Hacker News Reader

Comment by mosselman | Hacker News Reader

I have never heard the brake and tire argument, but it sounds like the 'batteries are worse for the environment than gas' argument which is not very accurate.

Makes you wonder if there are companies who benefit from information such as this being believed. Companies such as Shell maybe?

Edit: Not saying it isn't true! Just saying there might be more sides to this.

View on HN

Tire wear is a matter of friction. Higher weight, higher friction, thus more wear. In this isolated instance, electrical cars are likely to be worse off than regular cars due to generally higher weight. Perhaps this is offset by regenerative breaking systems though. I'm sure you could make that argument on other parts of the EV as well.

Outside of isolated areas like that, I would be seriously surprised if electrical cars comes worse off than gasoline cars on the whole. There has been some talk about CO2 emissions made when making hydro electric dams, for instance, but then there's also CO2 emissions when making oil platforms, and so on, so IMHO those kinds of discussions quickly become very theoretical. Either way, I'm sure EV's are better off in terms of local emissions, meaning that they reduce local smog, and so on.

On the other hand, EV's can very well run on coal, if that's how your local electricity is produced. In that case, how well EV's do environmentally speaking is due to the total effort made by society. For that reason I'd love to see a comparison of gasoline and diesel versus coal. Which one is the cleanest?

AFAIK there are some real issues with the way lithium is mined for the batteries, however, that doesn't strictly involve emissions. So there are many pros and cons in the debate on electric vs gas cars that aren't obvious to the casual on-looker.

I don't have a particular horse in this race myself, but I do note that those who do, tend to offer arguments that are more strongly coloured by their preference.

Personally environmental safety isn't the only deciding factor. There's also such things as cost and reach. And I don't just mean how many miles a car can run on one tank, but also its longevity. On the whole it seems to me that EV's have a higher capital cost (up front cost), that might not make up for the savings you make by running it.

On the whole it seems to me that gasoline cars have far better overall longevity than EV's, with the offset that EV's are cheaper to run, though with slightly more hassle in the "refuelling" department. For me personally, winter cold is an issue, since it severely affects battery capacity. On the other hand, those Teslas do look pretty cool.

Brake pads on my Nissan Leaf have lasted 6 years (~90,000 km).

> electrical cars are likely to be worse off than regular cars due to generally higher weight.

Given that a Nissan LEAF weighs about the same as a Honda CR-V, and that there are many EVs that have the same weight or are lighter than the Nissan LEAF, I would say that you are considering only a select group of EVs.

From https://www.easyelectriccars.com/how-much-do-electric-cars-w...

Here are some examples of popular electric cars and how much they weigh in order of weight:

    Model X Long Range – 2459 kg without passengers or fuel (7 adult capacity).
    Tesla Model S Performance – 2241 kg without passengers or cargo (5 adult capacity).
    Tesla Model S Long Range – 2215 kg without passengers of cargo (5 adult capacity).
    Model 3 Performance and Long Range AWD – 1847 kg without passengers or fuel (5 adult capacity).
    Nissan Leaf – 1775 kg without passengers or fuel (5 adult capacity).
    Chevrolet Bolt – 1616 kg without passengers or fuel (5 adult capacity).
    Opel/Vauxhall Ampera-E – 1611 kg without passengers or fuel (5 adult capacity).
    Renault Zoe, 44 kWh – 1480 kg without passengers or fuel (5 adult capacity).
    Hyundai Kona – 1399 kg without passengers or fuel (5 adult capacity).
    BMW i3 – 1343 kg without passengers or fuel (5 adult capacity).

Based on this, and the upcoming plans of many automakers to launch pickup truck and SUV type EVs, I would say that a significant portion of EVs will be heavier than the average car on the road currently.

The EV market is about 2% of car sales in the US. I doubt that we would be right to predict double-digit growth happening suddenly.

A Ford F150 (the most popular pick-up truck) weighs about the same as the Tesla Model 3. The top-selling vehicles in the US are all pick-up trucks.

The Toyota Camry (a popular sedan) weighs about the same as the Nissan LEAF. The Prius Prime is also in this weight range.

A Honda Fit (a popular small car) weight about the same as a Smart EQ. Small cars are not what US consumers are choosing.

Your argument is a hypothetical projection of Tesla-class EVs into a very large market-share. In reality, consumers are choosing larger, heavier ICE vehicles.

