2009 VW Jetta TDI Emissions Results In!

Not like the terrific, wonderful, environmental benefits of producing lead-acid, NiCD, ordinary NiMH, and LiON batteries. Bring facts and data such as Wiki reports:

Weird, no mention of nickel nor metal hydrides. That might be because lead, mercury and cadmium are well known, toxic compounds deposited in your local landfill by '179,000 tons' each year.

The Bible speaks about noticing the mote in your neighbor's eye while ignoring the beam in your own. This battery and by extension, the vehicle manufacturing nonsense is just that ... nonsense not supported by empirical data, yet. Trot out the sources.

Bob Wilson

 

So why did he focus only on the batteries and not take a look at the entire vehicle - from both makers. Since Germany and Japan are deficient in raw materials for autos both countries have to import everything essentially. Why focus on the batteries? It's both vehicles in their entireties that have to be brought from one place outside to be assembled inside.

It's a bogus argument that fails logically.

 

Let me think...

Maybe because the Prius has rare metal batteries and TDIs don't... or maybe because imported raw materials are present in any car as it is in boats, houses, office supplies, ... you name it, but I don't remember rare metal batteries as being a significant (note the emphasis in the word here) component in any of those, or maybe because why deviate the readers attention to imported raw materials when what is really in discussion here is the environment impact of rare metal batteries, or maybe why my dealer can easily tell where all those parts came from but he hesitates when asked about the batteries... I don’t know…

 

In order to avoid further misconceptions and more "dust-to-dust" black advertising, Toyota has done a wonderful job for the Prius 3G:

They have actually released an user-friendly and easy to read environmental report where the main facts and numbers are laid out plain and simple.

On top of that, they have CERTIFIED that report with an INDEPENDENT certificate which says the report was done and calculated according to the FULL LIVE CYCLE ASSESSMENT RULES AND MEASUREMENTS.

So, stop making up, just learn and accept, all other manufacturers are just way back in time when it comes to LCA assessment and environment impact.

Download and read from here: Certificado ambiental Prius 3G - Prius-PT

 

Ok, let's put everything in a clear and concise table:

	Column 1	Column 2	Column 3	Column 4	Column 5	Column 6
0	NMOG CERT (g/mi)	CO CERT (g/mi)	NOx CERT (g/mi)	Hwy NOx (g/mi)	EVAP 2-D	model
1	0.005	0.04	0.003	0.002	0.28	2010 Prius **
2	0.009	0.10	0.010	0.010	0.14	2007 Prius **
3	0.012	0.40	0.050	0.030	***	2009 Jetta TDI **
4	0.007	0.20	0.040	0.020	***	2009 Jetta TDI*

* - used the @50k data
** - used the @UL data
*** - untested, non-gasoline vehicle, we don't know

All data from California Air Resources Board executive orders:

• A-014-0657 - Toyota 2010 Prius
• A-014-0560 - Toyota 2007 Prius
• A-007-0271 - Volkswagen Jetta, Jetta Sportwagen diesel

Pick your poison ... choose wisely.

Bob Wilson

ps. I won't be posting this in the TDI club area.

 

FYI, I posted this about 4 months ago with graphs.

http://priuschat.com/forums/gen-iii...sight-civic-hybrid-jetta-gas-tdi-wrx-sti.html

 

Bob,

Now you just need to add the evaporative emissions into your table.

 

or here, if you can't find it on the page:

http://prius-pt.com/cafe/media/p/16455/download.aspx

This whole thread is over a year old, and folks got their panties all bunched because of this comment. Funny thing about it ... one post ... avatar says 2005 Prius ... yet his recommendation is to buy a "deisel" (sp) . . . because they don't cause "acis rain" (sp) or "S02"

what do you think . . . maybe?:




.

 

I would like to know how much energy is used on to create the batteries and recycle but those ancient reports just have crazy assumptions. Does anyone know the real energy costs of a prius? AFAIK the batteries use 10kg of nickel and it can be mostly recycled to be reused in products like stainless steel and chrome.

Clean diesels are a good step forward, and making a mild hybrid diesel (as mercedes is starting to do) should reduce emissions a great deal more and reduce carbon footprint. Hybrids are just part of the solution.

 

Mine cost three trips, about 1 gallon of gasoline, and a tad over $24,000 or ~9,600 gallons at today's prices. That is about as 'real' as it gets.

Bob Wilson

 

Nickel may be expensive but it's a common metal used all over the world in a huge variety of applications. It's used as an alloying element in steel all the time from common HSLA steel to stainless to chrome accents. Focusing on the battery alone as an AHA!!! issue is logically wrong. The Jetta may have a stainless exhaust system which also uses nickel. Why not focus on that?

Why not focus on the catalytic converters?

Why not focus on the entire vehicle?
The Jetta Sportswagon comes in at a Curbweight of 3228#.
The Prius comes in at a Curbweight of 3042#.

While the Prius might use more nickel than the JSW, the Jetta uses a more total material - meaning more energy used to fabricate it.

Focusing on 20-25# of nickel imported into Japan over 180# of extra material imported into Germany is nonsensical. That dog won't hunt. The JSW starts off at a disadvantage before it's even put on the road...then it loses every mile driven thereafter.

