Volkswagen asked by EPA to make electric cars in U.S. to make up for dieselgate

[JazzBeBop]

I couldn't believe it either.

http://www.autonews.com/article/20160221/COPY01/302219995/volkswagen-asked-by-epa-to-make-electric-cars-in-u-s-report-says

 

[JazzBeBop]

http://www.autonews.com/article/20160221/COPY01/302219995/volkswagen-asked-by-epa-to-make-electric-cars-in-u-s-report-says

 

[vwmk4]

I see this as a way out for the dieselgate mess,for VW.
And yes there is a need for electric powered Volkswagens.

 

[GoFaster]

They are going to have to come up with something a lot better than the current e-Golf - something comparable to the Chevrolet Bolt, for example, if they want to sell much more than 6 of them.

If one outcome involves installing a huge number of SAE Combo Level 3 public charging stations, that would help.

 

[Marthy]

All comes down to politic...

 

[South Coast Guy]

They are going to have to come up with something a lot better than the current e-Golf - something comparable to the Chevrolet Bolt, for example, if they want to sell much more than 6 of them.

If one outcome involves installing a huge number of SAE Combo Level 3 public charging stations, that would help.

Do you mean Chevy "Volt"? I think VW and BMW announced last year a joint project to build charging stations along the east coast.

 

[dwfdiesel]

VW to redeem itself with electric cars?

VW to redeem itself with electric cars?

Feb 21 2016, 09:20 ET | By: Yoel Minkoff, SA News Editor

U.S. authorities have asked Volkswagen (OTCPK:VLKAY) to produce electric vehicles in the U.S. as a way of making up for its rigging of emission tests, Germany's Welt am Sonntag reports.

The plan would see VW manufacture electric cars at its plant in Tennessee, and help build a network of charging stations for electric vehicles.

"Talks with the EPA are ongoing and we are not commenting on the contents and state of the negotiations," a VW spokesman said. The EPA also declined to comment.

 

[GoFaster]

VW not commenting, EPA not commenting. This is therefore speculative. As with all speculation that is outside of the Dieselgate threadzilla, I'm inclined to either lock this or combine it with Threadzilla - where this has already been mentioned.

 

[GoFaster]

No, I mean "Bolt".

Here is the info, right from the horse's mouth. http://www.chevrolet.com/bolt-ev-electric-vehicle.html

This will fit my needs for my daily-driver and I'm seriously considering one. One of my customers will be making parts for these ... I've laid hands on the tooling ... it's real.

 

[dwfdiesel]

sure you da man lol Put it where it's suppose to go.

I just posted the press release.

"Thanks I didn't see the other thread"

 

[forcedfedbug]

... If one outcome involves installing a huge number of SAE Combo Level 3 public charging stations, that would help.

That was in the Article too. VW would pay a big chunk for changing infrastructure.

Not that it means anything but to change someone a fine for doing something wrong and then saying instead of a fine why dont you pay for the infrastructure to get the rest of the US to buy EV's seems just as underhanded as the company that cheated. I suppose all the governments of the world live off the saying " to the victor goes the spoils." though so it means nothing.

Ron

 

[whatnxt]

Might take a look here, post 693. Makes going electric interesting considering cradle to grave rather than just driving.

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=871390&page=28

 

[wxman]

What's ironic if this is true is that corresponding electric vehicles would likely produce more life-cycle emission damage costs in most grids in the U.S. than the "cheating" TDIs. Graphical comparison of "cheating" Golf TDI (using "urban" emission profile of the 2013 Passat TDI in ICCT/WVU tests), Golf 1.8T and e-Golf, using GREET and EPA emission damage costs.

 

[gloaming]

Might take a look here, post 693. Makes going electric interesting considering cradle to grave rather than just driving.

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=871390&page=28

Best post i've seen in a while

 

[tadawson]

Well, they could always design the factory so if/when EV is a total flop, it will switch over to TDI production easily (or build for both . . . and hopefully, the US Gov. is blind enough to help subsidize the whole big taco . . ..).

- Tim

 

[tadawson]

I see this as a way out for the dieselgate mess,for VW.
And yes there is a need for electric powered Volkswagens.

Yup . . . on golf courses . . . I find no value or desire elsewhere . . .

- Tim

 

[GoFaster]

US gov't to US public concerning EVs: "You will eat this, and you will like it."

