507
Car tires shed a quarter of all microplastics in the environment. Urgent action is needed (phys.org)
submitted 2 years ago* by to c/climate@slrpnk.net
113 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Electric cars are not THE solution.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 2 years ago (24 children)

Electric cars are not THE solution.

This is why I raised the topic of airless tires a while back. They're not the solution, but they last longer than traditional tires. Initially they were rated to last a lifetime, but that's not profitable so they put an end to that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 24 child comments
    •
  • [–] 34 points 2 years ago (22 children)

    That does not address the issue at all. The problem is that tires wear, and the particles of tire rubber that are shed are the microplastics.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (9 children)

    A tire that lasts a lifetime would shed less particles than one that needs replacing every so many miles all the tires used in the same timeframe, would it not?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 26 points 2 years ago

    Here's the problem with tires.

    If you want long treadwear, you use harder material. But then you get worse traction.

    If you want good traction, you use softer material. But then you get worse treadwear.

    If you want a car to perform safely on public roads, its tires necessarily need to wear away as they are used. Electric vehicles are presently even worse on tires, as they weigh so much more than ICE vehicles.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    The reason tires need replacing is because they're relatively thin. Airless tires aren't wear-less tires.

    Not to mention that airless tires make for a horrible ride.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    Actually earlier prototypes were wear-less, from both companies that were developing them.

    As for the horrible ride, from what I've seen, that's not a problem. But even if it was perhaps that should be solved by other aspects of the car.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    There is, fundamentally, one measurement that defines everything about the performance characteristics of a car: the amount of force it can impart on the road (and vice versa). This single measure defines its limits of acceleration, turning and braking. And what determines how much of that force is available?

    The tires, and the coefficient of friction of the rubber compound they're made of, which is directly related to how quickly they wear. Every possible solution that makes tires wear less will also make cars perform worse.

    ...Well, short of drastically reducing weight (i.e. making a bicycle instead of a car).

    ...Or swapping them out for steel and running the thing on rails (i.e. making a train instead of a car).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    The amount of time a tire lasts ultimately has fuck-all to do with whether it's airless or penumatic; it has to do with how much traction it provides and how large/heavy a vehicle it's supporting. Any tire that is good at its job of providing traction to a big, heavy vehicle like an automobile (and SUVs / EVs / EV SUVs only make this worse) is going to pollute a fuck-ton compared to, say, a bicycle tire or the steel wheel on rail public transit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Rubber+friction=micro plastics

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago*

    Rubber is quite literally the sap of a rubber tree. Latex. They mix other materials in with it, but this is one instance where I don't think the rubber is the issue.

    It's the fillers they put in the rubber; Nylon, Rayon, Polyester, etc.

    Tires are about 25% steel fibers, another 30%ish filler materials, and Rubber (either synthetic or natural)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (7 children)

    I ride motorcycles and tires have always been a major issue with riders because of cost. Bike tires wear out fast even though it's a lighter vehicle and tends to put on less mileage.

    The main culprit that most industry insiders have suggested is that motorcycle tires are purposely designed to not last as long because its so easy to market crappy tires to the vast majority of riders. All you need is have marketing campaign of racers and racing tires and then stamp the name on a tire and sell it to young guys who want to ride as fast as possible ... they'll pay hundreds year after year for tires that only last one season but supposedly give them great performance.

    I ride moderately on a 1998 BMW K1200, a fast sport touring bike and I put on moderate mileage every summer ... I'm not a long distance rider ... yet I have to change my tires just about every year.

    Fortnine, a Youtube channel dedicated to motorcycle riding did a great description of this ....

    https://youtu.be/hEZeR9E3JyY

    The giveaway is that you could put a small car tire on a motorcycle and it would last ten times longer ... whereas you place a motorcycle tire on a motorcycle tire and it will last for a far shorter time.

    Motorcycle tires are designed to not last as long .... fast riders can argue that better tires do not last as long and I agree with them ... but for moderate riders or just Sunday riders with low mileage, there is no need to have motorcycle tires last for such a short period of time. It's all meant to sell as many tires as possible for no reason other than to make someone money.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    The trouble is that motorcycles are generally way higher-performance than cars (in terms of e.g. HP/weight ratio), so putting low-friction, long-lasting tires on them is irresponsible. It'd be like putting Prius tires on a Lamborghini: sure, you could drive the thing responsibly and within the performance limits of the tire, but it's missing the point of the vehicle.

