EPA says Volkswagen cheated on emissions with 482,000 diesel cars

John T Carroll

Special Circumstances wrote: »

This is genius lads, not only will the fools drive around slowly gassing each other, they will feel smug and self righteous while doing it!! We'll sell it to them as being CLEAN!!! [Guffaws, knee slapping] No really, they'll lap it up, sure they'll believe anything we say.

This Beetle (air cooled) met its end mainly also because of emission controls in the USA. (California).

Tea 1000

Emission controls in the USA are a pure joke. The same country you have wealthy individuals actually air conditioning their back garden to a more comfortable temperature.

creedp

Leroy42 wrote: »

The only real solution to this is that governments should be allowed to select a range of cars and models that have been on the road for varying number of years and test them in the real world.

You mean the likes of the NCT/MOT?

Oafley Jones

lotmc wrote: »

There have been cases before the courts where individuals who deliberately underpaid VRT on imported cars were convicted and given custodial sentences.

Here we have a German company doing this, on literally an industrial scale. I can't wait for the Fraud Squad and the Revenue Commissioners to do their dawn raid on VW's offices.

The fraud on the Irish state here is massive. Assume every VW has been fraudulently declared in a lower VRT category, and hence a lower tax band, due to the fraud. The VRT underpaid will total approx. €20m per annum, over the last 5 years (?).

Then there is the annual road tax, which is also underpaid / wrong Band due to the VW fraud. This needs to be fixed. Customers must be indemnified by VW over this, or better still if VW just pay it, over the expected life of all the cars. Another €5m per annum, for the (say) 12 year life cycle of VW's.

With the normal penalties for VRT fraud and interest, the total payable by VW to the Irish state will be in the region of €250M.

Or will this just be seen as a normal German theft from little old Ireland, and nothing done about it?

VRT is calculated on CO2. This is an issue NOX. There's nothing to suggest that they have cheated how that's calculated. Of course that test is piss poor as is how they calculate mileage.

creedp

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Emission controls in the USA are a pure joke. The same country you have wealthy individuals actually air conditioning their back garden to a more comfortable temperature.

But sure isn't electricity clean guilt free energy .. which is why certain people almost go as far as advocating that we should pay people to drive the likes of the Nissan Leaf

jimgoose

creedp wrote: »

You mean the likes of the NCT/MOT?

Nether the MOT nor the NCT does not do a proper emissions analysis on diesel exhaust. It's a relatively simple particulate density test, a.k.a. the "smoke test".

Oafley Jones wrote: »

VRT is calculated on CO2. This is an issue NOX. There's nothing to suggest that they haven't cheated how that's calculated. Of course that test is piss poor as is how they calculate mileage.

Well, inasmuch as running without that high-grade NOx-scrubbing stuff is better for fuel economy, and hence CO2 production.

Oafley Jones

creedp wrote: »

But sure isn't electricity clean guilt free energy .. which is why certain people almost go as far as advocating that we should pay people to drive the likes of the Nissan Leaf

There's certainly a better case for it in the US where you've got a far wider source of energy. It's a relatively small percentage of our supply comes from renewables. The rest is burning coal, which is hardly green.

creedp

Oafley Jones wrote: »

VRT is calculated on CO2. This is an issue NOX. There's nothing to suggest that they haven't cheated how that's calculated. Of course that test is piss poor as is how they calculate mileage.

But isn't the argument that in order to actually get the NOX within required levels the car would be less efficient and therefore sit in a higher VRT bracket? As a consequence cheating on NOX levels allowed VW to claim lower CO2 emissions .. is that view incorrect?

Oafley Jones

creedp wrote: »

But isn't the argument that in order to actually get the NOX within required levels the car would be less efficient and therefore sit in a higher VRT bracket? As a consequence cheating on NOX levels allowed VW to claim lower CO2 emissions .. is that view incorrect?

I don't know how one impacts the other. But the defeat device seems unnecessary for the standard of test that's carried out here.

munchkin_utd

Oafley Jones wrote: »

VRT is calculated on CO2. This is an issue NOX. There's nothing to suggest that they have cheated how that's calculated. Of course that test is piss poor as is how they calculate mileage.

the line between cheating and optimising is a fine one.

what VW have done is blatant, but even on my ford I notice that I get great fuel efficiency at 90kmh which is what stats seem to be based upon but motorway and city driving drink petrol like no end.

