VW in trouble over alleged US emission test manipulations
Discussion
St John Smythe said:
Never said petrol was totally clean so you are making that up. Agree that diesel has its place in commercial vehicles however hybrid tech is the way forward. The new Routemaster is the right idea. Turns out the US were correct about diesels and we got it totally wrong.
What are you basing that on? The US is an oil producing nation and has based itself on a model of high consumption. It sells petrol cheaply and has a history of consuming lots of it. How can that be clean?The USA is possibly the most polluting nation on earth (or certainly the most polluting developed nation) and its national longevity is really nothing to shout about, possibly the lowest human longevity of the developed world.
So what are you basing your premise on?
skyrover said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Then why, as some have posted should diesel cars specifically be banned?
Because they are a greater danger to public health than the equivalent petrol engined car?Because skewed taxation has led to a huge population of the UK switching to diesel with a corresponding decline in air quality.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/calls-for-ac...
They should not be banned... but tax laws certainly need re-examined
"a greater danger to public health than the equivalent petrol engined car" and as evidence you link a story of a street where no cars are allowed (if i'm right?)
I think you'd have a great challenge on your hands to back up your statement, as would others such as Lord Drayson, the Le Mans racing lord who is concerned about the environment and think diesel owners should switch to hybrids, in which he has a commercial interest.
I'm happy to be corrected, but for something that is supposed to be a big problem, I don't think anyone can separate the pollution caused by diesel cars from the other diesel vehicles (and hgvs will remain diesel for a long time to come - there is nothing remotely in the pipeline to replace diesel as the fuel to move this nation's goods) and I think it's not easy to separate diesel pollution form the rest of the pollution out there.
For something that is supposed to be a big problem, I don't think pollution from diesel cars can be linked without doubt to a single death. If the problem is as is being stated, it should be easy to do so.
I think the level of misunderstanding and mis-reporting on this subject, willful or otherwise, is just about as big as it could be.
kambites said:
Most people having a go at diesels are having a go at the government which promoted their use.
People keep saying this, as is repeatedly stated, derv is and was cheaper in Europe that here, they've used more diesel cars for longer than we have. Was the uk govt behind that too?Why would the UK take a totally different stance from Europe? Why would we source a fuel different than what is/was being supplied to all the other nations in this part of the world?
I know we like to copy pretty much everything the yanks do - are we miffed because on this one occasion we haven't?
mollytherocker said:
98elise said:
You do know that to make hydrogen you need lots and lots of electricity don't you? Hydrogen is just an energy store, and a pretty inefficient one. The only benefit it brings is speed of refueling, but by any other measure it makes no sense.
To create petrol and diesel we also need to use electricty, about 7kWh per gallon.....enough to drive an EV about 25miles without burning the gallon of fuel.
Thats interesting as I have read a number of times that hydrogen will change everything.To create petrol and diesel we also need to use electricty, about 7kWh per gallon.....enough to drive an EV about 25miles without burning the gallon of fuel.
I guess theres no such thing as perpetual motion so energy has to come from somewhere!
Hydrogen only makes sense when you have lots of spare energy, or you really must have fast refueling.
Home EV charging is just fine for most people. If I could refuel my car at home now, then I would. Its the most convenient way. Put it this way, if apple announced that the next iphone would feature fast charging, but could now only charge in petrol stations or special shops you would think they were idiots.
heebeegeetee said:
People keep saying this, as is repeatedly stated, derv is and was cheaper in Europe that here, they've used more diesel cars for longer than we have. Was the uk govt behind that too?
Because the tax rate for diesels in mainland Europe is even more skewed than it is in the UK. 
No-one is saying the UK government is the only one to be doing it or even that they had a realistic choice, just that they have been.
heebeegeetee said:
St John Smythe said:
Never said petrol was totally clean so you are making that up. Agree that diesel has its place in commercial vehicles however hybrid tech is the way forward. The new Routemaster is the right idea. Turns out the US were correct about diesels and we got it totally wrong.
What are you basing that on? The US is an oil producing nation and has based itself on a model of high consumption. It sells petrol cheaply and has a history of consuming lots of it. How can that be clean?The USA is possibly the most polluting nation on earth (or certainly the most polluting developed nation) and its national longevity is really nothing to shout about, possibly the lowest human longevity of the developed world.
So what are you basing your premise on?
heebeegeetee said:
skyrover said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Then why, as some have posted should diesel cars specifically be banned?
Because they are a greater danger to public health than the equivalent petrol engined car?Because skewed taxation has led to a huge population of the UK switching to diesel with a corresponding decline in air quality.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/calls-for-ac...
They should not be banned... but tax laws certainly need re-examined
"a greater danger to public health than the equivalent petrol engined car" and as evidence you link a story of a street where no cars are allowed (if i'm right?)
I think you'd have a great challenge on your hands to back up your statement, as would others such as Lord Drayson, the Le Mans racing lord who is concerned about the environment and think diesel owners should switch to hybrids, in which he has a commercial interest.
I'm happy to be corrected, but for something that is supposed to be a big problem, I don't think anyone can separate the pollution caused by diesel cars from the other diesel vehicles (and hgvs will remain diesel for a long time to come - there is nothing remotely in the pipeline to replace diesel as the fuel to move this nation's goods) and I think it's not easy to separate diesel pollution form the rest of the pollution out there.
For something that is supposed to be a big problem, I don't think pollution from diesel cars can be linked without doubt to a single death. If the problem is as is being stated, it should be easy to do so.
