• mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        62
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        26 days ago

        we could probably manage traffic much easier if switching was controlled vs. random drivers…

        • ValiantDust@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          44
          ·
          26 days ago

          While we’re at it, maybe we could install some powerlines to provide the vehicles with electricity. That way they could run on renewable energy.

    • thefartographer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      26 days ago

      Sounds like it’ll be rough on the road, but I’m willing to try it! /s

      I miss the trains of NJ and NYC so badly, this part of Texas fucking sucks with public transportation. Losing access to a car here has you flirting dangerously close to homelessness. Which is also why I’ll usually give a ride to anyone who asks around here.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    87
    ·
    26 days ago

    Geez, here is another issue for which we’ve known about for 40 or so years that requires “urgent Action” for the past 40 years already

    Wake me up when we finally do something

    • Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      edit-2
      26 days ago

      Boomers have categorically chosen apathy in favor of their own self interests since 1970. By the late 90s, they were a wrecking ball.

      • Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        26 days ago

        I disagree. People who live their entire lives being relentless bombarded by consumerist propaganda and pro-capitalist disinformation are not truly free to vote against it, nor were they given the chance. Al Gore cared more about the environment than Bush, but he was still a capitalist that supported car dependency and the military industrial complex.

        • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          26 days ago

          Which is why replacing First-past-the-post voting is so important. We need to have more then two options.

          Democrats believe in democracy right? What’s the hold up blue states?

        • Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          26 days ago

          So you’re absolving “Generation Me” of ever having to think for themselves? The same generation that could have educated themselves for less than the price of new car, and simply chose not to because a high school diploma was enough?

          Millennials were just as heavily, if not more propagandized, and yet, as a cohort, we have skewed far from Baby Boomers (ie Millenials are killing x), while retaining the ability to be critical of the systems we have inherited. We are also far more educated and far more in debt. All as a result of Boomers subsidizing their own welfare on the backs of their children and grandchildren.

          Baby Boomers collectively failed upward, soaked up benefit after benefit while telling themselves that they deserved their station in life, and then pulled up every ladder behind them.

          So, hard disagree.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        24 days ago

        Most probably simply didn’t know. A lot has to do with policies made by politicians that did know. Don’t pretend to be better, you would have done the same back then with the information you had. Remember, no internet.

        • Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          24 days ago

          lol, ok.

          Despite your unfounded assumption, I’m old enough to know what it was like living pre-internet. Information was there, for those who chose to seek it out. Boomers, on the other hand, are the living definition of Dunning-Kruger. So no, they don’t get a pass. They chose to remain ignorant and uneducated, and when they gained any advantage, they made sure that those who came afterward would NOT. That’s not just a lack of awareness, it’s mean-spirited and selfish. Which fits “Generation Me,” to a T.

          • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 days ago

            Well, no.

            I am from the generation after the boomers but I grew up right before the Internet exploded onto the world and i can tell you that you would never see that sort of information unless you were looking for it. I know people love to shit on boomers, hence boomers being an insult word these days, but many simply couldn’t know better.

            Hell, I didn’t know and believe me, I was (and still am) the kind of person that loves to read new things STEM. I had subscriptions on scientific magazines and I do remember reading articles about it being anything, scientists already knew about car tired being a problem, but it didn’t go beyond some reports. The general population didn’t know and pretending that they could have and should have known is simply disingenuous.

            If you were alive at that time then you too know that it wasn’t that easy.

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      26 days ago

      You might as well just take the long nap.

      No ones gonna do anything.

      We’re gonna keep wringing our hands about it, desperately shout time is running out…and watch time run out, then shrug our shoulders and go “Welp, nothing we can do about it now”

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      26 days ago

      Those reusable grocery bags made from recycled plastic? Disintegrates into dust eventually. And in your household to while it does so.

      Use either natural fiber or nylon(more durable and by default, PFAS free).

      • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        26 days ago

        I use a 40L messenger backpack for my groceries with a cotton bag inside for anything that doesn’t fit.

