Were VW diesel owners really harmed other than impacts to resale value (which I believe will be more in the short term)? I don't believe for a second that most really care much about the emissions - they want low running costs.
Were VW diesel owners really harmed other than impacts to resale value (which I believe will be more in the short term)? I don't believe for a second that most really care much about the emissions - they want low running costs.
So if VW wants to lower my diesel car cpmd : depreciation costs, due to their "admissions," why are folks taking umbrage to that? Right now my oldest with most mileage is @ 6.4 cents cpmd depreciation. So if they want to lower that for my later model ones, why not? I then can decide whether I want to leave them for another OEM or stay, with no uncommon economic penalty. It might be seen as imperfect justice. Better might be seen as full price buy back.
Lower running costs were/are certainly one reason ( one of mine certainly) to consider diesels. Once the transitions are made, the execution is really rather boring! So for example, I only put 21 mpg, PUG vs 36-38 mpg, ULSD ( like model) in context on this board. Day to day, I expect 36 mpg, I only note the exceptions, for lessons learned.
By some perhaps but not by all. Probably the next worst hose job by an automaker was to the poor Oldsmobile diesel owners---their cars were rendered worthless within a year or two.
I dunno--some of you guys are pretty forgiving. I think VW's actions were outrageous, not just to the owners, but to everyone who breathes the air.
Would you really support a company that say sold you a product that poisoned your drinking water?
And what about other diesel makers, who "played fair"? Shouldn't they be held in higher esteem?
By some perhaps but not by all. Probably the next worst hose job by an automaker was to the poor Oldsmobile diesel owners---their cars were rendered worthless within a year or two.
I dunno--some of you guys are pretty forgiving. I think VW's actions were outrageous, not just to the owners, but to everyone who breathes the air.
Would you really support a company that say sold you a product that poisoned your drinking water?
And what about other diesel makers, who "played fair"? Shouldn't they be held in higher esteem?
"All of the above. VW is a corporation an inanimate entity. It cannot cheat. "
(picking mouth up off the floor)
I think VW diesel owners will have to face it---they got screwed by a company they trusted and admired.
Really IF that's the (your) metric, it's fair to say that we've been screwed by EVERY auto OEM!
Well, funny you should mention that! In fact, MTBE was forced down CA gullets by CARB no less. Upshot, & log shameful story short, it was over strenuous objects to "water poisoning" & other cancer causing problems. It cost billions of dollars to implement, and continues to cost billions of dollars to decertify. This does not include the billions in spending for clean water remediation!
& before that, there was LEADED gasoline! Each haven been exponentially far worse than diesel!! Diesel got a bad rap because EPA/CARB refused to implement ULSD in the 1970's than in late 2006 !!!
Straw man argument. That has nothing to do with VW cheating.
Besides, we are not talking about government incompetence here, or the firemen who couldn't find the fire, or the man who chopped down the tree onto his house.
We are talking about deliberate, malicious, premeditated intention to do harm.
Straw man argument. That has nothing to do with VW cheating.
Besides, we are not talking about government incompetence here, or the firemen who couldn't find the fire, or the man who chopped down the tree onto his house.
We are talking about deliberate, malicious, premeditated intention to do harm.
I acknowledged it and made some money from their admissions! So the markets dealt out punishment & will continue to punish VW!
So who is doing the denying in defense of far more egregious WILLFULL actions????? Well again, that does meet your definitions ! Nexus here? EPA/CARB WALKS! Will VW? The markets handed VW some of its body parts on a platter!
It remains to be seen what pounds of flesh EPA/CARB will exact from VW.
I suspect running a lawnmower for an hour will produce more harmful emissions than the lifetime excess (that is, real vs claimed) emissions of a cheater VW . If one is going to play the "would you" game, this mess must be put in perspective.
VW is in trouble for deception rather than causing physical harm.
I suspect running a lawnmower for an hour will produce more harmful emissions than the lifetime excess (that is, real vs claimed) emissions of a cheater VW . If one is going to play the "would you" game, this mess must be put in perspective.
