How important was "green/clean" when you bought your TDI CR?

Ur2warped said:

Have you guys seen this article. I felt mpg and HP were great with emissions as a bonus. But I think this brings it home and why VW is in big trouble.
http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-ap-analysis-vw-evasion-likely-led-to-dozens-of-deaths-2015-10

Click to expand...

I think this brings home why someone was able to put dinner on the table by writing a BS article.

Did not care one single bit about the emissions, wanted a car that got un-matchable fuel mileage, and power to boot. Still don't care, sold my CR tdi 2 years ago and back in an ALH now, but I will be back in a CR in the near future, none of this phases me one bit.

roflwaffle said:

CO2 on the other hand is a global pollutant b/c is affects the earth's IR albedo, and that can change the climate negatively for anyone.

...on our current path, the economic costs of climate change are going to be substantial, and minimizing those costs is going to take more than just driving a TDI. To avoid those costs, emissions probably need to drop to ~1-2 tons of CO2/person in the US

Click to expand...

Driving a TDI does this. People that drive fuel efficient cars (TDI's, Prius's, etc.) are already doing their part for the environment.

By your calculation, dropping 1-2 tons of CO2/person is as easy to achieve as making the choice to drive a more fuel efficient vehicle. Here's a comparison for a JSW TDI with the typical SUV - in this case a Ford Explorer with a V6:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=31592&id=31909

By making choices like this, people save 2 tons of CO2 per year without breaking a sweat AND pocket $600 per year in fuel savings while doing it.

Big Poppa Pump said:

I think this brings home why someone was able to put dinner on the table by writing a BS article.

Click to expand...

Wonder if that AP analysis took the far-below regulated limits of HC, CO, and PM as measured in the ICCT studies into account?

I grew up on a farm and operated a lot of diesel machinery, so I'm pretty used to the smell of diesel exhaust. I always used to get a kick out of the truckers who had the "Diesel smoke makes me horny" bumper stickers. When I bought the TDI, I was really focused on the efiiciency and overall driving experience, but these cars were marketed hard based upon being "clean diesel". I was amazed at the lack of any typical diesel exhaust order when I got the car and there still isn't much in the way of soot around the tail pipe. So in that regard, these cars are engineering marvels, IMHO. However, I wasn't really clued into the NOx aspect of emissions. As a physician who treats patients with asthma, the fact that these cars do, in fact, produce significantly more NOx than advertised is a definite source of concern for me. So, in my particular case, I'll say that "clean" emissions was and still is an important issue for me. These cars are great for those long highway hauls, but if you can do about as well in terms of mpg with gas engines these days without all the NOx, then the 2L CRs don't make as much sense. Hopefully, they'll come up with a tenable solution, since I really like the performance aspects of the TDIs.

Big Poppa Pump said:

I think this brings home why someone was able to put dinner on the table by writing a BS article.

Click to expand...

Yeah, by this logic, we should shut down the economy because of commercial truck and agricultural emissions.

RebelTDI said:

I grew up on a farm and operated a lot of diesel machinery, so I'm pretty used to the smell of diesel exhaust. I always used to get a kick out of the truckers who had the "Diesel smoke makes me horny" bumper stickers. When I bought the TDI, I was really focused on the efiiciency and overall driving experience, but these cars were marketed hard based upon being "clean diesel". I was amazed at the lack of any typical diesel exhaust order when I got the car and there still isn't much in the way of soot around the tail pipe. So in that regard, these cars are engineering marvels, IMHO. However, I wasn't really clued into the NOx aspect of emissions. As a physician who treats patients with asthma, the fact that these cars do, in fact, produce significantly more NOx than advertised is a definite source of concern for me. So, in my particular case, I'll say that "clean" emissions was and still is an important issue for me. These cars are great for those long highway hauls, but if you can do about as well in terms of mpg with gas engines these days without all the NOx, then the 2L CRs don't make as much sense. Hopefully, they'll come up with a tenable solution, since I really like the performance aspects of the TDIs.

Click to expand...

As a physician, can you opine on a landmark study, ACES, which showed that laboratory rats exposed to concentrated diesel exhaust experienced only minor lung tissue inflammation at extremely high concentration of NO2 (4200 ppb or 42 times the 1-hours NAAQS) and no significant mortality difference to those rats exposed to only HEPA-filtered room air? The rats were exposed to diesel exhaust for 80 hours per week through the normal lifespan of the rats.

