VW Engineer sentenced to 40-month prison term

[Naguissa]

38,000 people a year die early because of diesel emissions testing failures
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/15/diesel-emissions-test-scandal-causes-38000-early-deaths-year-study

It should be life sentence IMHO. For everyone, who knowingly made profit from this (AKA the big guys). Not just VW. Also for the politicians, who just pushed and pushed, and keep on pushing diesel cars in Europe. Have you seen the stuff, which comes out that so-called turbo diesel when accelerating? How is that better than benzin?


A hybrid has 6mg NOx emission / km. An electric car has 0. They measured the VW Jetta was up to 1500 mg/km. This madness has to stop.

Hey, in 2 years my bmw 320i e36 is banned on my city.

It has no catalyzer, but it's 'homologated' and I can install it if I wish with no extra approvals.

But as it will be banned anyway, I'll not do it.

The case is that as it's a strange combination the car was checked several times for emissions as it was equipped with catalyzer, and passed all tests! A little just, but it passed without trouble.

So, it will be banned (even with catalyzer) but VW TDI models with defeat system will be allowed.


Vodka user said: Alfaques, Tarragona, Spain.

My city: Barcelona, Spain.

We can see a pattern here....

Enviado desde mi Jolla mediante Tapatalk

[joeqsmith]

Mazda's recently-announced "Skyactiv-G Generation 2" looks like a true breakthrough, by the way. Petrol engines with 18:1 compression ratio and compression ignition (most of the time) promising something like 30% improvement in fuel economy.

This is a first in a road car (or will be when it hits the market "before 2020"), but appears to be very similar to what is now in the current generation of Formula 1 cars. For those not following, several years ago F1 changed from 2.4l normally-aspirated V8s to 1.6l V6 turbo hybrids. At the same time they reduced the allowable fuel used in a ~300 km race from 150 kg to 100 kg.

At first the new cars were considerably slower than the old ones, but this year they are starting to set new lap records, even beating the 1995-2005 records set by the monster 3.0l V10s and V12s with unlimited RPM (up to 18000 or 19000) and unlimited fuel use and engines barely lasting for a whole race (now each driver is restricted to four engines for the whole 20 race season).

Mercedes are believed to have been the first to perfect compression ignition in the new engines, with Ferrari finally getting it right this year, and Renault trailing.

So it seems possible that Mercedes might, if they choose to, beat Mazda to market with this technology. In quite a different price range, of course.

I read an article back in the 90s where Honda had converted I believe a CR250 2-stroke dirt bike to homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI).  They brought it to the USA to compete in a cross country desert race.  2-strokes had not competed in many years.   The bike and rider did quite well.   They had a flap valve in the exhaust port to change the CR.  It would start with the plug and then switch over to compression ignition.   I later saw a commercially available 3 cylinder marine engine that used HCCI.   I thought the technology had been in use for some time in Japan but maybe not. 

I have built my own open loop compression ignition engines, purely by mistake.  They never seem to run more than a few seconds. 

[thm_w]

A plug in electric car doesn't have 0 emissions. It just has them in a different place. Unless your electricity comes mostly from nuclear and/or solar/wind. And those have an awful lot of emissions in their construction.

And the diesel just comes out of a tap with no gas powered drills, no plant built or energy required to process it right?
Even if the emissions exist, they are not manufactured in the middle of city centers and do not affect health nearly as much. They would also add similarly in both cases.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/opinion/mondaycop22-lower-co2-emissions-with-lower-carbon-solar-energy/

Similarly, photovoltaic (PV) power plants also have carbon footprints which, on a lifecycle basis can range from 12g per kWh for a facility using First Solar’s thin film modules, to as much as 24 g per kWh – for one using multi-crystalline silicon panels.

leaf = 5.4 Miles / kWh = 8.7km http://insideevs.com/long-term-nissan-leaf-mileageusage-review-once-around-the-sun/
Diesel fuel produces 2.7kg of CO2 per liter, car is lets say 5L/100km or 13.5kg/100km.

