Just buy back California vehicles and get the CARB out

[tadawson]

But note that adopting CARB rules does not have any bearing on how they will be enforced or applied as compared to California . . . just that the metrics will be the same . . .

- Tim

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

I don't know what that means.

 

[GoFaster]

The standards that the new vehicle manufacturers are supposed to build to, are the same.

The means of enforcement (periodic inspections, etc) don't have to be.

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

No state inspects an automobile in a way that would determine whether or not it meets CARB standards. the SMOG testing that CA does largely consists of checking hardware and emissions readiness. MA simply plugs in cars to see if the hardware is installed and working. Tuners have been fooling that for years. Other states have dyno tests or opacity tests, but they are in not anywhere near extensive enough to determine if a car meets CARB standards. Look what it took to find out that VW had a defeat device. No car in the field gets tested like that.

 

[CraziFuzzy]

No state inspects an automobile in a way that would determine whether or not it meets CARB standards. the SMOG testing that CA does largely consists of checking hardware and emissions readiness. MA simply plugs in cars to see if the hardware is installed and working. Tuners have been fooling that for years. Other states have dyno tests or opacity tests, but they are in not anywhere near extensive enough to determine if a car meets CARB standards. Look what it took to find out that VW had a defeat device. No car in the field gets tested like that.

In CA, gas vehicles emissions are actually tested at the tailpipe every 2 years (starting in the vehicle's 6th year). Part of the issue, however, is that this does not apply to diesel vehicles (because we can't piss off the teamsters), and even it it had, is often done on a 2-wheel treadmill, which would put the TDi into cheating mode anyway.

 

[tadawson]

I don't know what that means.

The metric (PPM NOx in this case) determines if there is a violation. How that is handled is different state to state. CA is in a lathered butthurt frenzy over this . . . another state could settle for a promise, 50 bucks, and a six pack of good German beer and call it good . . .CARB didn't create the violation, but they certainly defined it's significance!

- Tim

 

[fxk]

First off, California isn't the only CARB state. Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Washington, and Vermont also comply with CARB rules (I think I've got that right). And my understanding that the '09 and later TDIs were designed to be 50 state compliant, including CARB states. Singling out CA doesn't make sense for a lot of reasons.

The idea is divide and conquer. California has different vehicle rules. They singled themselves out long ago.
Indeed, other states follow CARB rules, but those states have no role in the creation and/or legal benefit of CARB as an organization that can go to bat for them. They're strictly el-cheapo me-too states without the benefits of an actual board making law and decisions for their constituents. Without a board, their leverage and authority is greatly reduced.
As I've said, and it is worth repeating, VW needs to fix this mess. CARB is not likely to approve anything VW comes up with. It has been clear that CARB does not want diesel in the state. Can VW ever come up with something that will be acceptable to CARB? I doubt it. I believe this is a stalemate.
I would be surprised if I were to find out whether CARB has the legal authority to operate outside of California.
I would imagine the most they could do beyond the CA border is to file a friend of the court brief.
California has singled themselves out, to be the leaders, even more so than the EPA. Buying back the CA cars would effectively cut their political legs out from under them, and POSSIBLY get real negotiations started. CARB would not have Californians to fight for, nor would there be constituent support for CARB operating out-of-state, solving someone else's problems. With the condition of the CA economy/budget, somehow I would doubt even Gov. Moonbeam would allow CARB to come to another state's aid.

So, a man with a duck perched on his head goes into the Dr office.
The duck said, "Can you get this human off my ass?"

 

[CraziFuzzy]

The metric (PPM NOx in this case) determines if there is a violation. How that is handled is different state to state. CA is in a lathered butthurt frenzy over this . . . another state could settle for a promise, 50 bucks, and a six pack of good German beer and call it good . . .CARB didn't create the violation, but they certainly defined it's significance!

- Tim

The Clean Air act is what was specifically violated, which is a federal law.

 

[jason_]

Unfavorably. The Malones and Rawteks of the world should be facing fines, and all 50 states should be emission testing on diesels.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

As this site frequently states, altering the emission control system is illegal. People who do so are at risk to be prosecuted for violating the regulations. Oh, I forgot, DPF delete is only done for off-road use -yeah right.

How do you feel about diesel owners who remove their DPF?

I'm not saying anyone is wrong.

Tuners and fabbers are protected because they imply off road use only.

Oh, last weekend I went to a semi pull. 6 turbos, each 150# boost, one injector pump per cylinder.... Exhaust so thick by the 280ft mark soot is falling in clumps like mud plops falling from a spinning tire...

