VW in trouble over alleged US emission test manipulations

[Fastdruid]

heebeegeetee said:

Fastdruid said:

That's 11% of the total NOx for diesel cars not private cars. Petrol cars according to the same doc make up 7% so private cars make up 18% of the total NOx.

As I read it though that the 11% is based on *claimed* NOx, NOT actual NOx, ie working on the basis that there are x number of petrol cars and y number of diesel cars and they give off certain amounts each of NOx. That in reality diesels give off many times more NOx than the lab tests claim would imply that the real figures for diesel are far higher.

But when you consider what is given off by taxis, vans, buses, coaches, hgvs, trains and even shipping, I think the contribution by the diesel private car must be small.

In truth it's very hard to tell the scale because everyone seems to be throwing different figures around. For example:

Some different figures here which downFrom http://www.ltda.co.uk/campaigns/downloads/Transpor...

18% (of the 40% from road transport) of the NOx emissions are from the private diesel car, the same as diesel taxies. In comparison (according to this report) petrol cars contribute 3%. While 18% is not a small proportion its only ~7% of total against 11% from the other TFL report (which would be 28% of the 40%).

What is unambiguous however is that the emissions are far higher than is acceptable.

[_dobbo_]

ORD said:

_dobbo_ said:

So the numbers are wrong for diesel cars (too low) and wrong for petrol cars (too high)?

Good lord, you're like a dog with a bone.

One follows from the other. That's how percentages work! Duh.

Thanks for the lesson on percentages! My comment was more aimed at the fact htat you've decided the numbers must be wrong for diesel, and must be wrong for petrol, based on your bias.

[ORD]

_dobbo_ said:

Thanks for the lesson on percentages! My comment was more aimed at the fact htat you've decided the numbers must be wrong for diesel, and must be wrong for petrol, based on your bias.

Nope. Based on the statistics in that and other reports on actual NOx emissions from diesels and petrols and the mix of diesel/petrol cars in London. Given that diesels produce very much more NOx than petrols, there would have to be vastly more petrol cars in London than diesel cars for the 7% and 11% figures to be right, and that is obviously wrong to anyone who lives in London. This is why I think those percentages must be based on official emissions, rather than actual emissions (and even on the basis of official emissions, they look to me to be wrong).

[Devil2575]

ORD said:

Huh? We know from the TFL doc that it is either 11% (if that doc uses real world figures) or much more than that (if it doesn't).

I think there must be something wrong with the numbers if it suggests 7 per cent for petrol cars, as there are pretty much none of those in the most congested (and so polluted) parts of London. About 20% is my experience, if that.

Is that 20% based on a proper analysis or just a number plucked from the air to suit your argument?

[_dobbo_]

ORD said:

(and even on the basis of official emissions, they look to me to be wrong).

That's what I mean though - you don't believe the official figures because you've decided they must be higher for diesel and lower for petrol, based on your assessment of the make-up of diesel/petrol vehicles on the road.

I'm not saying you're wrong, or right, but that your belief that they are wrong appears to be based on your bias.

Thing is for years I've been saying to people that there is no possible way that diesel is better for the environment than petrol, and people looked at me like I'm a swivel eyed loon.

Now this VW thing has happened and I say the same thing and people don't just dismiss it. Diesel is gross.

So what I'm saying is, I agree with you on almost all points, I just think your slightly holier than thou attitude is a bit off.

FWIW I bought a diesel because it was either that or a much slower petrol version, and there were far, far more diesels available. It chucks out black stuff occasionally and I would rather it didn't but it was the only way I could have the car I wanted.

[ORD]

Devil2575 said:

Is that 20% based on a proper analysis or just a number plucked from the air to suit your argument?

What are you on about now? I havent stood around with a fking clipboard. I think it was pretty obvious from what I said that I was speaking about my own perception as someone who has lived in London for a decade.

[Devil2575]

ORD said:

Devil2575 said:

Is that 20% based on a proper analysis or just a number plucked from the air to suit your argument?

What are you on about now? I havent stood around with a fking clipboard. I think it was pretty obvious from what I said that I was speaking about my own perception as someone who has lived in London for a decade.

So as evidence of anything it's meaningless then.

[Mr2Mike]

Devil2575 said:

So as evidence of anything it's meaningless then.

No less meaningless than the TFL report if it's based on manufacturers claimed emissions.

I could well believe only 1 in 5 cars are petrols in some areas.

