Volkswagen Emissions Issues Spread To Gasoline Cars (bloomberg.com) 208
schwit1 writes: Just a day after news broke that Volkswagen's emissions scandal had expanded to its Porsche unit and Audi SUVs, the company has disclosed yet another problem, this time affecting carbon dioxide levels emitted by their cars. "Volkswagen said an internal probe showed 800,000 cars had "unexplained inconsistencies" concerning their carbon-dioxide output. Previously, the automaker estimated it would need to recall 11 million vehicles worldwide — more than Volkswagen sold last year." This batch of cars includes a small number of gasoline engines. Until now, only diesel engines were part of the problem.
No car hits its official CO2 output level (Score:4)
Or its mpg for that matter, simply because the lab tests whether EU, US or elsewhere don't match real world conditions. Whether VW is refering to its lab results - in which case well duh - or real world driving - TFA doesn't say - it really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Personally I'd be looking VERY closely at the figures for hybrids because the real world driving test mpg & CO2 is frequently so far removed from the lab results that it might as well be for an entirely different vehicle.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No, it hasn't been even lab results, they've just made up some numbers.
PS
CO2 can be calculated from known mpg or l/100km.
Re: (Score:2)
"CO2 can be calculated from known mpg or l/100km."
Not with diesels it can't since a lot of the carbon from the fuel ends up as soot depending on how hard the engine is working.
CO2 and fuel consumption (Score:3)
The soot ends up in the soot filter, which is automatically cleaned every now and then by burning it into CO2. Hence, carbon emission = fuel consumption x conversion factor.
The reason they are talking about CO2 emissions is because in Europe, cars are typically taxed based on CO2 emissions, not on mpg or l/100 km. Fuel consumption values are too much apples and oranges between diesel, LPG, gasoline/petrol, and electric.
Note that CO2 values are a bit higher than you'd expect from chemistry; some of the energ
Re: (Score:2)
"The automobile diesel production of soot is trivial"
No, it really isn't. Take off the particulate trap and floor the throttle and you'll see black smoke spew out of the exhaust.
Re: (Score:2)
They do - at least the ones I see around here.
And occasionally I see black smoke from diesel cars that should be new enough to have a DPF. Not sure what's going on there.
Re: (Score:3)
A properly running diesel doesn't produce smoke unless it's under very heavy load or it's very cold. Which leads to incomplete burning, used to be you could tell the problem with a diesel by the smell and looking at the exhaust. Many of the incomplete burning problems especially in trucks were replaced by more gear ratios to allow better efficiency under load. In diesel cars it was pre-heating the air, because they lack the super charger setup that diesel trucks and trains use. Blue-black smoke was anothe
Re: (Score:2)
My plow truck is an F-350 and I see a surprisingly little amount of smoke. I dunno what the difference is but it's generally only going to smoke if it's just started on a cold day or if I decide to stomp on the throttle for some reason and then I don't notice any at highway speed even if I do give it some extra fuel. I just figure they're burning at a higher temp? It's a big ol' 6.7 liter so it's not like it shouldn't be smoking - I was actually expecting more.
I do have an old 85 Quantum. That's gasoline, h
Re: (Score:3)
Or its mpg for that matter
My VW diesel has a claimed 55mpg, and I get 50mpg on a short (15 minute, half town, half highway) commute, as long as I obey the speed limit. It can drop to 40 if I'm in a hurry. I don't really know exactly what driving conditions the "combined cycle" mpg figure is meant to represent, but to me 50mpg seemed pretty close to the claimed figure, to be honest. If their other infringements were that marginal, I don't think they'd be in so much trouble.
Re:No car hits its official CO2 output level (Score:4, Informative)
Under idealized driving conditions. Slow,gentle acceleration no sharp corners, level terrain keeping the engine at less than 2,000 rpm at all the time I can get up to 70 mph and beat the manufacturer mpg estimates by quite a bit. Of course that means a zero to 60 time of about 45 Seconds
The big difference is real world people don't drive like granny's who can't see.
Re: (Score:2)
You make a very excellent case for diesel hybrid. An engine that is tuned to produce slightly more power (overall) than is needed for average driving, would be the most efficient one made.
Re: (Score:2)
Slow, gentle acceleration at low RPMs is about the least fuel-efficient way you could possibly do it. You're wasting gas, and annoying.