I've seen comments that "humans aren't rats", but lab rats have been used for human surrogates for inhalation studies since I've been involved in air quality (e.g., LD50 levels of chemicals).

RebelTDI said:

I grew up on a farm and operated a lot of diesel machinery, so I'm pretty used to the smell of diesel exhaust. I always used to get a kick out of the truckers who had the "Diesel smoke makes me horny" bumper stickers. When I bought the TDI, I was really focused on the efiiciency and overall driving experience, but these cars were marketed hard based upon being "clean diesel". I was amazed at the lack of any typical diesel exhaust order when I got the car and there still isn't much in the way of soot around the tail pipe. So in that regard, these cars are engineering marvels, IMHO. However, I wasn't really clued into the NOx aspect of emissions. As a physician who treats patients with asthma, the fact that these cars do, in fact, produce significantly more NOx than advertised is a definite source of concern for me. So, in my particular case, I'll say that "clean" emissions was and still is an important issue for me. These cars are great for those long highway hauls, but if you can do about as well in terms of mpg with gas engines these days without all the NOx, then the 2L CRs don't make as much sense. Hopefully, they'll come up with a tenable solution, since I really like the performance aspects of the TDIs.

Click to expand...

If the government was really worried about the levels of NOx emissions they would have fined all the GDI engines. They emit higher levels of NOx then the new TDIs
Where is the up roar about this?
Oh they also emit particulate matter too

I wonder how many lives were loss because of them as well

Oilerlord said:

Driving a TDI does this. People that drive fuel efficient cars (TDI's, Prius's, etc.) are already doing their part for the environment.

By your calculation, dropping 1-2 tons of CO2/person is as easy to achieve as making the choice to drive a more fuel efficient vehicle. Here's a comparison for a JSW TDI with the typical SUV - in this case a Ford Explorer with a V6:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=31592&id=31909

By making choices like this, people save 2 tons of CO2 per year without breaking a sweat AND pocket $600 per year in fuel savings while doing it.

Click to expand...

From what I've gathered, per capita emissions need to be at ~1-2 tons per person per year.

Someone can still drive a TDI, hybrid, or even conventional car at those emissions levels, but they'll need to drive less and/or use fuel with a lower Carbon footprint.

A 1-2 ton reduction is good, but in the long run we need to be far away from the current average of ~25 tons per person per year.

Didn't mean that much & I consider myself an environmentalist. Wanted the power & mileage. Even asked the saleswoman where the adblue was inserted & was told it wasn't needed. What did I know - still bought the car

wxman said:

As a physician, can you opine on a landmark study, ACES, which showed that laboratory rats exposed to concentrated diesel exhaust experienced only minor lung tissue inflammation at extremely high concentration of NO2 (4200 ppb or 42 times the 1-hours NAAQS) and no significant mortality difference to those rats exposed to only HEPA-filtered room air? The rats were exposed to diesel exhaust for 80 hours per week through the normal lifespan of the rats.
I've seen comments that "humans aren't rats", but lab rats have been used for human surrogates for inhalation studies since I've been involved in air quality (e.g., LD50 levels of chemicals).

Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you can always compare LD50 testing to carcinogen testing in this case. Maybe you can, maybe there's some confound and the testing needs to be done on some other mammal for longer.

The one thing that stuck out to me is that the test didn't look at what diesel exhaust would do if it isn't in a vacuum. NOx in and of itself may not be carcinogenic, but it's a precursor for photo-chemical smog, some of which is considered carcinogenic.

My 09 Jetta CR was the 4th of 5 TDIs I have purchased. My work entails lots of long distance driving, so fuel mileage was of primary concern. Performance and handling was next. Durability of the diesel engine is a given. That I don't have that smudge of soot on my rear bumper above the tailpipe is a bonus. When the DPF goes, I plan on doing a delete. The 5th is a 3.0 V 6, so no worries there, except for the typical DEF issues. I still drive my Y2k Bug around when I'm home. 387k miles and counting. I love the smell of diesel.