I'd much prefer if they had gone and optimised effiency for more than just driving at medium to low speeds, maybe an extra gear or something for motorways, but the tests are as they are and cars are setup/ optimised to do well under those parameters

alias no.9

Oafley Jones wrote: »

VRT is calculated on CO2. This is an issue NOX. There's nothing to suggest that they have cheated how that's calculated. Of course that test is piss poor as is how they calculate mileage.

It's been stated that the to correct the NOx fiddling routine, fuel consumption will increase. If fuel consumption increases, CO2 emissions will increase proportionally.

Tea 1000

Leroy42 wrote: »

Can I ask a question? Why not just use the software all the time? Why only use it to pass the test and then turn it off?

I am assuming that it makes such a negative effect on performance that nobody would buy the cars anymore, is that it?

The whole area of emissions, it appears as useful as the MPG stats. Totally meaningless and no real attempt by the authorities to police it properly.

The only reason this was happening in the US is that their test is much stricter than EU, no real need for them to cheat in EU.

I do agree that this story is hardly surprising, but it really shows how easy the car companies have it.

The only real solution to this is that governments should be allowed to select a range of cars and models that have been on the road for varying number of years and test them in the real world.

If I were VW, I'd be buying my own testing equipment and buying many different american cars and testing the crap out of them to find out similar discrepancies. The EPA won't be as quick to damn their own!

Leroy42

creedp wrote: »

You mean the likes of the NCT/MOT?

Sort of, but that is putting on the onus on the owner.

What I am talking about it testing cars based on the claims by the manufacturers. No real point saying a car has a certain level, when within the 1st year of use that 'perfect' level of gone and now twice as much (for example).

Test cars that have been in regular use, compare against the original claims by the manufacturer and call into question any future claims if things don't stack up.

If, after testing, a certain model was found to fall way off the initial result, then manufacturer would be billed for any additional VRT/motor tax that would have been payable. That will sort it out fairly quick.

Leroy42

Tea 1000 wrote: »

If I were VW, I'd be buying my own testing equipment and buying many different american cars and testing the crap out of them to find out similar discrepancies. The EPA won't be as quick to damn their own!

You can be certain that the next wave of PR from VW will be to cast doubt on everyone else. They have taken a kicking from this and will want to drag the others down with them.

The offset of that, of course, is that VW group has many brands and a large overall % of the market so by effectively admitting that the whole industry is at it they are condemning themselves even more.

The calculation will be whether the cost to them by effectively making the situation worse for themselves is countered by the effects on their competitors.

All governments should be looking at claiming back undeclared VRT/Motor tax based on the lower emissions

Poulgorm

The EU will do a vast cover up in its investigation.

The car industry is too important. Particularly in Germany - it accounts for 20% of their total exports.

And as we know, the Germans are not without influence...

Boskowski

Leroy42 wrote: »

Can I ask a question? Why not just use the software all the time? Why only use it to pass the test and then turn it off?

I am assuming that it makes such a negative effect on performance that nobody would buy the cars anymore, is that it?

The article I'm quoting says it then becomes a serviceable item. Something you need to top up. This was deemed not desirable by the decision makers it seems.

Apparently this has been purely a commercial decision. It's not like the VWs are unable to meet the requirements. It's just that it becomes a service item then and a cost factor.

The cynical side of me thinks his is what happens when you have the business hawks and penny pinchers driving strategy decisions. All in the name of a good profit. Can't help but feel a bit of schadenfreude tbh.

cnocbui

I would wish for Gormley to get lung cancer if it wasn't for the thought his treatment would likely be funded by the registration costs and VRT levied on owners of cars with petrol engines.

Special Circumstances

Poulgorm wrote: »

The EU will do a vast cover up in its investigation.

The car industry is too important. Particularly in Germany - it accounts for 20% of their total exports.

And as we know, the Germans are not without influence...

