[HN Gopher] Study links adoption of EV with less air pollution a...
___________________________________________________________________
Study links adoption of EV with less air pollution and improved
health
Author : giuliomagnifico
Score : 46 points
Date : 2023-02-04 19:07 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (keck.usc.edu)
(TXT) w3m dump (keck.usc.edu)
| freitzkriesler wrote:
| Right, and what happens when we include the pollution used to
| make those lithium ion batteries?
|
| Oh, we're just going to ignore this inconvenient truth because
| the pollution and toxic lakes are somewhere in china and
| Mongolia. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150402-the-worst-
| place-...
| slater wrote:
| Right, and what happens when we include the pollution used to
| make the entirety of the petroleum processing industry?
|
| Oh, we're just going to ignore this inconvenient truth.
| freitzkriesler wrote:
| Right and what happens when include the pollution for
| disposing of those lithium ion batteries when they eventually
| die?
|
| Oh, we're just going to ignore this inconvenient truth.
|
| But please, let's keep lying by omission.
| dangrossman wrote:
| EV batteries aren't disposed of, they're reused as
| stationary storage, then recycled, with over 97% of the raw
| materials recoverable to put into new batteries as of 2021.
| Redwood Materials recycles over 60 tons of them per day,
| and has another facility opening in 2023 that can handle an
| additional 125,000 tons per year. The materials are too
| valuable to throw out, so a market for reusing and
| recycling them has existed as long as li-ion electric cars
| have existed.
| freitzkriesler3 wrote:
| [dead]
| slater wrote:
| Right and what happens when we include the gas flaring that
| happens in the production of gas?
|
| Oh, we're just going to ignore this inconvenient truth.
| tomtheelder wrote:
| It's on a completely different order of magnitude. And
| actually, yes, pollution far away from major population centers
| is much better than pollution within cities- regardless of what
| country it's in.
| freitzkriesler wrote:
| Right, so long as we out source the pollution somewhere else
| where in the world it's OK.
| nostromo123 wrote:
| Well, as long as it's not our kids digging in mines for
| lithium, it's OK...
| rgmerk wrote:
| The world's biggest lithium mines are in Australia, where
| miners earn extremely good wages and safety standards are
| at least as good as the US.
| dangrossman wrote:
| The US has just committed to billions of dollars per year
| in incentives to bring that pollution to the US. Between
| the IRA's 10-year expansion of incentives for buying cars
| with US-manufactured batteries and US-mined minerals,
| Section 45X, the Advanced Manufacturing Production Credit,
| is the reason billions of dollars of battery manufacturing
| and associated supply chain investments on US soil were
| announced in 2022.
| hedora wrote:
| People have run those numbers. Here is a calculator for CO2:
|
| https://evtool.ucsusa.org/
|
| Also, China will eventually improve their environmental
| regulations, just like every developing economy before them.
| ChemSpider wrote:
| 1. The pollution caused by oil drilling/production is even
| worse - and we (used to) even fight wars for oil.
|
| 2. You forgot to mention that more than 50% of lithium comes
| from Australia: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/01/chart-
| countries-produ...
| freitzkriesler3 wrote:
| [dead]
| pastage wrote:
| Environmentalist everywhere have been fighting mining industry
| for ever, often confused and co-opted by NIMBYs. Yes it is an
| inconvenient truth that all consumption hurts us. A car is
| still a car even if it is electric, we are of course better of
| with no cars at all. Very few people are actually arguing that.
| freitzkriesler2 wrote:
| The most honest comment here.
|
| But yes, EV lovers will not admit their biases. The only way
| to save the environment is by REDUCING.
| blamazon wrote:
| Shall we also ignore the similar negative externalities of ICE
| cars such as palladium/rhodium mining for catalytic converters?
| freitzkriesler wrote:
| Sure since we're both clearly lying by omission.
| blamazon wrote:
| I want to point out you started this quagmire by connecting
| into a broader narrative. The linked article simply says
| "we think localized emissions go down when EV adoption
| rates go up in a particular area" which says nothing about
| this larger discussion about the net social effects of EVs.
| Personally I believe we can discuss this until the end of
| time without a conclusive answer until someone has
| completely documented and analyzed all the relevant supply
| chains end to end for every new ICE car and every new EV
| car.
| freitzkriesler2 wrote:
| I really don't have any qualms about posting unpopular
| facts and truths.