    • vaionko@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      26 days ago

      And on the other hand, growing cotton uses a lot of water. And wool comes from animals.

      What actually is the greenest material to make garments of?

      • Scrollone@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        26 days ago

        I think hemp would be the best material for clothes, but in most places it’s still an illegal plant.

    • 4lan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      26 days ago

      Watch half the people in this sub completely scroll past your comment ignoring the fact that they are contributing to being insane amount of microplastics in our blood currently

      Y’all don’t stand for shit

    • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      26 days ago

      A little asbestos never hurt nobody

      (Edit: Nvm. I just looked it up, brake pads no longer use asbestos, which is cool at least)

  • Maetani@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    26 days ago

    While there’s no doubt tires are bad for the environment, a quarter of all microplastics seems a lot, especially since plastic is everywhere. Gladly there’s a source for that claim, a link to tireindustryproject’s FAQ… Claiming that this number is a gross overestimation. What the fuck is this article? Is it supposed to be satire or something?

    • Thorry84@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      26 days ago

      I’ve seen a similar number in a lot of proper scientific sources, so this article may be bunk, but the number is correct I think.

      For example this article: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.171003 They claim 27,26% in China.

      And this article: https://www.rivm.nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/2024-0106.pdf They claim 24.88% in the EU and state it’s among the biggest if not the biggest contributor to microplastics.

      I’m all for debunking stuff, but about a quarter seems to be the currently accepted quantity to the best of our abilities to measure.

      There is a bit of confusion between the amount tyres contribute into the ocean, how much into the ocean and waterways and how much in the environment as a whole. A lot of it ends up in the soil, so it doesn’t contribute to plastics in the water, but still in the environment.

    • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      26 days ago

      Bear in mind that the denominator is plastic pollution. Most plastic waste does not directly pollute the environment. If it is not recycled then it goes to landfills or incineration. Not ideal, but at least the damage is contained. (The bulk of ocean plastic comes from the rivers of poor countries without proper waste management.)

      The issue with tyre microplastics is that it’s all but impossible to channel the waste. It’s the same with synthetic fabric: just washing it creates pollution that’s really hard to control.

  • frankPodmore@slrpnk.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    26 days ago

    This is also yet another reason SUVs are bad: bigger tyres, higher weight, more wear, more pollution.

    It’s also another reason to have lower speed limits: less friction, less wear, less pollution.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      26 days ago

      You want trains because they are good for the environment.

      I want trains because chugga chugga choo choo.

      We are not the same.

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      26 days ago

      Yes, though note that tire and road wear scale with the 4th power of the vehicle weight. If a person on a bicycle weighs 200 pounds and a person driving a car weighs 2000 pounds then the car is going to have roughly 10,000 times as much tire wear (and microplastic shedding) as the bike.

      Now consider that people on bikes can even weigh less than 200 pounds and cars can weigh far more than 2000 pounds (I heard of a recent electric SUV that weighs 8000 pounds) and it becomes clear that bicycles are a complete non-issue, relative to cars. An 8000 pound car is equivalent to 6.25 million 160 pound bicycle + rider pairings.

      Now consider the effects of 18-wheeler tractor tailors with a maximum weight upwards of 80,000 pounds. These things absolutely disintegrate their tires. If you’ve done any highway driving you’ve likely seen the shredded debris of tires on the shoulder of the road.

      Edit: as an addendum I’d like to note that electric vehicles tend to weigh a lot more than ICE cars, by upwards of 1000 pounds. This is one of the reasons I’m dismayed at the rush to EVs: it’s going to accelerate the microplastic problem even as it reduces CO2.

      • Infomatics90@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        26 days ago

        Yes i agree. I have never driven but have been i a car due to medical reasons, but have rode a bike and plan to bike again once im a weight that a bike can sustain (im 370 right now). ive seen thoese tire “husks” on the highway sometimes.

  • AliasAKA@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    26 days ago

    If only there was a highly efficient mode of transporting people that didn’t use tires. Ah well, nothing can be done I guess.

      • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        25 days ago

        I imagine it’s still orders of magnitudes better than everyone driving their own car in.

        Same with busses. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of the good

    • Scrollone@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      26 days ago

      Yes, imagine if there was a fast and safe way of transport. Something like made to run on steel bars in order to reduce friction. I don’t know. I’m just imagining, I watch too much science fiction.

    • Echolynx@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      26 days ago

      To be fair, the most efficient mode of transportation is cycling by far. I wonder if bike tires also contribute to this.

        • Pulptastic@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          26 days ago

          The wear rate should be proportional to the weight of the system (car plus cargo and passsengers, bike plus cargo and riders), maybe with some correction factors for things that affect wear rate like knobbiness.

          Since bikes weigh a couple orders of magnitude less on average, the amount of tire wear material should also be a couple orders of magnitude less.

          Edit: other lemmyer said wear is proportional to weight to the 4th power and that may be correct. I vaguely recall that from school now that they mentioned it.

  • Blaster M@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    Lots of things contribute to this. Vehicle weight (extra stress on the tires), wheel alignment (toe-in/out causes scrubbing which causes more wear), unmaintained suspensions (worn out shocks, struts and bushings causing the above), burnouts (obviously, but, even in winter being the guy doing a burnout on summer tires while trying to get up an icy hill or across the intersection still counts), tire compound, road design, and driving style. If we had more cargo trains doing logi instead of long haul trucks we could probably cut down on a lot of pollution both in exhaust particles and tire particles.

  • Lun0tic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    26 days ago

    Tires also used to last longer. They are designed to wear out faster now.

    • icedterminal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      26 days ago

      This is so far from the truth.

      The real reason is cars are heavier. The more weight, the more wear on the tires. You can only make a tire compound so hard before they become uncomfortable rolling chunks.

      In the 70s when the fuel crisis hit, cars were very inefficient. Heavy steel and heavy engines that guzzled field. As the technology has progressed we use composite materials to make them lighter where we can. Some of these materials are more expensive than others, so you won’t find them on all models. Magnesium and Carbon fiber for example. We started to make cars lighter.

      Then there’s features, creature comforts, etc. We started adding more and more fancy features over time. These all add up. Heavy sound deadening pads are placed all over the bare chassis. Rip up your car’s carpet, underneath you’ll find them. They’re in the door and behind the dashboard. There’s even foam in the A, B and C pillars. We figured out that we can make cars quieter. Now that we can make them quieter, let’s add a lot of creature comforts. Power, heated seats and mirrors. Power windows, powered lift gates, and anything else that’s powered. These require electric motors. Not sure if you’ve ever seen these electric motors, but these are actually quite heavy little things. A few speakers is now almost a dozen in many models. Lots of trim pieces that make the car more aesthetically pleasing add weight.

      Safety is a huge factor as well. One or two airbags has turned into about a dozen. Extra beams that are used to dissipate energy around you in a crash. My car has 8 alone for just the front driver and passenger.

      Got a hybrid or an EV? These absolutely demolish tires because the additional components adds a lot of weight.

      Even though we got better at making composite materials and reducing weight where we could, our need for creature comforts and advancement in technology has caused the overall trend for a car’s weight to go up. This information is readily available if you’d like to search the Internet.

      A set of tires wear endurance has only gone up over time. But because of a car’s weight, it reduces its ability. Your driving habits also greatly impact how long your tires will last. Do you have a Rivian or Tesla? Go easy on the acceleration and showing off with the spirited driving. You can make your tires last less than 10,000 mi. Do you add additional weight? How long is that additional weight being hauled around? In other words, if your trunk is full of stuff, clean it out. You’re increasing fuel consumption and increasing tire wear.

    • AngryMob@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      26 days ago

      What? Maybe if you compare an old hard tire with no grip to a modern soft tire with tons of grip. But a modern hard tire lasts as long or longer and has more grip in all conditions.