VW Faces $17B Fine for Emissions Scam

They mention briefly (in that show "Hard NoX") that other manufacturers (German only manufacturers, IIRC?) also had marked variations between lab and road tests. Mercedes Benz and Porche if I recall correctly. And then they just leave it hanging there, which is odd.

Still, a lot to digest, that the problem could be very widespread, and that governments of various countries may be complicit, due to the lure of $'s...

 

I would not be so naive as to think VW has had any kind of eco/paradigm shift.
#1 VW's cheating has rendered them billions & billions in fines.
#2 High end VW sales (Porsche Audi) & others, take sales beatings from Tesla.
Just MAYBE, vw is taking a page out of MS windows playbook.
Once upon a time microsoft tried to drive others out of computer businesses - so they could further monopolize their industry.
MS - found guilty, of monopoly practices, were fined huge, for their underhanded practices. What did MS do? Offered in lieu of millions cash fines - to pay for & install 1,000's & 1,000's of MS PC's in schools. The courts quickly realized Gates wasn't being benevolent - far from it. He wanted to continue his same old vile monopolistic practices ... the Windoze PC's offered were just another way to drive apple out of the schools Bwa hahahaha ...

I believe that VW sees their fines as a way to hopefully cripple Tesla & recapture high end sales by bringing their own electric cars & infrastructure to fruition with $$ they'd have otherwise spent elsewhere, had their fraud not been found out. Fine ... let the best clean company win.
.

 

Part of VW's punishment for the cheating scandal is to put up a charging infrastructure.

 

The driving cycles used in the official tests do not represent how people actually drive their cars. So variations between the lab and road tests could be from cheating, abuse of loopholes, or just be the emissions compliant car when it is driven outside the limits of the lab test.

And CARB wants some of those funds for hydrogen stations.

 

VW deliberately exploited the usual test conditions, changed the behaviour when it was in test conditions, run leaner or whatever, then when on the road relaxed those behaviours, to the tune of a 40 fold (sometimes as much as 80 fold) increase in emissions.

I'm not sure how exactly they did this at first, maybe I wasn't paying enough attention, but about halfway through the doc. they say that VW (who was constantly consulted during this testing, and always assumed to be innocent, helpful) offered to recall a few test cars, and try to tweak the software to improve things.

What they in fact were doing was tweaking the cheat. The revised cheat was to improve engine emissions as long as the steering wheel was straight ahead and not being turned, basically the condition on the dyno. As soon as the car was road-driven though, when the car detected steering wheel motion, it would revert to higher emission behaviour.

 

yes, that's a part of the 'settlement'. wink wink
.

 

Yes, VW cheated.

When other European cars were tested on the road, many were found to exceed the emission limits they were certified for. This includes gas and diesels, though VW diesels were among to cleanest on the road there.

The difference between lab and road results might be from cheating, or it could be because people accelerate harder and drive faster on the road than what the test called for. The EPA test cycles use a 'heavier foot' than what Europe and Japan tests call for, but it is still extremely gentle driving compared to what most people do on the road.

 

Watch the show.

The road testers had a cradle attached to the back of the car, and an extension on the exhaust with various sensors. I would think they would be driving conservatively, for sure they would be concerned about their equipment staying intact. I'll have to watch it again, but I'd suspect it was a closed road track.

Their results, comparing to lab test (they did both), showed results at least 40 fold worse, sometimes up to 80 fold. At least one former US VW exec has testified that this is what they were doing, quite deliberately: they knew there would be certain car detectable/distinct parameters during the test, and they had the car change parameters when this occurred.

 

The equipment is robust. Road and Track or somebody regularly uses it in the reviews for calculating fuel economy. Their reviews are on public roads, as was the study that lead to VW getting caught.

People consider cars that take over 10 seconds to reach 60mph slow. The city and highway test cycles for the EPA have maximum acceleration rates that would take over 18 seconds to reach 60mph.

If care in driving was needed for the equipment that meant driving more carefully than normally, then the results don't reflect real world driving.

