zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. guywit+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-06-27 19:44:00
Although I know this might get met with pushback, I think it's reasonable to argue some of the regulations pushing back against VW were only there because domestic manufacturers didn't want to have to compete. You could argue the emissions scandal wasn't just about money, it had a government corruption component to it as well.
replies(2): >>adolph+Hm >>rainbo+J61
2. adolph+Hm[view] [source] 2023-06-27 21:46:44
>>guywit+(OP)
It may have been somewhat more easy to regulate nitrogen oxide emissions in the US, but it isn't primarily a protectionist move and VW was also cheating in the EU.

Underlying U.S. and EU emission standards

The Volkswagen and Audi cars identified as violators had been certified to meet either the US EPA Tier 2 / Bin 5 emissions standard or the California LEV-II ULEV standard. Either standard requires that nitrogen oxide emissions not exceed 0.043 grams per kilometre (0.07 g/mi) for engines at full useful life which is defined as either 190,000 kilometres (120,000 mi) or 240,000 kilometres (150,000 mi) depending on the vehicle and optional certification choices.

This standard for nitrogen oxide emissions is among the most stringent in the world. For comparison, the contemporary European standards known as Euro 5 (2008 "EU5 compliant", 2009[5]–2014 models) and Euro 6 (2015 models) only limit nitrogen oxide emissions to 0.18 grams per kilometre (0.29 g/mi) and 0.08 grams per kilometre (0.13 g/mi) respectively. Defeat devices are forbidden in the EU. The use of a defeat device is subject to a penalty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal

3. rainbo+J61[view] [source] 2023-06-28 03:38:09
>>guywit+(OP)
This is a pretty great presentation on dieselgate and how it worked.

https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-7904-software_defined_emissions

[go to top]