation (to the tune of the fourth-power of axle weight) and increases in liability for operating a vehicle over 3999lb.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    Then all the cars will weigh exactly 3999 lbs, which is about what they do right now (average new car is within 100 lbs of that), and everything will cost more because your tax will hit all the small businesses that use light trucks for legitimate needs instead of grocery runs. Also, it's a de facto ban on long-range EVs (EV battery weight is proportional to range), which seems counterproductive if you care anything about climate change, because then the vehicles that see the highest number of miles continue to run on petroleum. Stop trying to regulate random indirect metrics and concentrate on the actual problems. Is it traffic and too many vehicle miles? Then build higher density housing and subways. Is it air quality? Then address particulate emissions using general rules rather than specific ones -- regulate rate at which car tires can expel particulates. If they have to reduce the weight of the car to reduce the cost, fine, but if they can find another way, that's good too. If you don't like the status quo, identify why and address that, don't just pick some isolated aspect of it and try to ban it without contemplating what incentives the rules are going to create. That's how we got into this mess.
Filligree 2y ago
Would it be unreasonable to put a third axle on?

cagenut 2y ago

thats not what the word emissions means

tomjakubowski 2y ago

"zero emission" usually refers to greenhouse gases

tmountain 2y ago
Which is unfortunate because any metric in a vacuum can be misleading regarding contribution to the aggregate.

IshKebab 2y ago

Particulates are only a local air quality issue. They don't cause global warming. This barely-an-issue is only ever brought up by people trying to naysay EVs. I've never once heard it mentioned before EVs became popular, despite heavy ICE cars being extremely common.