Where Has All The Rubber Gone?

Makarand writes "We all recognize vehicle tailpipe emissions to be a source of pollution. But what happens to the castoff rubber from your tires that have lost tread? No one knew where this rubbber was going until recently. Allison Draper, a professor of environmental chemistry at Bucknell University, is conducting research to end all guess work on this topic and with the hope of finding ways to make tires less polluting. She found for every kilometer a car travels, about 90 milligrams of tread wears off in particles ranging in size 10-75 microns.Toxins in the larger suspended particles leach out when exposed to water and the run off harms plant and animal life. These toxins are still being identified."

Comments

Re:2 wheels good, 4 wheels bad

[redfiche]

I ride a bike, and I recommend it, but not for rubber conservation. I change the tires on my bike about four times as often as those on my pickup, so I suspect the rubber pollution is about a push. The active meditation is where it's at.

Re:Odd, I thought this had been resolved long ago

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually the synthetic (petrolium) rubbers are mostly more resistant to sunlight than latex rubber.

Also depends on treadwear rating of tire

[StandardCell]

If the treadwear rating on the tire is low (e.g. 60 for racing slicks), then the tires will wear out five times faster than the average passenger car tire (treadwear of about 300). It also depends on how you drive and what surfaces you drive on. Driving over crushed shale on your way to these remote towns north of the Arctic Circle is a lot worse than driving over freshly paved smooth blacktop. But there's a bigger problem here. Most of the mass of the tires is in the steel belts and the sidewalls to keep its integrity. I don't disagree that there may be some impact from tire dust, but this sounds like another misguided crusade to try and find something wrong with cars with respect to the environment.

rubber eating bacteria...

[RandyF]

I remember reading recently (within the last year) that a naturally occuring bacteria has been found along roadsides that actually break down and digest the rubber debri from tires. Again, these were NATURALLY occurring organisms, not GMOs. The lack of rubber debri buildup had puzzled scientists for years until this discovery.

You've got to remember the second law of thermodynamics: all things move from order to disorder (at least I think it was the second law... :) ). Nature has a way of breaking down just about everything, even our pollution! It may take time, and yes, we can "overproduce" polution, overwhelming the natural process. We simply need to pace production to meet measured, natural remediation. Sometimes, we need to give it a helping hand to make things better (our hand in defying that same "second law" that we are relying on.) Sometimes relying on nature and its cycle is not wise because the presence of certain chemicals in the environment, even if they do get broken down quickly, could cause health problems.

Another thought... When one large volcano erupts once, and we're talking a big blast here, not your typical "I think the mountain god is hungry" type of rumble, Chloro Flouro Carbons (however you spell it) and other polution (typically only linked with modern industrial pollution) are pumped into the environment in volumes in excess of ALL modern pollution over its entire history. Yea, the ash drops the temperature/raises the temperature, causes storms and other hellish environmental catastrophies, but it passes. The cycle catches up, sun goes up, sun goes down.

I'm adamantly FOR environmental responsibility. I am also for a LEARNED response to otherwise fear inciting "discoveries". Think it out. Learn the process. Compare with past evidences. THEN make policy. If something comes up that seems to contradict the policy, follow the same procedures and if the policy is wrong, change it.

Pure environmentalists are great people. We would lack the necessary conscience to take proper care of our environment without them. They are, however, oversensative to their ideals and, so, should not be running the policy. Just like RMS should not be "running" the open source movement. He is a great voice in the frey. Without him, we would not have gotten as far as we have, nor will we get were we need to be without his voice and others like his. The edgyness of his idealism, however, would drive too many people from the cause if he were "in charge". He's a great man in the struggle and his opinion should be listened to and respected. In the same way, environmentalists should be listened to and respected. Just don't give them the keys to the armory! We'd all be dead for stepping on ants!