One race, of hundreds that happen every day. They're protected because they don't roll down a taxed road under their own power.

Hm? No purpose other then fun. The honest man that can't spend $4k to fix his $2k car with 260k miles with another proven failed engineering flaw to make a living is a frowned upon outlaw.





Sent from my s-off'ed m7 with cm11!

 

[john.jackson9213]

By long standind FederalLaw, California has the legal right to make it's own car emissions requirements. Other states may adopt California's standards or Federal Standards, but may not make other standards. In the last few years, the EPA has basically adopted California standards as its own.

 

[fxk]

By long standind FederalLaw, California has the legal right to make it's own car emissions requirements. Other states may adopt California's standards or Federal Standards, but may not make other standards. In the last few years, the EPA has basically adopted California standards as its own.

Yup. This.

 

[Lug_Nut]

Because CA had emissions laws in place BEFORE the federal emissions laws, AND because the CA requirements were more stringent, the laws were 'grandfathered' in and allowed.
Once the feds had set limits no other state could make stricter ones. The other states had to meet at least the federal limits, but could choose the stricter CA limits if they chose to. Five others chose the CA stricter limits.
fast forward:
A few years ago the Feds set new limits the same as CA (and the other five) thus negating the grandfathering of the CA limits. CA is no longer able to set stricter limits than the federal limits.
All 50 states now have the same requirements on new vehicle emissions at the time of sale.

 

[fxk]

<snip>
All 50 states now have the same requirements on new vehicle emissions at the time of sale.

Interesting development timeline. Thanks for the info!
I'd ask where that leaves CARB, but California is what it is, and not interesting to me.
frank

 

[vwdsmguy]

Pure electric vehicles are 45% coal powered

Sorry to change the subject. The electric source in 45% of the US is from coal plants. Great, so you have an electric car that is clean at the tailpipe [which they don't have], in many cases, is sourced from a dirty coal power plants!!!
A far greater source of polution on US roads are diesel trucks. Getting after VW is only a small [tiny] part of the problem!!

 

[CraziFuzzy]

Sorry to change the subject. The electric source in 45% of the US is from coal plants. Great, so you have an electric car that is clean at the tailpipe [which they don't have], in many cases, is sourced from a dirty coal power plants!!!
A far greater source of polution on US roads are diesel trucks. Getting after VW is only a small [tiny] part of the problem!!

This isn't in any way about the absolute pollution, this is about the avoidance of regulations.

 

[CraziFuzzy]

And as of 2014, coal generation is down to 39% and continues to drop, as it is replaced with natural gas (natural gas is up to 27%), and for the first time in 30 years, there are actually a few new nuclear plants being constructed, with licences approved for up to 24 more reactors in the next decade.

 

[fxk]

This isn't in any way about the absolute pollution, this is about the avoidance of regulations.

Unfortunately, you're 100% correct. Not about trucks, ships, planes, trains, or electric automobiles. It's about the lie.

Someone p%ssed in the big guy's pool for six years while he wasn't looking. Neighbor saw them and told the big guy. Not only is he mad about polluting his pool, not once, but many times, but for making him the laughingstock of the neighborhood. There will be blood.

frank

 

[CraziFuzzy]

Unfortunately, you're 100% correct. Not about trucks, ships, planes, trains, or electric automobiles. It's about the lie.
Someone p%ssed in the big guy's pool for six years while he wasn't looking. Neighbor saw them and told the big guy. Not only is he mad about polluting his pool, not once, but many times, but for making him the laughingstock of the neighborhood. There will be blood.
frank

Manufacturers already push the regulations to the limit as much as possible - if VW is NOT hammered for blatantly violating them, what does that spell for the industry, and the concept of environmental regulation in general?

 

[pkhoury]

How would you feel if you lived in California, didn't own a TDI, and perhaps had a child or other family member with chronic respiratory health issues????
Consider that, according to CARB, California is home to both the highest ozone levels (South Coast) and ambient particulate matter levels (San Joaquin Valley) measured in the United States. Twelve million Californians live in communities that exceed the federal ozone and particulate matter ambient air quality standards
How about other auto manufacturers? Why should they be subject to stringent regulations while VW is given a free pass? It's a level playing field, but VW consciously decided to cheat. To make matters worse, they've dragged their feet, kept owners in the dark, and issued ludicrous statements, such as "it was the work of a handful of rogue engineers". Oh and let's not forget the Mathias Mueller Interview with NPR at the Detroit Auto Show - what an embarrassment to the company and to us. The guy is a dope

Well, there's an easy fix for that - just ban any and all fuel-burning machines in CA. You don't need powerplants to supply EVs, ban rail, ban trucks, and ban cars. Just make everyone walk or bike. Guarantee within a year, the air quality in CA will be akin to that before the 1400s.

