VW Faces $17B Fine for Emissions Scam

I read this report earlier this week:

Dutch researchers at TNO have revealed that tests on a new Mercedes C 220 CDI BlueTech – a Euro 6 car – saw emissions of NOx up to 40 times legally permitted levels. But it’s not due to a defeat device, say Mercedes.

The ridiculous levels of NOx in the C-Class were recorded at temperatures below 10 degrees centigrade (50F), and it seems that at temperatures at that level the NOx cleaning ability of the C-Class is disabled to ‘Protect the Engine’, which is obviously more important than protecting the humans.

Germany’s Spiegel says:

There is, says Mercedes, a shut-off device in the engine management of its C-Class diesel cars that stops the NOx cleaning under these and other circumstances. This is for the protection of the engine, and permissible, says the Stuttgart automaker.​

Read more: Mercedes C 220 CDI emits FORTY times the legal levels of NOx​

This suggests diesel cheating is an EU diesel manufacturer disease. Is there an engineering course that covers 'cheat-diesels?'

Bob Wilson

 

In some ways this is consistent with my general feeling EU is sometimes not as Eco-minded as the perception...not just cars but SOx etc.

Eco-minded may be but actual outcome can be lenient

 

the perception isn't that good either. the high gasoline taxes have forced them into the diesel box form many decades.

but also, you're talking a lot of different countries and philosophies, as unified as they would like to be.
in the same way that we have federal regulation, but carb and non carb states, and a few coal roller states.

looks like deutsche bank might be following in vdubs ethical footsteps.

 

Interesting NYTIMES article:

LONDON — European officials knew that Volkswagen diesels fell short of pollution limits years before the company became engulfed in an emissions cheating scandal, records show.

And they also knew that diesels across the industry had problems that were similar, if not worse.

The European Commission, the European Union’s executive branch, performed road tests on emissions from seven diesel cars starting in 2007, but it did not reveal what cars or manufacturers had been involved in the tests when it published the results in 2011 and 2013. Internal documents obtained through the European equivalent of a Freedom of Information request, along with records recently made public by the commission, detail the results.

The tests were not intended to identify carmakers violating the rules. Rather, they were aimed at identifying the shortcomings of conducting pollution tests solely in laboratories and also assessing equipment used to test emissions on the road.

The vehicles were tested by the Joint Research Center, a branch of the European Commission that bills itself as an “in-house science service.” Nina Kajander, a spokeswoman for the center, cautioned against drawing conclusions from specific models that were tested.

“It must be noted that the vehicles used for the research cannot be considered representative of the general level of emissions by the models in question,” she said in an email. “These were scientific studies designed to compare different methodologies for measuring emissions in laboratories against those measured on the road.”

Acting on the results, European policy makers developed a plan to require mandatory tests to measure emissions on the road with portable devices. The plan was approved by the European Parliament last week, though it has been criticized after automakers lobbied successfully to weaken the tests. European regulators have long had an accommodating relationship with the auto industry.

The testing found what independent research has shown for some time: Diesels are emitting far more nitrogen oxides on the road than in laboratory tests. Nitrogen oxides lead to respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses, smog and acid rain, and cause premature deaths

A VW Golf that met regulatory standards when tested in the lab exceeded those limits by nearly three times when tested on the road. But that was markedly better than a car made by Renault, the Clio, whose emissions exceeded regulatory limits by as much as seven times.

A Fiat Bravo, a Fiat Punto and a BMW 120d were among the other diesels tested, and had emissions ranging from two to four times higher than regulatory standards when tested on the road.

Notably, the Golf that was tested was a version of the car produced before VW began installing software aimed at cheating emissions tests. A second that Volkswagen tested, a Passat, was a prototype made by VW with the latest filtration technology and that was lent to the commission specifically for the tests. More recent testing by the commission of several cars designed to meet the latest European standards, known as Euro 6, showed that they averaged four times higher than regulatory standards when tested on the road. Some were eight to nine times higher, the commission said.

Volkswagen declined to comment. The company includes the brands Audi and Porsche, and SEAT and Skoda in Europe. Renault did not respond to requests for comment.

In September, VW admitted installing software in 11 million diesel vehicles worldwide that was designed to detect when a car was being tested in a laboratory, triggering a cleaner emissions setting. American regulators, with the help of independent researchers, discovered that VW emissions on the road exceeded by as much as 40 times the American limits for nitrogen oxides, limits that are stricter than those in Europe.

A majority of cars affected by the scandal are in Europe, where there is frustration over the company’s handling of the crisis. Among other things, VW is making good-will payments to American customers, but not to people in Europe.

“You’ve treated European customers with disdain,” one member of the British Parliament told Paul Willis, VW’s top executive in Britain, during a hearing last month.

