VW Emissions Scandal Thread V2

[logiclee]

If the software can only "manage" the amount of gas going through the EGR and also, to some degree, limit the combustion temperature which reduces the amount of NOX produced, but also effectively limits the HP and torque, then it is understandable that the software fix is not sufficient for either side ie EPA or VW as it will leave both parties deficient of the minimum requirement of air quality and/or drive-ability.  For NOX control it appears technically necessary to have sufficient post combustion treatment of the exhaust gases, via SCR and any other treatment methods to dis-associate the Nitrogen away for the Oxygen atoms again.  

 

This leaves either retro-fitting SCR or pulling the affect diesel cars off the road via a buy back or swap system which is what I hope happens for the US and hopefully here in the UK too to improve air quality in those polluted areas like West London, Heathrow etc where I often work.  Hopefully Zac Goldsmith or Sadiq Khan will stick to their promises to extend the ULEZ quickly to cover most the area within the M25 or adopt alternate evens and odd registration days, or use electric or hybrid, or a similar effective scheme.

 

Question remains is VW the main offender in scrimping on the exhaust gas emission systems to save a few tens of Euros/pounds or are other big diesel sellers ie BMW, Ford, GM, Nissan-Renault, PSA, Toyota equally guilty and just have not been exposed yet.  A software fix limiting such cars to a cylinder temperature limit at which NOX is little produced unless vehicle fitted with SCR or like seems the only answer for those vehicles wishing to enter urban areas during pollution sensitive times which, as we know with London's number plate recognition systems can be implemented.  Going to be an interesting London mayoral election issue but for the safe of the tens of thousand of Heathrow job connected to the third runway and for the sake of the UK economy I hope they can sort out PDQ. 

 

 

For Europe you can't impose different restrictions on VW to other manufacturers. That means the cheat engines have to comply with Euro5. And as we know from independent and German Government tests Euro 5 engines from GM and PSA emit many more time the official Euro 5 limit on the Road, in fact they emit more NOx on the road than VW cheat engines.

 

Unfortunately we wont get any real change to on road figures until 2017 and that has still to be finalised.

 

Lee

[vrskeith]

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/volkswagen-emissions-scandal-technical-fixes-rejected-california

Fix rejected!?

No compensation in UK.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/vw-emissions-scandal-uk-boss-says-owners-wont-get-compensation

Edited 13 January, 2016 by vrskeith

[Ryeman]

VW failed to explain the effects the fix would have on the emission control equipment........I guess the EGR valve for one is relieved that the EPA and CARB care.

[Ootohere]

I have just been reading on Reuters that VW are not going to be paying out any compensation in the UK.

No changes, no losses, so no need.

I expect that will be decided by others possibly in a court when tests have been done independently.

 

......................

&

http://bbc.co.uk/news/business-35302516

 

EDIT,

DOH, sorry i missed post #402

Edited 13 January, 2016 by GoneOffskiroottoot

[VAGCF]

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/volkswagen-emissions-scandal-technical-fixes-rejected-california

Fix rejected!?

No compensation in UK.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/vw-emissions-scandal-uk-boss-says-owners-wont-get-compensation

Mmm, reading those articles doesn't do any favours for VW as they seem to be trying to duck the situation now by smoke and mirrors and legal gymnastics.

 

First one says that there won't be compensation in the UK as there is an agreement and a solution. Really?

 

Second one disproves that as the "solution is just around the corner".

 

And have the authorities approved the "fixes"?

 

Makes me laugh when they talk about goodwill gestures as they make out it is their choice and they are doing the customers a favour!

 

As regards compensation in the UK why do they think it's their decision whether customers get it or not! Like you say GoneOff.... that's for the courts to decide, it's not their choice!

 

I can understand VW's legal challenge to the cheat device in Europe (to save the expense of fixes and possible compensation) but they will be walking a tightrope as regards repairing their tarnished image etc.

[Ryeman]

There seems to be a consistency when confronting 'foreign' companies as opposed to domestic ones.....and it doesn't help that it's an election year.

Remember how the 'gulf spill' was seemingly ALL down to bp (sorry "BRITISH" petroleum) as opposed to the American sub-contractor Halliburton who did a shoddy job and were significant contributors to the disaster.

[punyXpress]

Regarding compensation, aren't VAG referring to car tax, on which they've done a deal with the government.

Muddying the waters as ever!

[Ootohere]

It looks like they are saying or having the Transport Minister believing that there is no drop in residuals so loss of value to Owners.

 

Well given as how many Volkswagen Group vehicles were already depreciation disasters, that might well be true.

Also seeing as how many of the affected cars are on Lease Schemes and Financial Institutions or VW Finance actually own them, 

then VW know if the values have actually dropped.

(Some small and large petrol VWG vehicles getting traded in as they are going out of or are out of warranty have lost lots of money and are not part of the scandal, they just lose lots of money, thats what happens.)