 

[VeeDubTDI]

What's ironic if this is true is that corresponding electric vehicles would likely produce more life-cycle emission damage costs in most grids in the U.S. than the "cheating" TDIs. Graphical comparison of "cheating" Golf TDI (using "urban" emission profile of the 2013 Passat TDI in ICCT/WVU tests), Golf 1.8T and e-Golf, using GREET and EPA emission damage costs.

I'm probably missing something, so I'll ask... what "fuel" (green bar) is involved in the solar charging of an e-Golf? Does this take into account the production of the solar panels or something?

 

[Jimmy Coconuts]

There is no mechanism that the US govt can use to compel VW to offer EVs for sale here, and obviously they can't be compelled to produce these cars in the US either.

However, this would appear to be an offer for VW to reduce their fines, sort of a tit for tat. Spend money on fines, or spend the money on infrastructure that could one day turn a profit. Should be an easy decision if that is the case.

 

[bustNfuel]

Until there are some breakthroughs in battery technology, I'll never own an electric car.
I can drive from the South side of Raleigh NC to Washington Dulles airport and back without filling up my Passat. 720 miles plus. In comfort and safety, reliably.
I know a fella with a Nissan Leaf, and he can barely make it to work across town until it needs a charge. Electric cars are city cars. I don't need or want a 'city car'.

 

[20IndigoBlue02]

VWAG needs to partner with a company or buy one to make it happen

Too bad Tesla is partners with Toyota


Sent from my iPhone. There may be horrible grammar and misspelling involved

 

[delta18]

I hate when people make the argument that EVs are not as efficient because they simply transfer the source of emissions from the vehicle to the electricity source.

While it is true that in a state that uses primarily coal for electricity generation like Arizona for example. In a state like Washington, where the majority of electricity is hydroelectric then you can't make the same argument.

California, which has pushed EV adoption the hardest, only has 0.5% of its energy generated by coal. Of the rest 61% is generated using natural gas, which although still a fossil fuel is much more efficient than burning oil, gasoline or diesel. All the rest of California's electricity is generated using non-fossil fuel sources.

This is not to say that EVs are 100% emissions free or that they aren't without their own environmental consequences (Li mining anyone?) but it is a straw man argument to use the grid as a whipping boy for why EVs don't work.

Solar isn't the only emissions free source of power and not all fossil fuel sources are as dirty as coal.

Sorry for the rant it just irks me when it appears that it is assumed that our only sources of energy are either dirty coal or solar.

Anyway back to the discussion of possible VW EVs

 

[TDI smile]

VW not commenting, EPA not commenting. This is therefore speculative. As with all speculation that is outside of the Dieselgate threadzilla, I'm inclined to either lock this or combine it with Threadzilla - where this has already been mentioned.

The German Papers report, that's the way VW will need to go. It's not speculative at all.

 

[wxman]

I'm probably missing something, so I'll ask... what "fuel" (green bar) is involved in the solar charging of an e-Golf? Does this take into account the production of the solar panels or something?

Yes, it takes into account the production of the PV solar panels. Apparently, it's quite energy intensive to produce those panels per unit of electricity produced (at least according to the GREET model).

It also takes into account the emissions produced during well drilling and pipeline construction.

 

[wxman]

I hate when people make the argument that EVs are not as efficient because they simply transfer the source of emissions from the vehicle to the electricity source.

While it is true that in a state that uses primarily coal for electricity generation like Arizona for example. In a state like Washington, where the majority of electricity is hydroelectric then you can't make the same argument.

California, which has pushed EV adoption the hardest, only has 0.5% of its energy generated by coal. Of the rest 61% is generated using natural gas, which although still a fossil fuel is much more efficient than burning oil, gasoline or diesel. All the rest of California's electricity is generated using non-fossil fuel sources.

This is not to say that EVs are 100% emissions free or that they aren't without their own environmental consequences (Li mining anyone?) but it is a straw man argument to use the grid as a whipping boy for why EVs don't work.

Solar isn't the only emissions free source of power and not all fossil fuel sources are as dirty as coal.

Sorry for the rant it just irks me when it appears that it is assumed that our only sources of energy are either dirty coal or solar.

Anyway back to the discussion of possible VW EVs

Nevertheless, just because EVs produce (essentially) no direct vehicle emissions, there are significant emissions produced from manufacturing of the vehicle, and producing the "fuel".

The National Academy of Sciences produced a 2009 report that concluded essentially the same thing ("Hidden Costs Of Energy: Unpriced Consequences Of Energy Production And Use" - http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12794). Here is a graphic from that report on its projected non-GHG emission damages for 2030 model year cars...

