VW Emissions Issues Spread to Gasoline Cars [video](bloomberg.com)
bloomberg.com
VW Emissions Issues Spread to Gasoline Cars [video]
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-03/volkswagen-emissions-woes-deepen-as-800-000-more-cars-affected
7 comments
Are we sure that this should not be Carbon Monoxide rather then Carbon Dioxide. CO2 is the ideal result of complete combustion of a hydrocarbon. The only way it can be too high is if the engine is burning more fuel then it should be. Are they cheating on their CAFE standards? Usually tail-pipe emissions are checked for unburnt hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, and carbon monoxide.
I agree, this article is disappointingly light on details. CO2 is specifically regulated in Europe, separately from fuel consumption, so this could pertain to that.
Fuel consumption would be a very accurate proxy for CO2 production, unlike NOx, which strongly affected by vehicle processing, so it is really unclear what the cheat could possibly be.
Fuel consumption would be a very accurate proxy for CO2 production, unlike NOx, which strongly affected by vehicle processing, so it is really unclear what the cheat could possibly be.
>CO2 is specifically regulated in Europe, separately from fuel consumption
It's a joke. They should have increased fuel taxes. But that was too unpopular, so we have mess of regulations. As a result you either want to have new car with very small engine, or very old car with big engine. No matter how much emissions you actually make.
It's a joke. They should have increased fuel taxes. But that was too unpopular, so we have mess of regulations. As a result you either want to have new car with very small engine, or very old car with big engine. No matter how much emissions you actually make.
Huh? We actually tend to have quite high fuel taxes here in Europe.
(or well, at least here in Sweden)
(or well, at least here in Sweden)
Yes. That's the reason why it was unpopular to rise it further.
But it would still have been the only logical action. It would have fought congestion, as idle running would have been more expensive. It would have encouraged to buy less consuming car and drive less.
On the other hand taxing car ownership might make unemployment worse. If you have to sell your future means of commuting because of the taxes, you are in deeper shit.
But it would still have been the only logical action. It would have fought congestion, as idle running would have been more expensive. It would have encouraged to buy less consuming car and drive less.
On the other hand taxing car ownership might make unemployment worse. If you have to sell your future means of commuting because of the taxes, you are in deeper shit.
In this case, I think the numbers was simply wrong.
> Are we sure that this should not be Carbon Monoxide rather then Carbon Dioxide
Volkswagen says CO2 on their news site [1].
http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/info_center/en/ne...
Volkswagen says CO2 on their news site [1].
http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/info_center/en/ne...
"Under the ongoing review of all processes and workflows in connection with diesel engines it was established that the CO2 levels and thus the fuel consumption figures for some models were set too low during the CO2 certification process. The majority of the vehicles concerned have diesel engines."
So the official fuel consumption numbers were reported too low, possibly as a result of the dyno cheating mode.
So the official fuel consumption numbers were reported too low, possibly as a result of the dyno cheating mode.
I can't believe this is just Volkswagen, how long before we find out other manufacturers have been doing the same.
It is rather surprising for me that the tech crowd is surprised at this. This type of rigging has been going on for quite a while with bench marking of all things speed ie GPU, CPU, battery life etc. None of the models used would these bench marking would ever be close to real world situation. They are only good for comparing with the other.
another couple of rogue engineers? or were it the same ones who just happened to change the specialization from diesel to gas? Or how about some fairies ... err ... hackers who hacked into the VW network and put the cheating codes into the engine software? I can't wait for the spin. Some PR agency specializing in crises will make a killing here :)
This is about under-reporting CO2 emissions on paper, which they happened to find while investigating the NOx scandal. It's not related to the engine software. The consequences of this should be purely financial—they will have to pay back tax incentives.
Only CO2 emissions being different from originally claimed.
"Only".
EDIT: VW should be heavily penalized for their behavior. One might argue, "Its not a big deal. Its just environmental regulations." Would you feel the same way if they had submitted a stronger vehicle for crash testing and then proceeded to use lower strength materials for production vehicles? They're only people.
EDIT: VW should be heavily penalized for their behavior. One might argue, "Its not a big deal. Its just environmental regulations." Would you feel the same way if they had submitted a stronger vehicle for crash testing and then proceeded to use lower strength materials for production vehicles? They're only people.
What about other manufacturers? Independent tests in europe showed EVERY SINGLE BRAND (including bmw) testing above legal limits.
Any manufacturer found guilty of cheating emissions tests should face steep financial sanctions, with those directly responsible facing criminal charges and civil financial penalties.
But that has to do with NOx, not CO2. They are really two separate things.
The point is all they got out of this was lower taxes for their cars. The emissions weren't above any legal limits. That makes it a less serious crime. They're apparently earmarking about $2B for this.
The point that it is not the same thing as NOx emissions.
Emissions are emissions. I hope this cripples VW financially.
No they're not. CO2 and NOx have different effects on the population and on our environment. And yes, one is worse than the other. No, CO2 isn't wonderful, but mole for mole, CO2 is strictly preferable to NOx.
Yes, we should strive to reduce both. But they're nowhere near equivalent.
EDIT: I do agree with you though, I also hope this cripples them financially. I don't want to see them dead, but the consequences from this cheating should be so enormous that the company has a collective nightmare about this for the next several decades.
Yes, we should strive to reduce both. But they're nowhere near equivalent.
EDIT: I do agree with you though, I also hope this cripples them financially. I don't want to see them dead, but the consequences from this cheating should be so enormous that the company has a collective nightmare about this for the next several decades.
Yeah, and what happens to those of us who own VW? Car has been incredibly reliable, zero problems. What happens with the value of the car or the cost of repairs/OEM parts if they crater?
CO2 is part of the normal chemical formula for burning hydrocarbon fuel, and the majority of a car's emissions are CO2 and H2O (water).
Exactly. The ideal emissions would be 100% H20 and CO2. I suppose a string of chemical reactions could be engineered to make the emissions nothing but water and diamonds, but until that happens, some mixture of CO2 and water is the ideal.
"Mole for mole" is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand though.
> “VW is leaving us all speechless,” said Arndt Ellinghorst, a London-based analyst with Evercore ISI.
Very valuable insight and addition ¬_¬. The article seems really set on painting VW in a desperate failing state.
Very valuable insight and addition ¬_¬. The article seems really set on painting VW in a desperate failing state.
[1] http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/11/03/uk-volkswagen-emiss...
[2] http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34712435