 

Private owners that are selling or trading in might have no extra losses if trading in at a Volkswagen Group Main Dealership

and lose money anyway when needing to go to other manufacturers.

[stevie.d]

Renault has been supposedly raided by police in relation to engine emissions so looks like its spreading now

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35309674

 

Excuse the post....hadn't seen Goneoffskiroottoot's post on the same thing :p

Edited 14 January, 2016 by stevie.d

[Kandy]

 

Only ~60% NO2 comes from ground based transport and only ~25% of that is from private cars, so private cars only contribute about 15% overall.

 

So ban all private diesel cars overnight, and it would make SFA difference.

 

If anybody thinks this is about private car emissions or cheating on limits, there are far bigger games afoot, and this whole 'scandal' is just part of the strategy.

[vrskeith]

Renault has been supposedly raided by police in relation to engine emissions so looks like its spreading now

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35309674

Excuse the post....hadn't seen Goneoffskiroottoot's post on the same thing :p

Yep some report in Autocar attached.

url="http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/volkswagen-emissions-scandal-renault-factories-raided-police"]http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/volkswagen-emissions-scandal-renault-factories-raided-police[/url]

Edited 14 January, 2016 by vrskeith

[Ryeman]

Only ~60% NO2 comes from ground based transport and only ~25% of that is from private cars, so private cars only contribute about 15% overall.

So ban all private diesel cars overnight, and it would make SFA difference.

If anybody thinks this is about private car emissions or cheating on limits, there are far bigger games afoot, and this whole 'scandal' is just part of the strategy.

Spare me!

ONLY 60%!

ONLY 15%!

What if the 15% is overwhelmingly concentrated in congested urban areas with (for some) deadly consequences resulting.

Is playing with our toys a higher priority the the health of the public at large?.

Edited 14 January, 2016 by Ryeman

[lol-lol]

Only ~60% NO2 comes from ground based transport and only ~25% of that is from private cars, so private cars only contribute about 15% overall.   So ban all private diesel cars overnight, and it would make SFA difference. If anybody thinks this is about private car emissions or cheating on limits, there are far bigger games afoot, and this whole 'scandal' is just part of the strategy.

 

The plans of Zac Goldsmith and all big city majors and mayoral candidates, for the sake of the city dwellers/workers is to enforce that only diesels fitted with SCR may enter and all public transport and freight delivery vehicles, are all hybrid or gas powered or petrol (as VW has finally introduced the petrol Transporter range in the UK, about time).  This should be able to reduce the key NOX gases by about 90% from vehicles which will effectively half the overall NOX concentration in the big cities alone. 

 

Birmingham, Bristol, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds, London, Manchester and Sheffield are large enough and therefore polluted enough to need such measures as well as Athens, Barcelona and any of the worldwide cities over the half a million people mark.  In some cities my company are already hybrid and we can see the way ahead and it does not include non-modified (non-SCR /  Ad Blu) light diesels in urban areas for the sake of the tens of thousands of premature deaths here in the UK and other industrial countries. 

Edited 15 January, 2016 by lol-lol

[warley]

There seems to be a consistency when confronting 'foreign' companies as opposed to domestic ones.....and it doesn't help that it's an election year.

Remember how the 'gulf spill' was seemingly ALL down to bp (sorry "BRITISH" petroleum) as opposed to the American sub-contractor Halliburton who did a shoddy job and were significant contributors to the disaster.

As a BP shareholder I remember only too well !  Contributors? It was Halliburton's Blow Out Preventer that blew out!

[Ryeman]

As a BP shareholder I remember only too well !  Contributors? It was Halliburton's Blow Out Preventer that blew out!

.....and **** Cheney was ex CEO .....one of the 'good 'ol boys'.

Must protect the good(?) name of Halliburton at all costs

[Ryeman]

The WHO have put out a disturbing report re urban pollution and makes special mention of the Heathrow expansion.

So many polluting elements - make you wonder if we might get 50s type fogs again which all that airborne nuclei......not to mention other bad outcomes.

[lol-lol]

The WHO have put out a disturbing report re urban pollution and makes special mention of the Heathrow expansion.

So many polluting elements - make you wonder if we might get 50s type fogs again which all that airborne nuclei......not to mention other bad outcomes.

 

Working at Heathrow freight handling centre for much of my working month/year I do really want to see the air quality improved but I also want to see the Third runway built as soon as possible to get in the competitive advantage, against other EU airports, so the UK remains one of the top European export place to help UK industry compete.   

 

We can vastly reduce air pollution around Heathrow and in London by simply widening the Ultra Low Emission Zone to include all the area within the M25.  No diesels without SCR fitted or using electric or hybrid (gas or petrol) vehicles.  The third runway will allow the use of more of the larger aircraft, such as the A380 and 787 (and less of the inefficient turbo-jets), which will actually reduce the carbon emission per kilo of cargo or passenger by over 10% 

 

Boris and Zac (and Sadiq) reject the 3rd runway but LHR is the only site unless we engineer a super linked network between other good airports like Birmingham, Cardiff, East Midlands and Gatwick but I cannot see that happening just too big a plan for what has proven to be the relatively small minded thinking of the UK in the past couple of decades.    

Edited 17 January, 2016 by lol-lol

[Ryeman]

Do London busses run CNG or are they ALL still diesel?.

[logiclee]

.   .  No diesels without SCR fitted or using electric or hybrid (gas or petrol) vehicles.   

 

 

The trouble with current SCR technology in Europe is that it is designed to Pass Euro 6 Lab tests and that's it.

 

The independent and various Governmental on the road tests have proven that the vast majority of Euro 6 diesels equipped with SCR still emit 6 to 8 times the legal limit of NOX. 

 

PSA, GM and Ford have already said that current European SCR systems will not pass the 2017 Real World tests.

 

The whole ULEZ zone figures were based on Euro6 cars being limited to 0.08g/km NOx but we now know out on the road they are on average 7 times that level. (ICCT independent tests)

 

Best we can hope for is the 2017 test are not watered down.

 

Lee

[Breezy_Pete]

Easy to imagine that aircraft taking off must emit a veritable shedload of NOx.

 

(Edit) And if you zoom right in on lol-lol's NO₂ pollution map in post 399, you can see the eastern (start of take-off) end of the runways are disproportionately red/bad, compared to the overall yellow area of the airport land, I've just noticed. Almost like the NOx equivalent of burning rubber off the start line.

Edited 17 January, 2016 by Wino

[Ryeman]

Easy to imagine that aircraft taking off must emit a veritable shedload of NOx.

Certainly not on a per capita basis though compared to driving.

[mjh69]

Personally. Im not bothered about all the emissions stuff. I love my car and dont want it messed up cos of it all. And cos a manufacturer has lied

Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk

[lol-lol]

Personally. Im not bothered about all the emissions stuff. I love my car and dont want it messed up cos of it all. And cos a manufacturer has lied

Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk

 

It is the recognition that NOX and PM pollution, mainly from light diesel is causing approx 10,000 premature deaths per year in the London area and about 30,000 premature deaths throughout the UK that is the motivation to do something about the issue.  Governments and car manufacturers are increasingly legislating and engineering so that vehicles driven by and travel within, particularly in large urban areas, have low emissions of NOX and PMs, a change from the previous concentration on such factors as lead in fuel and CO2 but that is how the science has developed.

 

Individuals will have to adhere to these urban restrictions or face fines and probably eventual seizing of non compliant vehicles.  There will be some exemptions for classic vehicles are their will be for military vehicles also but from my time in Department of Transport and the currently the logistics industry this is how it will go.   The pace of change and the way the UK government and manufacturers will deal with will depend on political pressure but the result is quite certain based on the science, no diesels, without very substantial exhaust gas processing of the NOX and PMs, in urban areas and this looks like to be the case within 4 years in many major cities.

Edited 17 January, 2016 by lol-lol

[Breezy_Pete]

Certainly not on a per capita basis though compared to driving.

I dunno, it would be interesting to see some numbers.  Planes full of people or cargo, with no exhaust after-treatment at all (?), and super-super high combustion temps for good efficiency, full throttle down the runway, and for the next few minutes while ascending. Planes taking off in close succession what,  18? hours a day... prevailing SW winds blowing the results straight towards central London what, 15? miles away?  People/cargo generally not flying to places they could drive to, so hard to make a useful comparison in terms of passenger miles. Especially as the NOx produced is so locally relevant, rather than per passenger mile for the overall journey.

 

My gut feeling is that likely makes a big difference to central London air quality, even without expansion / more runways. 

[lol-lol]

I dunno, it would be interesting to see some numbers.  Planes full of people or cargo, with no exhaust after-treatment at all (?), and super-super high combustion temps for good efficiency, full throttle down the runway, and for the next few minutes while ascending. Planes taking off in close succession what,  18? hours a day... prevailing SW winds blowing the results straight towards central London what, 15? miles away?  People/cargo generally not flying to places they could drive to, so hard to make a useful comparison in terms of passenger miles. Especially as the NOx produced is so locally relevant, rather than per passenger mile for the overall journey.

My gut feeling is that likely makes a big difference to central London air quality, even without expansion / more runways. 

 

We actually carry most of cargo on passenger planes ie about 60%, there is relatively few pure cargo planes hence the cancellation of the A380F.

Journeys of less than 1000 kms are usually best by rail if possible, or road, river, sea or canal/river (in Europe) if not so time sensitive for emissions.  From the reports of Heathrow air pollution I recall that it is the road vehicles taking cargo and passengers to the terminals that is the major pollution contributor to the air quality in the area and changing to hybrid buses, freight vehicles and taxis.  I sometimes ride the motorbike to the freight shed as traffic is so bad a peak time or take my little engined (900cc) Dacia which I think has a NOX rating of one eighth of the limit (be interesting to see when TCE engines are on-road tested).   

Edited 17 January, 2016 by lol-lol