Re: (Score:3)
Or its mpg for that matter, simply because the lab tests whether EU, US or elsewhere don't match real world conditions. Whether VW is refering to its lab results - in which case well duh - or real world driving - TFA doesn't say - it really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Personally I'd be looking VERY closely at the figures for hybrids because the real world driving test mpg & CO2 is frequently so far removed from the lab results that it might as well be for an entirely different vehicle.
Funny you say that... My wife gets 30 mpg with her '01 Integra, which is better than the 21 city, 23 combined, 28 highway EPA rating, on a mostly-highway commute. I average between 17 and 18 mpg with my '95 Impala on a commute that's half city, half highway, and I drive it like I stole it. EPA says it should get 15 city, 18 mixed, 23 highway.
We are both getting expected or better than expected results. I don't think that the EPA numbers are out of line.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Umm... I don't think they're actually allowed to do any of that. That doesn't mean they're not - it just means that I think that would be a clear violation of the regulations. I'm kind of hoping that we'd have noticed them doing that.
Re: (Score:2)
That's nuts! Thanks for the link. That's... That's just straight up abuse! The strange part is, I get better efficiency on pretty much everything I own. Why bother? Just drive like a human - and I'm not the least bit gentle, I just maintain my speed and am efficient. Easy on, easy off. Well, okay, I'm not always gentle. But I usually average better than the official numbers - even with the 'new' EPA numbers. Perhaps they're also optimizing for burn temperature and that's lowering their numbers....
That's jus
Re: (Score:3)
My car gets exactly what it said on the window sticker.
That's not the point. (Score:3)
According to the linked article [volkswagen...rvices.com] there was something funky going on with the CO2/mileage certification process.
Granted the certification figures for all vehicles are optimistic, but that doesn't make them useless. I've spent many years working with environmental and scientific data, and it's often the case that you can't know certain things precisely. Nonetheless it is still important to measure these things in a consistent manner so you can compare figures to each other.
So suppose car A's test say it emit
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Stop with your fucking GAS! BRAKE! GAS! BRAKE! GAS! BRAKE! tailgating and maybe your fucking numbers will improve. You see that car that keeps getting farther away from you then closer again and farther again? That's me, just driving along at a constant speed while I watch you GAS! BRAKE! GAS! BRAKE!
We don't use cars nearly as much in 2043, but I can consistently get 40 mpg on the highway/36 mpg city driving out of my old ass 2013 Fiesta. The manual transmission probably helps.
Jeebus, I guess I just had to see this time period for myself, and I fucking majored in history! No wonder you cows blow it all up. You're completely unaware of your own actions and convinced your unawareness constitutes the "real world."
The walk to the gas station will be for your own good.
UNLESS
John Titor lives!
Re: (Score:2)
GAS BRAKE HONK
GAS BRAKE HONK
HONK HONK PUNCH
GAS GAS GAS
Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
What? CO2 inconsistent? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The increased attention has drawn increased scrutiny and attention to a normal deviation. VW says they've noticed a small subset of cars with inconsistencies--if you're 3 standards away from mean, you're going to find 99.7% fall within your bounds and the other 0.3% stand out, of which 0.15% are on the top end. For all appearances, it looks like VW has noticed that quality control isn't 100% perfect--surprise--and some of their gasoline cars are deviating.
Different problem, and not a problem.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Hyperbolic much? Think outside your bubble, friend. I would wager that if asked, an overwhelming majority of the population wouldn't know what you're talking about when you say, "released carbon emitted from hydrocarbon combustion", except in the most general sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Oxides of nitrogen are created anytime oxygen and nitrogen are at high temperatures. It is not incomplete combustion but high compression (hence high temperature) that creates NOx. Lighting creates a significant amount just by hearing the air.
Re: (Score:2)
"What is going on there?"
Politicians cashing in on the carefully nurtured panic about global warming and its association with CO2. They could have just said "the car more fuel than expected" ... but that is too tame to stir up the public with.
Or it's the emissions that we're concerned about, not the fuel usage. Sure, they go hand-in-hand, but from a regulation point of view we're worried about the pollutants more than the raw usage of fuel.
Re: (Score:2)
I am surprised CO2 is measured directly and not computed based on fuel consumption and other carbon based pollution components. I had hoped that 99.9% of the carbon would move to CO2 in which case it seems pointless do do anything but measure the fuel flow and compute the CO2. However, depending on the car it can be a bit worse. Try googling "Average Annual Emissions and Fuel Consumption for Gasoline-Fueled Passenger Cars and Light Trucks" and read that PDF. On page 4, they give an example with 368.4 g
Re: (Score:2)
Since all Prius models are PZEV (SULEV w.r.t compustion emissions + some specs on evaporitve emission). SULEV definition is:
SULEV mandates that a vehicle emit no more than .01 grams/mile of hydrocarbon, 1 gram/mile of carbon monoxide, .02 grams/mile of nitrous oxide, and .01 grams/mile of particulate matter.
