Atlantic article: US Driving Laws and long term impact

how do our peer nations protect their citizens from tire wear pollution?

agree with the speeding thing. enforcement is almost non existent.

 

i like my single family home, but around here, there are lots of two families, and there are tons of huge apartment buildings. unfortunately, they just add to the road congestion and more violence.

i noticed in parts of canada, you can convert your basement to a rental apartment. that is illegal here.

 

was this written by aoc?

this fellow doesn't seem to understand that we have, for better or worse, a representative government.

 

Urban air samples always contain tire bits, including those smaller than 2.5 microns that can get very deep into lungs. They differ chemically from particles and gases derived from tailpipe emissions. (with tailpipe being very broadly defined as the thing that comes after combustion)

Such chemical differences are important for toxicity. I cannot access Atlantic now, but my understanding of research is that combustion by-products are much more troublesome. There may be literature on this subject unknown to me. Actually that is certain to me so.

 

there's no scientific data or links in the article. the author is pretty much just throwing stuff out to see if anything sticks

 

Events where tires generate lots of smoke* are crowd pleasers. Folks inhaling there don't generally get sick. I guess. Don't know if it has been studied.

*aerosol

==
Diversion. During dry seasons here, water-spraying trucks roam streets, knocking down aerosols by making them bigger*. I don't know where they get their water but I'm sure it's not very clean. I run into a building when I see one of those 'bacteria/lung delivery vehicles' approaching.

*they fall faster

 

10-1 the author doesn't own a car, and is very bitter

 

Lung surface area is 50 to 100 square meters, depending on your size. Sounds big until some nerd mentions intestines are triple that.

 

yeah, like my gi guy

 

GI Joe

 

no, gi dick. great guy, but the intestine talk never ends

 

I was thinking of an Action Figure with white coat and endoscope.

 

Actually, the articles does link to this study regarding non-combustion PM emissions: Non-exhaust PM emissions from electric vehicles | Victor R.J.H. Timmers | Request PDF
Paywalled link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135223101630187X

However, I'm a bit skeptical that their check between EV and ICE vehicles was truly comparable.

That being said, the article is spot on regarding zoning laws and minimum parking requirements. Relevant exerpts:

 

Paywall - bah! Send private message if you need a personal copy.

Quick look, it mentions brake dust, which might not be friendliest aerosol around. This gang surely knows that vehicles with regenerative braking are all low emitters.

Vehicle weight is obviously a factor in tire wear. But focus on heavy battery haulers would seem to miss SUVs, pickup trucks, and other examples of upsizing.

 

and also a carbon diversion tactic

 

That publication was first submitted right around time of (VW) dieselgate and expressed high optimism that that diesel vehicles would become very clean very soon.

It sounds so quaint now.

 

authors name has me scratching my head...

 

Yeah, if they are comparing a Model 3 to a Corolla, I could see the Model 3 being not much better on tire dust. However, based on the pricing range, they should be comparing that Model 3 to something like a Highlander or 4Runner.

However, this overlooks the fact that the biggest health threat from car emissions isn't tire dust, but tailpipe emissions. That alone puts pretty much any EV over an ICEV.

 

the article claims that 85-90% of toxic vehicle emissions in traffic come from tire wear and other non tailpipe sources