Nothing to see here, these are not the emissions you are looking for, diesel is clean diesel is wunderbar

Seth Brundle

cnocbui wrote: »

I would wish for Gormley to get lung cancer if it wasn't for the thought his treatment would likely be funded by the registration costs and VRT levied on owners of cars with petrol engines.

Bloody hell.
Gormley is a knob alright but why would you wish that on anyone!?!?!?

Stallingrad

cnocbui wrote: »

I would wish for Gormley to get lung cancer if it wasn't for the thought his treatment would likely be funded by the registration costs and VRT levied on owners of cars with petrol engines.

That's the dumbest thing I've seen on boards on a long time.

Benny_Cake

Oafley Jones wrote: »

There's certainly a better case for it in the US where you've got a far wider source of energy. It's a relatively small percentage of our supply comes from renewables. The rest is burning coal, which is hardly green.

According to the Eirgrid dashboard, over the last month 52% of our energy was produced from gas, 20% from coal, 18% from renewables. It'd be nice to get Moneypoint replaced all the same.

dr.fuzzenstein

Benny_Cake wrote: »

According to the Eirgrid dashboard, over the last month 52% of our energy was produced from gas, 20% from coal, 18% from renewables. It'd be nice to get Moneypoint replaced all the same.

By nuclear.

Conor20

cnocbui wrote: »

I would wish for Gormley to get lung cancer...

If you drive a diesel vehicle, then you are already contributing to that possibility. Sadly, you're increasing the risk of cancer for everyone around you including yourself. However, let me guess: if someone in government tries to restrict your ability to, or increase the cost of driving vehicles which impact other's rights by increasing their chance of cancer, you will attack them for unreasonably impacting your rights.

josip

Winterkorn gone.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34340997

Tea 1000

All this crap happened while Ferdinand Piech was at the helm though!

dr.fuzzenstein

Tea 1000 wrote: »

All this crap happened while Ferdinand Piech was at the helm though!

They just needed a sacrificial lamb.

cnocbui

Conor20 wrote: »

If you drive a diesel vehicle, then you are already contributing to that possibility. Sadly, you're increasing the risk of cancer for everyone around you including yourself. However, let me guess: if someone in government tries to restrict your ability to, or increase the cost of driving vehicles which impact other's rights by increasing their chance of cancer, you will attack them for unreasonably impacting your rights.

I know, which is why I said it. Funny thing is, I can say something tongue in cheek that people find shocking but Gormley has actually done as much as he possibly could to maximise the usage of diesel vehicles in this country which may well lead to some people actually getting lung cancer and dying from it, but that's ok, because at least he didn't say something terrible.

I have known for years that diesel exhaust contains the most potent carcinogen ever found. I have never owned a diesel.

jimgoose

cnocbui wrote: »

...I have known for years that diesel exhaust contains the most potent carcinogen ever found. I have never owned a diesel.

Same as that. You might as well be talking to the wall once Paddy gets De Chape Tax into his cliggín, though. :pac:

dr.fuzzenstein

Conor20 wrote: »

If you drive a diesel vehicle, then you are already contributing to that possibility. Sadly, you're increasing the risk of cancer for everyone around you including yourself. However, let me guess: if someone in government tries to restrict your ability to, or increase the cost of driving vehicles which impact other's rights by increasing their chance of cancer, you will attack them for unreasonably impacting your rights.

You are absolutely right. Diesel are filth spewing, carcinogenic and evil.
That's why we need to get rid of trucks, buses, trains, boats, diesel powered generators and any sort of plant and craft powered by it.
Because getting rid of only diesel powered motor cars is going to do nothing.
The usual "bloke down the pub" diesel bashing. :rolleyes:

jimgoose

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

You are absolutely right. Diesel are filth spewing, carcinogenic and evil.
That's why we need to get rid of trucks, buses, trains, boats, diesel powered generators and any sort of plant and craft powered by it.
Because getting rid of only diesel powered motor cars is going to do nothing.
The usual "bloke down the pub" diesel bashing. :rolleyes:

This Bloke Down The Pub would be for banning all of the above from city centres. The smell of the sodding things is utterly vile.