Many of us suspect that energy prices will skyrocket, that charging your electric vehicle will go from a few pounds to tens of pounds (at the very least), but what else is there? What could possibly link outdated ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) powered cars with the cleaner, greener, alternatives?
What will be the common denominator between the two?
The answer of course, is brakes, tyres and road surface degradation.
Government air quality experts
Ding ding ding … we have a winner.
While nobody is actually denying that applying your brakes to slow down causes brake dust, it should be pointed out that at this moment in time, there’s very little choice (unless you want to find out how long NHS waiting queues are) in using the brakes, and more importantly, the question needs to be asked just how ‘realistic’ (read: truthful) that figure is?
Michael Ellis, Transport Minister, has been quoted as saying: “We are engaging at an international level to identify how to measure these emissions, as well as aiming to develop standards to control them”. The emphasis in that paragraph is mine; How to measure these emissions.
Yes, there are some manufacturers working on alternative tyres, mainly making them airless, but they’re years away from production, and they still may produce particles as part of their natural wear / grip cycle.
It’s a similar story for brakes – reducing particle pollution (with today’s accepted technology and designs) would amount to making the brake pads from a harder compound, which would then result in the need for a more wear-resistant disk, which of course reduces braking efficiency, along with costing the manufacturers millions in development.
Banning cars from a city centre is the perfect example – yes without doubt, it will lower air pollution within that targeted area, but it will also have a financial cost, potentially kill-off any trade within that city, and lead to more people becoming jobless (and simply shift the air pollution problem somewhere else).
Radically re-engineering brakes & tyres will have a similar effect – development costs will be passed on to the customer, there could be a potential safety implication, and any benefits will be marginal in the extreme. There should be more of an understanding between the need for road transportation versus the need for cleaning up our cities, it’s a balancing act that so far, is heavily weighted in the one direction.
Of course, technology and manufacturing processes change and develop over time, but with government officials calling for an ‘urgent review’ into the materials and processes, we could just be heading toward another panicked decision without any forethought to the wider picture.
Just how far can these government experts take the ‘car = pollution’ argument? I’ve said for a long time that the next step to easy money for them is a green tax on speeding; along with a fine, there will be a tariff added for the extra emissions caused by going over the accepted speed limit … they’ve got to keep that revenue generation coming from somewhere.
Simple. Don’t brake. No brake dust 😈. As for tyres, well will they be including cyclists tyres, I mean, after all, they are rubber too, and they wear, and while we’re at it, what about the plastic sandal brigade of environmentalists. Surly their soles on the crocs wear out, contributing to air pollution, I mean, again, they are rubber or plastic, and they do wear out.
Full regenerative braking on electric or hybrids will solve one problem but tyres? How is the field of levitation going?
My Kia Niro hybrid has regenerative braking and, while it does definitely slow the vehicle, i is NOT a substitute for “real” brakes.
real brakes are used very sparingly on evs and hybrids. its only really engaged in emergencies and to come to a complete stop.
Yes regenerative braking would be great if applied to automobiles it’s been used in industry for years., just needs some investment/development to apply this technology, tyre wear well that’s another problem, not got an answer for this, which is speed related, hope someone out there is thinking about it.
Regenerative braking?Ok but ultimately your hybrid today still uses barke caliper and pad/shoe combination to stop.So until this regenerative braking you mention does Not include the use of the mechanical braking parts on the vehicle,you statement is utterly invalid.
There is a technology called Regenerative Braking. This technology is used to stop drive motors on trains, machine tools and washing machines. There is not physical brake. Surely it can be developed to work on vehicles.
Mike, your right, its called d.c injection, effectively you stop the motor by using a reverse current, may be a tad harsh on a vehicle mind. May be you can bring it in slowly enough.
Heavy commercial vehicles use retarders, either hydraulic or eddy current, to assist braking and reduce brake wear, so I’m sure this could be scaled down for use in cars….at a cost of course. But mechanical service brakes will still be needed.
another massively overstated red herring to be used in the future to tax us even more. most ev braking is from regeneration and in fact ev owners are told to use their brakes more as the discs corrode through lack of use. tyres are another issue altogether but solutions to that issue are present in the article. why doesn’t the government consider reducing its size instead of constantly wanting to suck more and more life from us?