Based on the latest version of the GREET model (GREET_2015, available at https://greet.es.anl.gov/) and emission damage costs per EPA itself ("Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis: Proposed Rulemaking for 2017-2025 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards"; Table 7.1-6.4-1, page 7-2), the following are damage costs from various vehicle technologies and fuels currently available...

You're welcome to check my calculations (there's certainly a possibility of math errors in those calculations), but since the relative damages are reasonably close to what NAS calculated, it should be close hopefully.

I also agree that solar isn't the only source of renewable electricity, and it appears hydro power is "cleaner" than solar. It also should be noted that the "U.S. mix" for electricity is based on the latest info from EIA (first 10 months of 2015 when NG nearly equaled coal in electricity production (http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/mer.pdf , Table 7.2a).

 

[Lug_Nut]

I think of my vacation last year into Labrador and Newfoundland, and have to accept that I'd never have been able to do that in a battery electric car.
I'd have maybe gotten 300 miles out of town, just halfway to the next, before I ran out of current.

as far as VWAG paying for chargers instead of a fine:
I don't see a difference between that, and using the money paid in fines and turning that around to buy and install chargers.
VW makes the entire expense, the other makers that use that charger technology don't have to. VW is financially 'punished' and others benefit.

 

[delta18]

Nevertheless, just because EVs produce (essentially) no direct vehicle emissions, there are significant emissions produced from manufacturing of the vehicle, and producing the "fuel".

The National Academy of Sciences produced a 2009 report that concluded essentially the same thing ("Hidden Costs Of Energy: Unpriced Consequences Of Energy Production And Use" - http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12794). Here is a graphic from that report on its projected non-GHG emission damages for 2030 model year cars...

Based on the latest version of the GREET model (GREET_2015, available at https://greet.es.anl.gov/) and emission damage costs per EPA itself ("Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis: Proposed Rulemaking for 2017-2025 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards"; Table 7.1-6.4-1, page 7-2), the following are damage costs from various vehicle technologies and fuels currently available...

You're welcome to check my calculations (there's certainly a possibility of math errors in those calculations), but since the relative damages are reasonably close to what NAS calculated, it should be close hopefully.

I also agree that solar isn't the only source of renewable electricity, and it appears hydro power is "cleaner" than solar. It also should be noted that the "U.S. mix" for electricity is based on the latest info from EIA (first 10 months of 2015 when NG nearly equaled coal in electricity production (http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/mer.pdf , Table 7.2a).

I was not trying to imply that I dispute your calculations. Only that it irks me when a simplistic blanket measurement like (average US mix) is used when there is high variability depending on which state one lives in. As your improved figure above shows it is not a black and white issue there is a lot of grey. I like that figure BTW, nice job.

FYI my numbers for the California mix came from the same EIA source.

That said if we want to discuss hidden costs (i.e. EV's not as clean as claimed). We could also discuss hidden benefits. Since the grid emissions are located at power plants or production facilities that are not located in highly populated areas, rather than coming out the tailpipes of cars there should be a reduction in low level smog in cities. Not to mention this study http://www.nature.com/articles/srep09213 that found that by not running so many ICEs in a city you can reduce the urban heat island effect.

The above two points would hold true even in a state that uses primarily high emissions coal to produce their electricity. Yes it still just outsources the pollution and could simply result in more evenly distributed pollution but it is still a benefit (at least to those living in big cities).

 

[Perfectreign]

VW to redeem itself with electric cars?

...and I still stand by my statement that one battery pack will produce more pollution overall than any diesel (IDI, DI, Common Rail...) ever. Add this to the tons of CO2 used to produce most of the electricity (because we're so afraid of The China Crisis) and you have a net loss.
IIRC, all-electric vehicles are only about 10% more efficient than diesel.

 

[delta18]

I should also point out that I think diesels make much more sense as a low emission passenger car here in North American than hybrids or EVs. That said I worry that what VW did may not make it an option as we go forward.

 

[Perfectreign]

I should also point out that I think diesels make much more sense as a low emission passenger car here in North American than hybrids or EVs. That said I worry that what VW did may not make it an option as we go forward.

Almost as stupid (in the corporate sense) as the early '80s GM diesels where they tried to retrofit a 350 (5.7L) block with diesel components.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/automobiles/collectibles/18RUST.html