71–80 of 160 posts
"the high temperatures heat the selective catalytic reduction system ("catalyst") and improves the catalyst's ability to reduce tailpipe NOx emissions"
There has been recently http://www.thestar.com/autos/2015/09/30/canadian-trios-exhau...
I wonder if this tech would work for SCR systems or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do we go about measuring this "harm"?
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/29/vw-emissi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mustangs got more expensive, but that's only one data point :) http://blog.caranddriver.com/are-cars-getting-less-affordabl... Heavily salted states certainly have an easier time justifying no emissions testing. You start out with a "known good" (regulated by the EPA) and count on cars to expire quickly. Compare to California, which thanks to gentle climate still has a huge fleet of 1980's cars on the road.
That's about the only good thing about the salt (aside from not dying on an ice patch :) ). My wife's 2005 Pontiac G6 with 120k on it is already starting to rust. I dumped my last car at ~9 years old with ~130k because it was starting to rust. OTOH, I have a '96 Camaro that I only drive during the summer that doesn't have a speck of rust on it (driving an RWD car in a northern state during the winter is a good way to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surly Porsche has their own quality assurance and compliance engineers though? And they're proper Teutonic Engineers, right? I mean, they're Porsche engineers... They'd just take an engine from their parent company and not see that it lives up to the Porsche marquee? Maybe it's possible, but if it is, Porsche is really not the Porsche I think it is or want it to be.
Well, they're Porsche. I imagine "seeing if it lives up to the Porsche marquee" primarily involves flogging it to make sure it drives well. Do you associate the Porsche brand with a dedication to fuel economy or low emissions?
Nobody is going with Porsche for fuel economy but nobody is expecting to have their Porsche lose power due to a recall either. It's a premium badge, I expect them to dot more of the I's and cross more of the T's when I pay that extra $20-$40kk for a Porsche branded Touareg.
I'd love to get my car tested... Anyone know how I could do that? I have a 2015 Q5 TDI which while not specifically mentioned has the same size engine as several of the ones that are mentioned (3.0-liter). I would be shocked if they just started using the defeat device in the 2016 model year for the Q5 considering they were already getting pushback from the EPA before the 2016 models even got announced. I bought the…
It's also possible that EPA just hasn't finished testing all of the vehicles yet and your particular car may get added to the list. Sorry about that. I actually test drove the Touraeg TDI that shares the same engine and almost bought one a couple of years ago...
0 - http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/4A45A5661216E66C8...
I'd love to get my car tested... Anyone know how I could do that? I have a 2015 Q5 TDI which while not specifically mentioned has the same size engine as several of the ones that are mentioned (3.0-liter). I would be shocked if they just started using the defeat device in the 2016 model year for the Q5 considering they were already getting pushback from the EPA before the 2016 models even got announced. I bought the…
From the EPA news release [0], your 2015 Q5 TDI seems to be safe: "on September 25th EPA initiated testing of all 2015 and 2016 light duty diesel models available in the U.S using updated testing procedures specifically designed to detect potential defeat devices". It's also possible that EPA just hasn't finished testing all of the vehicles yet and your particular car may get added to the list. Sorry about that. I ac…
Meta: Earlier in the scandal, I recall reading that the engine management software is from Bosch. I should read further, looking for confirmation of this. If that is the case, then this is an example of the maxim: When you provide a feature, someone will use it to their own ends -- meaning, "misuse" it. Another example to wave in front of all those politicians and people advocating for encryption "back doors". If you…
However, this was later rejected by Bosch who claim that writing additional code is required by the car manufacturer to get the emissions test detection feature [2].
[1] http://blog.caranddriver.com/report-bosch-warned-vw-about-di... [2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/07/volkswagen-emissio...
Meanwhile there seems to be no enforcement of large diesel pickups "rolling coal" with modified emissions.
Wut? What does this have to do with vehicle manufacturers programming their ECUs to defeat emissions tests? There isn't a single diesel truck that 'rolls coal' from the factory. Also, diesel trucks that emit black smoke do fail emissions test - in counties that actually have emissions tests.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure. You could make several arguments. I think the idea that environmental regulations are reasonable presupposes that harm to society comes from environmental damage (negative externalities of other behaviors). A few such arguments might be that there were harms to: - peoples' lungs, wildlife, etc. - profits lost by firms that played by the rules - more cars sold than would have been (hence more environment…
Good points. I sort of touched on this in another comment, but perhaps the emission standard on these vehicles is what's unreasonable. We have a more-or-less arbitrarily set maximum allowed tailpipe emissions for a given class of vehicles. Is it fair to apply this arbitrary standard uniformly across all vehicles in the same class? If vehicle A and vehicle B both meet the same emissions standards, but vehicle B is cap…
I think that from an economic perspective, reduced fuel economy is also beneficial to the environment because the driver is less likely to spend money traveling (keeping the vehicle's engine running, producing pollution) when the cost is higher.
However if the vehicles in question were part of a fleet whose behavior would not change much based on fuel costs, there would seem to be nothing but downside to diminished fuel economy.
What's interesting to me about this is that it seems that a few other manufacturers were able to engineer diesel engines with power, fuel economy, and emissions characteristics that met the guidelines without cheating. It would seem that this is quite a feat, if VW had to resort to gaming the system.
On a tangential note, I also find it interesting that we accept certain tradeoffs about noise pollution vs air pollution, since if we simply removed mufflers from cars, fuel economy would increase.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the EPA news release [0], your 2015 Q5 TDI seems to be safe: "on September 25th EPA initiated testing of all 2015 and 2016 light duty diesel models available in the U.S using updated testing procedures specifically designed to detect potential defeat devices". It's also possible that EPA just hasn't finished testing all of the vehicles yet and your particular car may get added to the list. Sorry about that. I ac…
That's why I'd like to get it tested. I think they may have gone with the 2016 since that's what is currently on the lot, but I am very skeptical it is new to the 2016 model year when the required standards and engine did not change.