Slashdot Mirror
Volkswagen Seeks To Repair Its Image By Focusing On Electric (wired.com)
An anonymous reader writes: The emissions scandal that's plagued Volkswagen over the past month will be tough to recover from. But they're trying. The company announced a number of changes they're making to their line of vehicles. First, they'll be revamping their flagship Phaeton vehicles to be all-electric. (If you live in the U.S. and haven't heard of these, don't be surprised — they aren't marketed there.) Second, they've announced their intention to install top-of-the-line environmental protection systems in their new diesel cars. (In other words, they'll actually do what they're required by law to do, but vehicle prices will jump significantly.) Their press release is difficult to decipher, given the density of buzzwords and vague promises, but they indicate a greater general focus on hybrids and electric vehicles in the future.
I'd say Volkswagon can count on the short term memory of the buying public.
Like a bad breakup, time will heal this, too.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Er... The EU are looking into it too and they will be recalling cars from there just the same.
It's not an EU only issue, they're in for a world of hurt world-wide.
It isn't US only issue, they've messed things up in other countries as well.
3.6m european cars need hardware fix:
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/v...
Before that, there was (mostly unnoticed) "oscar scandal" with ADAC rigging votes in favour of VW Golf:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/774a...
VW is rather "known" in German auto industry for having cars that perform on par (e.g. VW Sharan vs Ford S-Max) yet are regarded as way better cars by many journalists "for some reason".
Bullshit. They conned the entire fucking planet. Europe has far higher emission requirements than the US, and most countries require vehicles to be tested annually. Fail the test, your is rendered illegal for public roads. VW's aim was to mislead the public about the efficiency of their diesel engines, but the efficiency took a dive in clean running mode, so they switched it off only for testing conditions.
VW need to contribute to infrastructure in countries where they are sold. For example, in the UK most of the rapid charger network was paid for by Nissan, and a lesser number by Renault. Other EV and PHEV manufacturers like BMW, VW, Mitsubishi, Vauxhall, Toyota and the rest contributed next to nothing, and we badly need more infrastructure to support their vehicles.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I would go for the "electric up to 5MPH" solution used with buses for my car. I don't want petrol, thanks. I sometimes tow things.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Yup. I'm in the UK, and I got a letter from VW yesterday onfirming my car will need a fix. No details except that the are working on it.
Oh no... it's the future.
Depends, the NOx limit in EU is much higher than the US. The CO2 limit in the EU is lower than the US. Different things to optimize or cheat for.
EU has higher requirements for CO and in general lower requirements for NOx, except maybe very latest EuroN test that raises a bar closer to few years old EPA test. NOx is what matters for smog. Paris at times is no better than Chinese cities and now they try to prevent diesels entering downtown. Maybe they should not have allowed them on the roads in the first place.
European annual road tests are BS in most countries except Germany, Switzerland and few others that take them seriously. Especially anywhere to the East of Western Europe. First, you don't need to pass new test with old vehicles. You need to meet only some old BS test. Then, you can just quickly tune the system to produce better results before the test at the expense of efficiency, and tune back as soon as you leave testing facility. Many older cares on the road have catalytic converters removed - they cost money to replace, but you can actually sell them for small money for precious metals inside.
There is no practical way to control all old car emissions on roads EU wide.
Well, they're not actually going to fix the problem. They're just going to have their computers report that it's fixed.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
I did an obsessive amount of research on VW's clean diesel technology, and the engineering issues that motivated their decision to cheat. Going hybrid would solve all their problems. Well, the technical ones anyway.
The problem is that their patented "clean NOx trap" pollution control technology involves storing NOx pollution in a zeolite "molecular sponge". The sponge needs to be cleaned out periodically by changing the engine fuel-to-air ratio: when that happens (for a few seconds every minute or two), engine performance is drastically reduced. VW's engine computer tries to keep this from happening while the driver is accelerating, but apparently it wasn't good enough, so they programmed the computer to not bother with trap cleaning unless it's being tested in an EPA lab.
With a full hybrid system, the engine can run at optimum efficiency at all times, and can take a break to clean the NOx trap whenever it wants: the electric motor and batteries can take over.
Because the EPA requirements are zealous, and makes producing a diesel vehicle unviable.
No it does not. Diesels can easily meet the emissions rules and there are plenty of vehicles that do it without cheating. VW cheated because they didn't want to install the expensive equipment necessary to make this happen such as a urea injection system. It has nothing to do with diesel technology and everything to do with profit motive. VW cheated to pad their bottom line.
The funny thing is electric cars are the real unviable vehicles, hydrogen powered vehicles are the best idea, only waste they produce from the combustion of hydrogen is water.
Umm, what? Hydrogen powered cars are clearly a non-starter at this time. Basically zero fuel infrastructure unless you use derivatives of hydrocarbons which basically ends up with the same sort of emissions problems we currently face. They've got high emissions intensity because our primary source of hydrogen is from natural gas. They also have low performance (comparatively) and poor efficiency (comparatively) with PHEVs. While conceptually hydrogen power has some attractive features, in practice it isn't superior to existing alternatives and there is no evidence to suggest that will change in the near future.
Since you think (wrongly IMO) that electric cars are "unviable", I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you otherwise but so far the evidence does not appear to be agreeing with you. Electric and hybrid electric vehicles are pretty clearly the next evolution in automobiles and that only happens if they are a viable technology.
> Phaeton
Right. So what they're going to do is make yet another "Tesla killer" that sells to a few thousand rich people, and leave all the people that bought a Jetta in the cold. The net effect of this on overall emissions will be basically zero.