To be sure the use of rodent models and how well they translate to humans is complex. Some animal models provide a great deal of insights, other are limited at best. When it comes to looking at toxicities in rats, they have different metabolisms than humans and can survive in deplorable conditions. There are plenty of epidimiological studies that show worse respiratory disease in populations living close to highways. These tend to be lower socioeconomic groups. Diesel exhaust has been shown to be the major pollutant, but this is from the big rigs. It's a complex cocktail of particulate matter, NOx, CO, etc. In comparison, the CRs are far cleaner, but not as advertised. I'm not losing sleep over this, but it's something I can't condone. We're still waiting for the solution, but we've all lost a significant amount of value in our cars.

Thank you for your reply. Appreciate your expertise in this area.

Remember however that the ICCT studies which showed high NOx emissions from VW TDI vehicles in "real world" conditions also showed emissions of all other regulated emissions were far below regulated levels in those same conditions.

The ACES Phase 2 study demonstrated that modern diesels have virtually eliminated over 300 unregulated emissions, so if/when NOx is effectively controlled, emissions from diesels will really be trivial.

It's true that secondary air pollutants can form from precursor emissions like NOx, but there are a myriad of sources of these precursor emissions, including HC emissions from gasoline cars and evaporative emissions from gasoline itself.

NOx can create ozone and particulate nitrate secondarily, but the production of both is quite non-linear.

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/deer_2005/session2/2005_deer_lawson.pdf

I remain hopeful that diesel technology will continue to advance and these emissions issues will be overcome. I've become a fan of the efficiency and driving characteristics of diesels, otherwise.

Not important to me in the least. I bought my Golfwagon for its comfort, reliability, fun to drive and Diesel efficiency.

Quick7 said:

Not important to me in the least. I bought my Golfwagon for its comfort, reliability, fun to drive and Diesel efficiency.

Click to expand...

All excellent attributes.

Lately driving in the right lane doing 50 mpgs feels pretty darn good.

Despite anything else and all the negative hype we can say we get 50 mpgs (if we drive slow).

Those ALH diesels are becoming legendary.

roflwaffle said:

From what I've gathered, per capita emissions need to be at ~1-2 tons per person per year...we need to be far away from the current average of ~25 tons per person per year.

Click to expand...

So let's assume that because I'm driving a car that gets 40MPG (that produces 5 tons of CO2 annually), my personal average is 23 tons - a little under the national per capita average of 25. You're saying that even if i crushed my TDI - and never drove another vehicle (of any kind) for the rest of my life, I'd still need to find a way to get my personal average from 18 tons to under 2. If that's the case, then civilization as we know it is doomed...

That is, unless we immediately stop the sale and distribution of gasoline, diesel, and natural gas, convert all power plants to nuclear, wind, solar, or geothermal generated power, install solar panels on every home, ride bicycles or electric buses to work, never buy plastic, clothing, or any other durable or consumable goods that require oil or other fossil fuels in the manufacturing process (essentially everything), and mandate that everyone switches to a vegan diet.

Good luck with that, and keep fighting the good fight.

If anyone was worried about what emission their car emits
Just plant some trees and call it a day and enjoy the drive

minis2003 said:

If anyone was worried about what emission their car emits
Just plant some trees and call it a day and enjoy the drive

Click to expand...

No doubt that's satire... but numbers are fun

A tree sequesters ~13lbs CO2/yr. @50 mpg that's ~0.4lbs/mi. So you can drive ~32 miles per year per tree planted.

Solar PV might be a bit easier since a single 40lb 41" x 61" solar module displaces >600lbs CO2/yr. So that's 40 trees or 1 solar panel... hmmm.

Just say'n

nwdiver said:

No doubt that's satire... but numbers are fun
A tree sequesters ~13lbs CO2/yr. @50 mpg that's ~0.4lbs/mi. So you can drive ~32 miles per year per tree planted.
Solar PV might be a bit easier since a single 40lb 41" x 61" solar module displaces >600lbs CO2/yr. So that's 40 trees or 1 solar panel... hmmm.
Just say'n

Click to expand...

You could also pay somebody else to offset your emissions. That is often more efficient, and in fact is what the emissions exchanges in many countries are based on. In the US, the price for one ton of NOx (the stuff that all this brouhaha is about, if anybody still remembers) has ranged between $130 to $300 lately. That one ton will last you one million miles if you drive one of those cheater TDIs. So, VW should buy each and everyone of us major TDI polluters $300 worth of NOx credit, and we can put all these threads to rest. Sounds like a good deal to me.

Diesl said:

You could also pay somebody else to offset your emissions. That is often more efficient, and in fact is what the emissions exchanges in many countries are based on. In the US, the price for one ton of NOx (the stuff that all this brouhaha is about, if anybody still remembers) has ranged between $130 to $300 lately. That one ton will last you one million miles if you drive one of those cheater TDIs. So, VW should buy each and everyone of us major TDI polluters $300 worth of NOx credit, and we can put all these threads to rest. Sounds like a good deal to me.

Click to expand...

That price is for power plants... which tend to not be located inside cities... in the rare case that they are they never discharge that NOx at ground level on main street.

As has been mentioned the half-life of NO2 is ~1 month... it decays into air rather rapidly. The effects of NO2 emitted 40 miles outside a city 300' in the air is a rounding error compared to the effects of NO2 emitted by cars inside the city.

With regards to NO2... it's all about location, concentration, location.

nwdiver said:

That price is for power plants... which tend to not be located inside cities... in the rare case that they are they never discharge that NOx at ground level on main street.
As has been mentioned the half-life of NO2 is ~1 month... it decays into air rather rapidly. The effects of NO2 emitted 40 miles outside a city 300' in the air is a rounding error compared to the effects of NO2 emitted by cars inside the city.
With regards to NO2... it's all about location, concentration, location.

Click to expand...

How far does the wind blow in one month, you think?

Mean wind speeds in the US seem to be in the 4 to 10 m/s range:
A day has 86,400 seconds - which gives air movements between 200 and 500 miles per day.

Diesl said:

You could also pay somebody else to offset your emissions. That is often more efficient, and in fact is what the emissions exchanges in many countries are based on. In the US, the price for one ton of NOx (the stuff that all this brouhaha is about, if anybody still remembers) has ranged between $130 to $300 lately. That one ton will last you one million miles if you drive one of those cheater TDIs. So, VW should buy each and everyone of us major TDI polluters $300 worth of NOx credit, and we can put all these threads to rest. Sounds like a good deal to me.

Click to expand...

That's the shell game that keeps Tesla in business. They earned $150M last year by selling ZEV credits to other automakers.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-tesla-paradox-1423786534

However, even with ZEV subsidies on the books, the company isn't expecting to make a profit until 2020:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-china-sales-declined-significantly-ceo-says-1421186754

The irony is that Tesla NEEDS vehicles like the F-150 and full-size gas-guzzling SUV's on the road in order to keep collecting those credits.

I think you've suggested a reasonable solution that would help VW comply with the EPA, but if VW writes a cheque to Tesla for additional ZEV credits; how does that actually make our air cleaner?

That's the trouble I have with the EPA...they seem to be all about revenue, and not about protecting the environment.

Bloomberg VW article

As I have read enough New York Times and Wall Street Journal articles I figured I would read this Bloomberg article:


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ld-volkswagen-s-top-engineers-not-have-known-


Very detailed article of the situation. Many reasons I bought my a Jetta TDI are in the article. It is a must read and very well written with many details.

It was all about emissions

I bought the TDI Jetta Sportwagen for 4 reasons... #1 was clean diesel, low emissions. Being asthmatic my whole life, I'm very concerned about pollution and it's effect on breathing, increased childhood asthma in cities etc. #2 was to reduce the amount of fuel I used, save on fossil fuels etc. Better mpg's meant less use of fuel. #3 was to keep this vehicle for 250k or more miles, and hope by then, some new clean hybrid tech had evolved enough for me to want to buy. and #4, it was fast and fun to drive !

Well #1 was a deliberate lie...#2 is true now, but if they reflash the software, I may get gas mpg's, at diesel prices. #3, that's a joke, I will dump this as soon as it's all resolved. Same for #4, I hear the performance may suffer with a software fix. So 0 for 4 !!