Since a Prius burns 1/2 the gas of the 24 mpg case I posted earlier, and 1/10 the CO, the percentage of C that comes out as CO2 is getting closer to 99.9% (50/50.4 = 99.2%).
Re: (Score:2)
That data has been massaged! You can't trust it!!!
(I modeled traffic. Any unmassaged data is probably not going to effect the real world when you're working with large data sets. In other words, the above is my bad attempt at humor.)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh sure a noaa.gov graph,
CO2 == MPG (Score:5, Insightful)
AFAIK the amount of CO2 produced is directly related to the amount of gasoline used. Car manufacturers - all car manufacturers - lie about mileage the same way all laptop and phone manufacturers lie about battery usage.
We all know this, we've all known this for a long time. How is this suddenly news?
Re:CO2 == MPG (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference here is the way car manufacturers in North America lie about mileage is the fault of the EPA.
See, they don't drive the car, and measure the mileage you get. As I understand it, they hook it up to a test rig, do some tests, and then calculate the mileage.
Car companies can only use the output of that formula, using anything else would be illegal -- and, unfortunately, people have known that the method calculating mileage is pretty flawed. Which is why all those people who had hybrids found out they weren't getting anywhere near the mileage they were promised.
So, no the car makers don't lie about mileage, they can only report it one way. Any other way would be illegal, even if the test is known to be wrong.
Apparently they do lie about emissions, however.
Re:CO2 == MPG (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that just jumping in the car and driving it has too many variables. Was the real terrain uphill? downhill? Was their a headwind or a tailwind? If it was a city test were the lights timed exactly the same? What was the temperature? humidity? road conditions?
Testing in a lab on a machine is suppose to control all those variables as much as possible so that different vehicles at different times all have the same base test conditions for comparison. It's no different than anything else that is performance/energy tested or benchmarked like appliances, HVAC, computers...
No the tests may not exactly match what you'll get with your usage, but hopefully it's a accurate baseline for comparison. And THAT's where Volkswagon screwed up.
Re: (Score:3)
The EPA MPG ratings are not intended to predict how many MPG you will get driving the car. There's just too much variability in driving styles, road conditions, and regional climate for any single number to be an accurate prediction.
The MPG rantings are intended to allow you to compare different cars to each other when shopping. If one car is
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's a terrible analogy, and it misses the entire point.
If the EPA requires that, by law, carmakers are ONLY allowed to report mpg figures based on an EPA provided formula which is known to be wrong ... then when carmakers tell you a mileage figure which is wrong, they are not lying, they are telling you the only number they are legally allowed to tell you.
So, in your terrible analogy, if I go into a store, and t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Car manufacturers - all car manufacturers - lie about mileage
I call bullshit.
I've owned three '91 200 Quattros (20v turbo 5cyl's, the last of the Type44's) and two of them were running factory-stock Bosch Motronic M. The EPA rated these cars at 16/22 city/hwy, however, I'd consistently get 30+ mpg going ~70mph (and those those supposed EPA figures were "calculated" for a mere 55mph).
My 2015 Suburban is rated at 16/23 yet I average ~27mpg @60mph and ~25mpg @70mpg; I only see ~23mpg @80mph.
Re: (Score:3)
How would living in a cave eating grass pollute the earth more than our current lifestyles? Please explain this to me, if you can do that, I'll subscribe to your newsletter.
Here goes:
1) Several billion caves need to be dug out.
2) Seven billion people are now dumping untreated human waste somewhere.
3) Seven billion people are cheating on their grass diet and using more land for food than current (because single family plots is grossly inefficient for food production).
On the plus side, when most of humanity dies-off, it'll be a much lower environmental footprint for whatever survives (which probably won't be most large animals).
Re: (Score:2)
Here goes:
1) Several billion caves need to be dug out.
2) Seven billion people are now dumping untreated human waste somewhere.
3) Seven billion people are cheating on their grass diet and using more land for food than current (because single family plots is grossly inefficient for food production).
On the plus side, when most of humanity dies-off, it'll be a much lower environmental footprint for whatever survives (which probably won't be most large animals).
Except people don't live like that, we've always clustered into multi-family groups, divided labor among the able-bodied, always did some communal farming and some familial farming, same with hunting and gathering. In a lot of ways the real advancement in human culture was cooking and money. Money allowed us to barter for future production.
