Slashdot Mirror
VW Group, BMW and Daimler Are Under Investigation For Collusion In Europe (cnet.com)
The European Commission has launched an antitrust investigation into the Volkswagen Group, BMW and Daimler, over allegations they colluded to keep certain emissions control devices from reaching the market in Europe, according to a statement the Commission released on Tuesday. CNET reports: The technologies the group allegedly sought to bury include a selective catalytic reduction system for diesel vehicles, which would help to reduce environmentally problematic oxides of nitrogen in passenger cars, and "Otto" particulate filters that trap particulate matter from gasoline combustion engines.
"The Commission is investigating whether BMW, Daimler and VW agreed not to compete against each other on the development and roll-out of important systems to reduce harmful emissions from petrol and diesel passenger cars," said Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, head of competition policy for the European Commission, in a statement. "These technologies aim at making passenger cars less damaging to the environment. If proven, this collusion may have denied consumers the opportunity to buy less polluting cars, despite the technology being available to the manufacturers."
"The Commission is investigating whether BMW, Daimler and VW agreed not to compete against each other on the development and roll-out of important systems to reduce harmful emissions from petrol and diesel passenger cars," said Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, head of competition policy for the European Commission, in a statement. "These technologies aim at making passenger cars less damaging to the environment. If proven, this collusion may have denied consumers the opportunity to buy less polluting cars, despite the technology being available to the manufacturers."
It's shocking how Europe is always so biased against these American companies and never investigates any of it's own.
Oh wait.
... sometimes with good reason, but we need people like him to force innovation on these dinosaurs otherwise nothing will change even if at the end of the day the maverick loses and the dinosaurs survive but producing much better vehicles.
Nobody wants these underpowered 1L engines that they try to compensate for by putting in a turbocharger. What they don't like to tell you is when your turbo or your intercooler shit itself is you're stuck with a $4000 repair bill. Then on top of that, they want to attach all sorts of non sense to the exhaust system. I don't blame these guys for going, "We're not going to develop this crap, our customers don't want it anyways."
There is a considerable difference between emissions control systems and a turbo or supercharger when it comes to performance and purpose.
So much so that it tends to make your entire comment pointless.
.Sure, it will end up with cars producing less CO2, but they'll as you say be less reliable and all the replacement parts required and/or early scrapping will easily offset any minor gains in the exhaust emissions.
Yet modern cars with all of this are far more reliable than they ever were back in the day of carburettors, doing mileage that cars of the 70s would never reach.
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
This. The most environmentally responsible approach is long-term car ownership. Longer you own the car, lower the annualized impact of manufacturing the car. If you own your big-block Chevy long enough you will have lower lifetime emissions that someone leasing Priuses.
If EPA was rational they would regulate car long term reliability - ensuring that the car could be used for at least 250,000 miles and 20 years without major rebuilds.
We no longer need to make cars that go at ludicrous speeds. My cheap run-of-the-mill car will easily do 130mph if I ask it to.
That's unnecessary.
All the safety features on modern cars are there for a reason. Your bumpers disintegrate because they will save your life much better than any older car. Airbags are everywhere, even the roof supports. Because it saves your life. None of those are repairable, you don't want them to be, because people will sell you a car with a second-hand replacement airbag that they bolted in after they rear-ended someone and you'll die.
The entertainment costs an absolute pittance of space and money. Usually the same wires as an ISO radio, maybe
a mic or two, and a couple of data cables. And yet they add satnav, in-car voice activation, bluetooth dialling etc. It's literally such a cheap bolt-on they give it away to you because people go "ooh" or consider it a necessity.
In terms of the *car*, the main engine and everything else, the repairability may have gone down but - you know what, few people care. The vast majority of people do not service their own car. It's just that simple.
My father's a mechanic, worked on fleets for decades. He is perfectly capable of building his own kit cars, making anything out of a pile of scrap, removing every single component of a car and engine, cleaning and servicing, and then refitting it all.
He hasn't for years because... he's not being paid to do it. He did it for me a couple of times for accident repair and literal engine failure, etc. but he wouldn't just do it.
The costs involved are all in the parts. He got trade prices. The rest is labour, which is enormous. The complications of all the modern tech is ridiculous, granted. Yet the computer tells him exactly what's wrong when it would take him hours to find out himself.
So even he would go out of his way to avoid promising anything more than an oil change, a brake-pad change or simple repairs / replacements (e.g. lambda sensors).
Not because he couldn't, but it's just not worth the hassle. And when you buy the kit - even a certified compatible, at trade prices, from a guy you've known 20+ years - it takes longer to fit and piss about than just taking it to a garage. It's not something he can afford to do any more as a favour to people.
ABS is mandated in Europe. No ABS on your car, it doesn't get off the forecourt for the model design. Entertainment and luxury stuff is literally just trim. My dad couldn't do anything about most of it or even approach anything techy, but it's all throwaway computer modules and switches in the seats, nothing complex or expensive. But the actual engine-running and safety features - nobody sits and pisses about with those any more, you can't afford to. Just replacing like-for-like costs a fortune because of the legislation on car design.
For example, seat-belt pre-tensioners. Literal explosives in the seatbelt. You can't mess with that stuff. Airbags in every corner and bracket and door and support. You can't mess with that stuff and even running cables around / near them can be a chore.
It's not that there's nothing to play with. It's not that you have to be an expert to do so. It's not that these features are "unnecessary". It's that there's so much in a modern car that you can't get cheaper parts to replace them and it's just not worth the effort to try.
My dad's already written off changing brakes on my car if they run low because it has an electronic handbrake. I didn't get the option on an entire raft of vehicle models. You get an electronic handbrake. And to safely adjust that means a piece of software from the manufacturer, a lesson in IT, and hours of pissing about.
But the consumer just sees "hill start assist" and doesn't think twice, because they don't care about the repairability. It will hardly ever be them repairing it.
Cars are more-so consumer items now than even computers and tablets and smartphones are. I sympathis
Nobody wants these underpowered 1L engines that they try to compensate for by putting in a turbocharger. What they don't like to tell you is when your turbo or your intercooler shit itself is you're stuck with a $4000 repair bill.
Then maybe you should nerd up and learn to replace the turbocharger yourself. It's a trivial job as such things are measured and you should be able to get a reman under $1000 including gaskets. Intercoolers are quite reliable as a rule, unless you hit something.
Then on top of that, they want to attach all sorts of non sense to the exhaust system.
Improving automobile emissions makes excellent sense for those of us who like to breathe.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Old cars can be cool and not expensive. If you drive a beater car and don't show pride of ownership, then yes, people react accordingly. If you drive an old car and it is clean, minimal rust, and is running well, then it is "old school cool".
For example old and inexpensive Civic Hatch, VW Golf, Subaru Impreza, Toyota Celcia, and so on would not be seen in a negative light. Your choices broaden a great deal if you step up to luxury bracket, as almost any $100K car would still be seen as cool 20 years older. For example, old diesel W123 Mercedes-Benz is both super practical (easily 40MPG) and super cool.
Europe has much stricter environmental laws, but it turns out European manufacturers are shady as fuck. This is pretty much the perennial argument about private enterprise throwing up their hands once the government steps in.