VW is in trouble for deception rather than causing physical harm.
Yes! And that's precisely the reason why they don't hook up and compare one to each other!
It's already known, proven actually, that gas emissions exhaust will kill you FASTER than diesel emissions exhaust! Somehow in the argument, it's casually forgotten or more willfully...ignored.
"All of the above. VW is a corporation an inanimate entity. It cannot cheat. "
(picking mouth up off the floor)
I think VW diesel owners will have to face it---they got screwed by a company they trusted and admired.
I still think it's the EPA that got screwed; not owners. However, the EPA might try and make owner's lives miserable if they resist "being screwed," and bending over.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
But 40x what? And wasn't the estimated range 10x-40x, with no concrete number?
Sure, run 100000 lawnmowers for an hour. The problems will evaporate in time and be irrelevant to the overall environment. Just like cheater diesels, which are both an insignificant amount of overall pollution and an insignificant amount of the automotive fleet.
Like I said before, VW isn't in trouble for harm, it is in trouble for lies.
I think you're on to something. Some EPA suits are likely personally offended someone pulled something over on them, and will take vengeance like so many prosecutor types.
I still think it's the EPA that got screwed; not owners. However, the EPA might try and make owner's lives miserable if they resist "being screwed," and bending over.
Wood burning fire places should be banned too; seems harmful to my nose when I'm out jogging on a cold night.
Wood fires are regulated and prohibited in some places. And the EPA regulates wood stoves to try to contain particulate emissions.
It's not diesel vs lawnmowers vs ICE vs wildfires and it's not a zero sum game. You can't shut the volcano down but you can regulate the "artificial" smog and punish those who ignore or willfully violate the regs.
They do ban wood stoves in many areas. As for old cars, I wouldn't be opposed to having them undergo a smog test, but with pretty loose standards of course. I don't need someone's 7 cylinder '55 Buick spewing hydrocarbons into the air. Old cars, when tuned properly, aren't too "dirty", given their limited use.
Fireplaces and wood stoves are allowed if they are the only source of heat. Sometimes that's simply due to preference or stubbornness of the "homeowner". No retroactive policies, just like with cars. Haven't seen anything credible claiming that cheater VWs will add anything at all to smog. There just isn't that many of them compared to the size of this land mass. People, SJW types especially, need to remember, VW is in trouble for cheating, not the volume of pollution.
My fintail predates all emissions equipment and its basic engine family never had it, good luck smogging it.
I would consider exceeding emissions standards by 40X as having a potentially harmful effect.
Then shouldn't we immediately ban 15 year and older vehicles off the road? So much for classic cars!
Absolutely NO! That would be an absolute & additional waste of time, money & resources! Realistically it would be the resources + plus needed to produce 2 vehicles when you need only one! (In my cases) The 1994/1996 TLC's, 22/20 years old, smog tests as NEW! That is even with very loose standards allowing for so called age. @ the 30 year mark, I suspect very little change. We still run 20,000 OCI's. We also double the recommended major tune intervals. The OEM recommended tire sizes & constant improvement, let use run them 90,000 miles. We even double to triple air filter mileage intervals. So if the gassers can do it(250,000 miles plus) , most certainly so can the diesels!
Haven't seen anything credible claiming that cheater VWs will add anything at all to smog. There just isn't that many of them compared to the size of this land mass. People, SJW types especially, need to remember, VW is in trouble for cheating, not the volume of pollution.
Every bit of pollution or alleged pollution needs to kept in check. If our coal-fired electric plants are so evil even with their current pollution scubbers that some want to do away with coal in the US but ship it to China and India, then I want the same government to go gung ho on pollution from diesels.
Scrubbed coal emissions are probably a trumped up issue these days - more of the "for thee, not me" set wanting everyone to live in a micro house/shoebox apartment and only travel by bus or bike - except for themselves, first class citizenry who can keep their private cars and nice urban detached houses they bought for nothing ages ago resolving old guilt by making questionable policies. If the government was to go gung ho on pollution, then lobbyists wouldn't be able to buy exemptions for special cases like lawn equipment and aging commercial vehicles that essentially go unchecked - not to mention outsourced pollution so EV/hybrid batteries can exist. Probably won't happen, remember the golden rule.