Re: (Score:2)
Kick em while they are down to try and eliminate a competitor in the low margin transportation industry?
Wait, I haven't bought my Golf R yet!
Gee-zus! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Owning stock gives you MORE of a right to criticize a company, not less.
Re: (Score:2)
"Buy low sell high" is still sound advice. Selling a downward-trending stock is not necessarily the most rational move. For example, Toyota had a rough patch with their breaks and are back on top again. You calculate your odds based on what you can control now, not how much you already lost.
The investment model you describe is likely good advice in any instance where the stock doesn't tank and never recover.
The final bailout price of this mess is not being helped by the slow, almost daily release of new negative information.
There is a limit, however astronomical it may be, to how much VW can spend to make this go away... unless too big to fail extends to large Deutschland employers. Volkswagon is listed as the largest corporation in Germany as of 2012, and 12th largest in the World, so we'
Re: (Score:2)
That gets back to predicting the future of VW rather than general stock techniques.
It looks like other auto makers have similar problems. We've only seen the start. The other co's study their competitors' smog systems. Why wouldn't they rat on VW? Why let your competitor cheat.
They probably considered ratting, but thought if they did that, they'd invite scrutiny to their own cars. So instead, they probably added and/or increased their cheating to match VW's.
If all car makers will be in the same boat, then i
Why do we still use MPG? (Score:5, Funny)
I was under the impression that MP4 took over a decade ago.
Fight for your bitcoins! [coinbrawl.com]
Re: (Score:2)
We don't. The world has moved on, we now use the international system of units, except of course for those living in Myanmar, Liberia or the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
We should use a different system of units for things being exported to the USA, just to show them how annoying it is to have to convert to another system when we're dealing with their products. For example, instead of measuring in centimetres and inches, sell them products measured in centimetres and fingerbreadths.
Fight for your bitcoins! [coinbrawl.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Surely the TPP will allow companies to export products to the USA that are marked using metric units? Allowing that would remove a real barrier to trade and the TPP is a trade deal, right? righ
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Even though it's supposed to be a metric country, Canada looks more like the USA.
Fight for your bitcoins! [coinbrawl.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Surely you meant KKV.
Fight for your bitcoins! [coinbrawl.com]
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Jaguar is mostly Cadillac and ford parts, Range Rover is also borne from many shared components of chevrolet and to a lesser extent GM.
How did Jaguar end up with Cadillac parts when it was part of Ford's Premier Auto Group for nearly a decade? At the 2010 auto show, the Jaguar XJ I sat it felt a hell of lot like my 2007 Volvo S80 in the cockpit and things like the outside mirrors were identical to my Volvo. I had always assumed at the time that the model shown in 2010 was still based off of shared parts from the Premier Group parts bin, although scanning Wikipedia just now shows they used differing platforms.
I'd ask the same questions ab
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I used to work for an automotive component supplier. A component of the ECU was used for both Mercedes and BMW cars, but with a different firmware. Many parts are sourced from third parties in first place.
Re: (Score:2)
As an engineer working for a company that rhymes with bored, this is a disaster of biblical proportions for VW. Ive already heard people calling them smokeswagons and having a hard time reselling, but its important to remeber that this could have happened to any automotive manufacturer with a lapse in conscience.
And nobody seems to be saying anything about the Bored Bocus that does the exact same thing.
http://www.bbc.com/news/busine... [bbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I bet Porsche and BMW owners do care now. If they bought then their cars are now worth a lot less, and if they leased then their next car will probably cost them more unless they switch to another brand.
Re: (Score:2)
I bet Porsche and BMW owners do care now. If they bought then their cars are now worth a lot less, and if they leased then their next car will probably cost them more unless they switch to another brand.
Porsche, maybe... if the owner bought one of the sportscars and not the SUV/sedan. BMW? Doubt it. Cars depreciate so much from new; luxury car buyers know well in advance that their car is worth comparatively nothing when they trade up. When you are prepared to lose $100k in depreciation just to be able to drive a luxury car, I seriously doubt that you will even care about another few hundred dollars.
We'll soon find out if this has affected VW sales or not.
Re: (Score:2)
I know someone who wants to buy a Tesla, but can't sell his Audi because it's waiting to be fixed.
Re: (Score:2)
I know someone who wants to buy a Tesla, but can't sell his Audi because it's waiting to be fixed.
Why is it waiting?
Re: (Score:2)
They are not even going to start fixing the emissions issues until next year in the UK. Since there are so many vehicles to fix it is likely to take some time to do them all. As they fix them people who have been waiting to sell will put them on the market, flooding it and pushing prices down.
Let's see in a year how much of an impact this will have on people. The UK government is already talking about compensation from VW for owners.
Re: (Score:2)
They are not even going to start fixing the emissions issues until next year in the UK. Since there are so many vehicles to fix it is likely to take some time to do them all. As they fix them people who have been waiting to sell will put them on the market, flooding it and pushing prices down.
Let's see in a year how much of an impact this will have on people. The UK government is already talking about compensation from VW for owners.
I do not understand - why can the car not be sold? Obviously the fix, when it comes, will be free to all the cars irrespective of owner?
Re: (Score:2)
He could sell it now but would get much less for it. There is still too much uncertainty. Will the fix decrease performance or MPG? If he sells it now will he miss out on any compensation due because he is not the current owner whose vehicle was devalued?
Fahrvergnügen (Score:5, Funny)
Does Fahrvergnügen mean "Fuck the Earth!" or something?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know, but their new motto should be "We Fahrvergnügened Up!"
Figured this would happen (Score:2)
Now what I'm waiting for, is for someone else to start thinking, '..hey, what about all the other auto manufacturers out there?', and start testing all of them for signs of emissions-test-evasion.
Bankruptcy? (Score:2)
"Rogue engineers?" (Score:2)
Those guys [latimes.com] get around.
Is it ironic.... (Score:2)
Real-world DOS (Score:2)
So what's it gonna take? VW has big expensive dealerships, fully staffed with commission-based personnel. It'd be easy to walk in, waste their time, and walk out.
Just a couple of rogue engineers :) (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The CO2 emissions can affect the way the car is taxed/licensed.
Re: (Score:2)
The CO2 emissions can affect the way the car is taxed/licensed.
True, but since CO2 basically is the product of complete combustion, CO2 emissions then would correlate directly with mileage. The more fuel economic, the lower the CO2 emissions. Or am I mistaken?
Re: (Score:2)
Governments don't really care how fuel economic your car is. That's your problem. You do not get taxed more because your car in inefficient (other than through fuel taxes).
But they do care how much CO2 it's producing. So many offer incentives for cars that emit less.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My motorbike consumes 1 liter of gas per 1 km. My 18 wheeler 40 tonne truck also consumes 1 liter of gas per 1 km.
They therefore produce the same amount of CO2 per km.
Are they equally fuel efficient? Or, bearing in mind that it is a tiny fraction of the weight, is my motorbike not ridiculously inefficient?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, we *could* measure fuel efficiency in liters per 100km per kg, but we don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:bah (Score:5, Interesting)
Catalytic converter burns off unburnt hydrocarbons. SOx is handled by not putting sulfur in the fuel. Burning the fuel colder reduces NOx, but increases CO; burning it hotter reduces CO and unburnt hydrocarbons, but increases NOx. NOx has a really short half-life and a high toxic dose (it's like 12ppb in the air right now and the NIH gets iffy if it hits 1200ppb; health problems start around 1500ppb), but we're panicing more over NOx right now.
People call NOx "pollution", which is a hot button word. NOx is an emission, but not polluting at the elevated levels VW's cars put out. On the other hand, your standard school bus emits lung-irritating particulate and *high* amounts of extremely-toxic CO because it would emit unacceptable (but not harmful) levels of NOx if it burned the fuel hotter, like a VW. I've seen poorly-tuned diesel cars spit out black smoke clouds, and I've been behind a gasoline car that was tuned properly and had a fouled cat--inhaling vaporized hydrocarbons in that concentration made me nauseated; it was like huffing off a jar of high-octane fuel.
That's pollution. That stuff clogs the air and, if every car burned that way, would start wrecking the environment and destroying people's health; NOx emissions like VW as a standard would not fit the government's numbers, but also would not damage the environment. We've been higher before, in the 70s, after catalytic converters became EPA requirements. NOx has a shorter half-life at higher atmospheric concentrations, so doubling the NOx output doesn't really double the amount of NOx in the atmosphere. We'd have less unburnt gasoline and less carbon monoxide in the atmosphere as a trade-off.
Re: (Score:2)
SOx are not added to the fossil fuels, they are the remains of the sulphates use by the plants that became your fuel. Heavy fuels, like diesel fuel tend to have more sulphur in them and diesel engine injectors and fuel pumps were designed to take advantage of the sulphur’s lubricity, now that ultra-low sulphur diesel is the norm, people with older diesels either have to use biodiesel or add an injector lubricant.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It appears that 1500 ppb is an insane level.