|
| Localized or not, we live in a globalized world and it's
| a fact that lithium ion battery production is dangerous
| and dirty work on par with the petroleum that it is
| trying to eliminate. EV fanatics don't like hearing this,
| but it is true.
| rgmerk wrote:
| The claim that lithium ion battery production is as bad
| as petroleum production is ridiculous.
|
| The scale of mining required to produce a lithium-ion
| battery and the solar panels to charge it is far lower
| than required to produce and refine the petroleum used
| over the lifetime of a vehicle.
|
| The other little secret about mining is that nasty as it
| is, the impact of non-petroleum mining on the environment
| is miniscule compared to farming, which is far more
| damaging but has much better PR.
| blamazon wrote:
| Agree to disagree to agree. One thing that's particularly
| dangerous and dirty right now is cobalt. (Used primarily
| in rechargeable batteries, and airbags, jet engines, etc)
| Unlike some other exotic materials, it's currently a
| supply chain that cannot prove which materials were
| obtained using modern techniques and heavy equipment, and
| which ones were obtained by hand through brutalized labor
| practices.
|
| I caught an interview on NPR recently[1] with the author
| of "Cobalt Red: How the Blood of the Congo Powers Our
| Lives"
|
| [1]: https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/02/01
| /1152893...
| nickysielicki wrote:
| This makes sense but I don't put a ton of faith in the analysis.
| EVs grew over the past few years, but Covid also cut down on a
| lot of urban activity over the past 1000 days, so it's hard to
| separate the two.
| dangrossman wrote:
| They compared the EV registration rates and asthma-related ER
| visit rates by zip code. Presumably COVID and its related
| effects happened pretty much everywhere, not only in zip codes
| with more EVs.
| amalgamated_inc wrote:
| > That disparity points to an opportunity to restore
| environmental justice in communities that are disproportionately
| affected by pollution and related health problems.
|
| > Past research has shown that underserved communities, such as
| lower-income neighborhoods, tend to face worse pollution and
| associated respiratory problems than more affluent areas.
|
| > While climate change is a massive health threat
|
| Would be a whole lot easier to take this more seriously if it
| didn't have the commie agitprop soundbites all over it.
|
| > ZEV adoption was significantly lower in zip codes with lower
| levels of educational attainment.
|
| Shocking! Poor people can't afford overpriced cars 3-10x the
| price of what they're currently driving. This is why (you)
| commies are the bad guys; being poor is unhealthy and you keep
| 'em poor.
| blamazon wrote:
| Hello, real commies don't think cars should be required for
| existence at all. Trains, trams, buses, cycling, walking are
| the socialist methods of transport and are like 100-1000x more
| affordable than any car to the poor.
|
| Cars on the whole are generally an albatross around the neck of
| the working class financially.
| nostromo123 wrote:
| Depends on your circumstances. I live in Central Europe, a
| bit outside a major capital and commuting there for work.
| This is a place with excellent public transport by any
| measure (metro travels on time every 2-3 minutes during the
| day, for instance).
|
| Total commute time in one direction: train + metro + walking
| 1.5h, car 0.5h.
|
| At this point, even if public transport were offered to me
| for free, I would not use it. 3h of commute per day is just
| too much.
|
| (Yeah, I could theoretically move closer to work... and what
| do I do when the workplace changes? move again?)
| katbyte wrote:
| I'm curious, what's the main contributor to the transit
| time? As you don't break down how long the
| walking/metro/train each are
| amalgamated_inc wrote:
| Switching lines, waiting on connections, and
| coordinating, of course.
|
| This is true of all public transit systems, even the best
| ones. Unless you live directly at the source station and
| have a direct shot to your destination station, you're
| going to waste a lot of time changing buses/trains and
| waiting and coordinating.
|
| And not everybody can live near every transit hub, not
| even near _a_ transit hub, by definition.
|
| Cars are point-to-point. The very best public transit can
| do is match it in terms of pure speed.
|
| Public transport has a much higher bandwidth at the
| expense of individual travel time. It's a trade-off.
| Naturally there's a limit to how many cars can dive at
| any given time in any given city, but I'd definitely
| expect the average public transit time to be 2-5x the
| equivalent individual transportation (bicycle if
| possible/car) transit time.
| amalgamated_inc wrote:
| Yes, of course. This faux environmentalism is just an excuse
| to take people's freedoms of individual transportation away.