Another lawmaker asked: “Would you agree it’s been a public relations disaster?”

“It’s certainly not been helpful to our brand image,” Mr. Willis said.

Some other companies have also had to answer questions about why their diesels fail to live up to expectations. Carlos Ghosn, the chief executive of Renault-Nissan, recently defended his company against suggestions that it also cheated on emissions tests, after Renault said it would recall 15,000 diesels to fix a faulty emissions filter. And Fiat Chrysler said last week that it would update the software in many of its diesels to improve their emissions performance.

Last month, the European Commission also proposed a general overhaul of how testing was done in Europe. As part of the proposal, the commission could for the first time conduct its own spot checks of emissions from car models on the road, echoing the testing that the Environmental Protection Agency does in the United States. Aspects of the proposals, however, could face opposition from the Parliament and member states.

The VW scandal has highlighted the relative differences of the American and European testing systems.

In the United States, Volkswagen has conceded that the software was an illegal defeat device designed to cheat emissions tests. In Europe, however, the company has said the same technology is not illegal under European rules, which give automakers wide latitude to pick their own testing contractors, select their own test vehicles and even adjust engine settings.

“Our position is very clear that this is not a defeat device,” Mr. Willis said repeatedly last month during the parliamentary hearing. Stewart McDonald, a Scottish member of Parliament, responded, “You seem to dance on the head of legal jargon,” adding, “People are quite fed up.”

Claire Barthelemy contributed research from London.

A version of this article appears in print on February 8, 2016, on page B1 of the New York edition with the headline: Cars Failed Fumes Test in Europe for Years . Order Reprints| Today's Paper|Subscribe

 

I don't understand how European governments work so I don't know if this is a big deal or business as usual: Forty-five MEPs join inquiry committee to probe dieselgate emissions scandal – EurActiv.com

Forty-five MEPs were voted into the European Parliament’s new inquiry committee tasked with uncovering potential failures of EU institutions to disclose information related to the dieselgate emissions scandal.

The temporary committee will meet for one year to investigate the European Commission and EU member states’ involvement in doctored vehicle emissions reporting following Volkswagen’s cheating scandal that erupted last year.

MEPs today (21 January) approved members of the inquiry committee in a plenary session. The committee includes 14 full members from the EPP group, 12 S&D MEPs, five ECR, four ALDE, 3 Green, 3 GUE/NGL, 2 EFDD and 2 from Marine Le Pen’s group ENF.

The MEPs elected to the inquiry committee were plucked from the Parliament’s Environment (ENVI), Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO), Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) and Transport (TRAN) Committees.

Substitute members were also elected to the committee, although they will not have voting rights.
. . .​

I stumbled across this article following a reference from a Malta paper. My impression is the earlier committee had given the diesel manufacturers a pass by loosening the standards. So in effect, they can tweak their EU customer cars and no fault, no foul . . . except for the bad air breathed by their kids, customers, employees, and management.

Now I understand the original commission was formed a year ago. So this has been going on at least nine months before the September 2015 reveal to the EPA and CARB. Now we often don't have much respect for our USA politicians but now I'm wondering if Europeans have had enough. Understand, we have our own rascals.

The Flint water was switched from safe Lake to a foul river. The incidents of fatal, Legionaire's disease has put bodies on the politicians who made this switch. Recent car-bans because of foul air in major European Cities has got to be equally infuriating.

ps. This was the original article and reading it made me angry: EP's Committee of Inquiry into emission measurements in the automotive sector - The Malta Independent

There is one report that VW management got an internal report in May of 2014 about the problem. People may do some jail time. Of course it will be the author, not the manager readers.

Source: Report: VW Managers Told Of Defeat-Device Probe As Early As 2014

Though Volkswagen’s Dieselgate scandal didn’t surface until the latter part of last year, reports suggest that an employee warned VW managers—including former CEO Martin Winterkorn—as early as May 2014 that U.S. regulators might check the company’s engine software in an investigation of pollution levels.

According to reports from German newspaper Bild Am Sonntag, the warning came by virtue of a letter from within the company over a year before VW admitted to cheating emissions tests. The employee who reportedly penned the letter about a potential check of defeat devices, according to the newspaper, had the internal (and unofficial) title of “Winterkorn’s fireman.”

Early on in the aftermath of the scandal, top executives put the blame for Dieselgate on a small group of engineers and Volkswagen USA CEO Michael Horn later said he first heard of an emissions discrepancy in 2014. Prior to now, beliefs were that most board members were not aware of the emissions cheat.
​

Holy CARP!

Bob Wilson

 

South Korean prosecutors raid Volkswagen office in emissions probe | The Fiscal Times

 

love it.

