Stéphane Pitois
The War on Cars"In fact, wear and tear on tires and brakes have been shown to produce increasingly more particle pollution, by mass, than car exhaust systems did in several real-world and test scenarios. Some of the particles are large enough to see with our eyes. Others are fine particles (known as PM 2.5, with diameters up to 2.5 microns) and ultrafine particles (known as PM 0.1, with diameters of 100 nanometers), which can enter through our bloodstream and harm our organs."
MarkNW@TheWarOnCars my initial thoughts:
1) yes, we need many fewer cars - better public transport, 15 minute cities, bike lanes etc;
2) EVs are not typically 1.5x as heavy as ICE equivalents, and the energy density of batteries is increasing, so the weight difference is likely to decrease;
3) regenerative braking means EVs emit far fewer brake particles than ICEs;
4) so implying EVs are worse because of their weight is misleading
1) yes, we need many fewer cars - better public transport, 15 minute cities, bike lanes etc;
2) EVs are not typically 1.5x as heavy as ICE equivalents, and the energy density of batteries is increasing, so the weight difference is likely to decrease;
3) regenerative braking means EVs emit far fewer brake particles than ICEs;
4) so implying EVs are worse because of their weight is misleading
dr2chase@alstonvicar @TheWarOnCars Eyeball estimate is 1.3x, which is definitely not equal. The way I'd estimate is tire size and tire lifetimes, using wear bar depth. Using plausible numbers (50kmile tire life) I end up with 100+mg of tire leaving a Tesla every mile. If EVs have larger tires and/or shorter tire lifetimes, that's more emissions.
@dr2chase @TheWarOnCars sorry - I don't understand what is 1.3x?
@alstonvicar @TheWarOnCars
"EVs are not typically 1.5x as heavy as ICE equivalents"
The ratio I saw, comparing Chevy Volt to Honda Civic (comparable passenger room) was 1.3x the weight. That should be less so in the future, but the future isn't here yet.
@dr2chase @TheWarOnCars thanks - that's interesting.
By way of comparison I've just looked at the VW Golf 7 (the new 8 range doesn't include an EV):
https://www.ultimatespecs.com/car-specs/Volkswagen/126116/Volkswagen-Golf-7-e-Golf.html
A low spec 1.2l petrol model weighed 1251Kg
A high spec GTi 2.0 weighed 1389Kg
The e-Golf weighed 1485Kg
By way of comparison I've just looked at the VW Golf 7 (the new 8 range doesn't include an EV):
https://www.ultimatespecs.com/car-specs/Volkswagen/126116/Volkswagen-Golf-7-e-Golf.html
A low spec 1.2l petrol model weighed 1251Kg
A high spec GTi 2.0 weighed 1389Kg
The e-Golf weighed 1485Kg
Volkswagen Golf 7 e-Golf Technical Specs, Range, Dimensions
Volkswagen Golf 7 e-Golf 2014,2015,2016 Specs:Power 116 PS (114 hp); Electric;Range:118 miles (190 km);Dimensions: Length:425.5 cm (167.52 inches); Width:179.9 cm (70.83 inches);Height:145.2 cm (57.17 inches);Doors:5;Weight:1485 kg (3274 lbs)
RiaResists@TheWarOnCars we’ve know this for at least 30 years.
I just love on-ramps highways that have a long straight stretch, then you have to break for the u-turn to enter the highway.
I remember being alarmed when crap like soft soap came along. More plastic waste.
It almost seems intentional.
I just love on-ramps highways that have a long straight stretch, then you have to break for the u-turn to enter the highway.
I remember being alarmed when crap like soft soap came along. More plastic waste.
It almost seems intentional.
KenBallweg@TheWarOnCars @seachanger this is why any large metro area I visit for long triggers my asthma. Portland OR was always a trial to visit because of this.