| I am aware.
| blamazon wrote:
| My friend, I don't mean to offend, but these takes seem
| unnecessarily hateful and indicative of a worldview where
| people are "out to get you." I encourage you to think
| collaboratively on these issues and perhaps travel to a
| place where socialized transit and bicycle infrastructure
| are the norm. It is a form of individual and financial
| freedom that is difficult to appreciate until you don't
| have a car in your life anymore.
| ilostmyshoes wrote:
| My personal experience tells me that reactionaries
| literally _are_ scared. Scared of change and things they
| don 't understand. Probably a controversial opinion but
| oh well
| amalgamated_inc wrote:
| Of course, as they should be. The last Cultural
| Revolution didn't go so well, remember?
| blamazon wrote:
| Some studies back this idea up with data, such as
| "Conservatives Anticipate and Experience Stronger
| Emotional Reactions to Negative Outcomes Samantha Joel et
| al. J Pers. 2014 Feb." [1]
|
| This is why it is more important than ever to be
| empathetic to others - we live in a crazy ass world with
| overwhelming amounts of both tragedy and beauty. The way
| each one of us perceives that endlessly complex
| environment is wholly unique, and it is the only reality
| each of us has ever known.
|
| [1]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23336710/
| amalgamated_inc wrote:
| I know these places. They are poorer and have less
| freedom and I'm not interested.
| thinkingkong wrote:
| Whenever I spend time abroad I think about the EVs back home and
| wonder how the hell this will ever see widespread adoption. The
| sheer number of motorcycles, cars, people, lack of infrastructure
| for batteries and charging systems is totally overwhelming. There
| doesnt seem any realistic way for these tools to be adopted by
| the majority of the global population. It doesnt make it useless.
| But I just cant see a realistic path forward to eletrification of
| transportation on a global scale.
| ghfjvfduk wrote:
| And yet gasoline cars were adopted despite no gas pumps or wide
| spread infrastructure.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Most places have electricity, and electric bikes are already
| very common in Asia. It seems like a lot easier problem than
| even just building enough gas stations to keep up with growing
| developing worlds demand.
| kamranjon wrote:
| Fwiw the U.S. emits the largest volume of CO2 emissions from
| road transportation worldwide, followed by China. So I think if
| we can start there, it'd be a huge improvement.
| funstuff007 wrote:
| I'm not sure I buy this. Isn't most of the pollution generated by
| a small % of vehicles. e.g. diesel trucks and maga pickups tuned
| to burn oil. In short, all the sedans on the road can be
| electric, but the pollution levels are largely unchnaged.
|
| asthma rates for residents of this building would not be affected
| until all trucks and buses went electric.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_Apartments
| Symbiote wrote:
| Changing that requires political will.
|
| In inner London, driving a car from before roughly 2005 incurs
| a charge of PS12.50 per day.
|
| Driving a heavy truck or large bus from before roughly 2014
| anywhere in London incurs a charge of PS100 per day, or
| PS300/day if it's even older.
|
| Of the public buses, "There are 3,854 hybrid buses, 785 battery
| electric buses, and 22 hydrogen fuel cell buses operating in
| London, as of March 2022, out of a total bus fleet of 8,795 -
| this is around 53% of the bus fleet".
|
| New York seems to be aiming for something similar for buses
| (not trucks), but is about 5 years behind.
|
| ("The New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) operates the
| world's largest fleet of buses -- 4,373 public buses" -- well,
| maybe the largest in the world in America. I'll leave it to a
| New Yorker to find figures, I don't know enough about how NYC
| transport is structured.)
| blamazon wrote:
| In other news: water linked to wetness. EVs are so much more
| pleasant to be around for both acoustic and particulate
| emissions. Anyone who's dined outdoors next to a busy car
| intersection in an ICE-centric location knows this.
|
| And it is easily 10x worse to me in places that have a lax
| approach to auto emissions and safety. Where I live now there are
| zero safety or emissions inspections for auto vehicles (zero!)
| and it feels like every tenth car going by on the major roadways
| has an absurdly loud modified or damaged exhaust system. I yearn
| for the day I can eat outside at the restaurants in my
| neighborhood without that disturbance. At the current rate of
| social change in this US state I will probably be very old, or
| dead before then.
| pengaru wrote:
| > And it is easily 10x worse to me in places that have a lax
| approach to auto emissions and safety.
|
| What surprised me was how noticeable the difference in
| emissions were even ICE vs. ICE, just getting around by bicycle
| all summer visiting family in Illinois vs. what I was breathing
| riding in traffic once back in California. IL exhaust is
| noxious in comparison.
|
| Then when Russia invaded Ukraine I learned CA fuel is an
| entirely different blend from the rest of the nation targeting
| better emissions with lower sulfur and particulates. So
| apparently CARB and all those frequent smog tests and spending
| more on gas actually makes a QoL difference, surprise!
|
| I fully expect many confirmations of auto emissions-caused
| disease/death once the nation pivots to electric. It can't
| happen soon enough. I don't even care if the electricity is
| produced via fossil fuels away from where people live. Having
| such large numbers of ICEs constantly spewing exhaust adjacent
| to where we breathe is categorically DUMB. And we sure have far
| more ability to clean the exhaust in a large-scale immobile
| power plant installation than little portable ad-hoc
| propulsion-as-a-30%-efficient-byproduct rube goldberg machines.
| tablespoon wrote:
| > Then when Russia invaded Ukraine I learned CA fuel is an
| entirely different blend from the rest of the nation
| targeting better emissions with lower sulfur and
| particulates. So apparently CARB and all those frequent smog
| tests and spending more on gas actually makes a QoL
| difference, surprise!
|
| I recall reading somewhere that California's geography means
| they have to be super-diligent about emissions or their major
| cities will have a severe smog problems. I think it was
| something about mountains trapping the emissions and keeping
| them concentrated.
| blamazon wrote:
| Los Angeles in particular is really bad. You've got like 20
| million people (a number higher than the individual
| populations of 45 US states!) all living in flat area
| mostly hemmed on 3 sides by mountains and on the fourth
| side by the ocean. Winds tend to blow in from the ocean,
| and don't tend to pass over the mountains. This tends to
| trap a pocket of air over the city.
|
| This wouldn't be so bad if car usage wasn't so necessary to
| get around there, however car ownership in the LA metro is
| something like 80-90 percent, with around 1.6 cars per
| household on average. (Compare to about 32% and 0.45 per
| household in Tokyo, a very similar place in terms of
| geography and population) EVs represent about 1% of those
| cars, so, conservatively you've got about 15 million cars
| filling up that one air pocket overhead with combustion
| byproducts.
|
| It gets worse! Traffic in Los Angeles is so bad that a lot
| of those cars are in stop and go hours-long commutes every
| day which is a particularly inefficient regime for fuel use
| and emissions. On top of that this bad traffic has an
| interesting side effect: over half of all car trips in Los
| Angeles are less than 3 miles. This is also bad for
| emissions because the catalytic converter may not get to
| heat up and achieve full efficiency.
| StreamBright wrote:
| You are assuming that every city allows cars into dining areas.
| There are many examples in Europe where this is not the case.
| The whole electric vs combustion car argument is predicated on
| the fact that we need cars in inner cities at all.
| blamazon wrote:
| Mmmmm, I don't think I assumed that. I'm pretty sure I
| described my current scenario, and the scenarios of others
| who live in similar places. I know how loathsome this
| scenario is because I have lived and traveled in those places
| in Europe you mention.
|
| The sad reality is that cars are so thoroughly stuck into the
| urban areas in so many places and it will take longer than my
| lifespan to unring that bell here in America and fix mobility
| in urban centers. However, we can potentially unring some
| smaller bells a hell of a lot sooner with EVs. It's a really
| valuable transitional tech in that regard, in my eyes. I
| don't think ICE will ever truly go away, due to the huge
| power density of the fuel. But, if we just replace say, half
| of the passenger fleet within say, 10-100 miles of american
| cities with EVs as they age out by like 2035, life will be
| much better here from that point until I die. Of course if we
| can increase the portion of those cars that age out and are
| not replaced, especially in a 1 mile radius of the city
| center, that's a much larger win than swapping an ICE SUV for
| an EV SUV.
| mark-ruwt wrote:
| An Urbanist credo: Cities aren't loud. ICE cars are.
| amalgamated_inc wrote:
| False; most modern cars aren't very loud. At city speeds, the
| loudest part is the tire noise. At highway speeds, the wind
| noise. You only really hear the engine in ICE cars under
| heavy acceleration or if the car is designed to be loud (e.g.