And get rid of the House of Lords expensive ineffective and not needed that will save millions Enviromentally friendly as less hot air
As usual, the government will make a complete hash of things. Their current “down” on diesel is a case in point. When the original push to diesel occurred it was to reduce CO2 output. The government of the day was told by motor industry experts and engineers that diesel emissions contained other things like Nitrous Oxide and PMs (soot), which they ignored. I know because I was one of the people who told them. Now, they are ignoring CO2 to focus on PMs despite the fact that diesels have developed in the intervening period and are MUCH cleaner. Add the CO2 output from battery production and diesel is undoubtedly the cleanest current method of achieving locomotion.
The government is now stating that we will be all electric for transport. That WILL NOT happen. This is because the Laws of Physics stand in the way, as does Lithium. To deliver all electric transport the UK would need all of the worlds output of lithium for the next thirty years. Unlikely to say the least.
The only possible, potential solution is hydrogen, and the pust to electrification has driven that from the governments thinking. Anyway, governments are incapable of working to a long term plan. Just expect knee jerk and hokey cokey decisions because that is all they are capable of.
Great comments in there Andrew and where i think it needs to go.
And regarding Hydrogen, what is needed to produce it? vast quantities of electricity and the process is not very efficient, then the conversion of the hydrogen back to electrical energy, again losses due to inefficiency.
Hydrogen doesn’t need to be converted back to electricity, it can be directly used as fuel in an internal combustion engine, producing only water vapour from the exhaust. It is possible that current petrol engines could be converted thus reducing the enormous carbon footprint of producing new cars, electric or otherwise. A win for everyone except the new car makers.
There was a report on FB last that said a german car company has confirmed that new electric/battery operated vehicles are 11%to24% more pollution to produce than a deisel.
And what is going to happen when they come to end of live
If anything the EU pushed the case for diesels while the Japanese turned their minds to lean-burn and hybrids/hydrogen. Brand-new diesels may be cleaner at first, but once the DPF become polluted then they still turn into black smoke generators. Especially as too many motorists consider that a car is serviced only when something has gone wrong, rather than regular service being a preventative measure.
They only on about diesel cars we just built the biggest war ship we have ever had and it’s diesel,the big cargo use the dregs from the oil companies so thick it has to be heated up so they can pump it 16 of these ships produce more than all the cars in the world
Thank you!! As an engineer I have said the same things as yourself over and over again…lot of deaf ears out there. WOW I have just read from you Andrew something that came right out of my head. Thank you again
Reduce pollution all you like. You will never reduce the overall level because every time you take a step foward in reducing pollution, you are overtaken by an increase in UK population. As long as you have increasing density of population, you will have to suffer increasing pollution and a decrease in health of people and environment.
Just looking for more and more ways to financially fleece the motorist.
The substitute for the revenue lost when ICE cars are no more has already started. It is currently called the congestion charge. That will be expanded to include every road. So you’ll be charged for every mile you drive as tracked by Big Brother with the compulsorily fitted GPS device. The Sheeple are already getting them fitted under the ruse of reducing their insurance costs. The actual amount you’re charged will be adjusted according to how busy the road you’re on is. So it can still be called a “Congestion Charge”.
I think they are trying to dis-invent the car,wheel and roads.
At the end of the day THEY STILL WANT THEIR MONEY.
Don’t you mean OUR money, the robber barons don’t use their money.
I think this is really missing the main issue. Hybrid vehicles account for so much shipping around the world. No allowance is made for manufacture of electric vehicles (certain elements are only found far away) and also how electricity is generated. When will Britain adopt totally renewable power and abandon fossil fuels?
Even renewable power consumes vast amounts of carbon to manufacture the equipment to produce electricity …
Well if it ‘consumes’ carbon thats a really good thing. I think you mean produces carbon! Can you place a link to where you found this information…
In 2018 the UK ran on totally renewable electricity for a few days during the summer, we are adopting it and as solar panels become more efficient we can charge our cars from them.
