The Greens are polluting the world again
Last week I told Mark Steyn that heavier cars would wear down tyres faster, which would vaporize more tyre chemicals in the air. And here we are a few days later with news stories saying that EV’s wear out their tyres 50% faster, which is not just inconvenient and expensive, and uses more oil, but unleashes as many as 200 different chemicals into the air and water as well. With 2 billion tyres made around the world each year and the forced EV transition supposedly coming any day, it’s yet another problem to be solved “on the fly”, damn the consequences.
By 2050 there are estimates that tyres will be the worlds largest source of microplastics. Not so good for the corals and fishes, but who cares about them right?
If Greens ever want to start caring for the environment or the poor they could always cut half a ton of weight off an EV just by buying an internal combustion engine car instead. It feeds more plants than a lithium battery does too.
h/t Spangled Drongo
LONDON (Reuters) – Tyre-makers are under pressure to almost literally reinvent the wheel as regulators turn their scrutiny to tyre pollution that is set to surge with the rise of electric vehicles (EVs) and threatens to undermine those cars’ green credentials.
When tyres make contact with the road, tiny particles are abraded and emitted. The extra weight of EVs linked to their batteries means this little-discussed form of pollution – from an estimated 2 billion tyres produced globally every year – is becoming a bigger problem.
Emerging research is showing the toxicity of tyres, which on average contain about 200 components and chemicals, often derived from crude oil.
While critics say tyres contain many toxic and carcinogenic chemicals, so far there is only really consensus around one – 6PPD, an antioxidant and antiozonant found in all tyres that reduces cracking.
Developed during the Korean War, research shows that when 6PPD reacts with oxygen or ozone it forms 6PPD-quinone, which has been blamed for mass deaths of Coho salmon off the U.S. West Coast.
Particles from tires are expected to be the largest source of microplastics potentially harmful to aquatic life by 2050. Michelin estimates that globally tires emit around 3 million tonnes of particles annually – and create another 3 million tonnes of particles from road surfaces.
It’s just another unintended glitch on the road to Green Heaven
A group called Emissions Analytics published a report comparing real-world tailpipe particulate mass emissions to tire wear emissions. And the emissions from wear-and-tear was apparently around 1,850 times greater than what comes out of the tailpipe. (Which shows how good those air filters and engineering is in cars).
“Where are the environmentalists”?
These issues of pollution are not being actively pursued by Greenpeace as far as I can tell, but by the free market — the tyre companies that want to brag about their better tyres.
I would not be surprised if brakes wear faster as well, generating more particulate matter to add to the collection. The Paris metro system has been in the news regarding higher than reported figures for particulates, though a lot of the rolling stock uses rubber tyres to reduce noise, and that is known to have an impact on air quality too.
https://www.france24.com/en/environment/20230405-prosecutors-investigate-paris-metro-operator-over-air-pollution-claims
Is EV generated particulate size distribution and composition “better” or “worse” for human health than that generated by vehicles with diesel engines, I wonder?
311
Regenerative braking will be a must!
When will it sink in with the commentariat that in this new world old inefficiencies that we are accustomed to just will not be affordable?
41 years ago I was forced to put in time at a Sydney hospital. When the first emergency passed, what does a farmer do? He walks out onto the footpath to see what he can see.
And what did I see? I saw an endless procession of 30 hundredweights of tin, mostly carting one person. That’s more than one tonne per person, by the kilogram costing money.
It would be difficult to devise a less efficient means of moving people.
41 years on not much has changed. But things soon will. No need for regulations, the price tags will force it.
135
Try heavy rail passenger trains. I looked up the numbers years ago, when Sydney’s Tangara carriages were newish, and it worked out at about 1 tonne per passenger with *every* seat occupied. So it’s only when playing sardines in rush hour(s) that rail is more efficient (energy-wise) than the “awful” single occuplant cars.
300
A 5-seat ICE motor car still has a minimum occupancy of 20%.
A Tangara could have up to 200 passengers per car without causing significant delays to other services but has an average occupancy of 5% to 10% over its service cycle.
Moreover the auxiliary services on an electric railcar (compressed air, aircon, lighting etc) together use as much energy as the traction system.
60
That’s the basis of hybrids and EVs, without it they wouldn’t exist. In fact the simple definition of a hybrid is: An ICE with regenerative breaking.
But there’s a “but” there always is. In my, quite old hybrid, at least, the regenerative breaking is not as strong as normal engine breaking so I do use my brakes a bit more. In a car with a more powerful electric motor/generator there would be less difference.
Hint: If test driving hybrids [I do recommend them on experience] go for the one with the greatest retardation. It is both more powerful AND economic.
110
Somewhere in that braking equation is the maximum rate of charge a battery can take, and how flash charging from braking affects battery life.
I expect that you need a bigger, heavier motor to give more regenerative braking, also an argument about why we don’t have more Nissan Leaf style EVs rather than much heavier & more powerful Teslas where heavier EVs have more inertia.
Are EVs still great producers of ozone, or have they solved that problem?
80
A local real estate agent broke his EV but alas it didn’t have regenerative breaking. He had to buy a new one.
70
OK, you got me. 🙁 But I am normally careful to use the correct spelling.
10
Don’t worry, happens to us all and spellcheck would not pick that one up.
00
And correct terminology – battery powered cars.
10
Fully correct ?…
BEV..Battery Electric Vehicle .👍
20
Perhaps, but was the initial problem being solved the efficient transport of people? There is a lot to be said said for convenience,flexibility, autonomy.
50
The whole idea of always carting around 500 kG battery, even if there is only a 70 kG of useful load, means that this is a way to environmental, economical, political, etc,.. etc,.. hell.
50
I drive a hybrid (ie petrol plus electric) car and although a full electric car would perform better than an ICE vehicle, the battery is a problem for all the reasons given here, except that I doubt whether the brakes would wear faster. Most of the braking in an electric car is done by regeneration where the vehicle’s momentum is generated back into the battery to slow it down rather than use mechanical brakes exclusively. Obviously, to get the maximum distance from the EV battery it would be wasteful of energy to use mechanical braking to slow down.
70
I want to go to ‘gong to visit daughter and family, but GP didn’t authorise my driver’s licence renewal.
Said daughter years ago bought new Excel, a handy little car. When she put it in for 70,000 km service the mechanic queried had she replaced the brake pads, because they were not worn. She said: No, I learned to drive in a truck that didn’t have any brakes.
Which was true.
180
My father learned to drive a truck as an AIF private in North Africa during WW2.
The brakes were unreliable which could be a nuisance if you were moving ordnance in a convoy subject to air attack.
Long after the war when he had his car serviced the mechanic would often ask him when he last replaced the pads, because they were worn out.
It was awful to be a passenger in any car he was driving. He was always testing the brakes.
20
When working is a service company many years ago I had occasionally to drive up to NSW north coast in a car driven by one of our managers. In those days the Pacific Highway was two lanes only, with really bad and broken edges. My manager would move out to overtake a truck, then slow down and drive alongside it with his foot on the brake. It used to scare me rigid.
10
Again i would point out the following…
This is a NON ISSUE !
1… EVs are NOT heavier than most current popular cars ,..SUVs, UTEs, Limos, etc
2. ..EVs are a miniscule proportion of of the car fleet and will remain so for the forseable future.
3….As has always been the case, the biggest factor in tyre wear isthe driving style not the vehicle weight or drive line technology .
4…. Where is there any real data to support this type of anti EV propoganda
631
Whatever size car someone wants to buy the EV version will always be half a ton heavier.
There is no getting away from that.
Will the Greens choose more plastics in the ocean or will they choose clean air and more plant fertilizer? You know the truth. They choose Big-Corp every time over the environment.
350
They choose to line the pockets of the ones pulling their strings…fools…
50
Sorry Jo, but that is just not true.
In the previous “EV weight “prpoganda thread i gave several examples of direct weight comparasons that showed there is little or no difference..EG
Tesla “X” SUV 2500 kg,..vs Lexus 570 ICE SUV…2600kg
Hyundai kona EV, just 30 kg more than the ICE Kona
Of course there are some exceptions like the USA Ford Lightening pick up, but that wont be coming here anyway.
People should do some real data searching before coming out with these sweeping false statements.
37
Chad, you evidently can’t tell the difference between the vehicle weight and tow capacity. The Tesla x (and several ev’s) weigh more than 6000 lbs! Please review and come back with your apology to our host.
50
Paul, ..i dont know where you find your data, but i would find a better source !
!
Tesla mod X “plaid” ( the heaviest) weighs 5395 lb or 2455 kg !
No need to reply with your retraction or apology !
P S… the 2500kg figure was actually used by Jo herself !
03
Chad, I used google and found several sources listing the x and other tesla models over 6000 lbs. Saw one source for your weight report, it was an outlier.
30
The Kona is a better example.
00
Paul
Tesla mod X Plaid (the heavy one) ..2462 kg.
https://www.tesla.com/en_au/modelx
Again , get better data sources !
02
Erm, you are comparing a tiny SUV with a huge SUV. You may apologise to everybody for your deception at any time.
50
Have you seen a Tesla X in the flesh ?
They are both large , 7 seat, 4×4 SUVs ( there are much bigger ones)
They are in a similar market sector for size, price, options etc.
You would likely prefer to compare to a Suzuki Jimmy !
03
Nonsense- The Lexus 570 is an upmarket Landcruiser capable of towing up to 3.5 tonne with a long-range fuel tank (range up to 950km). It’s a slug by comparison with the high performance Tesla X.
Moreover the standard seating capacity for the latest Australian Tesla X is for 5.
It’s not an appropriate comparison.
30
So we now have to compare to a faster SUV ?
Standard spec for Tesla x is 7 seats
Tesla x is NOT available to order in Ausrealia !
PS.. weight of a standard model X is 2335 Kg 😲😳
Ref https://www.tesla.com/en_au/modelx
02
The 2023 model is not YET available to order in Australia. But Australians have been ordering the Tesla Model X here since 2016.
The marketing info for the 2023 Tesla X Plaid shows a 7-seat configuration but this is only an option in some past and present Tesla X base models.
00
So, what is your point ?
A 7 seat, 4×4 mod X @ 2335 kg, compared to 7 seat 4×4 Toyota ice @ 2600+ kg !
Or maybe a jeep G Cherokee srt @ 2336 kg !
Do you get the picture yet ?
The weight problem is not due to EVs !
01
Or if you want a performance, 5 seat, ice SUV, how about the Jeep Trackhawk, @ 2437 kg !
01
Chad, the data are available on the Hyundai website. (I looked at the UK one.) The mild hybrid has a kerb weight from 1265-1387 kg. There are two EVs – 39 KWh and 64 KWh. The smaller (with an ideal maximum possible range of 189 miles) has kerb weight from 1535-1593 kg; the larger has kerb weight from 1685-1743 kg.
If you take the heaviest mild hybrid and the lightest EV, the difference is still 150 kg. If you take the heaviest mild hybrid and the lightest 64 kWh EV, the difference is 300 kg.
Not 30.
40
And if you takethe heavyest Kona ICE (1569 kg) and the lightest kona EV (1504 kg)…. The difference is … the EV version 65 kg LIGHTER !
Same body, different drive train !
( all data from the official Hyundai site)
That should tell you that its far too simplistic to just say an EV version will add 500kg or 30% to an equivalent car weight..as has been stated here a few times.
There are heavier ICE cars than anything Tesla has on sale , already on our roads (bashing up roads and collapsing car parks ?)..and in far greater numbers than any amount of EV will ever be sold in the next 20-30 years.
This is almost as bad as the false claims of CO2 warming the planet !
Its all about the detailed spec choices of the manufacturer and buyer.
01
What’s being missed here, is that only ‘important’ people will receive a permit to drive an EV. Everyone else with be on push bikes.
40
Chad, give me “real data” on how CO2 passes heat in one direction only.
40
Vlad, …why ask me ??
And its a very illogical question anyway !
01
EVs almost exclusively use regenerative braking. It’s ICEs and their friction braking putting exotic chemical brake pad particulates into the atmosphere.
EVs have a similar weight per axle to a loaded truck. Most EVs come with custom low wear tyres designed to handle the additional load.
126
Read the post. Follow the Reuters link to read how the new custom tyres are just as polluting as the old ones, and this is a very hard problem to solve.
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tyre-makers-under-pressure-too-much-rubber-hits-road-2023-05-17/
150
Most EVs only use regen braking on a single electric-drive axle and that is usually the rear axle. The front wheels use conventional friction braking and provide the majority of the vehicle’s braking effort.
70
This shows your lack of familiarity with EV drive trains and braking system controls !
04
LOL. Admittedly my first EV driving experience on a vehicle with regenerative braking was more than four decades ago and on a very different system to that used on contemporary road motor vehicles.
There are variations in EV drive chain systems, some use a single motor others multiple motors and mixed types (eg induction and reluctance motors) and there are different design regimes used to manage friction and regenerative braking.
For instance, Tesla uses a permanent magnet synchronous reluctance motor for its rear wheel drive EVs which influences the way regen braking is used on those vehicles.
20
Where will there be enough land to grow the dandelions to make tyres for EVs. All the suitable land will be needed for solar panels and batteries to produce and store the electricity required to power the EVs.
40
I’ve got the EV specific low resistance Michelins and they are excellent. 25,000 km and no visible wear. Tyre wear is strongly related to how you drive and EVs encourage a smooth driving style.
Leo’s comment is nonsense, the only time I ever have to activate friction braking is when somebody does something radically unexpected in front of me.
I would strong argue that EVs place significantly less particulates into the atmosphere, considering there is no tailpipe belching potentially cancerous CO/CO2 and NOX fumes into that atmosphere.
214
Absolute BS.
Is that what you people are scaring children with now?
There is no evidence that any of those substances are carcinogenic.
110
Maybe not, but Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons do as does arsenic, benzene and nickel.
https://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2012/06/14/diesel-fumes-definitely-cause-cancer-should-we-be-worried/
Carbon monoxide is a poisonous gas.
02
And totally ignoring all the children doing the mining for some of the materials..
… and totally ignoring the massive amount of mining and processing that has to be done to make these EVs.
… and totally ignoring that in Australia they run mostly on COAL.
But its “virtuous”… so that’s all that matters. 😉
61
“EV specific”. Is just sales hype.
There is no difference between the tyre requirements for an EV or an ICE.
Low Rolling Resistance tyres have been availaable for many years with their claim to reduce fuel consumption (or range for an EV) and extend tyre life.
Unfortunately, low RR goes hand in hand with poor grip, especially in the wet, so thet have not been a popular choice for the average safety concious driver.
The equivalent might be Lewis Hamilton using “Hard” race tyres in a very wet rain race !!
30
More utter BS !
Few EVs weigh even 2 tons…1 ton per axle max
A “loaded truck”, of only 2 axles can weigh 10 tons,… 5 tons per axle !
01
Soon an entrepreneur will produce a “Beyond Rubber” tire, or tyre, if you wish. Made from corn husks, wheat shafts, and rice hulls these tyres will wear out rapidly but will produce great volumes of organic matter for enviro-agriculture. Each auto will have a trailing bag to catch the particles, much like a lawn mower or a dog diaper.
280
🙂 That could act as quite a brake.
30
Of course, the long term plan of the Left/Elites is to abolish private car ownership altogether.
The fact that they continue to talk about a “transition to EVs” as though regular people will all one day have them is just to placate the masses. They intend to eliminate private car ownership. The Leftist “fact checkers”(sic)/propagandists say this isn’t true, so that’s a fair indication that it is.
In any case, if everyone had EV’s, a wind and solar based electrical grid wouldn’t have enough power plus transmission capacity would be inadequate, plus there is probably not enough lithium in the world for all the batteries.
Countries such as Australia that engage in the most groupthink and are fanatical followers of the UN/WEF and already have compliant governments in all mainland states will be among the first to implement this.
The WEF who write the Agenda, are very clear about the future (or lack thereof) of the private motor vehicle (for non-Elites):
SEE LINK FOR REST
282
What’s the biggest joke in all of this I wonder? Probably the “while protecting the anonymity of the passengers and information about their travels, …”. That will be the day – all of that data will need to be extracted for your social credit score.
40
Road Wear is also influenced by axle weight (double the weight 16 times the wear )
280
Correct. Road wear is proportional to the fourth power of axle load.
260
Where they’re taking us, we won’t need roads.
https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/pictures/cadillac-evtol-air-taxi-flying-car-vtol-ces/
Instead of micro, soon they’ll give us large particulate air pollution.
(I keep reflexively looking for the Babylon Bee logo)
90
I read that a 44 tonne lorry exerts 120000 times the road pressure than a 1 tonne car. Does that sound right?
70
Compared to a 1 tonne car the overall damage for a 44 tonne truck is 44^4 = 3,748,096 times as much but there are 4.5 times more wheels on an 18 wheel truck so factor is 3748096 / 4 = 832,910 times as much.
However, you also have to take into account the tyre contact area which will reduce it further.
Your figure is 7 times less than 832,910 which may reflect a 7 times larger contact area per tyre for each wheel of a truck compared to a car.
Seems plausible, but amazing figures anyway.
80
The link I posted below has some calculation examples. They may give different results to how I roughly calculated above.
But the damage of heavier vehicles is still significant.
They compare a 2 tonne 2 axle car and a 30 tonne 3 axle truck and get a damage ratio of 10,000 times.
They don’t take into account the number of tyres or contact patch area.
90
Thanks for the responses to my question. At the very least EV’s exert much more pressure on the road surface than a ICE vehicle.
In addition because of their extra weight they exude more particulates in the form of brakes and tyre particles. I don’t know about OZ but over here we pay a car tax licence and also over half the fuel price is tax of one sort or another. EV’s pay a very small road tax (which has only just started) and drive on the roads for free as there is no equivalent to fuel duty. So they are freeloading off ICE drivers. I had estimated £1500 as a fair extra tax for EV’s to pay each year to compensate but bearing in mind the extra wear and tear now reckon it ought to be more.
Add in those extra costs and an EV looks a lot less attractive to those wanting ‘cheap’ motoring whilst ‘saving the planet.’
30
It’s a lot more complicated than that.
20
SEE LINK FOR REST
170
Say a 600kg battery increases total weight by 30%. The increase in road damage is (1.3)^4 or 3:1. As road taxes are based on road damage, electric cars should cost 3x as much to register. In fact that’s true for all heavier cars.
But given that most trucks are say 5-10 tonnes and 40-625x the damage, the cost of shipping would skyrocket.
It is in the interest of society to make passenger cars as light, efficient and safe as possible and adding a fixed 0.6 tons to them all is a disaster.
120
TdeF,
You are a facts/ data type person, ..so please dont fall for this “+30%” drivel that keeps getting repeated.
Check some facts on vehicle spec sheets from manufacturers who make direct EV equivalent models to their ICE cars ..eg Hyundai.
16
Yes, it was off the top of my head for a reasonable ratio for comparison to see the power of the effect.
It means the battery is about 1/3.3 of the weight of the car which seems about right. A polestar 2 is 1.94 to 2.11 tonnes. The 78kwhr battery is 500kg.
This is 500/1940 or about 26%. The 30% seems reasonable.
60
And I found a weights table of electric cars.
Say Nissan Leaf 62kwhr 1685 kg. Battery 410 kg. Ratio 24.3%. There is a smaller battery.
So on a sample of two I should have used (1.24)^4 or 2.36:1 instead of 3:1.
60
But how much is not the battery weight but related to the battery? Motors, wiring, more.
For comparison we need to check a petrol car like the Nissan Micra which weighs in at 1.044tonnes and that’s much lighter. The ratio of weight is 1.6:1, so the number is closer to 38%! My 1.3 seems fine.
A lot of the lightest petrol cars are just over 1 tonne and the lightest electric cars at 1.6 tonnes and we are closer to 40%!
50
No !..
You need to compare cars of the same model but EV vs ICE versions .
Such as the Kona EV at 1525 kg vs the Kona ICE at 1504 kg. !
Or the Mini EV ar 1440 kg , vs the ICE mini at 1310 kg.
Even then it is not directly comparable as the EV versions tend to be fully spec’d with all options included
And it doesnt really matter what the weight ratio is of battery to kerb weight, it is only the total rlling weight that this debate is about.
Further it is clear that many of these “main stream” selling EVs ar still much lighter than the current top selling ICE cars in Australia.
That , together with the minute portion of the car market that they can achieve in the next 20 years…..it is all a non issue !
11
Yeah, all those battery cars ‘fully spec’d’. Try running all those ‘spec’s’, i.e. aircon, stereo sound systems, navigation, telephonics, heating, electric windows, doorlocks, wipers, etc, etc. for any length of time. Timed out in the middle of nowhere I’ll wager.
40
Hyndai Kona Smartstream G1.6 T-GD ICE kerb weight 1395 kg
Hyundai Kona 100 kW Electric Motor kerb weight 1685kg
Same body different propulsion.
btw. Show me where TdeF ever does anything other than use rhetoric and inference. He doesn’t offer any proofs or impirical data.
04
The Kona is a small car. Of course a SMALL car won’t have a 500kg battery and its range [258mi] is more modest than a Tesla, less range = smaller battery.
20
Hyundai kona N spec ICE….kerb weight 1569 kg..
Hyundai kona 100 kW EV .. kerb weight 1504 kg
Same body different propulsion. !
….BUT the EV version is lighter ?
… it all depends on which spec you choose
(..PS.. you have the wrong weight for the 100 kW EV kona )
01
It is also hair splitting since the near future will look quite different.
take this for example from the worlds biggest transport battery maker..
https://www.catl.com/en/news/6015.html
It nominates aircraft because that is a new application but, of course, would also mean a lighter battery with a longer range
02
If cars are not running on oil based products, what happens to the oil industry? What happens to the supply of lubricating oil? Or bitumen for roads, or tyre supply? Has the collective Genius spared a thought for these things? In 20 years time we might be back to dirt roads, and running on wooden wheels.
310
All cars are fitted with plastic fittings that include: internal panels, bearings, seat coverings, mats, electrics and electronics. Also, all cars are painted using oil based products.
The oil industry is going nowhere. The green meanies are deluded.
200
‘Although crude oil is a source of raw material (feedstock) for making plastics, it is not the major source of feedstock for plastics production in the United States.’
US Energy Information Administration
Plastics will be affected, but they don’t seem to be a major product from oil production. It is mostly used for energy, so if it’s no longer required on a large scale for petrol and diesel supply, then… what happens?
21
Oil derived products are a key feedstock for the chemical and pharmacutical industry.
11
So you just disagree with the facts presented by the EIA. Good for you, now maybe you’ll start applying that same scepticism where it belongs.
Regardless, the problem remains unresolved.
10
No, i dont disagree.
I am simply saying that currently oil is a vital source of feedstock for many products, without which life would become very different (eg, pharmacuticals)
Cutting oil consumption use for transport will allow much more time before oil resources become too expensive to exploit , to develop alternative sources for those products such as lubricating oils , bitumen, tyres, etc.
The oil industry will likely shrink and refocus, but it will remain essential.
What exactly is this problem that remains unresolved ?
01
So if we’re being driven around cities and auto-charged per trip, I don’t think we’ll have any privacy anymore.
If this happens and someone has a regular, but not reasonable destination or explanation we’ll be called in and asked to explain, particularly if you’ve been visiting the IPA office or a local conservative’s club etc.
This could happen in the near future and local members of the WEF will be able to monitor your every move and bring you in and sign you up for a nasty re-education holiday.
Won’t that be fun?
I’m sure the above sounds far fetched but I don’t trust any of these left wing extremists anymore, because they’ve ignored data and evidence for decades and even pursued decent scientists until they lose their jobs.
Meanwhile the Bowen and Albo idiots are doing their best to rapidly increase the price of ICE cars etc and con us into buying their TOXIC expensive EVs.
290
That’s why I voted No in a referendum for an Australia Card many years ago, as did the majority of voters.
In those days we had a lot of post WW11 migrants who had experienced living under authoritarian regimes where one had to carry identification “papers” and justify being found in any location. It seems they didn’t all tell their kids about the experience.
Soon it won’t just be the vehicles that register on the tollways. it’ll be the drivers’ licences and ID cards.
160
We voted NO to the Australia Card but we are getting it anyway in the form of “My Health Record”..
Please opt out of this outrage.
120
Not at all.
Absolutely not at all, Neville.
When referring to the Left, I no longer think or say “how crazy or totalitarian will they get”? Because they never fail to disappoint.
190
Meanwhile Albo is busy causing CO2 and other emissions over much of the planet, a couple of week ago he was in the UK for the coronation and other places, back home for the budget, and now he is in Tokyo at some important summit
100
Albo made some climate “deal” with the White House resident.
60
A true meeting of the minds turbocharging our “transition to renewable energy”
20
I wonder what nasty (or nasties?) are hidden in the agreement. A simple addition, like “CO2” into the EPA list of pollutants? Or maybe a reworked definition similar to that for “vaccine”? Or is it more creative to add to its camouflage?
Please excuse today’s bout of cynicism.
Cheers
Dave B
20
Judging from history, as bad as the long term natural restrictions on the movement of trade goods has been for regional development,…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fof9xZA7dpg
…why would anyone deliberately interfere with such an essential human need?
The research has been done. Africa was the negative control. This is an experiment that doesn’t need to, nor should it, be repeated.
60
Just more proof that they’re already planning so called VIRTUAL power plants to control your entire lives.
Just more of their controlled misery and lower life expectancy etc to look forward to in the future.
Obviously TOXIC W & S and clueless batteries don’t work, so this lunacy is their next choice.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/05/21/finally-a-solution-to-the-problem-of-intermittent-power-generation-the-virtual-power-plant/
70
Australia is a world leader in Leftist lunacy.
So it’s no surprise that AGL has been promoting a “virtual power plant” for some years now.
https://www.agl.com.au/residential/energy/solar-and-batteries/solar-batteries/virtual-power-plant
The Left are into “identifying” as things they are not, e.g. a man “identifies” as a woman. Leftist post-modernist ideology makes it true (for them).
So why can’t a pretend power plant “identify” as a real one?
100
The formular for tyre wear used to be . For every sixty five thousand cars over one km. of road lost one kilo. of tyre. This can be seen on any building along busy arterial road. God only knows what damage it does to the lungs.
70
‘too much rubber hits the road’ note that car tyres are all synthetic and only the heavier tyres on trucks contain the rubber. Someone correct me if I’m wrong.
Doesn’t really change the debate though, because the car tyres are all an oil based product and we know where that is going . .
80
As usual, almost all if not all ideas the greens/elites/communists come with are far more damaging, more expensive and eco damaging than what we already have. I have looked to see some of the huge array of by and full products that are manufactured from oil. Our world would literally stop if they ever implement their crazy ideas. As often mentioned, the pollution and water usage around lithium is astounding but no one here in Oz seems interested or cares, especially the mob mentioned above. How did Australia end up the guinea pig nation?
90
“Our world would literally stop if they ever implement their crazy ideas.”
That is the intention. !
100
Air Filters in car exhausts?
21
Now the Kerry loony is trying to force up the price of food and make every farmer’s life more difficult in the future.
I hope the Dutch farmer’s concerns will be transferred around the OECD countries and have a similar positive response from the voters.
Only time will tell, because the data proves that Kerry’s so called CRISIS is just more of their BS and FRAUD.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/05/21/john-kerry-targets-farmers-we-cant-get-to-net-zerounless-agriculture-is-front-center-as-part-of-the-solution-i-refuse-to-call-it-climate-c/
70
I have never run a fleet as such, but as a farmer for many years ran three Hi Luxes and a Landcruiser.
It has never occurred to me that the heavier Landcruiser wore out tires at a faster rate than the much lighter Hi Luxes.
90
I used to own soft drink venders. If I had known of this cube law I may have loaded my van less, and more often.
40
Here is another problem
Electric kiddie beds and Hotwheels
30
Peter, my immediate thought was that Leftists truly are crazy enough to do that.
But then I saw it was the The Babylon Bee. Had it not been for that, I would rate that insanity as entirely plausible.
60
How often does Babylon Bee satire… becomes reality !
There is no accounting for the gormless stupidity of the left.
John Kerry is now after the farmers as well…
Trying desperately to bring about the destruction of world food supplies.
81
In your link b.nice, Kerry says:
Crisis? The Left get away with endlessly calling it a “crisis” and children are indoctrinated that the world is about to end (which is obvious child abuse).
Has no one bothered to look out the window and seen that there is no climate crisis? The only possibility of a crisis is that the world might actually be cooling and we won’t have sufficient electrical power to deal with that as the power stations are being shut down in the more woke countries like Australia.
120
In todays news an article that New York is sinking due to the weight of all of the buildings constructed there and as sea level rise “continue to accelerate” the streets will be awash “soon”.
Then in Oz we plan to build a hugely expensive football stadium at sea level in Hobart.
Like an old Irish bloke I had the pleasure of knowing used to say “ You just can’t even believe half the lies they tell you”
70
Because of the extra power and weight of a Tesla the tyres are twice the price that of a similar ICE.
70
What is a “similar ice” to a tesla ?
Tesla3……BMW 4 series .?….. check thetyre prices !
Tesla S……Merc C63…check the tyre prices !
Tesla X…..Lexus 570 or Range Rover…check tyre prices
20
The Tesla is the same size as [possibly smaller than] my Camry.
You quoted BIG luxury cars. Not fair.
The Merc is a cool qtr mil [used]. If you need to ask how much the tyres cost you can’t afford one.
https://www.carsguide.com.au/cars-for-sale/D_13127780/MERCEDES-BENZ–C63–VIC+-+Melbourne–OAKLEIGH+3166,+VIC–Coupe
20
I quoted cars in the similar market bracket..price, performance etc….fair ?
01
More lies and fraud from the climate con merchants who never seem to learn.
Strawberry production is booming in the USA and yet the loonies insist ( using modelling) that this could evaporate in the near future.
And yet our left wing fools still BELIEVE their nonsense?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/05/21/relax-fresh-plaza-florida-strawberry-production-is-growing/
70
Yes, tyres wear out faster, not only because of the rolling wear over distance but because of the much higher torque in acceleration and in braking. And of course these new much heavier cars are generating more heat and wasting more energy and wasn’t heat the problem?
But the idea that switching to electric cars would reduce CO2 was proven wrong in the great lockdown. From Delhi to New York to Melbourne, the streets were empty. And the aircraft didn’t fly. The cruise ships were locked up. Travel was banned. Was there any effect on CO2? No.
So what is the point of electric cars again? How much a bigger test could you have than to shut down all the cars across the entire planet? It didn’t do a thing.
Besides a 16% electric 84% petrol hybrid gives the best of both worlds, halves CO2 output, light weight, doubled range and provides exhaust free cities. Plus it does not require billions in new charging stations, windmills and mining for 600kg batteries. So why aren’t hybrid cars the go to solution for the planet? Just based on the rocketing price of fuel?
CO2 is not a villain. It is absolutely essential. The more the better. Not only is CO2 essential for all life on earth, the worst we have seen in 250 years is a temperature increase of 1.5C even if they are right? And that is good. Who is complaining? Where is there a (new) problem?
The world has seen phytoplankton blooms and phytoplankton produce O2 from CO2, stripping excess CO2. And according to NASA, CSIRO, NOAA etc. the world has greened massively since 1988, green vegetation largely in near desert regions to the extent of the Brazilian rainforest in size. But CO2 has NOT gone down.
So in the Australian newspaper this morning, carbon farming is booming in Queensland, as it is in the UK. But if an area the size of Brazil can be greened over 40 years and CO2 is not affected in any way over 40 years, how can a few forests in Australia and the UK make any difference?
The trees and plants and humans love the extra CO2. And there is no observable effect on CO2. In fact there is no observable effect of the dramatic increase of ‘CO2 emissions’ in the last 40 years.
The whole argument for electric cars is also that we can reduce CO2 by driving electric cars. But that’s proven wrong. If billions of trees and a complete world shut down doesn’t impact CO2, why should electric cars?
So the question is why are we spending $1.5Trillion a year trying to control CO2 when it is proven impossible? Or have I answered my own question? Cui Bono? (Latin: For whom is it good?)
180
Because, it has nothing to do with “saving the planet”.
It’s about restricting or banning personal motor vehicles altogether.
Clearly it is not physically possible for everyone to own an EV because of lack of electrical power on a solar/wind/storage grid, lack of power transmission capacity on the grid, and lack of lithium supplies for all the batteries.
The Elites know it. The idea that everyone will all be driving battery cars like they do ICE cars is just to placate the masses until reality hits.
SEE my post #3.
140
Of course. That is self evident. I agree. The public is suffering from the superficial plausibility of the carbon dioxide is pollution story. Half the articles in the new paper are about Climate, from social to business. The rest about woke. If people knew the truth there would be outrage.
But I am trying to give hard evidence that it is rubbish.
Suppression of CO2 is the only argument behind in this scam which includes electric cars. There is nothing else.
We cannot control CO2 gas. And I have been surprised how many knowledgeable, educated and even serious scientist types just gloss over it or even accept it as true. Hydrogen. Sequestration. Electric cars. Hot Rocks. Windmills. All nuts.
The atmospheric physicists talk about the radiation. The economists talk about priorities of expenditure, risk benefit. The journalists try to balance the stories. The former head of the Royal Society Geneticist Sir Paul Nurse invented the immoral ‘Precautionary Principle’ And the politicians just want to be on the right boat with their friends. And the UN says we are on a highway to Climate Hell even though the actual report says no such thing. Even the Greens who should be fighting to preserve the hilltops and oceans as pristine environments are cheering their destruction.
There is more science in Scientology than in Climate Science.
170
So the Green theory is that trees are made entirely from CO2 so growing more trees means CO2 will go down. It’s logical. Even I thought so, as did Tony Abbott and many others. But that has been proven completely wrong by NASA.
As NASA concluded indirectly CO2 and trees both increase at once! 14% more CO2 since 1988 and 14% more Green since 1988? The conclusion is obvious. CO2 is not at all connected to trees and cars and grass and leaves and phyto plankton. Rather they are all utterly dependent on CO2 from the oceans. And if you reduce CO2, more comes out of the water a near infinite supply. Our whole precious ‘biosphere’ is pond scum, a green rash on the landscape of a huge planet covered mostly by water. And if the water is a little warmer, we get more.
Highly soluble CO2 is in massive exchange between the atmosphere and the oceans as a 98% ocean based gas. And nothing we can do changes atmospheric CO2. Not China, volcanoes or gigantic forest fires are observable in the CO2 record. It’s called equilibrium and obeys Henry’s Law.
So switching to electric cars has been proven to be an utter waste by the shutdown. Pointless. And making 500million x 600kg batteries a year is guaranteed to wreck the planet. As is blowing up all the current power stations and installing a million giant windmills which achieve nothing in changing CO2. We already have 340,000 of the monsters. And twenty years from now they will be defunct. I assume that’s why they are called Renewables.
Carbon Dioxide and the oceans existed billions of years before life on what was a dead planet earth. You cannot live on H2O or O2. All life requires CO2. This comes in the form of solar energy in hydrated CO2 known as carbohydrate. But the Greens want to ban CO2. It’s a sort of intelligence test.
120
And I love the fact that everything the Greens adore and everything they hate are both made from CO2. Coal, oil, gas are all from dead plants. They are Green pollution. And with 340,000 giant windmills and endless acres of solar farms, appalling Green pollution is worldwide. All ecological disasters.
70
Actually i do not believe that is the whole argument at all.
Fundamentally, the use of EVs is intended to reduce the consumption of oil/petrol, and that has a lot of merit sincewe need to conserve oil for farmore vital uses than trips to the pub/footy/shops etc.
and of course, EVs are a good way to extract $$$s from those wealty enough to want them.
30
Hybrids are good for conserving oil. And they are not expensive as you suggest. In fact the Toyota Camry is a real bargain for a quality mid size car.
My point is that fully electric cars are a real cost to society because to switch entirely to electric car means mining lithium and more for 500 million new electric cars a year, which is impossible and incredibly destructive and expensive for the whole planet.
Considering that we are also banning fracking, oil exploration, gas exploration, picking up sticks for fuel and forcing people into heat pumps and banning gas stoves and gas heating. The cost to everyone is starting to be absolutely unsustainable. It’s the poor who will freeze to death to prevent warming.
And for what? To prevent warming? Who said that was a good idea? Or that warming was a problem?
If I asked anyone if they thought 3C increase in temperature was a terrible idea, I would not get many takers.
So I am absolutely flabbergasted that anyone thinks there is a problem? Why?
40
I think most people would have trouble guessing the temperature to 3 degrees.
30
I fully agree, as a sharer of knowledge in a former life, I would love to have performed the following experiment – ask the students as they enter the room to estimate, to the nearest couple of degrees, the current room temperature where they are now standing.
Record their answers. Then, secretly turn the thermostat up by 1.5C degrees. Ask the same question at the conclusion of the lesson. Record their answers.
I guarantee that not only did they guess wrongly in the first instance, they also guessed wrongly in the second instance – and NOBOBY noticed the difference of a 1.5C degree rise in temperature. It is not discernible, hence not an existential threat.
Even the very act of a room filling with bodies would raise the temperature by 1.5C, but nobody would notice.
20
True. My Camry Hybrid was only a little dearer than a similarly optioned straight ICE. It was old stock and I bought it in Dec but those months are forgotten 12 years later.
The Dunlop tyres were rubbish but apart from that the only non routine expense was ONE 12 battery last year. There is no starter motor so no heavy drain, so it lasts.
10
I have to keep saying it …
There is a flaw in your argument that is blindingly obvious.
Clearly the construction of enough renewable energy generators to power all the electric vehicles is impossible to achieve in the medium term.
Clearly, the construction of replacement electric vehicles is impossible in the medium term because of a lack of raw materials.
Clearly electric vehicle manufacture is being transferred to China at the same time the US is picking a fight with China. So where exactly are these electrric vehicles going to come from?
So, which part of “impossible” dont you understand?
Since all of these things are impossible then clearly there is no intention to transition the vehicle fleet to all electric, – and there never has been.
Clearly, – Its no secret – as they keep telling us over and over again – “You will own nothing and be happy.”
Suddenly the problem of a lack of generation becomes resolved. Suddenly the problem of a lack mineral resources becomes resolved. Suddenly there is no requirement to strengthen bridges. And suddenly tyres are not an issue because quite clearly there will be no demand for them.
There doesnt seem to be any point fighting against a future that is impossible anyway. You need to focus the fight against that which is (unfortunately) possible.
100
I’ve tried to explain why their co2 problems are just more of their BS and fraud, but nobody seems to be interested.
Even the UK Royal Society and the USA NAS have told us that co2 levels would still be the same for THOUSANDs of years even if we stopped all HUMAN co2 emissions today.
Here’s a short quote from question 20 of their study.
“20. If emissions of greenhouse gases were stopped, would the climate return to the conditions of 200 years ago?
Climate change: evidence and causes
No. Even if emissions of greenhouse gases were to suddenly stop, Earth’s surface temperature would require thousands of years to cool and return to the level in the pre-industrial era”.
And even the left wing Conversation agrees with their study.
Here’s that link to question 20 and the answer from the Royal Society.
https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/question-20/
40
“and return to the level in the pre-industrial era”.”
The utter stupidity of that statement needs to be highlighted.
Why the heck would anyone want temperatures and CO2 levels to drop to levels of the Little Ice Age !!
These people have no idea of the dire ramifications for humanity of what they say they want to accomplish.
Or perhaps they do !
70
AGAIN here’s the Conversation article and read their paragraph “slam on the brakes.”
BTW Maths guru Nic Lewis has calculated that it would take hundreds of years , not their thousands of years.
Anyway their so called reduction of Human co2 emissions is definitely the worst and silliest quest in our history.
https://theconversation.com/if-we-stopped-emitting-greenhouse-gases-right-now-would-we-stop-climate-change-78882
60
‘we must destroy the planet in order to save it’
-lefties
70
2030 is the new 1984.
The country’s reliance on private vehicles needs to drop by more than half for the country to play its part in slashing global emissions by 2030, according a report released by the Climate Council today.
Eighty-one per cent of trips are made in private vehicles across Australia, but the report says that would need to drop to 36 per cent by the end of the decade.
50
It’s frightening what they have in store for us.
50
And the worst is that 1) they now feel bold enough to say these things in the open without fear of retribution, and 2) the sheeple fall for this garbage without question. It’s all for “DA CHILDREN”, regardless of the fact that life will be so expensive that “DA CHILDREN” will not be able to make a living. Again, some generation got it almighty wrong to have risen a generation who are the parents of today.
70
Gen X is the worst generation. People blame the boomers, but for me Gen X is way worse. Perhaps as you say because of the boomers raising them. But boomers are the only thing saving us from pure insanity at the moment.
40
Yes, I am sick of hearing boomers being blamed. As you say, if it weren’t for boomers the world would be TOTALLY insane. And there would be ZERO hope. As it is, there is a tiny amount of hope, especially if President Trump (born the first year of boomers) can be re-elected.
40
Air pollution from brake dust may be as harmful as diesel exhaust on immune cells – new study
The harmful impact of air pollution caused by diesel exhaust fumes on our health is well known. It’s responsible for causing everything from respiratory problems to dementia and even certain types of cancers. But what most people don’t realise is that exhaust fumes aren’t the only cause of air pollution. In fact, up to 55% of roadside traffic pollution is made of non-exhaust particles, with around 20% of that pollution coming from brake dust. And as our latest research reveals, these particles may be just as damaging to our lungs as exhaust fumes.
Composed of iron particles, brake dust is caused by friction between the iron brake rotor grinding on the brake pads when a vehicle slows down. This brake dust is then worn away and becomes airborne. And as recent research conducted by me and my colleagues found, brake dust triggers inflammation in the lung cells with the same severity as diesel particles.
By adding brake dust particles to macrophages – the cells responsible for clearing the lungs of invading germs, waste and debris – we saw a nearly 185% increase in the cell’s inflammatory activity. Not only that, we also found brake dust prevented the immune cells from destroying Staphylococcus aureus – a species of bacteria responsible for pneumonia. Once again, the brake dust was found to be as toxic as diesel particles.
https://theconversation.com/air-pollution-from-brake-dust-may-be-as-harmful-as-diesel-exhaust-on-immune-cells-new-study-129594
As for diesel pollution, modern functioning DPF’s are astonishingly good at eliminating particulates, to the point that a diesel exhaust is WAY cleaner than the air you’re breathing right now.
As for brake pads, Akebono are the way to go if you’re in the market, and they’re doing some interesting research.
For example, as Akebono’s original material, the R&D Centre succeeded in developing phenol resin with wood powder. A special feature of this new material is that fibers miniaturized to nano size based on coniferous wood powder are uniformly dispersed in phenol resin. The new material makes it possible to achieve greater strength in the brake’s operating temperature range than with conventional phenol resin. As a result, the new material helps improve the wear resistance of brake pads and improves noise and vibration (NV characteristic).
We are conducting research and development into magneto rheological (MR) fluid brakes that eliminate brake dust. This product accommodates the increasing use of electro-mechanical systems in automobiles and is environmentally friendly.
A functional material that has been researched since the 1960s, MR fluid has the characteristic that it changes from a liquid to a semi-solid state in reaction to magnetism. When a magnetic field is applied, the strongly magnetic particles (iron powder) several microns in diameter suspended in the fluid align with the direction of the magnetic field, forming chain-shaped particle clusters that change the fluid to a semi solid state.
https://www.akebono-brake.com/english/csr_environment/environment/development_design/index.html
I’ll be switching to Akebono’s on the REX when the time comes, but that could be a while as it’s driven carefully.😁
All the deleterious effects are no doubt academic should the ghetto-cities plans reach fruition.
30
Is there a “send money here” button at the end of the publication? LOL
30
I don’t get paid to push products (if that’s your implication), unlike most “celebrities”.
But I know good products when I see them, and such products deserve promoting over the mediocre.
If, on the other hand, you’re suggesting that the length of my post is more suggestive of an ad, tough, as good information can’t be compressed into single paragraphs for the intellectual midgets out there.
00
Don’t worry Jo, I see the Climate Council is already onto it. Heard on the compliant (complicit?) commercial radio station this morning that we will have to reduce our family car trips to 36% of current use and increase our use of bicycles and walking by about 70% within a decade if we want to hit the emissions reduction targets that’s being set for us.
70
“if we want to hit the emissions reduction targets that’s being set for us.”
So does anyone know what sacrifices are being made in China, Russia, India, Phillipines, Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, South and Central America, Africa (outside South Africa which is imploding, self destructing to meet its targets), Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE.
20
So there’s a problem in the rest of the world and we in Australia, in the bottom third of the planet almost on our own with 2% of the world’s population south of the Tropic of Capricorn are supposed to commit hari kari? Seems reasonable. Whatever we can do for our friends in China.
30
Yes I caught a reference to this on the 8.00 am news on 2GB. One of the climate council had been earlier threatening us that we have to give up our petrol cars sooner if we are to meet (their) 2035 net zero target. (didn’t catch the name)
Earlier listened to Ben Fordham as he gave Andrew Forrest an easy ride on renewable energy. Ben Fordham’s questioning was not up to proper scrutiny and of course Andrew Forrest basically came out with all the rubbish one would expect from him. Including a direct comment that ‘renewables are cheaper than coal by a mile’
Really disappointed with 2GB . .
20
I don’t really care tbh. Except for the environmental hypocrisy of the bedwetters, that bothers me.
Cars have been getting heavier ever since mothers realised they liked 4wd to go shopping in (remember that in the 90s?) and European cars became fashionable, killing off Holden and the Falcon.
But it’s also about how hard they make the tyre compound. We had a Land Rover Defender and those tyres went forever, despite the weight. These days we drive a Mini, a small car but feels like a heavy one. Awesome cars too, amazing handling, tiny tyres.
But people love big heavy cars, no matter if it’s an EV or not. We also have a DMAX 4wd because I need a 4wd, use it all the time.
40
In Germany battery cars have been failing their tests on tyres, suspension and axles. The manufacturers have been trying to keep the unsprung weight down but look like they have not got it right. In the UK, tyres have caused the most test failures when they come to the first test after 3 years. Tyres are pretty easy to check but are the owners used to normal cars and would no expect tyres to wear out in 3 years. At European club football matches, Hankook advertise a battery car specific tyre on the perimeter boards. With the higher weight the carcase would need to be stronger but as for the wear, that would need harder rubber compounds with a trade of of less grip. With their high torque delivery and less grip there could be more wheelspin to wear the tyres out just as quick.
20
Gerry, my SUV weighs 2500kg, and doesnt have a tyre wear problem ?
Why would a lighter EV have a tyre problem ?.
Answer,.. because EV manufacturers fit special “low rolling resistance” tyrres to help improve range .
Those tyres have poor wear properties.
00
The Jeep Trains could reduce the need for rubber tyres(tires).
https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/121630
00
A few more examples of Jeep Trains
https://www.google.com/search?q=jeep+train&tbm=isch&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjd_ejUi4j_AhXOqGMGHXaUD0AQtI8BKAB6BAgAEC4&biw=1097&bih=535#imgrc=eaH_F_VTIbBTVM
00
I wrote about the Emissions Analytics report – and the reaction to it in the media – at Cliscep last year. The link, if anyone is interested, is https://cliscep.com/2022/05/21/no-smoke-without-tyres/
10
[…] Jo Nova citerar Reuters: […]
00
[…] Source – https://joannenova.com.au/2023/05/evs-increase-pollution-heavier-cars-wear-out-tyres-… […]
00