 

Source: VW managers see no agreement with EPA before end-March: Manager Magazin| Reuters

Top managers at Volkswagen (VOWG_p.DE) do not expect an agreement before the end of March with U.S. authorities over the German carmaker's rigging of emissions tests, German monthly Manager Magazin reported on Friday, citing company sources.

Negotiations are dragging on because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is demanding a long distance test of a technical solution proposed by Volkswagen, the magazine said.

It also said the costs for recalls, buybacks of affected vehicles and compensation of customers would be significantly higher than previously expected.
. . .​

So VW has one plan for ~80,000 diesels with SRC still being reviewed by the EPA/CARB. Their first plan was rejected. It isn't clear which one they were referencing.

Bob Wilson

 

how's feinberg doing with the compensation fund?

 

No funds in the fund. Everyone is waiting on VW to buy-back the non-SCR diesels ... in North America. But that will bolux everyone else.

Bob Wilson

 

congrats on 15,000 posts! i'm honored to have been the recipient.

 

EPA To Volkswagen: Make Electric Cars In The U.S.

 

...talk about pushing an agenda, does not seem right to me for EPA to suggest that

 

i'll make an exception in this case.

 

It does feed a narrative that it is import or trade based. But I'll hold my final thoughts until the EPA officially responds. If they did, someone in the EPA needs a new job.

Bob Wilson

 

Agree, That seems to be intruding into CARBs turf.

 

Well this helps explain it: VW May Be Forced to Clean the Air Its Diesel Cars Polluted - Bloomberg Business

Caterpillar, Cummins

Penalties on VW need to be enforced because past EPA settlements haven’t always panned out, Billings said. In 1998, heavy-duty truck manufacturers, including Caterpillar Inc., Cummins Inc. and Volvo AB, settled with EPA after discovery of defeat devices to cheat emissions tests. The truckmakers paid a $83.4 million civil penalty and close to $1 billion in remediation projects to producing cleaner engines and new emissions technologies.

They also were supposed to fix the trucks but many never were, Billings said.
. . .​

Explaining it does not make it right BUT as an air breather, I have to think about this remedy. It can be done wrong. For example, requiring VW to build out hydrogen fuel stations in a network along USA interstates . . . say every 300 miles. The problem is forcing one technical solution over say building out charging stations. Either one addresses a very small percentage of the USA fleet and 'declares a winner.'

I am more in favor of 'requiring a corrective, VW standard' that betters the USA emissions and MPG standard until the emissions load and MPG of their legal and cheat vehicles are brought into USA standards. Without dictating the technology, permit VW to sell vehicles per year to equal to 1/10th the NOx rate of the remaining cheat diesels.

1. It does not 'choose' a winning technology so VW engineering is free to do the right thing.
2. Encourages VW to replace the existing cheat-diesels and high emissions vehicles as quickly as possible because their existence remains a cap on future sales.
3. Encourages VW to improve the emissions of their existing vehicles with biggest gain from the worst (i.e., SUV/CUVs.)

This is just a rough draft and translating it to a legal agreement remains a challenge. Just the goal is to give VW credit for their legal cars yet let the cheat-cars take away from the years when both were sold. Then require future sales to over the same time period, dilute to the legal value.

Bob Wilson

 

Here is another source that puts corrective action in perspective: Volkswagen’s Electric Shock - Bloomberg Gadfly

To be clear, we don’t know the EPA will go down this route: Arndt Ellinghorst, analyst at Evercore ISI, said he would be “amazed” if a government agency could dictate a private company’s product line up and, hence, competition in the market. Nevertheless, the move would chime with the idea that VW may be made to clean up the pollution released by its dirty diesel engines.
. . .
So even if VW commits to building electric cars in the U.S., it doesn’t mean consumers will buy them, or that they’ll make money. On the contrary, a forced push into electric cars could be a big drag on VW's profits.
. . .
So it’s hard to imagine VW succeeding with electric vehicles in the U.S. (a technology about which the company’s engineers were until recently very sceptical) when it failed so badly with diesel (a technology it was supposed have mastery of). Paying a bigger fine might be the cheaper option.​

Bob Wilson

​

 

...yeah I need to be careful with media reports

 

In this case, the Germans appear to be under a lot of pressure because it impacts their employment. Some of the rumors are there to fuel a sense of resentment that 'it really isn't about emissions.' Then we also have to deal with Google 'translate.' Sometimes subtle differences in meaning are lost. For example, this paragraph translated to German, French, and back to English:

In this case, the Germans are under great pressure because of it . Impact of employment Some of the rumors, there is a feeling of resentment to fuel that "it does not address emissions really is. "Then we have to deal with Google" translate " lost sometimes subtle differences in meaning , for example, translated in this paragraph in German, French and English. . :​

We're in the same boat. <GRINS>

Bob Wilson