EVs - The Tire Wear Argument

The latest talking point in the anti-EV world seems to be tire pollution and tire wear.

I hate idiots. I really do. I hate people who throw "facts" in my face without researching themselves, refuse to understand the counter arguments or even attempt to understand the premises the arguments they are making are built upon.

So, to start. The are 2 premises for this argument. The first is the tire compounds and the second is the combination of the weight and acceleration leading to increased wear.

On the topic of tire compounds, this is simultaneously the more legit and the more derpy of the two. Legit because automakers are likely to slap these tires on the cars because they generally make the car perform better. But then derpy because most people just replace their EV tires with whatever is cheapest. People are shit at maintaining vehicles and tires are expensive. 

The second argument is bad for a different reason; it assumes all EV drivers will drive like shit heads just because they have more torque.

Now, I think these studies have an understandable flaw. Electric vehicles still aren't exactly mainstream. In fact, it hasn't been that long at all since virtually all EV sales were Tesla's. Put another way, most driving statistics out there are from affluent people who intentionally bought a fast, expensive vehicle. 

Look at most EV forums/subreddits/etc... for non-Tesla's and you find a community largely obsessed with efficiency. There is something about EVs which turns non-enthusiasts into people MUCH more acutely aware of their driving efficiency. 

This is purely anecdotal, but virtually every time I'm at a light when it turns green an ICE vehicle in another lane is going faster than me. Much faster. And other cars are passing me. While I have the potential to emit more tire based pollutants than the average driver, I don't think I am.

And this points out 2 VERY large flaws with this argument;

1. Excessive tire wear is controllable to a degree and dependent upon the driver and thus EV drivers can potentially pollute less than the average ICE driver.
2. A driver who cares about the environmental impact could adjust their driving habits.

Now, what blows my mind here is the next major blow to the argument. Most studies which talk about tire wear also pair it with studies about brake wear. And this is where my rage about idiots and not reading the counter arguments comes into play. You see, brake dust is considered substantially worse for the environment and health. Also, ICE cars are ALWAYS worse and there is no practical way to bring ICE vehicle wear and tear anywhere near EV wear and tear. 

So, when coupled with the above point we end up with the following:

• ICE vehicles will ALWAYS produce more pollutants from brake dust.
• Brake dust is a finer particle and worse for both health and environment.
• EVs CAN have greater tire wear.
• That tire wear can be mitigated to a large degree with better driving habits.

On to the studies!

Now, getting mad about people not doing their homework would be pointless if I didn't do my own. So, I dug up this study, which is itself more of a review of the findings of several other studies.

My favorite part is that there is a table which relates the reliability of the studies it found on each topic and the tire and road wear studies had no standardization and huge variability in results. Put another way, the results on road and tire wear are less definitive than the findings on brake wear.

And the findings on brake wear? Boy oh boy are they bad for the haters. The worst case scenario? EVs emit 83% less brake dust. WORST CASE (page 30, key finding #3.8).

For tire wear, the article doesn't talk about worst case scenario, but does appear to talk to worst case findings which is EVs being up to 2-3x worse, but seems to suggest that reality is probably somewhere in between those estimates and another study which saw the gap shrink to between 5-23% worse. It also states that wear grows linearly with vehicle weight and with EVs being, on average, about %20 heavier than their ICE equivalents, we also need to add that in before any other factors.

That being said, variability is pretty easy to understand. The article points out a wide array of factors from turning, acceleration, temperature and the roads themselves. Acceleration and weight are seemingly the key ones and this supports my argument that drivers can mitigate this this impact.

I won't talk about road wear. The study admits that road wear is hard to separate from tire wear and most studies actually just bundle the two together. So, instead I'll jump down to the 49 which states that as long as at least 15% of driving in an EV is done in city it will produce less total emissions of NEEs than (an equivalent) ICE vehicle. 

This makes sense. Highway driving is more or less cruising at a stable speed. The biggest impact is going to be road and tire wear and the biggest factor when travelling at a more or less static speed is going to be weight. 

Speaking of road wear, many will start yelling that EV drivers should pay an additional tax for road maintenance. I agree. I have no issues with this. I understand that governments tend to take their road infrastructure maintenance costs out of gasoline taxes. I also understand why many places choose not to. It is part of what incentivizes people to make the switch to begin with. Eventually there will be no option though, and I certainly don't begrudge countries, states, or provinces that want to charge that immediately. 

I also think it is a bit of a deminimis argument at the moment. EVs are still a small enough chunk of regular road traffic in most countries that it doesn't make a ton of sense at the moment. Whatever amount they arrive at will most likely be "wrong" by the time it becomes important for budgeting concerns and most regions have some sort of emissions targets and not charging this undoubtedly helps adoption.