Well Mark, I presume you are going to be a night shift worker as I am 100% sure Solar Panels are not very good at generating EV during the night darkness 🙁
The big drake power station runs wood pellets from the west coast of the USA it’s cut down with big machine then drying with large heaters then made into pellets the shipped 4000 mile to east coast then loaded onto ships for another 4000 miles then the last bit 200miles .then they try to tell it’s less polluting than burning coal from just down the road
Why is there no mention of ships the worst diesel fuel polluters on the planet,some only do about 8 nautical miles and mostly mixed oil and waste diesel.
But there are now a new generation of ships using light oil and/or batteries!
Hybrid ships have been around for a long time, the batch 23 Royal Navy frigate is a good example.
Some ships also use gas turbines, not diesel.
Listen, massive oil tankers an cargo ships carrying thousands of containers used diesel engines as big as a block of flats, they burn any fuel, but mainly the really sulfur rich rubbish left over from oil refineries because it’s cheap and no other easy way to get rid of it. When your burning 6-8 tons of fuel per hour you want cheap. Your little toy boats/ pleasure craft aren’t really a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
We the Motorists are just Cash Cows, always have been and always will be. As usual, the ones who are going to suffer from all this are going to be the ones who can just manage to keep a vehicle on the road. The cost of keeping a vehicle on the road is forever rising, and this suits the affluent, whom are stuck in the same traffic jams as you and I. The more vehicles forced off the road on grounds of costs, affords them more room on the road.
Perhaps some of the next measures could be raising the minimum age for new drivers, and introducing a maximum age for existing drivers. Electric cars are all well and good in theory but, the buts are already raising their heads. With the National Grid not being able to cope with the demand of charging. The cost of such vehicles, coping with producing the batteries, the life of the batteries is another bone of contention of course the battery manufacturers are going to give a longer life in theory, than that is actual. Just like Car manufacturers have previously done with emissions and MPG.
With regards to the environment, and Government advice. Diesel cars are better. Wrong. On another point. Change your polluting, inefficient free standing gas boilers in your homes for a Condensing one. Wrong. What ever we are going to be told that applies now, will surely turn out to be wrong in the future. Car sales are down and it’s no wonder. Hardly anyone is buying Diesels. Even though the technology is available to meet and exceed emissions. Where does this then leave the case for the Government and why are car manufacturers not pushing this better technology and throwing it back in the Governments face. If I remember correctly, the French PSA group have achieved this solution, with the car basically emitting Water!! Surely leaving, if correct the Government without a leg to stand on. Bosch have also developed a modification for Diesels giving the same clean results. Some of the solutions are there, and the public should be made aware of them. And put an end to all this confusion and put Diesel engine cars back on the road, where they should be.
I personally was buying Diesels before the Government advice to buy was issued. So I thought that I had chosen the right path, only for me to feel slightly different when told that I am contributing to peoples bad health. Unfortunately, the debate will rage and in my opinion, the rich will end up with more road space.
CFC’s, Catalytic converters, unleaded petrol, the list goes on and on. And still we never catch up. We never will. Working in the motor industry I first got a sight of “green issues” in 1975-76 through an advertising rep. It was his new advertising mantra, and it went…. “If you don’t buy my product the world will end….and if you don’t give it back…I’ll charge you for it again”. How we all laughed way back then…………we’re not laughing now.
Quite a few of the newer electric cars have no brake pedal, they use some sort of gadget built into the motor to brake the car. I was watching it on a tech programme a few days ago. So, that’s the brake dust argument over..
I fancy fish and chips, anyone else want some ??
Tyres, brake discs. I know let’s disinvent the wheel and get back to basics. Walking. That’ll save the planet.
Imbeciles. Raving liars. It ic Chemtrails and Geoengineering that are affecting our climate. Large conglomerates, America and China power stations using coal. A money spinner on the back of convincing people that it is their fault. Wake Up!!