 

Hi Bob,

Just noticed you did include some evap emissions in your table. Sorry I didn't notice before my last post.

Based on my analysis of evaporative VOC emissions, I've adjusted your values slightly to include both direct and indirect (i.e., upstream) VOC emissions...

	Column 1	Column 2	Column 3	Column 4	Column 5	Column 6
0	NMOG CERT (g/mi)	CO CERT (g/mi)	NOx CERT (g/mi)	Hwy NOx (g/mi)	EVAP (g/mi)*	model
1	0.005	0.04	0.003	0.002	0.059	2010 Prius
2	0.009	0.10	0.010	0.010	0.07	2007 Prius
3	0.015	0.50	0.050	0.040	0.002**	2010 Jetta TDI

* - includes all direct (i.e., evaporative emissions from the vehicle itself) and indirect (i.e., VOC emissions generated in the fuel supply chain) evaporative emissions
** - based on relative volatility of diesel fuel:gasoline @ 80 degrees F per EPA AP-42

(used certified emissions @ UL for all emissions)

 

If you insist in deviating the attention from the issue of rare metal batteries even thought the Jetta have all those raw materials just like the Prius except the battery, then, I just have to say...

:closed_2: for me!


Bye bye...

 

Why anyone would focus only on the battery when the JSW has so many other 'green deficiencies' is beyond me. While the Prius uses more nickel in the traction battery the Jetta uses more lead in the lead-acid battery. While the Prius uses more nickel in the traction battery the JSW uses more of everything else in the rest of the vehicle.

Focusing only on one area without looking at all areas is a logical fallacy that's easy to squash. It's been done too many times. It's a softball being served up to Puljos, CYA.

 

Just want to a monkey wrench into the discussion.... Jetta TDI has a particulate filter that Prius does not. Why not focus on it as well?

 

Well, no matter how often we beat to death this topic

:deadhorse:

it just won't go away

As far as smog-forming compounds, NOx is a principle precursor of smog-forming emissions.

Ozone formation is a health hazard. Precursors for ozone include evaporative emissions from NMOG and HC's.

 

I don't see how the 2010 Prius evaporation, 0.059, came about (see attached PDF.) I see the following but only one element has a units/mile:

• 0.20 - 3-D, Three-Day Diurnal + Hot Soak
• 0.28 - 2-D, Two-Day Diurnal + Hot Soak
• 0.00 - RL, Running Loss (grams per mile)
• 0.01 - ORVR, I have no idea, yet.

Then when I look at the Jetta TDI PDF, I only see "*" which appears to mean 'not measured' (see attached PDF). When I posted the evaporative loss of the Prius, I used the worst case, "2-D", value. I do not believe adding the "2-D" and "3-D" numbers makes a valid evaporative test metric. Inventing a non-measured value seems less than fair. If the Jetta has emissions, measure them. Otherwise point out they were never measured. A short skit might explain the problem:

• Dr. (played by John Cleese), "Nurse, Mr. Smith is very sick and I need to know his temperature measured twice per hour. I will be back in an hour. Is that clear?"
• Nurse (played by Terry Jones), "Yes, doctor. His temperature twice per hour and you want to know his exact temperature."
• screen fades and comes back
• Dr.,"Well nurse, what is Mr. Smith's temperature?"
• Nurse,"204.6 degrees."
• Dr.,"What? Mr. Smith is not on a well-done, roast. He is not burning up. The bloody thermometer only goes to 110 degrees. How did you come up with 204.6 degrees."
• Nurse,"Well I measured his temperature twice and added it up."

This is why we compare like-metrics to like-metrics. Adding up different reports, well one might as well add blood pressure to temperature to weight. It has no meaning and the units are wrong.

One thing that puzzles me is this quote from the Jetta report:

.
Any idea what this might be? If it were the system that detected the catalytic converter and filter efficiency, it would be a bad thing.

Bob Wilson

ps. I will not be posting this note to the TDIclub.

 

.
Huh?


Actually this thread is more like the old:

"Bring out your dead!"
"Bring out your dead!"

"But I'm not dead yet."
​

Now you are.

Bob Wilson

 

Sorry Jayman, I disagree with you on this point.

NOx IS a necessary component for ozone formation. It is the source of "odd" oxygen which comes from the photo-dissociation of NO2 (NOx = NO + NO2)...

NO2 + (shortwave solar radiation) --> NO + O
O + O2 (molecular oxygen) --> O3

However, the NO that is left over from the photo-reaction is immediately available to destroy the O3...

O3 + NO --> O2 + NO2

...and the cycle starts all over again. This is known as the "NOx photolytic cycle". NOx in and of itself will never generate net ozone no matter how high the concentration of NOx becomes.

Ozone accumulates in the atmosphere by the oxidation of NO to NO2 by an oxidation product of hydrocarbons (and also CO) - "peroxy radicals". Thus there is a shift to more NO2 to generate the O3 and less NO to destroy the O3. This is a fundamental principle of atmospheric chemistry.

This is an over-simplification of the chemistry involved, but I would argue that VOC (HC) is the principle ozone precursor.

That I agree with.