And as of 2014, coal generation is down to 39% and continues to drop, as it is replaced with natural gas (natural gas is up to 27%), and for the first time in 30 years, there are actually a few new nuclear plants being constructed, with licences approved for up to 24 more reactors in the next decade.

CA has nuclear now? Where and when did this commence? And I'm actually surprised you can still buy coal in CA; I thought it was illegal to burn it. However, I had to buy a hundred pounds of it for my stove when I was out there a month ago, and TSC sells it.

 

[pkhoury]

If you live in the LA basin and have respiratory issues then you should question your decision to remain there. You may jeopardize your own health if you wait for the air to get clean enough to not affect you.

Yup. Reminds of me of the people who work at the Indian gaming casinos in CA who complain of the second hand smoke bothering their respiratory system. If it's really a problem, you pack up and leave.

As this site frequently states, altering the emission control system is illegal. People who do so are at risk to be prosecuted for violating the regulations. Oh, I forgot, DPF delete is only done for off-road use -yeah right.

That sounds fair - your tax dollars can pay for room and board in Club Fed for those who removed their DPF and get prosecuted. Thanks for the free ride, pushgears!

The issue is whether VW should be allowed to play by a different set of rules than other car manufacturers. What would BMW, Mercedes, GM, Ford, or Chrysler say?

And you know that those other manufacturers do or do not have defeat devices how?

In CA, gas vehicles emissions are actually tested at the tailpipe every 2 years (starting in the vehicle's 6th year). Part of the issue, however, is that this does not apply to diesel vehicles (because we can't piss off the teamsters), and even it it had, is often done on a 2-wheel treadmill, which would put the TDi into cheating mode anyway.

Actually, you still do have to smog diesels in CA. I think it's passenger cars and vehicles under a certain weight and 1997 or newer. It's a waste of 50 bucks, where they pop the hood, make sure everything is there, plug into OBD2 and make sure there isn't a CEL. I've had to pay for this scam twice already since I've owned my JSW.

 

[CraziFuzzy]

CA has nuclear now? Where and when did this commence? And I'm actually surprised you can still buy coal in CA; I thought it was illegal to burn it. However, I had to buy a hundred pounds of it for my stove when I was out there a month ago, and TSC sells it.

For starters, I was talking about the national power grid, not CA - but regardless, yes, CA does use nuclear power - San Onofre has shut down, but Diablo Canyon is still operating, and 27.4% of Palo Verde, the largest nuclear plant in the country, is owned by California utilities, with a direct line from there to southern California. Coal is not used much directly in CA, but there are a couple very large coal fired plants that feed CA. The 2GW Navajo Power Plant in AZ sells a lot of it's generation to CA utilities, and the 1.9GW Intermountain Power Plant in UT is operated 100% by the LADWP, with a special High Voltage DC transmission line between there and Adelanto.

Actually, you still do have to smog diesels in CA. I think it's passenger cars and vehicles under a certain weight and 1997 or newer. It's a waste of 50 bucks, where they pop the hood, make sure everything is there, plug into OBD2 and make sure there isn't a CEL. I've had to pay for this scam twice already since I've owned my JSW.

I didn't say diesels didn't need to be checked in CA, I said emissions were not checked in CA.

 

[pkhoury]

For starters, I was talking about the national power grid, not CA - but regardless, yes, CA does use nuclear power - San Onofre has shut down, but Diablo Canyon is still operating, and 27.4% of Palo Verde, the largest nuclear plant in the country, is owned by California utilities, with a direct line from there to southern California. Coal is not used much directly in CA, but there are a couple very large coal fired plants that feed CA. The 2GW Navajo Power Plant in AZ sells a lot of it's generation to CA utilities, and the 1.9GW Intermountain Power Plant in UT is operated 100% by the LADWP, with a special High Voltage DC transmission line between there and Adelanto.

I thought CA stopped getting power from AZ? Or was that just LA, due to AZ being anti-illegal immigrant? Cracks me up that CA b***hes about air pollution, yet still gets electricity from coal... just burning it in other states. Sounds hypocritical to me.

I didn't say diesels didn't need to be checked in CA, I said emissions were not checked in CA.

I know that. But I was saying that the smog check (as the DMV puts it, anyways) is a waste of money. Even the smog check stations concur.