Perhaps they would be better off spending this on making a diesel hybrid PEH drivetrain that could equip 80% of the cars they sell? This is a move that takes far less development, would cost less in real dollar terms, and would *drastically* reduce overall real-world emissions.
Volkswagen's fix will reduce the mileage on the cars that it's applied to. I wonder if VW owners are really going to line up at the garage to have the fix applied. Or will mandatory emissions testing force them to allow VW to apply the fix?
Silly, I am talking about hydrogen powered combustion engines, they produce more power than a gasoline engine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Maybe I'm reading this wrong but it appears the Wiki shows the Hydrogen version made less power by almost 50% when compared to running on gas (80kW on hydrogen vs 154kW on gas).
> Europe has far higher emission requirements than the US
European regulation crusades against high tail-pipe emissions of CO2 (global climate change arch-enemy) and PM10 (tiny soot particles eventually causing cancer and systematic heart failure after decades of accumulation in the lungs). PM10 is a big-big issue for diesels, necessitating particulate filters to meet Euro 4/5/6 norms. Another trick is "AdBlue" tech that uses acid refined from urination to wash tailpipe exhausts clean.
In contrast, as far as I understand, US regulations are much focused on the various nitrogen-oxides, which cause the classic "smog" effect. Generally speaking Europe receives more rain, so NOx is less of an issue for the old continent. (But France and especially its capital Paris is an exception to this generalization.) It should noted as well that Europe uses a lot of methane (~ Russia's piped natural gas) for heating and electric power generation, so their coal/wood burning emissions are lesser, helping to alleviate the NOx problem. (Poland is an exception in Europe, they are crazy about poor quality "brown" coal, have no reactor and afraid to buy much gas from Putin.) Meanwhile USA is a big consumer of coal and mineral oil.
I am talking about hydrogen powered combustion engines, they produce more power than a gasoline engine.
Did you actually read the article you linked to?
Power: Hydrogen 80kW vs Gasoline 154kW
Torque: Hydrogen 140Nm vs Gasoline 222Nm
Range: Hydrogen 100 km vs Gasoline 550km
When powered by hydrogen it is worse in each and every relevant measure. A LOT worse.
A french magazine for consumers wrote an interesting article about long-term reliability of the various cars.
Volkswagen has a generally good quality, but still a lot of problems.
Here are a few ones:
- fouling and breakage of the turbo diesel 4 cylinder
- failure of injectors and water/oil leakage on the 1.6 TDI
etc.
The recommended models are : Up!, Polo (except diesel until 2014), current Golf Jetta and Passat, New Beetle, Sharan since 2013 and current Touareg.
If you are interested, I can translate some of their recommendations.
Diesel hybrid is a nonsense.
Really? Every locomotive in use today is a diesel electric hybrid. Frankly I think a diesel hybrid would make a lot of sense for many applications, particularly large trucks. Electric motors are great for around town stop/start traffic where diesels aren't so hot and diesels are great for steady state long distance driving (like highways) where electric motors aren't so hot. Their strengths are very complimentary.
I know they exist, but still the whole hybrid jazz is about overcoming problems of petrol engine the diesel just does not have.
Diesel engines are not *that* much different from gasoline engines.
You seem to be quite sure of this... I would question as to why?
Several reasons.
1) PHEVs require minimal to no infrastructure investment to be viable. No other alternative can make that claim.
2) Fuel economy standards. PHEVs are a proven solution to the problem and the solution with the least compromise of performance.
3) Prices of batteries continues to fall and performance continues to rise. As that happens the the price of hybrid vehicles will continue to improve.
4) Performance and luxury cars already are beginning the conversion to hybrid. (See McClaren, Ferrari, BMW, Porsche, Lamborghini, etc)
5) Internal combustion engines aren't going to get much better than they already are. We are well into diminishing returns on their performance.
6) There are basically no other market-ready alternatives to improve performance. Not hydrogen, not natural gas, not pure-electric. Not yet.
Well, they DO get a lot of press... but sales? Plug in EVs of all types were less than 1% of the total light car and truck sales in the US in 2014 (it was 0.7% to be exact).
Find me another alternative fuel vehicle type that has even close to the market uptake that hybrids have. Hybrids are still relatively pricey so it's not surprising that they will take some time to gather market share but they ARE gaining market share. And they are selling. In Japan the Toyota Prius is currently the #2 selling vehicle and has been near the top for years. They're not going to take over the market tomorrow but they will become very commonplace over the next 10-15 years.
That is a rounding error, not the "coming replacement of ICE cars".
That's like saying in 1978 that personal computers are a rounding error in computer sales. It's true but it misses the point of what will happen next. Hybrids are still new and fairly expensive. But car companies will HAVE to start pushing hybrids or they will have to greatly lower the power of the vehicles they sell to meet fuel economy standards. I think the former is far more likely than the later. There is no other market ready alternative available to them. You're particularly going to see hybrids becoming standard equipment on luxury cars first and then working down the food chain into mass market cars as costs fall. It will take some years but I don't see any credible scenario where hybrids don't grab big market share.
Nonsense. Most visible smoke is larger particles than PM10, and is not fully respirable. The cilia trap most of it before it gets to the alveoli. PM10 is relatively coarse particulates. PM2.5 is fine particulates, and below this there are superfine particulates too, and these are the more dangerous. PM2.5 and superfine particulates are a problem in gasoline engines as well, particularly the newer direct injection designs. Hysteria has just not centered on this yet.
Back then, if a heat wave came in and people died, tough.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Plenty of room in the passenger seat.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'