It's an immense problem for sure.
While I fully admit that these are all engineering challenges that people could make progress on, there's also much simpler and more immediately actionable ways to improve this situation. Like encouraging walkable neighborhoods.
So, presumably non synthetic tires are actually fine. Though, it’s not clear if that was the intent of the article.
While it's true that regenerative brakes are not frictionless, none that I'm aware of rely on friction. One could imagine using a clutch to controllably wind/unwind a spring, for example, but auto manufacturers aren't rinky-dink steampunkers and even so you'd still do everything you could to minimize clutch slippage.
They rely on the friction between the tire and the road, wearing the tire down, releasing the microplastic particles.
I don't think the tire is what people mean when they talk about the brakes. They mean the brake pads and other brake components.
I thought the resistance was provided by magnets in the motor? How do you think they capturing energy from friction?
> Regenerative brakes rely on friction just like any other. Pollution is a given.
The article is about pollution from tires. Regenerative breaking can't cheat the laws of physics. That force has to be applied to the road through tires, just like any other form of wheel braking. And tires have significantly more mass to shed over their lives than brake pads.
However both are inferior to a bicycle if you are really serious about your environmental impact.