Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nearly all new diesel cars exceed official pollution limits

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 133 posts

Re: Nearly all new diesel cars exceed official pollution limits

#61

Post by tremon »

verytrivial wrote: post #33
InclinedPlane wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Diesel vehicles kill people, period. It's very difficult to reduce emissions sufficiently to change that but it's nigh impossible to ban diesel cars and trucks from the road. Given that, the only reasonable alternative is stringent tests that push diesel technology to the limit in terms of minimizing health impact. Which is what we have. Could the tests be better? Certainly. But that doesn't excuse the cheating. Imag…

The manufactures were required to "pass" the tests. They did. The tests were not fit for purpose. Fix the tests or GIVE UP. You will NEVER get the manufactures to act as moral entities -- they are amoral. They are profit machines and are required by law to be that way. The comparison to aircraft manufacturing only works if you are arguing aircraft manufactures and industry bodies design and implement similarly stupid…

I don't disagree with your opinion on the tests. If the tests aren't fit for purpose, they must be replaced or removed. However, the tests as-is do serve one purpose: to provide an absolute comparison between different models across different years.

However, regarding corporations:

You will NEVER get the manufactures to act as moral entities -- they are amoral

This attitude is part of what keeps them immoral.

They are profit machines and are required by law to be that way

So, change the law? I'm sure there's been many articles on HN where the prevailing opinion was "the law is wrong, and must be changed".

Re: Nearly all new diesel cars exceed official pollution limits

#62

Post by rayiner »

ptaipale wrote: post #43
kuschku wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DEF tank is a global thing – ever heard of AdBlue etc? But yes, the issue is that the US requires dealers to refill them. And also sets a limit for how often refill cycles may happen. And the weight of the tank sets a limit on how large it may be. The result is simple: Small Diesel cars can’t exist legally in the US.

> The result is simple: Small Diesel cars can’t exist legally in the US. And that is, of course, intentional. To keep some of the foreign competition away.

Because American companies can't make diesel cars?

Re: Nearly all new diesel cars exceed official pollution limits

#63

Post by guscost »

makomk wrote: post #37
teh_klev wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in particular insisting that they couldn't require the diesel exhaust fluid tank to be topped up by the end user Not being rude, but I'm having trouble parsing that part of your comment. Do you mean that the US authorities won't let diesel car owners re-fill the diesel exhaust fluid tank by themselves, i.e. the re-fill must be performed by a dealer? Also is the DEF tank just a US thing? I'd never heard it before (U…

I'm pretty sure that owners can refill the tank by themselves, but manufacturers are required to have a big enough tank that it can be done by the dealer as part of the regular servicing schedule. The tank itself not so much a US thing as it is a modern diesel car thing; it's part of the emissions control system on I think most new diesels.

Wow, I hadn't heard this. What a counterproductive, idiotic piece of regulation.

Re: Nearly all new diesel cars exceed official pollution limits

#64

Post by Marazan »

verytrivial wrote: post #33
InclinedPlane wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Diesel vehicles kill people, period. It's very difficult to reduce emissions sufficiently to change that but it's nigh impossible to ban diesel cars and trucks from the road. Given that, the only reasonable alternative is stringent tests that push diesel technology to the limit in terms of minimizing health impact. Which is what we have. Could the tests be better? Certainly. But that doesn't excuse the cheating. Imag…

The manufactures were required to "pass" the tests. They did. The tests were not fit for purpose. Fix the tests or GIVE UP. You will NEVER get the manufactures to act as moral entities -- they are amoral. They are profit machines and are required by law to be that way. The comparison to aircraft manufacturing only works if you are arguing aircraft manufactures and industry bodies design and implement similarly stupid…

They are not required by law to be amorral profit machines. Directors have to take into consideration company image and general well being in making decisions. They don't have to take into consideration profit.

Re: Nearly all new diesel cars exceed official pollution limits

#65

Post by yellowstuff »

verytrivial wrote: post #33
InclinedPlane wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Diesel vehicles kill people, period. It's very difficult to reduce emissions sufficiently to change that but it's nigh impossible to ban diesel cars and trucks from the road. Given that, the only reasonable alternative is stringent tests that push diesel technology to the limit in terms of minimizing health impact. Which is what we have. Could the tests be better? Certainly. But that doesn't excuse the cheating. Imag…

The manufactures were required to "pass" the tests. They did. The tests were not fit for purpose. Fix the tests or GIVE UP. You will NEVER get the manufactures to act as moral entities -- they are amoral. They are profit machines and are required by law to be that way. The comparison to aircraft manufacturing only works if you are arguing aircraft manufactures and industry bodies design and implement similarly stupid…

> They are profit machines and are required by law to be that way.

People say this all the time, but it's not true. In the US managers at public companies do have an obligation to act in the best interest of the shareholders, but no court has ever said that means maximizing profit. On the contrary, managers had very broad rights to run a company as they see fit. In fact public companies forgo short-term profit all the time in favor of long-term goals such as improving their reputation with customers, politicians or regulators. Shareholders don't get any say in business decisions such as how to handle emissions regulations.

There are some exceptions. You can't explicitly screw over the shareholders, such as by selling the company for cheap in a deal that guarantees big bonuses for management. That doesn't apply here. Craigslist got in trouble and the details of the case are kind of interesting, but it was an extreme and unusual case that also doesn't apply to VW.

I'd assume the rules are similar in Germany. It wouldn't make sense to have a rule that corporations must maximize short-term profit all the time. No one could run a big business that way.

Re: Nearly all new diesel cars exceed official pollution limits

#66

Post by selimthegrim »

hcrisp wrote: post #56
selimthegrim wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no limp mode?

A truck mechanic told me that drivers have been rumored to urinate in the DEF tank to bring the level of urea up to the point that it can be driven.

Well I suppose that's unintended comedy in the naming then.

Re: Nearly all new diesel cars exceed official pollution limits

#67

Post by vinay427 »

rayiner wrote: post #62
ptaipale wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The result is simple: Small Diesel cars can’t exist legally in the US. And that is, of course, intentional. To keep some of the foreign competition away.

Because American companies can't make diesel cars?

They do with reasonable success in many parts of the world, so I'm not sure what GP was trying to claim.

Re: Nearly all new diesel cars exceed official pollution limits

#68

Post by alkonaut »

Nothing strange about that - if there is a limit that is hard to meet (which there should be) then manufacturers will make a car that exactly meets the standard.

And just like advertised fuel consumption figures, it will meet the standard under very controlled circumstances. In case of fuel consumption the manufacturers can reach the figure by taping shut door seams, using overinflated tyres, throwing out interior to reduce weight etc. Those aren't "real world conditions" but apparently they are real-world enough to use in advertising. Presumably the same conditions can and are used when testing emissions.

The only conclusion we can draw is that emissions tests aren't used to make manufacturers build cars that emit at most X in real world conditions. That would be both unfair and expensive - it's better to say "use whatever extreme conditions you want and the emissions should be at most Y".

In that case authorities can make Y This of course only works so long as no one cheats and designs workarounds specifically for the test conditions (which is what VW did).

Re: Nearly all new diesel cars exceed official pollution limits

#70

Post by deelowe »

alkonaut wrote: post #68

Nothing strange about that - if there is a limit that is hard to meet (which there should be) then manufacturers will make a car that exactly meets the standard. And just like advertised fuel consumption figures, it will meet the standard under very controlled circumstances. In case of fuel consumption the manufacturers can reach the figure by taping shut door seams, using overinflated tyres, throwing out interior to…

Why couldn't a third party just take a production car and do the testing? This is how it works for most compliance testing. This whole situation seems needlessly complex. Or, probably more aptly, it reeks of crony capitalism and politics.

Testing and compliance is an engineering problem. It should treated as such.

Post reply on HN