• Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    127
    ·
    17 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
      51
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 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
        25
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        16 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.

        • Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          16 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.

        • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          16 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?

        • ansiz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          16 days ago

          Given that Gore actually won the election it’s arguable that his concessions towards climate change, that it was real for a start, was the reason the election was close enough for him to lose the election. Voters loved the comforting lie over the hard truth then and they still do.

          Especially given the yahoo Trump wants to appoint that doesn’t believe in climate change even in 2024 is pretty damning of our ability to do anything about it.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 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
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          14 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
            ·
            5 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
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 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”

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          nah, guilliotines exist and are very convincing.

          we dont actually have to take orders from them.

        • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          16 days ago

          they dont care about anything but their money and the bunkers where they think they’ll hide during the coming man made disasters

  • AliasAKA@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    16 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.

    • Scrollone@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      16 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.

      • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        15 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

        • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 days 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
            ·
            15 days 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
              ·
              15 days 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
        ·
        15 days 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
      ·
      16 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
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          16 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.

      • Tire@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        16 days 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
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    16 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
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      16 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.

      • Maetani@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        16 days 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
      ·
      16 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.

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        15 days 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
          ·
          15 days 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
            ·
            15 days 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.

      • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days 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.

        • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          14 days 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
      ·
      15 days 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

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      16 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
        13
        ·
        16 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
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 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
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 days 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
        16 days 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
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 days 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.

    • 4lan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      16 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

  • frankPodmore@slrpnk.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    16 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
      57
      ·
      16 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.

    • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      15 days 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
        ·
        14 days ago

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

    • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      16 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)

      • travysh@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        16 days ago

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

  • riodoro1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    16 days ago

    But electric cars will fix everything. Thats what electric car manufacturers said!

  • Blaster M@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    15 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.

    • Saleh@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 days 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
        ·
        14 days 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.