I am so mad at VW. and for those that say what's the big deal, it's not like people are dying like in airbag recalls etc I say this: that was a design flaw, mistake, sad for those impacted by it, but a mistake. VW's cheat was intentional! Designed to deceive the people of the world to sell more cars and make more money !! All for the mighty dollar. Who care what impact it has on the world. And to those of you who say what's the big deal, it's only a few cars, there are more diesel trucks on the road I say this: every little bit helps. You have to start somewhere to clean up the air.

Hef said:

Being asthmatic my whole life, I'm very concerned about pollution and it's effect on breathing, increased childhood asthma in cities etc. I will dump this as soon as it's all resolved.

Click to expand...

Dump the car...that actually means selling or trading in the VW and then buying another vehicle; is that correct? Putting the emotions aside for a moment, If you buy a new car...all you've done is added an another car to the pollution problem. In that scenario, there are now two cars polluting the environment instead of only one.

If you're very concerned, choose to become part of the solution, and take steps to offset your own carbon footprint. Install solar PV on your roof, plant some trees, drive the VW until it you sell it for scrap, then buy an EV or ride a bike.

Jeta Life said:

As I have read enough New York Times and Wall Street Journal articles I figured I would read this Bloomberg article:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ld-volkswagen-s-top-engineers-not-have-known-
Very detailed article of the situation. Many reasons I bought my a Jetta TDI are in the article. It is a must read and very well written with many details.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link.

Even more appalling (from the video) is data showing that VW factories are apparently larger contributors to CO2 than Toyota or GM. This from a company that marketed itself as a champion of the environment.

Hef said:

I bought the TDI Jetta Sportwagen for 4 reasons... #1 was clean diesel, low emissions. Being asthmatic my whole life, I'm very concerned about pollution and it's effect on breathing, increased childhood asthma in cities etc. #2 was to reduce the amount of fuel I used, save on fossil fuels etc. Better mpg's meant less use of fuel. #3 was to keep this vehicle for 250k or more miles, and hope by then, some new clean hybrid tech had evolved enough for me to want to buy. and #4, it was fast and fun to drive !

Well #1 was a deliberate lie...#2 is true now, but if they reflash the software, I may get gas mpg's, at diesel prices. #3, that's a joke, I will dump this as soon as it's all resolved. Same for #4, I hear the performance may suffer with a software fix. So 0 for 4 !!

Click to expand...

#1: the emissions will be corrected, and your TDI will emit allowable NOx emissions and continue to be well below the limits for hydrocarbons and particulate matter.

#2: retrofitting SCR, which many of us believe will happen, will not negatively impact fuel economy.

#3: I see no reason not to keep the vehicle once this is corrected, unless you want to trade up to a hybrid or electric sooner than you planned. The new Chevy Volt is looking very attractive.

#4: retrofitting SCR will not negatively impact performance or fun factor.

Rather than letting internet hype and misinformation get you all worked up, do some research and make informed decisions.

Oilerlord said:

So let's assume that because I'm driving a car that gets 40MPG (that produces 5 tons of CO2 annually), my personal average is 23 tons - a little under the national per capita average of 25. You're saying that even if i crushed my TDI - and never drove another vehicle (of any kind) for the rest of my life, I'd still need to find a way to get my personal average from 18 tons to under 2. If that's the case, then civilization as we know it is doomed...

That is, unless we immediately stop the sale and distribution of gasoline, diesel, and natural gas, convert all power plants to nuclear, wind, solar, or geothermal generated power, install solar panels on every home, ride bicycles or electric buses to work, never buy plastic, clothing, or any other durable or consumable goods that require oil or other fossil fuels in the manufacturing process (essentially everything), and mandate that everyone switches to a vegan diet.

Good luck with that, and keep fighting the good fight.

Click to expand...

nwdiver said:

No doubt that's satire... but numbers are fun

A tree sequesters ~13lbs CO2/yr. @50 mpg that's ~0.4lbs/mi. So you can drive ~32 miles per year per tree planted.

Solar PV might be a bit easier since a single 40lb 41" x 61" solar module displaces >600lbs CO2/yr. So that's 40 trees or 1 solar panel... hmmm.

Just say'n

Click to expand...

Oilerlord, if nwdiver's numbers are correct, the solar panels on your house are reducing CO2 by 12.5 tons if they're at full output. Given your location, you're probably a bit under that, but still well on your way. Expand beyond the individual residential level into commercial and industrial, and the reductions are even greater.