EV Tires Causing Increased Pollution

[timbop]

Because one type of pollution leaves extra bits of rubber on the ground. The other could potentially boil our entire planet. Which one would you consider more important to address?

Exactly.

The crux of the matter is not just that average temperature goes up - it's that climate patterns change significantly because there is more heat energy in the atmosphere. Sure areas at or near the equator may end up bing uninhabitable to humans, but the locations of arable and arid lands will also change. Some rich farmland of today will become marginal within decades. Areas once unlikely to have severe weather in the past will have severe storms on a regular basis. Miami routinely has flooding in clear weather with no storms present. Two major insurers have pulled out of Florida already.

As for Hybrids: they only reduce pollution over an ICE if you predominantly drive them on electricity like a BEV. They have far more complex transmissions, require more maintenance, and STILL contribute 75% as much "tire pollution" as a BEV. Did this study take that into account?

Sponsored

 

[voxel]

This exact same argument was mentioned to me by an EV-hating Toyota finance manager when I bought my RAV4 Prime back in 2021. It's been floating around for a while.

Same Toyota F&I guy said that Toyota was building hydrogen fueling stations in FL and they were going to lease/sell Mirais. Toyoto loses buckets of cash (some say $100K) per Mirai leased. Doesn't make sense in a non-CARB state like Florida.

 

[Teslaeata]

Earth.com posted an article that EV's tires are 20% more polluting. This is partially due to the weight and torque that release microplastics.
Hidden costs: Electric vehicle tires emit 20% more pollution • Earth.com

Are EV tires made of different compounds than tires for ICE vehicles? What about the F250 4 door full size bed that weighs more than the MME? Do they pollute? True they don't have the torque.

I wonder what the tire manufacturers would say.

Maybe it's just another article to show if you think your car is helping the environment and reducing global warming, you are very wrong.

?is it horse I can smell?

? is it dog?

? is it sheep

? nope, think it’s bull ?

 

[Logal727]

"Earth.com is the premier internet destination for those who care about our planet and environment and want to make a difference ... Earth.com is for people who care about the Earth and have an interest in nature, the environment, and science. It’s for those who care about our planet and want to make a difference."

So you’re saying only liberals care about the environment? Hey at least someone is admitting it.

 

[DevSecOps]

So you’re saying only liberals care about the environment? Hey at least someone is admitting it.

I think most people care about it regardless of party. I care about it, but the difference is to what extent and where I believe there's truth. I've said in many posts that I don't necessarily believe that I'm saving the environment with EVs, but if I am that's a great thing! I'm just not blindly sold on most of it. I also think there's plenty of examples of liberals trashing the environment especially with the homeless and rich Hollywood jet-setters. I personally believe that a lot of things are sold to us for financial gain of politicians, stock holders and those interested in selling agendas.

I've also said many times on this forum that it's very strange how government isn't pushing other zero emissions technologies. Why are they so hell-bent on Electrification. When I was a kid I specifically remember them passing out florescent bulbs for free (even at Costco) because using electricity was "bad" for the environment and we should conserve it. Well ... 20 years later and we want to switch everything to electricity? Make it make sense!

 

[kltye]

As for Hybrids: they only reduce pollution over an ICE if you predominantly drive them on electricity like a BEV. They have far more complex transmissions, require more maintenance, and STILL contribute 75% as much "tire pollution" as a BEV. Did this study take that into account?

I 100% agree with your other points, but I don't think it's exactly fair to say that hybrids have far more complex transmissions or require more maintenance. At least for the series-parallel hybrids like Toyota's Hybrid Synergy Drive system (and Ford who licensed that tech from them), those transmissions are incredibly reliable. If anything, I'd say they also require less maintenance since there's less overall engine wear, and the planetary gearset of that transmission type involves fewer moving parts than a regular torque converter. Yes, it's technically a more complex system (I'm lumping PHEVs and HEVs together since PHEVs are just hybrids with comparatively giant batteries), but most of the complexity is handled in software, rather than hardware.

I think PHEVs are a great stepping stone for some types of people (unsure about charging, need to repair trombones across the country on a daily basis, etc.). The only problem is the good ones are either unobtanium at this point (RAV4 Prime), or have gone out of production (Chevy Volt).