 

[CraziFuzzy]

I thought CA stopped getting power from AZ? Or was that just LA, due to AZ being anti-illegal immigrant? Cracks me up that CA b***hes about air pollution, yet still gets electricity from coal... just burning it in other states. Sounds hypocritical to me.

Well, as far as I know, the Intermountain plant is undergoing the planning stages of transitioning to natural gas instead of coal. And it's not like the coal plants were built outside of California in an effort to keep the pollution outside of california - there's just no coal IN california to use, and it's cheaper to transport the power than it is the coal.

 

[fxk]

Emissions stations are merely a government JOBS program. Let's go to roadside passive testing - oh wait, less people, and no none gets to charge a fee...

 

[Matt-98AHU]

Interesting development timeline. Thanks for the info!
I'd ask where that leaves CARB, but California is what it is, and not interesting to me.
frank

With that attitude, what makes you think those of us that do live in the state give a rats ass what you think VW/CARB should do with OUR cars?

A buy back should not be mandatory, it should be voluntary. If people like THEIR cars enough to keep them, either require them to be fixed and/or grandfathered in as-is, slap VW with a large fine and move on.

I, for one, was banking on these cars coming into my shop for service as they come out of warranty and people look for a more affordable yet still capable and knowledgeable alternative. A potential buy back calls that into question and puts a serious dent in my plans to make a living in this expensive state.

Think before sharing an opinion. VW deceiving emissions testing should not negatively affect those who do own or want to own these particular cars.

 

[fxk]

With that attitude, what makes you think those of us that do live in the state give a rats ass what you think VW/CARB should do with OUR cars?

I do know my attitude about CARB is poor; I also am aware that because of my attitude, much of what I said would be dismissed. That is life.

A buy back should not be mandatory, it should be voluntary. If people like THEIR cars enough to keep them, either require them to be fixed and/or grandfathered in as-is, slap VW with a large fine and move on.

As I see this, it is much like an accident. Depending on the value of car at the time, someone will either pay to fix the car, or total it out. If it is totaled, it can be bought back for a given price, fixed on one's own dime, and will end up with a salvage title.

Now, take a car that CARB deems unsafe for the rest of CA residents to have on the road. VW is "the insurance company", so to speak. IF (and that's a BIG IF) a solution is found and approved, it will cost $X to repair each vehicle. If the vehicle is worth less than $X, VW will not offer to fix the vehicle, rather would buy back the vehicle (the equivalent of totaling out a car) If the car is worth more than the repair, then VW will fix it.

CA will not allow the polluting car to continue on their roads, and will withhold registration, as they threatened with the ECU flash. The car without registration, is effectively totaled. A buy out would be the mitigation of the owner's and California's damages. (along with whatever sanctions are imposed on VW). Turning down the buyout would render the car useless (on road) in California (at least). CARB would be disingenuous to grandfather in the vehicle, as it is not THE OWNER'S problem, but affects THE STATE as a whole.

I, for one, was banking on these cars coming into my shop for service as they come out of warranty and people look for a more affordable yet still capable and knowledgeable alternative. A potential buy back calls that into question and puts a serious dent in my plans to make a living in this expensive state.

There will be economic ripples throughout the world because of the actions of VW. CARB plays a huge role in mitigating the damages to folks, like you, who will have a negative impact. If CARB is intractable, you lose. If CARB backs down in any way, they lose face. I see that as the definition of a rock and a hard place, you being squarely in between.

Think before sharing an opinion. VW deceiving emissions testing should not negatively affect those who do own or want to own these particular cars.

I have thought long and hard. VW screwed the pooch, no doubt. CARB has placed themselves (and California citizens) squarely in the lead of this fight. CARB has been the tail wagging the dog. Some call it leadership. Some call it activism. Whatever the case, many folks like you will suffer. When I look IN MY CRYSTAL BALL, I do not see it going well for California owners, and probably not well for the rest of us, either.
I do hope I am wrong. I do hope your business model can accomodate this uncertain future. I do wish you well.
frank

 

[compu_85]

No state inspects an automobile in a way that would determine whether or not it meets CARB standards.

In VA they have emissions testing equipment set up at highway off ramps from time to time. Those tests did see super high NOx levels from 2.0 CR TDIs, but they didn't seem to do anything with that data.

-J

 

[tadawson]

Largely because that one particular location, throttle position, load, etc. is not indicative of anything particularly meaningful in the big picture . . .

- Tim

 

[jerryn63]

I wanted to put an end to the VW drama in my life so I traded it in for

A 2016 Jeep Wrangler. It's time for an off road fun vehicle for me.