[Devil2575]

Mr2Mike said:

Devil2575 said:

So as evidence of anything it's meaningless then.

No less meaningless than the TFL report if it's based on manufacturers claimed emissions.

I could well believe only 1 in 5 cars are petrols in some areas.

Actually it's a lot less meaningful as it's not based on any data. It's just based on a what someone reckons. At least the TFL report is based on data.

[heebeegeetee]

_dobbo_ said:

Diesel is gross.

No it isn't. Historically it's probably been better than petrol (no lead, no added benzene, lower quantities needed to produce/transport/store). At the moment petrol is probably better, but there's not likely to be much in it and the situation can change at any time.

Neither is good for the environment.

[Fastdruid]

heebeegeetee said:

_dobbo_ said:

Diesel is gross.

No it isn't. Historically it's probably been better than petrol (no lead, no added benzene, lower quantities needed to produce/transport/store). At the moment petrol is probably better, but there's not likely to be much in it and the situation can change at any time.

Neither is good for the environment.

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/15/9541789/volkswagen-europe-diesel-pollution

[Pesty]

ORD said:

Actually, Porsches are very clean indeed within their class

I doubt many diesel drivers with an interest in cars believed the idea that diesel cars were very clean.

You would be way way off. I bet vast majority didn't put much thought into these things. They were encouraged by the government to get diesels as friendlier to the environment they didn't really look into it and then there is the VW marketing. Just thought they were saving the planet.

[Pete317]

heebeegeetee said:

No it isn't. Historically it's probably been better than petrol (no lead, no added benzene, lower quantities needed to produce/transport/store). At the moment petrol is probably better, but there's not likely to be much in it and the situation can change at any time.

Neither is good for the environment.

I don't know about you, but just a whiff of diesel fumes is enough to make me want to throw up.
To me, gross is an understatement.

[TheInsanity1234]

Forgive me for choosing to not read through the entire thread, but does anyone know what shall happen when the EA189 engine gets recalled for its 'fix'?

My parents own a Skoda Yeti with the 1.6 EA189 engine, and we got a letter saying that it'll get fixed, but there's no indication of what happens in the fix?

What'll happen to the car as a result?

[kambites]

From what VW have said, it seems it'll need new (or possibly modified) injectors and an ECU re-flash.

[hornetrider]

kambites said:

From what VW have said, it seems it'll need new (or possibly modified) injectors and an ECU re-flash.

No adblue?

I wonder how it will affect performance? If it was that easy surely they wouldn't have had the defeat device installed in the first place.

I have a feeling we don't know the half of it yet.

[tyranical]

I was looking to get rid of my VW, went round some local garages and price was around £9500, this was the week before the emissions scandal became public.

I actually got rid of the vehicle this week, prices had dropped all the way down to around £8000, such a significant drop in such a short period of time isn't through depreciation (car is 8 years old so not depreciating by much anymore anyway) or some new model of the car becoming available this was because (I quote) "we're struggling to sell VW's at the moment" - this was from several different garages, not a one off trying to cash in on the scandal, if I look at the second hand market in general the prices have all come down significantly.

The car wasn't a diesel, I've got physical, dated quotes of the prices - Any chance that eventually some compensation may become available in the future as I have definitely lost money as a result of the scandal and i'm sure I won't be the only person that this will happen to.

[TheInsanity1234]

kambites said:

From what VW have said, it seems it'll need new (or possibly modified) injectors and an ECU re-flash.

I can see how the ECU reflash would make a difference, but why would the injectors need to be replaced?

[mollytherocker]

TheInsanity1234 said:

Forgive me for choosing to not read through the entire thread, but does anyone know what shall happen when the EA189 engine gets recalled for its 'fix'?

My parents own a Skoda Yeti with the 1.6 EA189 engine, and we got a letter saying that it'll get fixed, but there's no indication of what happens in the fix?

What'll happen to the car as a result?

It wont be a Yeti anymore. Maybe a squirrel?

[tumble dryer]

hornetrider said:

kambites said:

From what VW have said, it seems it'll need new (or possibly modified) injectors and an ECU re-flash.

No adblue?

I wonder how it will affect performance? If it was that easy surely they wouldn't have had the defeat device installed in the first place.

I have a feeling we don't know the half of it yet.

I agree, and the cost implications.
Everywhere I look I see the future VW hemorrhaging money.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34541457

Well, you would....