10 Comments

Excellent article, Jason! I knew only a fraction of the dangers you mentioned in tire manufacture, use, and disposal. The life cycles of our tires is very inimical to the environment it would appear. As always the problem is scale as you spotlight.. Cut one tree down, the world ecosystem doesn't notice. But cut 8 billion trees down and that same ecosystem is gravely wounded. There are simply too many of us. I don't think humans are very good at prioritizing avoiding the long term consequences of our technologies or scaling issues. Witness tires and plastics and fossil fuels.

Expand full comment

Thanks, Michael. For me, this was one of the more eye-opening topics I've written. Like you, I had some idea but not nearly enough re: both the toxicity and breadth of problems. And yes, scale is, in a sense, everything. I have in my notes a topic idea centered on ubiquity: those you mention, plus PFAS, warming, etc.

Expand full comment

Well it was an excellent presentation! Ubiquitous things that we hardly notice because of their very familiarity, provide fertile grounds for research and writing. Similarly, scale issues. One human over the course of an 80 year lifespan can wreak a lot of damage but the global ecosystem will hardly notice. But 8 billion humans? We're seeing the results now. Thanks again for this essay.

Expand full comment

Speaking of ubiquity, this from Google AI on mine tailings

"What are mine tailings?

Tailings are a slurry of water, rock, and minerals left behind after mines process ore. They can contain high concentrations of REEs, and the [global] mining industry produces enough of this waste each year to cover the state of California."

That's a lot of toxicity out in the open air.

Expand full comment

We are stardust and rubber. Thanks, yet again, Jason, for bringing into focus the blurry truths we know and hold (sometimes repress) back there in our busy minds. It's essential and helpful to see the troubled world this way. (And thanks for the shout-out!)

Expand full comment

Thank you, Bryan. This piece really felt important to me, in good part because I didn't realize the scale of the problem regarding tires. From start to finish they're a nightmare, a vehicle (so to speak) for the spread of so many toxins and toxic behaviors. So much good can be done if some basic regs are put into place regarding tire construction and durability. I have to confess being surprised at the lack of comments here. But a writer never knows what will land, I suppose.

Expand full comment

This was pretty stunning, Jason. I mean, stunning in the way it's written, but also, stunning in the sheer breadth of the problem. A lot of this is new to me. The issue of scale keeps coming up across this work; of course your series on population was one of the clearest I've seen, and the thought keeps returning to me that solutions, even partial ones, that work at-scale are where our efforts have to go. The idea of bringing great harm reduction by getting rid of the worst 50% of toxic tires has an appeal, for sure. I still think there's a place for individual choice in its potential for network effects. Like, maybe someone in your social network will buy a used hybrid instead of a new SUV after seeing how much you're enjoying your Prius V (I have a 2014 one; people try to buy it from me at least once a month). George Monbiot's recent book on Neoliberalism cites some cool data about societal tipping points: when a human population is able to change direction on an issue (an example was cigarette smoking in public places) - a relatively small portion of the population has to come around to a new way of doing something to shift the entire population to a new norm. I think individual action "from below" has a role then, and is additive with regulatory pressure from above. Anyway, they're a thornier problem than I even realized, tires. Thanks for the learning.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Rebecca. I was repeatedly surprised at what I was learning about the problems all through the life cycle of tires, and especially about the scale of those problems.

Impact of individual choice certainly has massive potential, but by definition most potential energy remains potential... Seriously, though, while it depends on what change we're looking to make, the answer is usually all of the above. Noise from below can activate regulation from above, and vice versa. In this metaphor I think science is in the middle, hypothetically activating both individuals and policy makers. Smoking is a good example of that, along with the large-scale corporate opposition that science has to push through. Tires as the new tailpipe seems much the same too: talk about the toxicity at all levels, chip away with regional regs (e.g. CA), activate at local levels esp. where impacts (rivers, highway-choked neighborhoods) are highest. As far as I know, none of that exists except the talk of regional regs.

I love the Prius...

Expand full comment

Lots of good info and solutions. We have enormous cars here in America. Yes, demand is growing for cars elsewhere, but they are usually much smaller cars with much smaller tires. How about incentivizing small cars, like Smartcars and Fiats? Better yet, e-bikes! Yes, they aren't feasible in Maine but, to me, e-bikes could be a planet-saving solution. And they require smaller tires and 1/4 of the pavement. I can still dream ...

Expand full comment

Thanks, Amanda. I'm hoping a much wider selection of smaller EVs is on the horizon, but given the political future the incentives will have to come from the market. And yes, e-bike sales are outperforming expectations everywhere, but they have substantial geographic limits in the U.S.

Expand full comment