[ustolemyname]

1. Larger vehicles pose a much greater threat to pedestrians and cyclists, both from frequency and consequence of incidents.

2. Tire emissions are more toxic than exhaust [1] and tire wear is dramatically greater on heavier vehicles. This is about air pollution in the city, not climate change globally.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/03/car-tyre...

[ToucanLoucan]

> 2. Tire emissions are more toxic than exhaust [1] and tire wear is dramatically greater on heavier vehicles. This is about air pollution in the city, not climate change globally.

Is there any info on how this impacts the environmental benefits of EVs? Or is the lack of combustion still a net gain?

[pille]

I found one write-up investigating this a few months ago:

https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/electric-vehicles-...

Trying to summarize: EVs still seem to be a net gain, but non-exhaust emissions are still a significant problem. We don't know how bad that problem really is because there's not enough research yet.

[_ache_]

What are you measuring ? CO2 emission or particles count in the air ?

Worst for particles emission, better for CO2 emission, basically. Hope we will improve down tire emission.

[blibble]

not to mention the road damage caused is to the fourth power of the axle load

[gruez]

That also implies that trucks are much worse than cars OR suvs, and should be banned entirely as well.

[_ache_]

Yes, out of the city ideally, you will use cargo train. In fact, in some (french) city lorry are forbidden, only local service are permitted. The most heavy one are already forbidden on the WE, day off and summer all over France.

[jacquesm]

But then you'd need to have a viable alternative and that's a bit of a problem for 'last miles' delivery of goods. But in-city SUV traffic is entirely optional.

[tzs]

What range of weight is that fourth power rule valid for?