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

EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

epa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 137 posts

Re: EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

#91

Post by Zak »

galdosdi wrote: post #79
Zak wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big cars were always popular in the US. Until the mid 1970s when fuel economy standards and an oil crisis or two changed the market. The oil crisis passed, but the economy standards did not. Trucks weren't held to the same standards as cars, so manufacturers started making more carlike trucks to meet consumer demand for larger vehicles. The improved visibility and image of toughness and independence also helps drive…

The visibility is modified, not improved. Far away objects are more visible and very nearby objects (like curbs or children) are less visible. Bad drivers driving huge cars through dense places are scary...

Consumers with this preference perceive that their visibility is better. Don't confuse them with facts.

I think it's mostly related to the percentage of other vehicles that they can see over.

Re: EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

#92

Post by [deleted] »

btilly wrote: post #66
yuhong wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally don't think that jail for simply emitting NOx above limits is worth it

An estimated 60 people have died because of these excess emissions. What penalty would you consider appropriate for someone breaking the law, resulting in 60 deaths? Should it matter what law was broken, or how those deaths were caused?

[deleted]

Re: EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

#93

Post by [deleted] »

blakeyrat wrote: post #11

Note: they mean exceeding in the bad direction, not the good direction. At first I thought this was some kind of spoof article, or Chrysler marketing effort. It should probably read "exceeding limits" not "exceeding standards". EDIT: actually the press release doesn't even say that really. It says Fiat Chrysler installed software that could impact emissions testing but didn't tell the EPA about it, which is considere…

[deleted]

Re: EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

#94

Post by Mtinie »

yuhong wrote: post #83
btilly wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NOx emissions are not a new problem, and our ability to estimate its effects are pretty good. The exact number is an estimate, but the real number is very unlikely to be off by more than a factor of 2. If you randomly shoot 30 people, what is the appropriate penalty? What if you were shooting blindfolded and couldn't see when or who you killed? What if you were being paid money to take shots? That is an exact analogy…

I mean in the sense that the emissions before the EPA was created was far worse.

Ok, so in your example 120 people were killed by emissions vs. the ~60 that died today. That's an improvement for everyone except for the people who still died.

Arguing that killing less people than could have in the past doesn't feel like it's the best way to frame a position, unless the new number is zero.

Re: EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

#95

Post by x0x0 »

yuhong wrote: post #83
btilly wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NOx emissions are not a new problem, and our ability to estimate its effects are pretty good. The exact number is an estimate, but the real number is very unlikely to be off by more than a factor of 2. If you randomly shoot 30 people, what is the appropriate penalty? What if you were shooting blindfolded and couldn't see when or who you killed? What if you were being paid money to take shots? That is an exact analogy…

I mean in the sense that the emissions before the EPA was created was far worse.

And murders were worse 10 years ago too.

How on earth is that related to giving someone a pass for a murder now?

Re: EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

#96

Post by sctb »

blakeyrat wrote: post #11

Note: they mean exceeding in the bad direction, not the good direction. At first I thought this was some kind of spoof article, or Chrysler marketing effort. It should probably read "exceeding limits" not "exceeding standards". EDIT: actually the press release doesn't even say that really. It says Fiat Chrysler installed software that could impact emissions testing but didn't tell the EPA about it, which is considere…

We reverted the submission title to that of the article from “E.P.A. Accuses Fiat Chrysler of Secretly Exceeding Emissions Standards”.

Re: EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

#97

Post by cocoa19 »

blakeyrat wrote: post #11

Note: they mean exceeding in the bad direction, not the good direction. At first I thought this was some kind of spoof article, or Chrysler marketing effort. It should probably read "exceeding limits" not "exceeding standards". EDIT: actually the press release doesn't even say that really. It says Fiat Chrysler installed software that could impact emissions testing but didn't tell the EPA about it, which is considere…

Someone "accuses" you of wrongdoing (negative direction). Exceeding standards usually means better than the standard (positive direction). I agree with you. Title needs an update.

Re: EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

#98

Post by djrogers »

yuhong wrote: post #58
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #33

Volkswagen, a German company, admitted wrongdoing, is paying $4.3bn in fines and will see its executives, domestic and overseas, jailed by the U.S. government [1]. Curious if Fiat Chrysler will see those checkboxes--admission of wrongdoing, material fines and jailed executives--filled. [1] http://abcnews.go.com/US/volkswagen-pleads-guilty-pays-43-bi...

I personally don't think that jail for simply emitting NOx above limits is worth it

> I personally don't think that jail for simply emitting NOx above limits is worth it

The violation doesn't actually state the increased NOx emissions were above any limits, just that the software responsible for the increase wasn't disclosed.

Re: EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

#99

Post by avn2109 »

alphabettsy wrote: post #78
donatj wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So instead we overregulate to the point where affordable car's can't exist furthering the divide between the rich and the poor. Wonderful.

What evidence do you have to make such a claim? These diesel vehicles were not truly "affordable" to start with, they are a very costly upgrade (> $4000) over the base engines. A truck that starts at over $37,000 and an SUV start at over $40,000. While these are obviously vehicles the average middle-income person might be able to afford, it's a far cry from the $27,000 starting price of the RAM and these aren't leavi…

>> "GM, BMW, MB, and Ford"

GP here. My whole point is that ~everyone is cheating to various degrees, it's just that not everyone has been caught yet.

Re: EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

#100

Post by btilly »

yuhong wrote: post #83
btilly wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NOx emissions are not a new problem, and our ability to estimate its effects are pretty good. The exact number is an estimate, but the real number is very unlikely to be off by more than a factor of 2. If you randomly shoot 30 people, what is the appropriate penalty? What if you were shooting blindfolded and couldn't see when or who you killed? What if you were being paid money to take shots? That is an exact analogy…

I mean in the sense that the emissions before the EPA was created was far worse.

Yes. See https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/progress-cleaning... for estimates of things like how many hundreds of thousands of deaths per year worse we used to be.

But that is irrelevant to the question of what the consequences of Volkswagen's actions were. That's like justifying calling a black person a nigger on the basis of that being better than the lynchings that they used to have to put up with.

Post reply on HN