And don’t forget Germany which burns vast amounts of Dirty Coal in their power stations
It’s a pity that this article has been worded to point the blame on the car driver, and yet manages to overlook half of what the report actually deals with. One aspect of the report is mentioned above (road surface wear), but is completely ignored. Another one (resuspension of road dust) isn’t even mentioned. Having skimmed through the actual report (all 93 pages), there is still an underlying effort in the report to shoulder most of the blame at the car driver, whilst hinting that some blame ‘might’ be due to other forms of transport.
However, what they say in one sentence is contradicted by what they say in another. i.e. cars will cause more of this ‘pollution’ because they drive further distances, but in another statement they say that the bigger the mass of the vehicle, the more ‘pollution’ it generates. My car is an ’08 and has 119k on the clock. It only has four tyres with disc brakes all round and weigh roughly 2 ton. Yet, what they are suggesting is that my car generates more pollution than a HGV! I’ve seen the speedos on a few lorries with over 300k miles on them and they’re less than 10 years old. They have four axles with a total of 12 tyres (with a considerably bigger contact patch), with brake pads that are enormous, with an unladen weight of around 9.5 ton and a carrying capacity of around 22 ton. So which is it? How does my car cause more ‘pollution’? Answer, because it’s a car!
BTW The report can be found here: https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/library/reports.php?report_id=992
Ah, but road haulage lobby wants the private motorist to take the blame for ever increasing pollution caused by HGVs, industry introducing JIT has increased HGV traffic but let’s point the finger at Joe Bloggs in his little car.
It’s been around for ages but someone will not allow it’s use.
Generate fuel from water & electricity.
Increase fuel economy.
No emission other that water vapour.
Convert cars to run on hydrogen fuel cells.
Great idea but there are those who will moan that with all the water coming from Hydrogen Car Exhausts everywhere is going to be WET
Can someone please explain to me why it is always the diesels that appears to be the bogeyman, why when I look at tax bands for cars ( be it older secondhand ) ie; diesel and petrol, the petrol appears to be worse figures than diesel on emissions ? – are petrol cleaner in some other way that I don’t understand ? thanks – Col
Yes they are; you were lied to by the (diesel invested) French and German motor industries, backed bythe EU, and our government. CO2 is completely harmless, indeed, it is essential for life on earth to continue, diesel emissions are far more toxic and carcinogenic than those from petrol engines.
What about pollution from aircraft? Commercial & combat, Public transport- Buses, trains, coaches and taxis, police vehicles, industrial & comercial vehicles – Earth moving plant, lorries and vans, farm vehicles that use red diesel – tractors, combine harvesters etc. Ships & ferries, Fishing boats and tugs. Did I forget anything?
It’s simple really. Go back to the early days of automobiles. Engines were single cylinder steam engines and tyres were made from wood! (Oh, and a 4mph speed limit)….
Someone mentioned ships, well that’s easy to solve, it’s called sail!
If everyone took some personal responsibility there could be a meaningful reduction in car pollution. Many journeys are short and walking or cycling would be a realistic alternative. Drivers need to switch there engines off when stationary. Without exception whenever I go out I always come across drivers sitting in cars, engines running, texting, eating sandwiches etc. Some drivers even leave their engines running and leave the car ( illegal) to get money from an ATM or similar. The most annoying drivers though are the parents who sit outside schools with engines running for well over 10 minutes waiting for their kids who then have to walk through the unnecessary and harmful pollution produced.
Will they ban all motorsport as well?
What a load of rubbish. They just want new ways to get money. Cut out one aeroplane and it will probably equal all the uk cars’ emissions. Cut out all air travel and save the planet! But, nobody is going to suggest this. As for electric cars, another cockeyed scheme. How do you make all the electricity need – solar panels covering all countryside that hasn’t be then got housing on it.
They won’t be satisfied until it’s like the old days only the rich will be able to afford a car It starts to feel like a kind of madness everyone screaming to get cars off the road with no thought for the pyramid effect how many jobs will be lost how many businesses will close They have cut bus services where I live as a pensioner I could not get to a supermarket by bus. What happens to having a supermarket deliver usually diesel vehicles What about the carers they will not be able to go to as many people as they do now without cars Public transport would take hours from one person to the next District nurses these people can barely afford to run a car now
The criminal government will continue to find new ways to rob the people and dress it up in fancy legalese jargon, citing the latest fad by the shouty brigade as proof of their earnest endeavours. In plain English its all b****ks.
How much more pollution do lorrys cause than cars? They have more tyres, heavier loads – hence more break use and are usually diesel. I have for years advocated getting them onto rail.
Assuming that my car (a 2007 Astra estate) is typical, tyres that each easily last more than 10,000 miles and brake pads over 20,000, the amount of “pollution” they generate per mile is microscopic. I recommend these experts* refocus their attentions on commercial and public service vehicles.
*The late Derek “Blaster” Bates defined an expert as “ex is a has-been and spurt is a drip, under pressure.”
I think its about time that we called for a crackdown on ministers and MP’s in general. These people forget that they are there to serve us, not to be our masters. Lets get a random selection of ordinary folk into parliament to discover exactly what is going on with their expenses now and put an end to the parliamentary gravy train. That will save us millions. Get some decent human beings to start deciding our future instead of career politicians whose only goal is to come up with more and more ways to take our money off of us. It’ll get to the stage where most of us won’t be able to afford to leave the house soon. God help us when they come up with a way of monitoring and charging for our oxygen consumption. “I’m sorry sir, you’ve used your weekly allowance of oxygen”, “but it’s only Thursday what am I meant to do”, “well you’ll have to stump up a huge amount of cash or we’ll be forced to harvest you. We don’t get any pleasure from our job sir, but rules is rules”. Hope I haven’t given some government official an idea here!
Electric flying cars or vehicles! Bring em on!
You can NOT be serious!
Surely the biggest offender where pollution is concerned far greater than the motoring fraternity is the Aviation industry.
A concerned motorist.
Probably 50/50 between commercial aviation and road freight as far as UK transport is concerned. The trouble is that road fuel costs are a revenue generator for the Government. Any increase in diesel taxation hits 99.999% of the freight industry and has an immediate knock-on impact on prices and inflation.
i believe there are both tyres and road surfaces available now containing Graphene which substantially increase the life span of these products
Let’s have a crackdown on exorbitant fuel prices in UK and appalling road surface maintenance. We’re supposed to be a relatively affluent country, yet Spain has us beat hands down for excellent roads (yes even the small rural stuff) and they’re always campaigning to get fuel prices even lower! Get a grip UK!!
Cheap petrol doesn’t mean more pollution and good road surfaces mean greater fuel economy and less tyre wear!
I recall an historical episode of Top Gear in which Jeremy Clarkson recommended that Brits drove to Spain and used their roads to the utmost, on the grounds that we’d paid for them! (He claimed that the costs of Spain’s main roads construction programme were equivalent to the UK’s net contributions to the EU’s budget. Of course, that may have included a modicum of journalistic licence.)
“Just how far can these government experts take the ‘car = pollution’ argument? “. Do not forget it was government experts who convinced us that diesel was the fuel of the future and who have now done an about turn. Does that not say it all?
Need to know asking price before making an enquiry. Please advise. Mick baker
If all fossil fuel vehicles are to be banned by 2040 then that will make a huge difference to pollution levels, so why are they now panicking about tyres and brakes. We have to face facts that we can never reduce pollution to zero no matter what we do but we can reduce it to levels that we no longer have to worry about BUT only if it’s global. the UK alone is just a tiny tiny tiny polluter that makes little or no difference to global pollution.
THE WEAR AND TEAR ON BRAKES AND TYRES IS ALL DOWN TO THE WAY A DRIVER CONTROLS THE VEHICLE. LEAVING A SUFFICIENT GAP BETWEEN YOU AND THE CAR IN FRONT AND ALLOWING YOUR VEHICLE TO REDUCE SPEED BY THE DRAG FROM THE ENGINE WILL SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE WEAR AND BENEFIT YOUR WALLET AS WELL. SIMPLES!
AS A PROFESSIONAL DRIVER FOR MANY YEARS, BY USING HIS TECHNIQUE I SAVCED ORTUNES ON BRAKES, BRAKE DISCS, TYRES AND FUEL AS WELL AS APPARENTLY REDUCING POTENTIAL EMMISIONS.
As usual,the Government is making a hash of it! They continue to persecute the individual and force our remaining industries towards ever increasing costs or closure . When lead was removed from petrol many years ago,[car manufacturers were developing lean burn technology], it was done for the wrong reasons. In the USA, catalysts were introduced to reduce air pollution resulting from oxides of nitrogen and the inversion air conditions in some States. Unfortunately, the lead poisoned the catalyst! This is why lead was removed , it was nothing to do with lead poisoning which a certain Party latched upon, and panicked the public into believing their children were being poisoned. This was supported by the Government for purely political reasons. So diesels were championed despite the fact that everyone knew they generated more oxides of nitrogen than petrol engines. So, surprise, surprise what happened next?
The number of diesels increased significantly and the chickens have come home to roost!!!
One problem that can be resolved is Speeding up to the vehicle in front and late braking. Keep a larger distance from the vehicle in front, take your foot off earlier and gently brake when required. It will reduce fuel used and reduce brake wear. ONLY one problem, motorists that think they are more important than you and HAVE to get in front at all costs. Wake up, you are no more important than anyone else.
How about back to the horse or horse and cart with wooden spoked steel rimmed wheels? Unlike dog poo the government/councils wont ‘fine’ horse poo from grass burners will they? Unless they create a ‘smell’ tax?
When will people look at aircraft pollution and leave my little old diesel car alone how can Heathrow Airport be in the middle of a low emission zone roll on brexit good bye eu
Just how far are the government prepared to go to implement more measures to reduce pollution,because the increase in population to my mind is the prime cause and this should have been attended to many years ago.To try to blame the motorist is as far as I am concerned just another way of escaping the reality of lack of controlling population all those years ago.
It’s all very well saying ‘go electric’, but we use an 1800kg caravan for our main and many short holidays. There isn’t an electric car that could pull it. I’ve considered getting a horse to pull it, but the neighbours would complain about all the old washing machines and scrap metal…Tsk Tsk I agree that aircraft are heavy polluters, you only have to look up on a clear day to see how the increasing number of flights eventually cause cloud cover.
They’re a one trick pony
What about planes dumping pollution and shipping spuing out their pollution?
When are we going to see electric ministerial cars
Reductions on mp travel and overseas travel
I’m sure water contains hydrogen and oxygen, fuel and air to power a car. Oh that won’t happen because water is free from the sky.
Free from the sky at the moment. You just wait until it becomes fuel and see how much it costs!
Don’t forget the plastic in and on the cars too. Bye bye number plates , dashboards,wings, bumpers etc. Ooh what about the big polluter, pedal rubbers, oh no I can’t cope,tell me what to do big brother!
The basic answer is birth control, because fewer babies will eventuly reduce polution, there are too many people on this planet and it is sure to end in tears.
With regards to brake dust, the treatment for brake wear is mostly down to drivers not thinking ahead.
The times I have seen drivers using the vehicle more like a dogem car.
Heavy acceleration means heavy braking.
Use of engine braking and anticipating the road ahead.
Charging up to a stop at speed before slowing rather than easing down earlier.
Driver retraining is needed.
Reduces the car maintenance and fuel consumption considerably.
I generally beat the manufacturers specs and most people think it’s driving slowly.
It’s not, it’s anticipating.
ITS time we took a look at the money paid to the members of the house of LORDS and to MPS.THERE expenses are outrages and should be curbed .BUT WILL THAT HAPPEN NEVER.
The government I’m not on the list for decades and I’m not about to trust him now all politicians are corrupted there is no one honest wise politicians any longer I feel it’s all about money making subtext the people so while the tax man gets richer the oligarchy with different role games gets preacher majority suffers this to me is tyrannical suppressing way and I do not call this living… mistakes are creating for the benefit of corporations years ago to make huge profits and now the people have to suffer and pay for it I don’t think so get rid of all governments get rid of all these greedy corporations go back to the old ways of course people will make a huge crazy shout about it but it is the only way Roy own food family unit have to be a unit and no longer social services can get involved in family units because discipline must start at home to reduce crime if you can’t see that then you might as well forget and call it end game
Please delete my comments as that typo errors created by Siri