| a sports car).
| derefr wrote:
| I'm sitting beside a very, very loud street as I type this.
| My apartment faces onto a four-lane stroad, that climbs up
| a hill right in front of my building.
|
| Cars have to throttle up to climb hills. This is also "city
| driving." People seem to forget that many cities are not
| flat, but instead are quite hilly, or even mountainous
| (when a city is built a narrow valley, getting to most
| places often involves going up or down the sides of the
| valley.)
|
| Also, it's not just cars. Frequently, semi trucks go by my
| apartment, hissing and wheezing their pneumatic brakes as
| they recover them going up the hill, or expend them going
| down the hill. And this isn't even an arterial road in my
| city!
|
| And then there are the local motorcycle clubs that use this
| stroad to caravan together to places...
| dangrossman wrote:
| I've certainly heard modern ICE cars where the engine noise
| was minimal. At the same time, I can scarcely recall
| sitting in a drive-through fast food line with my window
| open to order and NOT being annoyed at the level of engine
| noise from other cars making it harder to hear and be heard
| at the speaker. It's definitely not tire or wind noise when
| we're all just idling in line.
| amalgamated_inc wrote:
| Yea, that's true. But I can walk around plenty of cities
| with cars driving within feet of me and not hear much
| noise besides the road noise at all. I suppose the design
| of the city makes a difference, e.g. are there sound-
| reflecting bare concrete walls everywhere (like many
| drive throughs).
| karmelapple wrote:
| At the 10:15 mark in this video, different types of
| vehicles are measured for noise output.
|
| It would be pretty amazing if we could get around on
| e-bikes a lot more than we could today. Quiet, easy to
| ride... but in places that are not hospitable to bike
| riders, less safe than a car, which is likely why they
| won't be adopted en masse.
|
| https://youtu.be/CTV-wwszGw8
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| Even ignoring the sound, which is definitely louder than an
| outdoor speaking voice, I can _feel_ my neighbor start his
| truck every day, it's completely stock and was made ~2015.
| Cars are loud as hell, and most new cars sold in the US are
| trucks.
| amalgamated_inc wrote:
| > most new cars sold in the US are trucks
|
| source?
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| Over 80% are now trucks and SUVs apparently.
| amalgamated_inc wrote:
| Yes, like that monstrously loud Tesla Model Y!
| nickysielicki wrote:
| The fundamental problem is that people conflate air quality and
| carbon emissions. It's two separate problems with two separate
| solutions.
|
| Diesel emissions cause cancer, but burning those emissions off
| takes additional energy. If you have a semi-truck without a
| diesel particulate filter going down I94 in rural North Dakota,
| getting 15-20% better fuel economy than if it had one, there's
| an argument to be made that this is a net positive for the
| planet overall. Nobody is getting cancer from the long-haul
| semi trucks that spend most of their time on the interstate,
| and the reduced consumption is a better deal for the planet.
| Even with the NOX. (Citation needed).
|
| Likewise, a semi truck that exists doing short runs in urban
| Illinois, sitting next to a coffee shop waiting for his
| trailer, probably should have a DPF.
|
| The main problem I have with EVs is that we're forgetting
| reduce-reuse-recycle. A 2005 Corolla is safe, it's production
| emissions are already accounted for, and gets decent fuel
| economy even by modern standards. The correct choice for
| someone that cares about the planet isn't to buy a luxury EV
| (and they're all luxury cars), it's to live a simple life and
| to make the least consumptive choice you can. There's a total
| lack of nuance when it comes to climate change.
| dangrossman wrote:
| Is anyone advocating for nation-scale forced replacement of
| 2005 Corollas with EVs? Most of what I see are pushes,
| starting in the 2030s, to limit the sale of new gas/diesel
| cars, not to force anyone to replace one they already have.
| The gas/diesel cars will continue to be used until they reach
| their end of life, which is typically once they hit the point
| that they cost more to repair than they're worth.
| Symbiote wrote:
| Some European cities have announced plans for this.
|
| Paris and Amsterdam have announced that from 2030 onwards,
| only zero-emission vehicles will be allowed to drive in
| those cities. Depending on your definition, Paris is a
| nation-scale settlement. (The population is larger than
| many countries.)
