this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
77 points (98.7% liked)

Toronto

1621 readers
4 users here now

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Friends:
Support lemmy.ca

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Tire degradation comes from heat. Going slower produces less heat and therefore less pollution. On top of that, slower speeds are better for fuel economy as you aren't dealing with wind resistance as much. That's why the u.s. set the national speed limit to 55 during the 70s oil crises. Of course today's cars that use hybrid and cvt transmissions are even more efficient at slower speeds than cars from 50 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A more narrow road will also cause drivers to slow down, they could put up barriers for bike lanes and repaint the lines

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

we could create a system where cars can link together and use a low friction guided surface that doesn't require rubber tread.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I’ve been optimistic my whole life that cars will be banned by 2030, still not too late

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Going slower may produce less heat but does decelerating produce less heat? Some may drive slower but most will speed up and then brake before each speed bump.

When you brake the tires rubber is what actually slows the vehicle for the most part, and many may skid if they accidentally brake to hard before a speed bump, contributing to more rubber being washed away into nearby catch basins and creeks.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I can accept what you're saying about heat as true, but I don't think you're addressing the issue of repeated acceleration and deceleration as it relates to speed bumps. Some amount of extra tire wear will occur due to the extra forces involved in acceleration and deceleration, regardless of the temperature of the rubber.

I agree that slower speeds are better for fuel economy due to the wind resistance issue, but that's very different from saying that a road with speed bumps is better for fuel economy when many of the drivers will be accelerating and braking between each bump, instead of traveling at a constant speed.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

...thats constant speed.

Constantly slowing and accelerating due to speed bumps is horrible for fuel efficiency.