More just like being A-holes. Ridiculous out of control agency."Specifically, Vehicle #0002 tested at EPA had one FTP test result of 0.191 grams NOx+NMHC per mile which exceeds the 0.190 Maximum Emission Limit. Similarly, vehicle #28 tested at CARB had FTP emissions results of 0.219 and 0.247 grams NOx+NMHC per mile. Settling Defendants provided a third vehicle to CARB (#33) for testing. Vehicle #33 had an initial passing result but in its second FTP 75 test
had a result of 0.195 grams NOx+NMHC per mile. "
It looks like each fixed vehicle needs to pass each every single testing, not even being allowed a mere 0.5% miss. Pretty strict. EPA/CARB is doing its job.
CARB does nothing more than enforce California Laws as enacted by the legislature. CARB acts within the full authority of California law.More just like being A-holes. Ridiculous out of control agency.
Remind me again how it is CARB/EPA's fault that VW broke the law?More just like being A-holes. Ridiculous out of control agency.
I couldn't have said it betterSet ridiculous laws, expect them to get broken. New 10MPG ford raptor, legal 50 mpg TDI not legal.
If they would just pull back on the NOx requirement, we could get much more clean burning efficient diesels. They did it because they knew it would cause diesels to be pushed off the road.
What about gassers and their ultra-fine PM, EPA, CARB just sticks their head in the sand and pretends it does not exist.
I am all for clean air but it needs to be done scientifically, not with agendas and paid off scientists to come up with bunk conclusions.
Let me guess- your favorite Stones song is Sympathy for the Devil.More just like being A-holes. Ridiculous out of control agency.
Set ridiculous laws, expect them to get broken. New 10MPG ford raptor, legal 50 mpg TDI not legal.
If they would just pull back on the NOx requirement, we could get much more clean burning efficient diesels. They did it because they knew it would cause diesels to be pushed off the road.
What about gassers and their ultra-fine PM, EPA, CARB just sticks their head in the sand and pretends it does not exist.
I am all for clean air but it needs to be done scientifically, not with agendas and paid off scientists to come up with bunk conclusions.
"Clean burning" but producing huge amounts of NOx?Set ridiculous laws, expect them to get broken. New 10MPG ford raptor, legal 50 mpg TDI not legal.
If they would just pull back on the NOx requirement, we could get much more clean burning efficient diesels. They did it because they knew it would cause diesels to be pushed off the road.
What about gassers and their ultra-fine PM, EPA, CARB just sticks their head in the sand and pretends it does not exist.
I am all for clean air but it needs to be done scientifically, not with agendas and paid off scientists to come up with bunk conclusions.
WRONGIf you want to get up in arms about anything, it should be large truck diesel emissions, which are virtually unchecked.
Since you appeared to be technical, let me ask you a question. In terms of emmission compliance/being brought into compliance, What's the difference between 3.0L gen 2 and 3.0L gen1 TDIs or the Ram 1500 3.0L diesels?WRONG
Heavy trucks and buses all have DPF and SCR nowadays.
By the way, the Passat in question also has SCR, but it's an added-on system as opposed to the 2015+ models in which it was integrated into the design of the engine's intake and exhaust systems.
And a large part of the other 49 states think that California's cheese has slipped off it's cracker . . .Most California voters are pleased with our state's clean air requirements and are willing to pay the costs. Plain and simple.
Your comment about paid off scientists is really childish.
Since you appeared to be technical, let me ask you a question. In terms of emmission compliance/being brought into compliance, What's the difference between 3.0L gen 2 and 3.0L gen1 TDIs or the Ram 1500 3.0L diesels?
As far as we know, VW' fix plan for gen 2 vehicles were not approved for their April/June submission. It's very likely that after they submitted supplemental materials for SUV2.2 & SUV2.1. They are not approved either, because EPA/CARB has 45 days to inform VW of the results. So VW is certainly scrambling up additional materials trying to satisfy EPA/CARB. As of now, the longer VW prolongs the process, the less likely they'll come up with a compliant fix plan in time.