The ICCT was the ones that funded the study that caught VW. They have done similar studies before and after, and have found gasoline and diesel cars to exceed NOx emission limits on the road. Because of the differences between how the car is driven on the road and in the lab, measuring higher emissions on the road is not enough evidence of cheating alone.

Cars don't get the same fuel economy when driven on the road than as in the lab. Their emission amounts change also, and for pretty much the same reasons.

A comment about some car or manufacturer exceeding emission limits on the road means nothing without further context; how much did it exceed, did other cars exceed on the same route, was the car checked out or tested in the lab, etc.

 

I wonder how much pollution all the effected VW diesels produce vs. your grandpa's 1984 Chevy/Ford/Dodge V8 or diesel pickup...

 

doesn't matter, unless grandpa was cheating.

 

VW's cheating caused harm beyond extra emissions.

They defrauded customers. Many bought a TDI believing that the emissions were as low as VW claimed.

It lowered diesel's reputation. This hurts the sales of diesels that honestly passed the tests.

It gave VW an unfair competitive advantage over competitors. Mazda had planned to introduce a diesel engine for the Mazda6 when the SkyActiv model first arrived. They didn't want to use SCR, and thought it was possible because of VW models. They tried for years to pass US emissions while still maintaining performance and fuel economy. Honda had looked into releasing a diesel Accord after the first hybrid was cancelled with the same results. The difficultly in honestly passing US emissions meant VW had near zero competition in diesel cars.

 

According to EPA emission factors, which only date back to 1990, the average new gasoline car produced 1.04 g/mile (exhaust VOC), 2.32 g/mi (NOx), 14.9 g/mi (CO), and 0.0355 g/mi (PM).

According to the ICCT/WVU study, the average NOx emission rate of the TDIs tested was 1.5 g/mi, but the other regulated emissions were very low - 0.001 g/mi (exhaust VOC), 0.03 g/mi (CO), and 0.0002 g/mi (PM).

 

Certainly defrauding the customers is terrible and VW has paid the price in consumer confidence and reputation for that. As for competition, VW really does have an excellent diesel engine that is ages ahead of the competition. Certainly cheating on the tests has given them an edge, but their diesel is still VERY clean. The cars that they will be putting back in service in this country (the ones they bought back) will all be passing a DIFFERENT, less stringent set of standards. My point was more about why focus on one manufacturer and make such a hige deal about the environmental impact when a much larger impact is being made by much dirtier diesels allowed to operate all over the country. I smell a bit of a rat there. Again, no excuse for the stupidity of the cheating on VW's part, but environmentally I think it's a drop in a bucket compared to what we do allow.

So, even a cheating VW diesel is almost 50% cleaner than average in the NOx emissions and much lower on other stuff? Well, at least we got rid of that nasty crap from our roads...

 

Good things have been said about GM's 1.6L and Honda's diesels. FCA's 3L was Ward's engine of the year at least once, before they ran into regulation issues.

The study that caught VW also ran a BMW with no suspicion of cheating. Under enhanced EPA scrutiny, they passed and were certified. So where GM's diesels. If VW hadn't cheated, we might have the choice of Mazda and Honda diesels now. VW was the only non-luxury option for those that wanted a diesel car for years. Competition not coming to market was a major advantage for their profits.

I would lie diesels to succeed because they have potential with renewable fuels. I agree the extra emissions from the cheating cars is small compared to other sources, but the other damage VW's cheating has done far exceeds the polluting.

Those figures are between today's TDI and and gasoline cars that are nearly 30 years old. Gasoline cars have gotten much cleaner since then.

 

I agree, cheating just sucked on so many levels and I am really surprised a company like VW would do something so stupid. And get caught! As for other brands, the documentary states that virtually all other brands with diesels showed signs of cheating. BMW, Mercedes included. I know the WVU group did not test those in the same way they tested the VW (why?!). I also think there are lots of non-diesel cars that do the same thing. I really do believe VW is just a tip of the iceberg. We may never know, though because if that were true the car industry would come to a halt. All the cars are tested on the dyno for the EPA, none are tested in anything like a real driving environment. The potential for defeat device in software is way too big and tempting. And if VW did it, I am almost certain that others are doing it and it's more of an industry standard practice than we all know. Why aren't the WVU guys testing other cars?