    Now, if more motorcycles were built sensibly -- with much less horsepower -- then I'd expect the tires to last a decent amount of time. For example, do 49cc scooters have the tire wear problem you're complaining about? I'm willing to bet the answer is "no."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    This is where the debate constantly diverges to extremes ... either have sensible long lasting tires ... or high performance racing tires ... but nothing moderate in between.

    Manufacturers are more than able to produce a reasonable motorcycle tire that would have enough performance and would last far longer. There just isn't any incentive to do it. It makes them far more money to make tires that don't last as long and at this point, I think everyone knows that, we are just not able to do anything about it.

    Like my 1998 BMW ... it's an ancient machine at this point and it was originally a performance bike when it was new and would have benefited from a high performance tire ... but its 26 years old and I really don't trust it to go fast any more but I love the look of the bike and I enjoy riding it. I maintain and service it myself but there are far too many old parts on it that there will inevitably something that will fail and I really don't want that to happen at speed. All I need is a good decent tire, not a tire that is meant for the race track for a modern newer bike.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Like my 1998 BMW … it’s an ancient machine at this point and it was originally a performance bike when it was new and would have benefited from a high performance tire … but its 26 years old and I really don’t trust it to go fast any more

    I guarantee your '98 BMW is still way faster than my '90 Miata, and even that is still a sports car that still deserves and requires decent tires. Therefore, yours still does too.

    I wasn't being hyperbolic when I used 49cc scooters as an example -- I really do think that's pretty close to the limit of how much power a motorcycle can have and still reasonably use long-wearing, not-very-grippy tires.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Is it not because they have so little contact area compared to passenger vehicle tires?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    The contact area compared to the weight ratio is not that different from any other vehicle .... a bike weighs less so it has less contact ... a car weighs more and so needs more contact with the road ... a truck weighs a lot and needs even more contact with the road.

    The end result is always the same ... the technology is there to make a motorcycle tire last far longer and the same with car tires ... the problem is is that there is no financial incentive to make a long lasting tire that would be better for the environment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I know motorcycle tires need replacing fairly frequently, but I had no idea it was a racket. Although, I'd think they'd generally need to be softer for maximum traction on two wheels.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    The whole traction debate only makes sense if you start getting into racing speeds and riding on a fast race track. For the average rider, we're only riding at normal highway speed (at least we are supposed to) and guys like me like our riding lifestyle enough to never get into crazy speeds because we baby our bikes, we don't want to create any more variables to put our lives at risk and we're cheap and don't want to wear out our tires.

    If I knew of a manufacturer that produced a cheap $100 tire that could last four or five season of my light moderate riding ... it would be the only tire I would buy. But there are so many manufacturers, types, subtypes, models, years, design, material of tires out there that's it's a constant science to try to figure out what is real and what isn't. I usually don't have the time to research it all nor do I have the resources that I just end up buying the same Metzeler tires because I don't want to order the wrong tire and I definitely don't want to install the wrong tire either.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Tires are a part of life. We can make small changes until we improve public transport infrastructure across the world or we can continue as we have done and drive this planet to extinction.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Tires are not "a part of life!" Humanity did just fine without them until not much more than a century ago, despite not having much public transit back then, either.

    You know what the real difference, and the real solution today is? Walkable, dense zoning.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    I would love to force everyone to walk their kids to school, but things are fucked. Sadly it takes a while to teach us to unlearn things. Even iny borough in London, they're dragging their heels on licensing ebikes and that hurts everyone.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    For those who didn't read the article or aren't following EU politics, Euro 7, passed in April, explicitly addresses the need for reining in pollution from brakes and tires. Some more information here:

    The position adopted by the European Parliament improves the European Commission's proposal by extending the scope of tyre abrasion limits to all tyres and not just those fitted on Euro 7 vehicles. It also directly links Euro 7 to the work that is being done in the UNECE World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP. 29), which will set global rules regarding a test method and limits for tyre abrasion.

    There's a new Euro standard "major version" every 5.8 years on average, so here's hoping that my outdoor furniture will soon not become completely blackened within a year after the last cleaning.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago*

    It has nothing to do with being "not profitable"; they couldn't find a way to engineer the tires to not be unstable at speeds above 45mph. They sell airless tires commercially today, but it's mostly for farm equipment that moves slowly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent