• AliasAKA@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    1 month 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.

    • Scrollone@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 month 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.

      • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month 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

        • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Technically, a subway would be easier to build a microplastic containment solution than applying the same to endless miles of roadway. Using metal wheels is probably still the better option though

          • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            subways are only economical in big cities though.

            No one is building a subway in my town, would be waaaaay to expensive. they couldnt even keep a tram system going

            • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              I was agreeing with your sentiment that rubber subway tires are still magnitudes better than cars, realistically, buses are probably less microplastics per person moved as well if the route has decent ridership.

      • DillyDaily@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Brisbane? Their metro is literally a bus 😂 the council are so proud of it too.

        Our public transport in Vic leaves much to be desired but at least we have a well developed tram system that reduces the number of tyres in the collective fleet.

        We did just outlaw e-scooters which was necessary because the infrastructure and community education wasn’t there and it was dangerous. But long term e-scooters do serve a place in a less car reliant community. Bike infrastructure investment is decades behind what it needs to be.

        Much like everywhere, the oversized nature of “yank tanks” seems to be a large factor in every single thing wrong with cars and car infrastructure these days.

        Smaller, lighter cars don’t wear through their tyres as fast 🤷

    • Echolynx@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month 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
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month 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.

      • Tire@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        1 month ago

        Bikes cause thousands of times less damage to streets so I wouldn’t be surprised if they also wear less.

  • Maetani@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    1 month 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
      34
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month 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.

      • Maetani@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        That was an interesting read. I guess tyre fragments (and industrial pellets) are just way bigger than the other big offenders, which would explain why they represent such a huge portion of the total mass, and why they are filtered out “easily”. Overall it seems to me that we really need to categorize the different microplastics better, as the current definition (anything plastic 5mm and under) seems a bit too large, and with all the mix ups, you can always blame something else.

    • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 month 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.

      • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        So then isn’t it 1/4 of a meaningless number? It seems like the specific impacts mentioned in the article (zinc,6PPD) are more relevant.

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        (The bulk of ocean plastic comes from the rivers of poor countries without proper waste management.)

        This might be true for places nearer to shore, but studies have found the great Pacific patch to be mostly discarded fishing gear by weight.

        • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yes I’ve seen this factoid too, but I struggle to see how it could be true. We’re comparing theoretically non-disposable kit from individual boats with the output of a large number of massive rivers in countries with populations of hundreds of millions (in particular Indonesia and Philippines) and a terrible habit of dumping trash in waterways. The amount reaching the ocean must by definition be huge.

          Of course, the main problem with discarded fishing nets is not that they are plastic but that they destroy the ecosystem by design. Maybe the two harms have been conflated.

          • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            I also struggle with it, but the research I’ve seen is that it’s the majority by weight. Microplastics wouldn’t get picked up, so they’d be really hard to be weighed.

            Then again, these big pieces will be shedding microplastics all the time so maybe they’re contributing to it as well.

            Either way, we’ve got two problems: Plastic runoff from rivers and fishing gear disposal. And both, I think, could be solved by simply providing cash for people who can verifiably dispose of plastics. Check out some nets and floats and line, check in a certain amount and you get money back. Because people are greedy and stupid we need to incentivize cleaning things up.

        • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yes the washer wastewater should be easy in theory. But to filter the really small particles you’d need an expensive HEPA-equivalent filter that has to be regularly changed. Needless to say, none of this is happening in practice.

          Filtering tyre dust is always going to be a haphazard proposition. This interesting contraption notwithstanding.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’ve read arguments that typical plastic pollution never really wears enough to become micro plastics. Not that it’s ok, just that it stays in macro pieces

  • frankPodmore@slrpnk.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    1 month 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
      58
      ·
      1 month ago

      You want trains because they are good for the environment.

      I want trains because chugga chugga choo choo.

      We are not the same.

    • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      I learned recently that speed limits are determined by studying the speeds driven and setting them at the 85th percentile.

      So what we can do to lower speed limits is to find a place they’re doing a traffic study and repeatedly drive over them at very low speeds.

      • Tehdastehdas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        We can lower the speeds driven by putting bushes right next to the lanes. They increase perceived speed.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 month 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
        12
        ·
        1 month ago

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

    • 4lan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month 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

    • vaionko@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month 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
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

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

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Cotton and wool can at least be returned to the earth naturally. Cotton can be grown places where water shortages aren’t an issue.

        Personally the greenest option for me is trying to buy clothing made from nature textiles at a second hand store. I also wear what I own until it is basically rags, if a garmet gets a hole or a stain it becomes work clothing for when I’m doing dirty work. Obviously everyone on the planet cannot do that, but as it stands we already waste tons of clothing with fast fashion and many garmets are only worn a handful of times before being thrown away or even never worn or sold at all before becoming trash.

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Someone already suggested hemp, but there is also other fibres like linen.

        At the end of the day clothing would not be an issue at all, if clothes were made to last and worn accordingly. Unless you work in blue collar jobs, the wear on clothes is minimal and there is no reason why a set of shirts shouldn’t last you a decade.

    • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month 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)

      • travysh@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Brake pads are also moving away from copper. Little improvements over time

    • KneeTitts@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 month ago

      The only thing I see amerikans taking ‘urgent action’ on is making sure a few select convicted criminals avoid doing any prison time.

      • Lennny@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Also, we’re due for a new high school shooting record. Maybe we can break it this next time.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s why this is so important. Now that we’re finally starting to move to electric vehicles and can see a future with no exhaust and much less brake dust, that tire pollution stands out even more.

  • Blaster M@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 month 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.

    • Saleh@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Unfortunately this is known since two decades or so. I have learned about it in Uni 5 years ago.

      I expect that car and tire manufacturers have been lobbying against this getting more attention extensively. There is no other solution except reducing car traffic.

      • Tehdastehdas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Reduce car traffic, or…

        Tyre dust vacuum car, just add HEPA filter:

        Even more road noise. No improvement to car-dependence ruining walkability in cities and bikeability in suburbs.

  • maniii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Vulcanized RUBBER tyres shed PLASTIC microparticles … hmmmm something sounds very rubbery and not at all plasticky… i truly wonder what it could be …hmmmm…

    Edit: “Is rubber considered a plastic? Although materials such as rubber, textiles, adhesives, and paint may in some cases meet this definition, they are not considered plastics.”

    Here is a Scientific study MIS-CONSTRUING Rubber as a Plastic AND MAKING ASSUMPTIONS WITHOUT PROPER EXPLANATIONS !!!

    https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5664766/

    This is the problem with Scientific studies, Media, Reporting and bunch of people running with studies that make a lot of FALSE ASSUMPTIONS WITHOUT TELLING YOU THE FULL FUCKING STORY.

    • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 month ago

      Rubber can mean both, natural rubber from specific trees, or synthetic rubber, which is made out of plastics.

      • maniii@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Again there is a difference even when you say synthetic rubber,

        DO NOT MIX AND CONFUSE RUBBER and PLASTIC.

        Rubber === mixture of ISOPRENE and ELASTOMERE polymers ( naturally occurring from Latex/rubber trees but 50% naturally produced and 50% synthetically produced from petrochemicals)

        Plastic === mixture of various Ethyl,Propyl,Poly-Propyl Polymers mainly derived synthetically from petrochemical sources ( may or may not be combined with elastomere for rubberized properties).

        So MOST MODERN Industrial processes are DIRTY and HEAVILY POLLUTING.

        Dont confuse Rubber and Plastic manufacturing and lump it into a single problem unless and until you have definitive and REPRODUCIBLE PROOF THAT PROBLEMS ARE COMMON TO BOTH.

          • 4lan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Is that your only retort to being shut down with logic? I love the spirit of this sub but the people in here are so unbearable

            Is all of your clothing natural fibers? I guarantee you are shedding pounds of microplastics into the environment every year personally

            Got a goretex jacket? You are killing the earth with PFAs

            • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              1 month ago

              Shut down with logic? My entire comment was about differentiating between natural and synthetic rubbers and he wrote an entire wall of text about how I have to differentiate between natural and synthetic rubbers.

              And yes, except for a couple jackets, which I don’t really wash at all, all my clothes, bed sheets etc. are out of 100% cotton. Always have been. My top level comment in this very thread is literally me calling out synthetic textiles. Any other things you want to project onto me?

    • ReanuKeeves@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 month ago

      Microrubbers sounds like condoms for guys with unfortunate situations in their pants though

      • maniii@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Maybe we need a new study of “Forever chemicals” and “Short-term chemicals” and “Long-lived chemicals” redefined and not use confusing terms like “microplastics” for anything polymerised. DNA is a polymer but we dont call people microplastics.

    • Affidavit@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 month ago

      hi HOW ARE you TODAY?

      i’m pretty GOOD MYSELF!!111!!!

      I TOO like to RANDOMLY SWITCH TO upper case.

      I HOPE YOU RECOVER SOON!

    • leftytighty@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 month ago

      Daddy I’m so sorry microplastics in your bloodstream are causing your untimely demise…

      mic

      miiii

      Yes Daddy?

      they’re MICRO rubbers you ignorant IDIOT

    • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Imagine things being made of multiple components and not one pure component. /s

      • maniii@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Imagine confusing Tigers and Lions and claiming BIG CAT micro-pussies are causing problems all over the world!!!

        Tigers are different and Lions are different. They are big cats but different species have different habitats and habits.

        So dont mix Plastics and Rubbers when they are chemically different and may have different manufacturing processes.

        Was that really hard to understand ?

        • BakerBagel@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          I worked at a tire factory. Half the rubber used in tires is synthetic rubber, which is made from plastic. Your car tires are not made from 100% natural rubber from a tree.

          • maniii@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Synthetic rubber is not plastic. It is from petrochemicals but not the same chemical substance.

            • Takumidesh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              1 month ago

              A plastic is just a material made from polymers, you are the one adding artificial limitations on what polymers can be used. The belts in tires use both nylon and polyester which are both plastics by anyone’s definition. So even by your strict definition, tires are made up, at least in part, by plastic.

        • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 month ago

          Was that really hard to understand ?

          … umm, yes. I have literally no idea what you’re talking about.

    • Suzune@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      The study linked in the article also says that microplastic and rubber are different. As far as I understood it, they also quoted it wrong.

      • maniii@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Exactly. We need more and better peer-reviewed and vetted studies. Is rubber pollution exactly same as micro-plastics? Or is it 80% the same effects? Is it the same effects due to the same chemicals? Is it similar due to the same processes and not necessarily the end-product material ? Many many questions that people don’t seem to understand and just blindly trust whatever some “latest study shows …” bullshit that has been going on for a very long time.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      This is the problem with Scientific studies, Media, Reporting and bunch of people running with studies that make a lot of FALSE ASSUMPTIONS WITHOUT TELLING YOU THE FULL FUCKING STORY.

      ah, but randos online know the real story. The Caplocks only adds to your authenticity. Look, you’re trying to ague about semantics to discredit concerns about microplastics getting in people’s blood streams. Within the context of micro particials, there’s really not much difference between “rubber” and “plastic” as what makes them unique to each other is their properties when bonded in large forms. Maybe it’s harmless or maybe it’s this generation’s lead poisons, toxoplasmosis, or aspectos. Aspectos, which by the way, is perfectly natural, but still dangerous to humans. Something I have to remind people when they talk about corn oil based plastics. The half life on PLA may be shorter, but research is still being done on how quickly harm happens and what levels harm can occur.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      Thanks for the link that argues against your rant. I guess you could salvage it some by comparing the numbers and claiming the plastic component is lower than the main article’s numbers in contribution. It would be awkward though if you find out they already separated those number in their math. It also doesn’t change the point that a huge amount of pollution in the form of tire wear occurs constantly and isn’t going away anytime soon.