Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Businesses United States

Tesla Accused of Environmental Rule Violations In US and Germany (cnbc.com) 127

Rei_is_a_dumbass shares a report from CNBC: Tesla is defending itself in the U.S. and Germany against allegations that it has violated environmental rules and regulations, according to a new financial filing. In the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency accused Tesla last week of failing to prove it is in compliance with federal emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants. Specifically, the EPA is seeking details about how Tesla handles "surface coating" of its vehicles. As CNBC has previously reported, the "paint shop" at Tesla's main U.S. car plant in Fremont, California, has a history of problems, including fires, improper cleaning and maintenance. Some vehicle re-touching, to fix flaws in paint on the cars, has been done in a tented "paint hospital" at the Fremont factory, employees previously told CNBC. In 2020, Tesla embarked on massive improvements to its paint facilities, Fremont building permits revealed.

Tesla said in the filing Wednesday that the company "has responded to all information requests from the EPA and refutes the allegations." The company does not expect any "material adverse impact" on its business from its dealings with the EPA in this matter. Tesla is also still tangling with local air quality authorities in California -- the Bay Area Air Quality Management District -- over previously disclosed "notices of violation," relating to "air permitting and related compliance for the Fremont Factory."

In Germany, Wednesday's financial filing said, authorities have fined Tesla 12 million euros, or about $14.5 million, for allegedly failing to make public notifications and properly fulfill their obligations to take back old batteries from customers. German law requires automakers selling electric cars to take back batteries and dispose of them in an environmentally sustainable manner. Tesla wrote in the filing: "This is primarily relating to administrative requirements, but Tesla has continued to take back battery packs." Tesla filed an objection in Germany and said that the matter should not have a material impact on Tesla's business.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tesla Accused of Environmental Rule Violations In US and Germany

Comments Filter:
  • I have little doubt the raw materials extraction to scrap yard life time environmental impact of a BEVs and the energy to run them compared to traditional ICE vehicles is a win in terms of total environmental impact.

    However when we look with a broader eye than just carbon emissions and start to consider what actually happens vs what was supposed to happen we are going find scale of that win is a lot smaller than people like Musk want us to believe.

    • However when we look with a broader eye than just carbon emissions

      Nobody cares if it's not something that plays into the Global Warming panic. Other environmental hazards are largely ignored or written off as misinformation pushed by the fossil fuel industry. There's a general attitude that if China wants to shit up their local ecosystems then let them do it.

    • I have little doubt the raw materials extraction to scrap yard life time environmental impact of a BEVs and the energy to run them compared to traditional ICE vehicles is a win in terms of total environmental impact.

      Except it isn't because an ICE vehicle is 100% recyclable and currently they are. With EVs nobody is interested in actually recycling the batteries because it's cheaper to dig new lithium out of the ground.

  • I love how this guy keeps getting stories submitted. Classic troll.
    • by ac22 ( 7754550 )

      That's quite a compliment coming from one of the OMBad accounts.

      • Right. This is one of my dozens of accounts. You guys seem obsessed about people having multiple accounts. And yeah, I fully support Rei_is_a_dumbass. He is way better than me.
  • by Rei ( 128717 ) on Thursday April 29, 2021 @08:21AM (#61327332) Homepage

    Where a person whose account exists only to stalk another user is not blocked, but rather, featured on the front page.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Thursday April 29, 2021 @09:09AM (#61327452) Homepage Journal

      Yeah, come on editors, this isn't on. It's bad enough that this person created an account with that name, but you don't have to let it onto the front page too.

    • by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

      Where a person whose account exists only to stalk another user is not blocked, but rather, featured on the front page.

      Ad hominem attack. Even your stalker can contribute noteworthy news.

      • Sure, show the story, but there is no reason to advertise that troll's name. Just show him as AC.
        • by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

          Sure, show the story, but there is no reason to advertise that troll's name. Just show him as AC.

          He contributed the story. That is both the reason and the practice.

    • I complained once and Logan fixed it. I complained recently about it and never heard back. And then there's this one.

      All of them were BeauHD and let's be honest, we all know the quality of work there. Just a fucking joke. They're obviously not going to do anything about comments but they could at least pretend to give a shit about what they post.

  • "air permitting and related compliance" is a good way for govt agencies to get money from firms. The air quality norms are so tight, ambient air at any arbitrary urban location fails them. They measure air quality inside a half-bulldozed furnace of a decommissioned factory, that was never lit in the last 40 years and issue a violation for exceeding emissions.

    • Agreed. We should just trust Musk instead. He is an environmentalist.
    • Literally *all* the things are "shakedowns" to you libertarians.
      Including laws against shakedown done by firms.

      It's ye olde "You are taking away my freedom to take away your freedom! How dare you?".

      • I think you've confused the sides. And you're defending a "law" that was written in such a way that *every* business violates it. There are no "innocent" here, only these who didn't get a visit from the inspector with the sensor. Your granny knitting socks violates it.

  • "Move fast and break Earth"

  • Nobody cares if you do it, or do the right thing.

    All that matters is that you obey the rules without question and fill out ALL the forms to get your permit A38. Even if it is completely counter-productive to the original goal. In fact *especially* then!

    Oh, and make sure you always scold and criticize anyone stepping out of line, or, if not available, the entire country.
    (Can you tell where I'm from? ;)

  • Oh, the irony of a company whose product is supposed to keep the environmentalists happy being accused of not being environmentally friendly. The EPA might want to read today's Wall Street Journal article on Elon Musk. He regularly tells regulators (see what I did there?) and other useless, overpaid bureaucrats to go pound sand and they usually do.

No man is an island if he's on at least one mailing list.

Working...