 

by the same irrefutable logic - a cheating diesel is also cleaner than a model A, ... & it's cleaner than a funny car ... & cleaner than the Exon Valdez ... & the Bhopal chemical death cloud, & Chernobyl & Fukushima .... & even though i stole a toy from the local 5&dime when i was 10yrs old, i should have got a free pass, because that's not as bad as Charlie Manson. Even so, my dad seriously beat my nice person. So yea, some aren't as serious about meeting out consequences .... as long as there's a lower basis of comparison. Others? They're into the "set an example" & "consequences" notions.

.

 

Did the documentary site sources? As I stated earlier, on road testing has found gasoline cars emitting NOx above regulation limits. Levels above the limits alone isn't enough evidence for cheating. Then European regulations, where the testing likely occurred, have loopholes a coal rolling truck can drive through. Mercedes has cancelled their diesel offerings for North America, so I won't be surprised if they were cheating.

Then on a selfish note, I am more effected by a guy blocking the EGR valve on his Civic VX than diesels in Europe when it comes to NOx. BMW's diesel did not raise suspicion in the WVU study, and their cars were certified after increased EPA scrutiny, which may include road testing. That extra scrutiny found software that FCA did not disclose, and now the only 3L diesels for sale are 2017s still on the lot. No word if FCA has abandoned diesels for the US yet.

The WVU study was in partnership with the ICCT. International Council on Clean Transportation European car manufacturers have been fighting tighter regulations for diesels for years. The ICCT has done a lot of emission research into European cars already; the studies the documentary sited likely came from them. They wanted evidence from North American models on how a clean diesel was possible without compromising performance or large cost to counter the manufacturers in Europe. And we know the rest.

The WVU guys, EPA, and others would test other cars, but it takes money.

 

The 2018 3.0L diesel received emissions certification earlier this week.

According to ICCT itself, diesel vehicles in the U.S. are now receiving rigorous extra testing:

"...Recent actions by California’s Air Resources Board and US EPA indicate that future LD diesel NOx emissions will be much closer to regulatory emissions limits. These actions include ARB’s newly-developed defeat device screening methods, which notably include the use of “special driving cycles and conditions that may reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal operation and use”. As a result, average NOx emission factors for future vehicles certified to Tier 3 standards are estimated to be within 30% of the certification limit...."

Anenberg et al. "Impacts and mitigation of excess diesel-related NOx emissions in 11 major vehicle markets." Nature 545, 467–471 (25 May 2017)

 

There's a few levels of cheating, really.

What Volkswagen did was detect the test (through a combination of distance versus time running, various sensor values that matched allowable test conditions, and steering angle remaining straight), and change behavior if there wasn't a test occurring. That's straight up illegal everywhere.

Many European automakers are detecting the conditions that occur in the test, and changing behavior outside of those conditions. So, if it's, say, 25 C and you're doing 1500 RPM at 5% throttle, it'll always be compliant, because those conditions are part of what's tested. Very cold (or sometimes not even very cold), very hot, high RPM, high throttle, all of those never happen in the European tests, and in some cases changing strategy for those conditions is legal, if frowned on. In the US, a change of strategy is considered an auxiliary emissions control device, however, and must be disclosed and approved - not doing that is what FCA got caught doing on the 3.0 V6 EcoDiesels. Note that approved AECDs can significantly increase emissions in certain cases - boost enrichment on a Ford 3.5 EcoBoost, anyone? - but how likely those conditions are is part of how the EPA determines whether to approve one.

Finally, you can *not* change strategy outside of the test conditions, but end up emitting more due to higher load and RPM operation. This is legal, but it's usually not going to be anywhere near an order of magnitude or two more emissions than the test - maybe double or triple.