Good question, the test dates listed are from April, but this document is dated 9/7?So, this is the official rejection letter that most of us were aware these cars did not pass with their proposed fix back in May? Or is this a rejection of a subsequent fix proposal made after the initial rejection?
Just trying to judge how swift the government moves here
.
Just because they have SCR and DPFs doesn't mean their emissions aren't insanely high.WRONG
Heavy trucks and buses all have DPF and SCR nowadays.
Yes, and it wasn't operating at the level required to meet emissions standards. The point is that the technology existed to allow diesel vehicles to meet mandated emissions standards, but VW blatantly disregarded the law. That's why they lost a $20B lawsuit and some engineers are facing criminal charges.By the way, the Passat in question also has SCR, but it's an added-on system as opposed to the 2015+ models in which it was integrated into the design of the engine's intake and exhaust systems.
My point here is that CARB is not "out of control". CARB simple does the job assigned to it by the laws of California. Nothing more, nothing less.And a large part of the other 49 states think that California's cheese has slipped off it's cracker . . .
So what's your point again? That somehow popularity should matter here, or ? ? ?
And from what I have seen, there is some truth to 'paid off scientists' . . .
The scientists in question were far more likely to be onthe EPA payroll to support the current standards . . . . amazing how the results of paid research often automagically support the point of view of the payer, isn't it? Ask Gore how that works . . . or the folks that have been caught manipulating climate data . . . It happens, sadly . . .Who are these paid off scientists and for what purpose have they been paid? The VW cheat was unveiled by college students/instructors, not some nefarious corrupted scientists. In my experience scientists are in science for the advancement of knowledge. It's the politicians who are easily corrupted by industry lobbyists.
The heavy-duty emission limits are indeed based on grams per horsepower-hour, but it's not allowed to emit at the rate indicated by maximum power output regardless of how little power it's actually making at any given instant as you suggest. It is based on grams per horsepower hour of actual power output during a standardized testing cycle.Just because they have SCR and DPFs doesn't mean their emissions aren't insanely high.
For 1 hour of operation, a typical 420bhp 18-wheeler is allowed up to 82g of NOx production. Doesn't matter how fast or slow the vehicle travels. Let's say 40 mph.
For 1 hour of operation at that same 40 mph, a Tier II, Bin 5 vehicle with 50k miles (like the VW TDIs) is allowed 2g of NOx production.
A truck is producing 40x the amount a car is. And that's only on 2007+ vehicles. Older vehicles pollute at a much higher level.
Yes, and it wasn't operating at the level required to meet emissions standards. The point is that the technology existed to allow diesel vehicles to meet mandated emissions standards, but VW blatantly disregarded the law. That's why they lost a $20B lawsuit and some engineers are facing criminal charges.
Unfortunately, with these emission control systems, the devil is in the details, and I certainly don't know what details are tripping VW up. The FiatChrysler situation seems to have been mostly failure to have AECDs approved - they had undeclared AECDs in their calibration. I know FiatChrysler had to tweak their calibration but it doesn't seem to have been much of a real-world issue, and those engines are back on sale. The engines had the hardware that was needed.Since you appeared to be technical, let me ask you a question. In terms of emmission compliance/being brought into compliance, What's the difference between 3.0L gen 2 and 3.0L gen1 TDIs or the Ram 1500 3.0L diesels?
I pass 3-4 3/4 ton farm boy trucks that lack anything EPA related each day. I've seen the same truck around town with a 4" stack for the past 4 years, that's 4 years it's passed state emissions/safety inspection that must verify all federally regulated emissions equipment are in place.WRONG
Heavy trucks and buses all have DPF and SCR nowadays.
By the way, the Passat in question also has SCR, but it's an added-on system as opposed to the 2015+ models in which it was integrated into the design of the engine's intake and exhaust systems.