Laurie WinklessI've just published my April story for @forbes. It's all about non-exhaust emissions and covers lots of recent research into their extent in our cities and their impact on our health
Robyn@LaurieWinkless
Good read, thank you.
Has anyone tried up quantify the amount buses and cyclists contribute compared to cars? And I'm presuming the things cyclists can do to reduce that are largely the same as for drivers- tire pressure and riding style, except that often people are replacing car trips with cycles so unless it can be realistically replaced with walking instead cycle trips are net benefit.
@RedRobyn I've seen a few studies - I'll link below - but it will likely be a tiny fraction, especially when measured on a per capita basis. The average Bikes+cyclist might weigh ~100kg(?). A Ford Range is 2500kg+. A Metlink bus here in Welly weighs about 10x a Ford Ranger when full of passengers (they have a capacity of 110ish). Cars and trucks dominate emissions profiles in general because of their sheer numbers (and their weight), so I can't imagine it'd be any different for non-exhaust emissions
@RedRobyn Quantifying abrasion of microplastics from mountain bike tires https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969725006060
@RedRobyn and this is a decent review - Table 1 gives numbers for different types of vehicles (incl. buses) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720313358
Tanguy Fardet@LaurieWinkless this gives a surprisingly (to me) small difference between car and bike as they mention 3.6 vs 11 g/100 km; though maybe mountain bike emissions would be much larger than road bike... if the latter is closer to the 1.43 g/100 km that is mentioned for later stages in mountain bikes (or even lower) then it'd be a bit more significant.
Anyway, I expected the speed and mass difference to lead to more significant differences.