From here [psr.org]
(high levels of NO will convert to nitrogen dioxide in a short period)
The legal limit for air quality over a long period is 53 ppb, and 100 pbb over shorter periods. Children show an increase in asthma even at these levels.
NOx is a serious pollutant. It is a cause
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't harmful until you get a couple million cars running in the same location with low wind. As someone who saw in LA in the 80s and remembers orange/brown skies in Riverside I understand why these limits exist. Residents of WY may not understand and feel a bit resentful.
Perhaps a bigger problem than brown skies, was ground level ozone. Although the smog was brown in color due to NOx, the major reduction of smog problems in the LA basin had more to do with the reduction in volatile hydrocarbons (and improved gas efficiency).
It's a bit complicated, but by itself, NOx like O2 is mostly neutral to ozone production. Ozone is mostly produced by sunlight O2+uv->2O, O2+O->O3, but it is generally in an equilibrium with the O3->O2+O reaction. Like the O3->O2+O reaction,
Re: (Score:2)
Are you serious? How on earth can environmentalism occur naturally if just raping the earth is economically advantageous rather than doing things a bit more sanely? ...?
How will doing the environmental thing ever be better if we don't impose such regulations, restrictions, laws,
How will properly handling your waste ever be more economical than just dumping it somewhere and not care about it anymore? How will having your cars be economical ever be better than just making wasteful car that is far less complex
Re: (Score:2)
I am not sure how anyone currently on the right can accuse environmentalists of being "ideologues" with a straight face at the moment.
Re: Environmentalism has to happen naturally! (Score:2)
Re:Environmentalism has to happen naturally! (Score:4, Insightful)
The most important lesson we can learn from all of this is that environmentalism can't just be forced because some ivory tower academics or pandering politicians want it to just happen.
Environmentalism must happen, no pun intended, naturally. There must be real desire for it to happen among the participants directly involved. There must be economic feasibility. There must be technological feasibility.
A bunch of leftist ideologues can't just get together and set arbitrary limits on carbon dioxide emissions, write some laws, and expect it all to work fine in the real world.
Environmentalists need to get with the real world. They need to get with it when it comes to economics. They need to get with it when it comes to technology. They need to unchain themselves from trees, and do something useful for a change.
You say that like economics and technology are "natural" phenomena. They are not. I know people think Capitalism is some natural law, but it's not either. It is a man-made system. Environmentalism is concerned with our economic system working in a sustainable way. What you seem to actually be saying is that people want to do what people want to do (e.g. making money in the cheapest way possible) and the Environmentalists are getting in their way by pointing out that they are polluting the atmosphere by what they are doing.
The Earth doesn't care about your economic feasibility. If we destabilize it, it will find a new equilibrium whether we like it or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure what you think capitalism actually is, but I would bet a lot of anything that if I spent a few hours making a shovel, I could shovel a heap more shite in the next week than you could with your bare hands.
You might find it worth paying me to shovel your shite, or buy a shovel from me.
You and your mates might, over a period of years, be happy to support me while a build a power shovel, and shovel a load of other stuff too - maybe dig a ditch
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Forget about NOX and CO2, emission testing and all the BS. Just tax fuel, because that taxes real world mileage. Make the gallon about $7.50-9 and everyone will be driving cars that convert all the energy in the fuel into movement and spew almost no pollutants
I'm just going to assume that you posted AC because you can't bear to put your name to this sophistry.
Re: (Score:3)
1. Minimizing your opponent in an argument is an old, ineffective tactic that does not display any of the alleged merit in your argument.
2. This disclosure was in Europe, where the EPA has absolutely no jurisdiction.
Thanks for the post.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I prefer the one from the time of the Challenger explosion.
Q: How many astronauts can you fit in a VW Bug?
A: 12. Two in the front, three in the back, and seven in the ashtray.
What's the last thing Christa McAuliffe (spelling?) said?
What's this big red button do?
I have more... I'll spare you. Those are my favorites, however. Well, favorites from that time.
Re: (Score:2)
And the 'Godwin point goes to .... AC.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder. The scandal is only getting worse, and I wonder if this old brand will be able to recover? Its reputation is no doubt tarnished for years to come, and I am sure that's already taking a big toll on sales.
Please! I'd be surprised if it made more than a 0.01% dent in sales.
Re: (Score:2)
Temperature has gone up 0.20C in the past 18 years.