Your argument proves my point. The customers that are currently choosing larger, heavier ICE vehicles will choose the same form factor of EV when given the option, and that F150 which currently weighs the same as a Tesla Model 3 will add on however many hundreds of pounds a battery pack weighs. Same goes for the Camry, it weighs the same as a LEAF (a much smaller car) now, but when you add the battery pack in the bottom, now it weighs the same as a Model S.

I see, you imagine the current ICE-Vs with batteries. But US consumers want large vehicles and ICE-comparable range.

Very large EV batteries are expensive. Your conjecture may hold if the cost of Tesla-sized batteries becomes much cheaper (approximately half the current 2021 cost).

EVs are likely to remain a small market in the US. Hybrids make more sense for cost and range. In Europe, the EV market is growing rapidly. Although some people can afford the Tesla, small EVs are popular in Europe. And the small EVs are not especially heavy vehicles, as the data show.

Our two cars are a 2015 LEAF and a 2005 CR-V. These aren’t directly competitive cars IMO. The CR-V has much more interior and cargo space, obviously longer range, and better winter road performance.

The LEAF is more directly comparable to a Nissan Versa in size and capability (3500# vs 2500# curb weight).

* Weight of the average Small family car (C) (same class as the Nissan Leaf): 1,365 kg ^[1]

* Weight of the Nissan Leaf: 1,560 kg ^[2]

Difference: 1,560-1,365 = 195 kg.

So about two washing machines in difference... :) And that's by giving you credit by comparing the heaviest average within the same car class. The lightest one yields a three washing machine diff.

[1]: https://carroar.com/average-car-weight/#:~:text=An%20average....

[2]: https://www.guideautoweb.com/en/makes/nissan/leaf/2019/speci...

I think we differ in our perception of "small" and "mid-size" car.

But even so, 195 kg is the weight of a driver and passenger. If we consider this to be a decisive factor in pollution, we had better also consider the obesity epidemic as a factor in tire wear. ^_^

Excuse me, "perception"? I used an industry standard, pal.

One possible explanation is that I live in a different market. In any case, the weight comparisons are the real data to use. The Nissan LEAF is heavier than some cars, but much lighter than the most popular ICE-V choices being made by consumers.

> I have never heard the brake and tire argument, but it sounds like the 'batteries are worse for the environment than gas' argument which is not very accurate.

It's not quite the same thing as "the long tailpipe fallacy".

it's established fact, e.g.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48944561

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/microplastics-from-car-br...

https://airqualitynews.com/2020/03/09/air-pollution-from-tyr...

https://www.emissionsanalytics.com/news/pollution-tyre-wear-...

Electric cars are great, but let's be clear about what issues they will solve, and which they will not. They will produce _less_ particulate matter pollution due to not having an Internal Combustion Engine, but will not eliminate all sources of particulate matter pollution.

Or even come close - the last link above estimates 60% is "Non-exhaust emissions" from "brake wear, tyre wear, road surface wear and resuspension of road dust"

>Makes you wonder if there are companies who benefit from information such as this being believed.

If there is one thing I've learned from the Corona virus, it's that sometimes people push misinformation for ABSOLUTELY no reason at all.

It's not a showstopper, because the environmental argument for EVs is CO2 and climate change rather than PM2.5 and air quality. But it's worth bearing in mind that they only solve the former.

Don't lower diesel and gasoline emissions matter at all?

>>But it's worth bearing in mind that they only solve the former.

That's....almost categorically not true, the PM2.5 emissions should be solved with in ICE cars with inclusion of DPF and GPF filters, but there is plenty of cars without those still on the road. A taxi driver sitting outside of my house at night in his 10 year old Skoda Octavia diesel is definitely contributing to the air pollution around me, and that wouldn't be a problem if he drove an EV or a modern diesel with all the filters functional - but the economics of taxi driving mean they almost always drive crappy old cars which pollute a lot.

> the PM2.5 emissions should be solved with in ICE cars with inclusion of DPF and GPF filters

Unless they filter the tyres, this will not be "solved".

"Non-exhaust emissions (NEE) .. are currently believed to constitute the majority of primary particulate matter from road transport, 60 percent of PM2.5 and 73 percent of PM10"

https://www.emissionsanalytics.com/news/pollution-tyre-wear-...

I can't find it but I did recall there was some rule in France or some Scandinavian country that banned early childhood centres away from within certain distances to highways and a like

The tailpipe emissions on modern gasoline vehicles have very low particulates (and low NOx, which reduces particulate formation in the resulting air).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com