The VW emissions fiasco

They won’t be properly held to account on this continent like they were in the U.S. because they are German and because EU wide enforcement of environmental law is too weak. There needs to be more integration within the EU to allow them to be punished financially but more importantly, send some of the directors and people ITK to prison.
 
not one death can be Proved, imo, entirely based on speculation. Compared to the deaths actually proved to be attributable to : Contaminated blood, Asbestos, Thalidomide, Bhopal, Aluminium oxide, No-one has been compensated, no-one punished. How many died in burning cars before the design changed, how many died being sucked out of trains by door-locks failing? The public are being led up the garden path. The biggest Diesel engines that the public encounter at very close quarters are the 30plus years old knackered units in our trains, the gigantic oil-burners in cruise-ships and container-ships. Do they conform? The same limits that the cars face, applied to power stations would shut them all down. Empirical evidence, ie, before mass motoring, millions of us used diesel buses every day, crude engines burning crude fuel, how the fuck did anyone survive?
Governments have been found guilty of cherry-picking scientific "speculation" to justify legislation they want to enact, that is not in the public interest but business interest. The way climate change figures were wildly exaggerated is classic spin to suit an agenda.
Europe has millions more diesels than the UK, ergo their life expectancy must be shorter given their exposure to diesel fumes is so much greater. But it is isn't.
VW found a way to make their vehicles appear more economical in certain circumstances. And that's it.....
Not a way to poison children ffs,
 
not one death can be Proved, imo, entirely based on speculation. Compared to the deaths actually proved to be attributable to : Contaminated blood, Asbestos, Thalidomide, Bhopal, Aluminium oxide, No-one has been compensated, no-one punished. How many died in burning cars before the design changed, how many died being sucked out of trains by door-locks failing? The public are being led up the garden path. The biggest Diesel engines that the public encounter at very close quarters are the 30plus years old knackered units in our trains, the gigantic oil-burners in cruise-ships and container-ships. Do they conform? The same limits that the cars face, applied to power stations would shut them all down. Empirical evidence, ie, before mass motoring, millions of us used diesel buses every day, crude engines burning crude fuel, how the fuck did anyone survive?
Governments have been found guilty of cherry-picking scientific "speculation" to justify legislation they want to enact, that is not in the public interest but business interest. The way climate change figures were wildly exaggerated is classic spin to suit an agenda.
Europe has millions more diesels than the UK, ergo their life expectancy must be shorter given their exposure to diesel fumes is so much greater. But it is isn't.
VW found a way to make their vehicles appear more economical in certain circumstances. And that's it.....
Not a way to poison children ffs,

Completely wrong.
I did some work with the company that actually wrote the 'cheat' software for VW. The software was nothing to do with making the vehicles look more economical - it was all to do with the lowering of the co2 emissions regarding pollution. The software detected when the vehicle was in 'test mode'. Example: if the steering wasn't touched for a certain length of time or the vehicle did not change direction (because it was on a ramp) etc.
The 100% sole intention was to show a lower co2 emission figure which means the vehicles do not pollute as much as they actually do. It was completely and totally immoral on every level. The amazing thing is that VW is 20% state owned. Hence the reason they have effectively got away with it in the broadest sense.
 
Sad one should die before their time, unless they are truly bad people, but in the scheme of things 1200 people out of a population of 741.5 million is like a grain of sand on a beach.

I don't condone VW's shenanigans but assuming 1200 will die early (and are we certain this is the only contributing factor) isn't really a news story. It, to me, is more of a manufactured crisis type of thing.

That's nearly twice as many as turned up at MCWFC last night! Has this eminent scientist worked out what percentage might be Rags 'n Dippers?
 
It was wrong and yes people will die. What about governments who pushed people into diesels even before these faked test - are they responsible? The fact is that we just struggle to accept that to move around comes with an environmental cost. Petrol engines pollute too obviously. In fact I saw a study that they were worse for particulates in that the ones emitted by a diesel engine are larger ( more visible to the human eye ) petrol ones are smaller and therefore when breathed in are lodged even deeper in the lung causing more damage.

I don't know if there is an answer to be honest. Leaf driver are driving around boasting zero emissions - however if they electricity they use is generated by nuclear power stations surely their legacy is spent fuel rods with a half life of tens of thousands of years that have to be dealt with?