|
| Petrol/diesel vehicles will be traded away from such cities
| as time goes by, and their resale value will decrease. This
| is already happening for the largest goods vehicles and
| buses in similar European cities. Mostly, older large
| diesel vehicles have been banned from large cities, but
| this gradually extends to all large diesel vehicles, then
| diesel vans, etc.
|
| https://urbanaccessregulations.eu/ lists many of these
| restrictions, but it's not the easiest site to navigate.
| VBprogrammer wrote:
| The average age of a car at the time it is given up for scrap
| in the UK is just shy of 14 years. Cars exist in a paradox
| where they wear out and become uneconomical to maintain; the
| counter point being enthusiasts who can keep cars on the road
| practically forever. Doing this relies on a steady stream of
| parts from the same model being scrapped and sold for parts,
| limited exposure to the elements (slowing the rate of decay)
| and eventually expensive bespoke replacements.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| > Nobody is getting cancer from the long-haul semi trucks
| that spend most of their time on the interstate
|
| What about the drivers in those trucks and traffic? (I don't
| know how to find the data.)
| derefr wrote:
| > The correct choice for someone that cares about the planet
| isn't to buy a luxury EV (and they're all luxury cars), it's
| to live a simple life and to make the least consumptive
| choice you can.
|
| Okay, but why focus on individual choice when it comes to
| climate policy? That's the same myopic "fix the visible
| symptoms" thinking that causes voters to demand offices
| enforce recycling policies on employees, but then does
| nothing to push for preventing those same companies from
| dumping 10000x the mass of industrial waste into the nearest
| river.
|
| Think like the civil engineer who must design the next pre-
| fab pre-densified /r/UrbanHell development to sit beside an
| existing factory town somewhere in rapidly-urbanizing China.
| What type of cars do you want that engineer to _design their
| city to accommodate_? What policies, enacted by _other
| countries_ , would influence their choice?
|
| The point of global climate policy, is to influence the
| choices that _those_ people make -- choices which entirely
| swamp out (by five or more orders of magnitude) any choice
| you as an individual commuter will ever make.
| melling wrote:
| Strange, only 8 days ago I was told this on HN
|
| "Most emissions from modern vehicles these days comes from
| things like tire dust rather than tailpipe. What would be best
| for local street level pollution would probably be something
| like a lightweight rickshaw over a multiton EV."
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34540177
| Xylakant wrote:
| There's nothing strange about it. EVs are better than IC cars
| but still not good on all metrics.
| blamazon wrote:
| That is not a discordant take. Pedestrians and cyclists are
| obviously the most pleasant transportation option to be
| around in an urban space acoustics/particulates emissions
| wise.
|
| Unfortunately, some places have gone all-in on cars and it is
| literally impossible to live a full life without using one.
| This is where EVs slot in nicely. Further, EVs that fit into
| the micromobility space are an excellent option for many
| places-- e-bikes, scooters, Renault Twizy, etc. (Which aligns
| with what you were told above)
| hedora wrote:
| That's only true for _particulate_ emissions.
|
| ICE cars produce much nastier stuff than particulates, and
| EVs eliminate those classes of pollutants.
|
| On the particulate front: EV's greatly reduce brake dust, but
| increase tire wear. The market will partially address the
| latter.
|
| Tire wear on my EV costs $0.15 per mile, and I'll certainly
| be taking that into account when I buy my next car!
| nickysielicki wrote:
| That can't possibly be true. A new set of all season tires
| is like $2000. You are going through a set of 4 tires every
| 13k miles?
| blamazon wrote:
| $2000 for a set of all seasons? I thought I was spending
| a lot of money when I dropped $1100 on a new set for my
| Model X. That works out to about $0.024 per mile for me
| if they last as long as the last set of the same make and
| model. (About 48k)
|
| So, maybe that poster meant $0.015 per mile, not $0.15?
| nickysielicki wrote:
| CrossClimate2s or don't even bother. ;)
|
| https://youtu.be/PT2odY3C6Og
| piperswe wrote:
| What tire sizes are you buying? My CrossClimate2s were
| less than $1k for a set of 4
| dangrossman wrote:
| The tires on my last EV needed replacing at about 25K
| miles, and those were the OEM tires which tend to wear out
| quicker than retail tires. I think I spent about $700
| replacing all four. That's about 3 cents per mile. If the
| replacements lasted their 70K mile warranty, that'd be only
| a penny per mile.
| freezedryCS wrote:
| I cackled at water is linked to wetness
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-02-04 23:01 UTC)