 

[hartmms]

Science says CO2 is a massive problem, so we gotta address that with urgency. Micro plastics/rubber solution is a lower order concern right now, IMHO. Can someone do a study that takes a crack at measuring what level of rubber pollution has already happened over our 100 years of vehicles and compare that to what the impact would be of a 20% increase in rubber pollution due to BEV (assuming we quickly covert the world to BEV)?

Science is not a conspiracy.

 

[GreaseMonkey]

When I was a kid I specifically remember them passing out florescent bulbs for free (even at Costco) because using electricity was "bad" for the environment and we should conserve it. Well ... 20 years later and we want to switch everything to electricity? Make it make sense!

I get what you’re saying, but 20 years ago electricity was much worse than it is today. Electricity is the power source to lean on, not because it’s great now, but it can be in the future. It’s the platform to make meaningful reductions in GHG.

 

[MG101]

I don't know, my '89 leaves way more mircoplastics on the road than the Mach-e and I only drive that maybe 1000 miles a year.

 

[kltye]

I get what you’re saying, but 20 years ago electricity was much worse than it is today. Electricity is the power source to lean on, not because it’s great now, but it can be in the future. It’s the platform to make meaningful reductions in GHG.

Also, conserving electricity is different than switching sources of motive energy. We should still strive for energy efficiency, e.g., stupid 200 kWh Hummer EVs are still stupid. And going EVs means abstracting the fuel type from the vehicle; in other words - an upgrade to the grid automatically upgrades hundreds of thousands of vehicles for "free" in terms of CO2 emissions.

 

[DevSecOps]

I get what you’re saying, but 20 years ago electricity was much worse than it is today. Electricity is the power source to lean on, not because it’s great now, but it can be in the future. It’s the platform to make meaningful reductions in GHG.

I knew someone would say this... I recognize that it's better in some countries, including the USA:

2003 emissions from electricity generation in the USA = 532 gCO₂e
2023 emissions from electricity generation in the USA = 367 gCO₂e

This doesn't take into account solar panel manufacturing and emissions generated there. I don't think it makes up 165 points, but it's still not the greatest thing.

Also in 20 years, over 60 countries have increased their output through electrical generation and it has become much worse. The electricity generation CO2 emissions for the entire world have only gone down 30 points in 20 years (cited). I would guess that solar panel manufacturing emissions easily make up this 30 point difference. So what's changed in 20 years?

 

[GreaseMonkey]

I knew someone would say this... I recognize that it's better in some countries however

2003 emissions from electricity generation in the USA = 532 gCO₂e
2023 emissions from electricity generation in the USA = 367 gCO₂e

This doesn't take into account solar panel manufacturing and emissions generated there. I don't think it makes up 165 points, but it's still not the greatest thing.

Also in 20 years, over 60 countries have increased their output through electrical generation and it has become much worse (cited).

It got worse because they are making suboptimal choices when better choices are available. My only point is, you can get to a cleaner state with electricity, when you can’t with most other sources of energy.

 

[MG101]

2003 emissions from electricity generation in the USA = 532 gCO₂e
2023 emissions from electricity generation in the USA = 367 gCO₂e

Maybe I don't understand but don't those numbers show less co2 per kwh?

edit: and without total production it kinda doesn't tell the whole story?

 

[HGxxx]

The tyre issue is not EV specific, it's vehicle weight, and I don't think any vehicle is going down in weight anytime soon.

 

[DevSecOps]

Maybe I don't understand but don't those numbers show less co2 per kwh?

edit: and without total production it kinda doesn't tell the whole story?

You're right, it's less. In the USA we have gone down in emissions from the generation of electricity. I think my wording choice may make it sound like I'm disagreeing, but I'm not. The problem I see with that is that we have outsourced CO2 emissions to other countries for our power generation in the forum of solar panel manufacturing and as a planet we haven't budged in 20 years. CO2, doesn't just stay in one spot. Since we have 2B more people in the world over the last 20 years I would only assume production has gone up.

Sponsored