Is the answer more mass transportation working on the theory its less polluting to have 100 people on a train/bus/tram than 100 people in individual cars? If so best of luck with the UK's rail service then.

Whilst what VW - and probably others - did was wrong. There should be consequences - but to think that fines, compensation or anything will change matters is as naive as thinking getting McDonalds and Wetherspoons to not use plastic straws will fix the plastic pollution issue.
 
What about governments who pushed people into diesels even before these faked test - are they responsible?

Exactly. The polluting nature of diesel engines were perfectly known at the time, they can't pretend that they were somehow caught out on this. They went all out on CO2 emissions and ignored totally the horrendous nature of diesel engines, encouraging people to buy them through the tax system.
 
Completely wrong.
I did some work with the company that actually wrote the 'cheat' software for VW. The software was nothing to do with making the vehicles look more economical - it was all to do with the lowering of the co2 emissions regarding pollution. The software detected when the vehicle was in 'test mode'. Example: if the steering wasn't touched for a certain length of time or the vehicle did not change direction (because it was on a ramp) etc.
The 100% sole intention was to show a lower co2 emission figure which means the vehicles do not pollute as much as they actually do. It was completely and totally immoral on every level. The amazing thing is that VW is 20% state owned. Hence the reason they have effectively got away with it in the broadest sense.
For someone who claims to have special knowledge, your comments I think are surprisingly flawed.

The amount of CO2 produced is directly and entirely proportional to the amount of fuel burned. CO2 output and fuel economy are measures of exactly the same thing, so you cannot say it was all to do with CO2 output and nothing to do with fuel economy.

It is true that the frigged tests (and in fact ALL the manufacturers were frigging the tests with activities such as removing the seats and other items to keep the weight down, taping up the doors to reduce drag and other things ridiculously unrepresentative of typical driving conditions) were about showing a lower CO2 output per mile, in order to achieve lower tax bands. As a result, they would also have shown purchasers better MPG figures than are actually achievable.

But in VW's case, they were ALSO about showing artificially low NOX output by changing the engine's settings for test conditions only (for example, burning more AdBlue than would be possible under normal driving conditions, or adjusting timing perameters to favour low NOX in lieu of fuel efficiency when NOX testing was detected).
 
Just to give a little bit of background on some of this...
I was in a previous life involved in the motor industry and was involved with people who conducted the testing for the economy and mileage figures quoted by motor manufactures in the brochures. Everybody and I mean everybody in the industry has known for years and years that the numbers published in the brochures are complete nonsense. I'll explain why:
When the testing on a vehicle for MPG was conducted the car was effectively stripped back to its bare bones. The wing mirrors and door handles were removed. All of the trim and extras and accessories were removed. The seats were changed for light weight versions along with the tyres etc etc.
Anything and everything that could be slimmed down or removed to reduce weight and wind drag were taken to the absolute extreme.
Therefore the numbers quoted in the brochure are effectively totally fictitious on every level.
As I say EVERYONE in the industry was aware of it. The general public have and are being lied to on a daily basis regarding such issues.
It is a scandal of the highest level but no one appears to give a shit.
 
For someone who claims to have special knowledge, your comments I think are surprisingly flawed.

The amount of CO2 produced is directly and entirely proportional to the amount of fuel burned. CO2 output and fuel economy are measures of exactly the same thing, so you cannot say it was all to do with CO2 output and nothing to do with fuel economy.

It is true that the frigged tests (and in fact ALL the manufacturers were frigging the tests with activities such as removing the seats and other items to keep the weight down, taping up the doors to reduce drag and other things ridiculously unrepresentative of typical driving conditions) were about showing a lower CO2 output per mile, in order to achieve lower tax bands. As a result, they would also have shown purchasers better MPG figures than are actually achievable.

But in VW's case, they were ALSO about showing artificially low NOX output by changing the engine's settings for test conditions only (for example, burning more AdBlue than would be possible under normal driving conditions, or adjusting timing perameters to favour low NOX in lieu of fuel efficiency when NOX testing was detected).

Seeing as you know better than the team who wrote the cheat software then we will bow to your superior knowledge.
However, I can tell you for a 100% fact the software was designed to reduce the co2 emissions. Anything else was a side benefit or additional extra.
I can also tell you that the company who wrote the software have already paid 328 million Euros as a fine with a second and possibly larger fine to come. But hey - whatever you say.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.