I think the level of misunderstanding and mis-reporting on this subject, willful or otherwise, is just about as big as it could be.
b
hstewie said:
As expected I guess!hstewie said:St John Smythe said:
bhstewie said:
As expected I guess!hstewie said:Those results are simply the fault of the test.
gizlaroc said:
St John Smythe said:
bhstewie said:
As expected I guess!hstewie said:Those results are simply the fault of the test.
Pan Pan Pan said:
How much of a greater danger to public health? bearing in mind all the other sources of pollution that have a bearing on this, and that only one third of cars on UK roads are diesel.
You need to be able to quantify and prove how much diesel cars specifically are increasing the danger to public health, but you cannot, because no one can.
Are you perhaps jealous of those who `might' have benefitted from the governments taxation of vehicles mess, and VW`s f*ck up?
Remember up till a few months ago diesel was dearer than petrol. and that the swing to diesel was the government`s (at the time) fault
You seem to have avoided the simplest and most obvious reason: he simply doesn't like the stinking fumes that diesels emit.You need to be able to quantify and prove how much diesel cars specifically are increasing the danger to public health, but you cannot, because no one can.
Are you perhaps jealous of those who `might' have benefitted from the governments taxation of vehicles mess, and VW`s f*ck up?
Remember up till a few months ago diesel was dearer than petrol. and that the swing to diesel was the government`s (at the time) fault
Jealousy
Pan Pan Pan said:
If anyone wants to have a go about diesels, they should have a go at the government which promoted their use.
Governments making poor decisions based on inaccurate or incomplete information is hardly news, just look at the entire climate change idiocy. Whilst there is a government, there will be stupid decisions made that affect everyone.However, government incompetence won't stop many people disliking stinking diesel engines, why do you think it should?
Edited by Mr2Mike on Sunday 4th October 13:49
UK site is now up to check if your car is affected - http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/owners/dieselinfo
If so you'll get this message:
If so you'll get this message:
VW said:
Dear Volkswagen customer,
We regret to inform you that the Type EA 189 engine built into your vehicle with the Vehicle Identification Number [removed] you submitted, is affected by software that causes discrepancies in the values for oxides of nitrogen (NOx) during dynometer runs. Your car is safe from a technical standpoint and roadworthy.
We are very sorry to have broken your trust and are working at full speed to find a technical solution. Volkswagen will cover the cost relating directly to this repair.
We will be in touch with you directly to explain what steps are required. We'll do the necessary work at our cost and have you quickly back on the road.
Yours faithfully,
Volkswagen.
We regret to inform you that the Type EA 189 engine built into your vehicle with the Vehicle Identification Number [removed] you submitted, is affected by software that causes discrepancies in the values for oxides of nitrogen (NOx) during dynometer runs. Your car is safe from a technical standpoint and roadworthy.
We are very sorry to have broken your trust and are working at full speed to find a technical solution. Volkswagen will cover the cost relating directly to this repair.
We will be in touch with you directly to explain what steps are required. We'll do the necessary work at our cost and have you quickly back on the road.
Yours faithfully,
Volkswagen.
Dr Tate / Leeds University - obtain good lawyers 1st thing Monday morning as you are inferring 'foul play' by the manufacturers you mention whereas the reality is that the 'lab test' by definition gives differing results from 'real life' tests which is a result of the methods of the current tests not the actions of the manufacturers.
there is a new "European Real Driving Emissions" Initiative soon to come into force in Europe that is being supported by some of the manufacturers mentioned to better reflect real life.
VW Group are alledged to have committed fraud and acted criminally on a grand scale by using 'defeat software' across 4 brands to dupe the regulators this they have admitted.
The other manufacturers in the article have not.....! there is a big big difference.
there is a new "European Real Driving Emissions" Initiative soon to come into force in Europe that is being supported by some of the manufacturers mentioned to better reflect real life.
VW Group are alledged to have committed fraud and acted criminally on a grand scale by using 'defeat software' across 4 brands to dupe the regulators this they have admitted.
The other manufacturers in the article have not.....! there is a big big difference.
Edited by TKH on Sunday 4th October 15:11
heebeegeetee said:
tomjol said:
This has been covered earlier in the thread, stop parroting it as though it's meaningful.
It hasn't been covered at all. There was a link to a coupe of documents published somewhere - hardly overwhelming proof of a supposed global problem.It is a fact that these diesels emit significant quantities various chemicals that are known to have a strong statistical link to various health problems (including nitrous oxides). It's also an indisputable fact that many cities (including London) have levels of some of these chemicals which are greatly above what prevailing scientific opinion believes are safe for humans to breath. Is that proof that diesel fumes have ever killed anyone? Of course it's not but it's fairly compelling circumstantial evidence.
The betterment of the health of human kind has always been based around the idea of using statistical trends to indicate causality.
Edited by kambites on Sunday 4th October 17:53
heebeegeetee said:
tomjol said:
This has been covered earlier in the thread, stop parroting it as though it's meaningful.
It hasn't been covered at all. There was a link to a coupe of documents published somewhere - hardly overwhelming proof of a supposed global problem.The comparison in the previous example was with smoking tobacco - surely you wouldn't argue that smoking tobacco isn't a serious health risk?
gizlaroc said:
St John Smythe said:
bhstewie said:
As expected I guess!hstewie said:Those results are simply the fault of the test.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff