VW Faces $17B Fine for Emissions Scam

The Dirty Truth About 'Clean Diesel', New York Times-Jan 2, 2016

Europe's Foul Plan on 'Clean' Diesel

 

sounds like business as usual is not politically correct in europe anymore.

 

It was a nice day in Santa Monica, CA in the 60's (as in years) when I was playing handball at Lincoln Jr High only 14 blocks from the beach when all of a sudden I could not breathe.....I had to sit down on the asphalt to compose myself....I felt somewhat dizzy. Recess bell went off. Later on we were told that we were to all stay in on the lunch hour. I guess some kids went to the school nurse. The day was still sunny yet the deadly smog was unseen but felt by almost everyone. Car pollution controls were non-existent those days...road draft tubes to ventilate the engine crankcase as well as belching gas out the tail pipe when the engine is floored. It was a given then. As we fast forward to the present there have been much improvement in Los Angeles since those days. Sure its good to breathe again but the story is not always so rosy for some big cities. Improvement may take decades they say.

 

As I said in another forum, the EU's test cycles, and likely the EPA's, for emissions do not represent how the cars are actually driven oout on the roads. So cars can legally pass the test without cheat, but still exceed the limits when tested on road. No where as bad as diesels, but petrols will also exceed their NOx limits when tested on the road.

 

Do you mean all petrol (gas) engines will exceed their NOx limits or just some?

 

But they have not been deemed illegal by the EPA have they not?

 

For what it's worth, Argonne National Laboratory uses NOx emission factor of 0.1202 g/mile for model year 2016 gasoline cars, and 0.2333 g/mile for model year 2016 diesel cars in its GREET model. The FTP regulatory limit (T2B5) is 0.07 g/mile.

 

It was in an ICCT(same group that sponsored the study that caught VW) study looking at the emissions of cars with on board test rigs under typical driving conditions. It looked at a dozen or so different models. On average, the petrol models exceeded NOx limits by a little and the diesels by a lot.

Who, the petrol or diesels? Until recently, none of these cars were illegal.

I am not trying to give diesels a pass. I am just pointing out that the EU, and possibly EPA, test cycles aren't reflective of modern driving styles and patterns. So any car that fairly passes the emission test may exceed emission limits in the hands of the consumer. The EU is moving to also include on board testing as part of its emission test.

 

Because of the Volkswagen cheat software the EPA is NOT doing tests with the dyno as an exclusive. They are going to strapon those portable emission testers and road test ALL the cars from now on. Better believe that the possible $18 Billion in fines will certainly come in handy for that and also a increase of personnel for increased implementation and compliance. I guess the best as yet to come...

 

And this is pure criminal;

Which? study reveals how some diesel cars emit up to 15 times the safe amount | Daily Mail Online

These are 15 times over the already relaxed limits. I remember telling York Council about the benefit of Prius emissions and that officially diesels could be 20 to 200 times worse for NOx. Now it appears those official limits were treated with total contempt by the manufacturers and the levels are significantly higher still.

You could literally have hundreds of Prii on the roads to give out the same NOx as one single diesel car.

Diesels really are killers.

 

Here is the original article and list of offenders:
Car emissions - the worst offenders - Driver tools - Driving your car - Which? Car

There is also Lexus LS hybrid on the list for emitting four times the legal amount of CO.

Why no one makes the list of the cleanest in real world driving?

 

I like the way they put 'some hybrid' cars are not so innocent. I read that as meaning most are ok.

And this is worrysome;

"Peugeot diesel-hybrid does not meet Euro 3"

The first diesel hybrid doesn't meet Euro 3 emissions introduced in 2001 or 10 years earlier than when the car was released, let alone Euro 4 in 2006 or Euro 5 in 2011 when it was released.

And Toyota isn't totally clean as they make out. Their good reputation is tarnished by the locally built, small hatchback Aygo model;

"Euro 5 and Euro 6 limit - 1 g/km

Toyota Aygo, 1.0-litre (2014-) emits 4.91 g/km of CO
Another supermini that pushes out a massive amount of CO."

A small car sold on its environmental credentials pumps out nearly 5 times the legal limit from 2006. And this is from Toyota. That's a poor show, and heads should roll at Toyota European HQ for that. Slack doesn't come near. Disgusting sums it up better.

 

agreed. it's better to look at technologies and car models, rather than manufacturers. there are no angels in competitive business.

 

There are other regulated emissions which need to be considered though, as that Which?Car article highlights. CO, THC and PM/PN are regulated along with NOx (NMOG/NMHC is the regulated entity in the U.S. instead of THC - methane is not included).

One thing that the ICCT studies have shown is that diesel cars have low emissions of CO, THC and PM in real-world conditions, well below regulatory limits in most cases.

Diesel NOx emissions definitely need to be addressed, but since some diesel cars can meet the regulatory limits in the real world, it can be done (Homepage ).

 

It's all about doing the test, no manufacturer is different. If there are certain initiatives to be cleaner than standard (eg. PZEV), then we will see some effort in that direction, but in EU there is only one category (EURO 6) on one test (NEDC) and it looks like it's just too easy too pass it.

 

Now this is interesting, 'Which?'. It sounds like what Consumer Reports should be but has failed. But how did they miss the emissions fraud that University of Leeds appears to have pioneered? Did they just replicate the EU emissions test protocol?

Bob Wilson

 

"Which" is the UK analog of "Consumer Reports"
Which? - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've not seen one of their magazines in years so I can't comment on how they compare.

 

But who is the criminal; the corporations or the governments?

Are these car companies deliberately cheating in regards to NOx with diesels, or CO with petrols?
"At the same time, many popular petrol cars put out higher levels of toxic carbon monoxide than is permitted by EU and British law."

Or are they just following current regulations that do not reflect how these cars are actually driven?

 

Well it's morally questionable as many of them make their cars comply for the US market, then tweak them a little to increase their emissions for the EU market.

I remember the old petrol Jeep Cherokee I had had a sticker under the bonnet/hood confirming it met US emissions, and it easily walked through the EU emissions tests. Let that same company then diddled their EU diesel and it now pumps out all sorts of nasties. Shameful.

It can/could be done, they just choose not to. There'd be an outcry if pharmacutical companies were selling dangerous and poisonous medication in other markets like Africa, so why is it ok for car companies to get away with it?

 

Laxer NOx emissions let the car companies increase the fuel economy of diesels in Europe, which means they have a low carbon emission, which gives them a possible tax advantage there. They are building to the test, and it happens for other regulations and industries. If I had to be in a car crash, I'd rather be in a Volvo than a Toyota or GM, even if they have the same crash ratings.

The question I am posing is who is more to blame? The car companies for building to a test without taking illegal steps like VW did, or the governments for using a test that has not been shown, and not recently, to not represent the emission levels that many cars, both diesel and petrol, put out as they are driven by the public?