So after driving 1km, a solar powered leaf would "produce" ~2g of CO2, while the VW diesel would produce 135g, 68 times more.
Good luck finding data for NO2 produced when making a solar panel or hydro plant, its probably minuscule after amortization.

[nctnico]

A Leaf needs more energy. More like 4.5km/kWh according to real world EPA tests. Besides that you also need to factor in the CO2 during manufacturing. All in all it takes 150000km before an EV breaks even with an economic petrol/diesel where it comes to CO2 emissions. And by then the battery pack in the EV likely needs replacing.

[thm_w]

A Leaf needs more energy. More like 4.5km/kWh according to real world EPA tests. Besides that you also need to factor in the CO2 during manufacturing. All in all it takes 150000km before an EV breaks even with an economic petrol/diesel where it comes to CO2 emissions. And by then the battery pack in the EV likely needs replacing.

That's real world driving data, EPA test is not as relevant, but ok.
Are you also taking into account CO2 to produce a conventional car? Lets just look at the battery, as that is the main difference:

The report shows that the battery manufacturing leads to high emissions. For every kilowatt hour of storage capacity in the battery generated emissions of 150 to 200 kilos of carbon dioxide already in the factory

30kWh = 5,250 kg, or about 40,000 km of diesel driving.

Anyway the leaf battery pack should last more than 10 years where I live (older packs hit 76% capacity after 125,000km). Hotter climates are not appropriate for some cells, and they don't last long there.
Tesla estimates 500,000 km before their pack drops to 80%: https://electrek.co/2016/11/01/tesla-battery-degradation/

[tszaboo]

A Leaf needs more energy. More like 4.5km/kWh according to real world EPA tests. Besides that you also need to factor in the CO2 during manufacturing. All in all it takes 150000km before an EV breaks even with an economic petrol/diesel where it comes to CO2 emissions. And by then the battery pack in the EV likely needs replacing.

Everything what you are saying is bogus without a source.

[nctnico]

A Leaf needs more energy. More like 4.5km/kWh according to real world EPA tests. Besides that you also need to factor in the CO2 during manufacturing. All in all it takes 150000km before an EV breaks even with an economic petrol/diesel where it comes to CO2 emissions. And by then the battery pack in the EV likely needs replacing.

Everything what you are saying is bogus without a source.

You can go to EPA's website and  Google the rest yourself! You've got internet and this has been debated to death already on this forum including links to scientific reports. There is no need to derive every formula before posting it.

[tszaboo]

A Leaf needs more energy. More like 4.5km/kWh according to real world EPA tests. Besides that you also need to factor in the CO2 during manufacturing. All in all it takes 150000km before an EV breaks even with an economic petrol/diesel where it comes to CO2 emissions. And by then the battery pack in the EV likely needs replacing.

Everything what you are saying is bogus without a source.

You can go to EPA's website and  Google the rest yourself! You've got internet and this has been debated to death already on this forum including links to scientific reports. There is no need to derive every formula before posting it.

You mean this myths has been debunked over and over again.

[nctnico]

First hit from Google: EPA data for a Nissan Leaf:

34kWh/160km=212Wh/km

[tszaboo]

http://www.roperld.com/science/graphics/LEAF2013EPA.jpg
 
And you had other 3 claims. Like at 150.000 you need new battery. While it is under warranty for 160.000 Km. Or the made up number for breaking even.

[cdev]

Something similar is going on with health care and profit driven insurers who are eager to cut costs by preventing care and driving away or dumping sick patients. Doctors are being put in the same position as these engineers by what are increasingly "mangled care" companies. Under one popular system, called "capitation" they get paid a fixed fee per patient and make money when their patients are not using care. They cant even discuss tests or treatments the insurer hasn't approved with them in advance.  Another approach is called "risk sharing" the risk refers to the cost of denying care if the strategy backfires.



Quote from: LabSpokane on 2017-08-28, 15:57:39

Executives give verbal "suggestions" to subordinates to break the law. Executives almost invariably have high-priced law firms to pummel the prosecution into subservience.  The whole goal is to wear down the prosecutors and coerce them into picking an easier scapegoat. Enter the engineer.

Engineers document everything. Engineers virtually never have a lawyer much less a top law firm.
So, guess which of the above will go to prison?  By virtue of the nature of the work, engineers are easy targets.

Never break the law on behalf of an executive and their "suggestion."  Just don't do it. Document and protect yourself as a whistleblower. You will likely get fired, but unemployment beats the shit out of a felony conviction and club fed. If you've really been wronged, you can file a whistleblower suit, but do prepared. Such suits are not easy and take a huge toll on everyone involved.

[thm_w]

First hit from Google: EPA data for a Nissan Leaf:
http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/ndzj9601.jpg
34kWh/160km=212Wh/km

Thats 2011 leaf. But I know why the user reported numbers are a off, "Remember that EPA figures measure plug-to-wheels consumption, this means that the internal charger efficiency matters."
http://pushevs.com/2016/11/23/electric-cars-range-efficiency-comparison/
So the user value is a bit lower (10% or so), as the efficiency of the internal charger is ~91% (using 240V outlet). Not sure if EPA used 91% or another value (120V charging is much less efficient).

Of course, good luck taking into account the energy required to transport the gas, power the gas pump and station, etc. as well.

[nctnico]

First hit from Google: EPA data for a Nissan Leaf:
http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/ndzj9601.jpg
34kWh/160km=212Wh/km

Thats 2011 leaf. But I know why the user reported numbers are a off, "Remember that EPA figures measure plug-to-wheels consumption, this means that the internal charger efficiency matters."
http://pushevs.com/2016/11/23/electric-cars-range-efficiency-comparison/
So the user value is a bit lower (10% or so), as the efficiency of the internal charger is ~91% (using 240V outlet). Not sure if EPA used 91% or another value (120V charging is much less efficient).

That really doesn't matter because people are confronted by what they need to pay at the gas station and/or to the power company. If you measure wall-plug or (liquid) volume put into a tank to distance travelled you can compare different cars. If you are going to cherry-pick efficiency numbers then this comparison gets needlessly complicated.

[Refrigerator]

With the recent EU emission standards in the big countries i've noticed a huge influx of older diesel cars in my country.
I'm personally not interested in getting an economic car with low emissions, since my budget doesn't leave me with a choice.
When i was looking for a car my main criteria was for it to not be a diesel, mainly for the tractor-ish sound and secondly for ease of maintenance.
Right now, at least where i live, diesels are absolutely everywhere.

[brucehoult]

With the recent EU emission standards in the big countries i've noticed a huge influx of older diesel cars in my country.
I'm personally not interested in getting an economic car with low emissions, since my budget doesn't leave me with a choice.
When i was looking for a car my main criteria was for it to not be a diesel, mainly for the tractor-ish sound and secondly for ease of maintenance.
Right now, at least where i live, diesels are absolutely everywhere.

I have a perfectly serviceable 1997 2.5l AWD station wagon that uses about 7.8 l/100km on the open road and 9 l/100km in my everyday part city part urban motorway use. I do about the standard 15000 km a year i.e. use about 1300 litres a year, or say NZ$2500 (US$1800).

The current model of the same car costs NZ$50000 (US$35000) and has an urban rating of 9.0 l/100km and extra-urban 6.3 l/100km, 7.3 combined.

Let's say that 7.3 combined is equivalent to my actual every day 9.0. I could save 255 litres a year, or about NZ$500 (US$360)!!!

The payback period on spending $50k to save $0.5k a year is 100 years, even with a zero interest rate. Even if I allow for a new car costing zero in maintenance for a few years, while my old car might cost about $500 every six months, that's still 33 years payback period. With no interest/discount rate.

It just makes no sense at all, as long as I'm enjoying the old car and the expenses of running it stay as they are.

[Specmaster]

Follow the money!
Engineers don't make huge graft campaign contributions to the politicians

The engineer may not have known what the code was doing, he may just have been instructed to install that particular version of code for instance. Just following orders.

Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk