this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2025
43 points (66.2% liked)

Technology

72453 readers
2169 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
43
Researchers finds high levels of dangerous air particles(PM2.5) in air near electric vehicle fast charging stations. (newsroom.ucla.edu)
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by Pro@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
  • At the charging stations, daily concentrations of dangerous air particles, known as PM2.5, ranged from 7.3 to 39.0 micrograms per cubic meter.
  • Urban sites without fast-charging stations had concentrations of PM2.5 ranging from only 3.6 to 12.4 micrograms per cubic meter.
  • The tiny particles likely come from particle resuspension around Direct Current Fast Charging power cabinets. Cooling fans designed to prevent the electronics from overheating can also stir up dust and particles from internal surfaces.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bosht@lemmy.world 36 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Jesus they will release any study to try and smear electric. It's the same argument as cigs vs vapes. Yes they're both bad and not the best solution, but one is obviously better than the other. Plus how are they separating contamination of the charging stations from any other area where normal ass cars operate. There's just as much of a chance if not more that those particles are from the gas vehicles driving around, and not something specific to the chargers.

[–] VicksVaporBBQrub@sh.itjust.works 16 points 3 days ago

They're not separating data throughly. Researcher Yifang Zhu, over many publishings, mainly gathers and publishes raw findings. Such as... (summarizing) "Children are at risk due to immature respiratory systems and faster breathing rates... by traveling in diesel powered school buses in my South Texas study."
Source- https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=kvSIKM8AAAAJ&cstart=20&pagesize=80&citation_for_view=kvSIKM8AAAAJ%3A5nxA0vEk-isC

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world -4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Dafuq.

This is the craziest reaction to knowledge

Knowing something new we didn't before means..... We know more now.

Stop trying to politicize this.

This just means there is room to improve, this is a good thing.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

i don't know if i would take this study as "knowledge". that map of the us? it's just a map of chargers, not of data from the study. reading the study, they were only measuring in one county. there's no categorisation of the type of fast charger they measured, just "a variety". the error bars overlap enough that this could all be errors. and why only measure at fast chargers and gas stations? why not at other high-power electrical systems like transformer yards in urban areas? they alno have fans, surely.

question is, why publish it if it is so obviously (and willfully) wrong?