I saw a VW themed TV lawyer ad this morning, it only mentioned lies, nothing about emissions harm.
Haven't seen anything credible claiming that cheater VWs will add anything at all to smog. There just isn't that many of them compared to the size of this land mass. People, SJW types especially, need to remember, VW is in trouble for cheating, not the volume of pollution.
Every bit of pollution or alleged pollution needs to kept in check. If our coal-fired electric plants are so evil even with their current pollution scubbers that some want to do away with coal in the US but ship it to China and India, then I want the same government to go gung ho on pollution from diesels.
Well it's obvious what you have said, it's not so obvious what you really mean or imply!
In fact, OVER USE of gasoline has been, is & continues to be the policy now ! Current percentages of the PVF, (95 to 97% gasoline, gas hybrid) in fact force & guarantee more gasoline use: both volume & % wise STRUCTURALLY than Europe does ( with 49% gasoline/51% plus ULSD) , all things being equal!
So, keeping the current % PVF ratios guarantees far greater gasoline use & much greater %'s & more barrels of oil that need to be refined, than IF the US had app 35% + plus PVF diesels!
You diesel HATERS might be LOATHED to hear this, but the current policy ( 95 % to 97% gasoline use) , actually GUARANTEES (artificially) high DIESEL production volumes + %'s !!!
Slow diesel News Day out here @ $ 1.98 per gal ULSD, (spot 12/21/15, NYC harbor ULSD $1.05/ gasoline $1.21)
$2.19 RUG, $2.45 PUG!
So given like model gas, gas hybrid / ULSD which would I prefer & chose? We already know which the overwhelming majority chooses (gasoline & more gal use) !
TMI: 21 mpg vs 36 mpg @15,000 miles per year ( our) commute ( more importantly avg US drivers mileage) = 714 gal vs 417 gals, = 71% more. Would one chose more or less gals, mpg? @ today's prices $ 1,749. vs $ 824. = 112 % more. Would one rather pay more or less?
Do you all wonder where it is going @ $4.00 gasoline?
Straw man argument. That has nothing to do with VW cheating.
Besides, we are not talking about government incompetence here, or the firemen who couldn't find the fire, or the man who chopped down the tree onto his house.
We are talking about deliberate, malicious, premeditated intention to do harm.
As Perry Mason would say, you opened the door when you accused VW of poisoning the water.
Straw man argument. That has nothing to do with VW cheating.
Besides, we are not talking about government incompetence here, or the firemen who couldn't find the fire, or the man who chopped down the tree onto his house.
We are talking about deliberate, malicious, premeditated intention to do harm.
As Perry Mason would say, you opened the door when you accused VW of poisoning the water.
Another reason why I find this board so entertaining!
I thought it was @gagrice that brought up the MTBE, not Shifty. Or maybe he was accusing the EPA of poisoning the water (meaning the EPA dug all those abandoned mines 100 years ago that leech arsenic 24/7?).
Perry Mason only played a logger on TV.
In diesel news, I got squat. Some state in India has banned diesels more than 15 years old. US crude is getting shipped to Switzerland in January. Fuel stockpiles are down unexpectedly, so a price jump in gas and diesel is imminent. Except that the bbl prices are still at a 20+ year low.
I thought it was @gagrice that brought up the MTBE, not Shifty. Or maybe he was accusing the EPA of poisoning the water (meaning the EPA dug all those abandoned mines 100 years ago that leech arsenic 24/7?).
Perry Mason only played a logger on TV.
In diesel news, I got squat. Some state in India has banned diesels more than 15 years old. US crude is getting shipped to Switzerland in January. Fuel stockpiles are down unexpectedly, so a price jump in gas and diesel is imminent. Except that the bbl prices are still at a 20+ year low.
Yes, it was Gagrice rather than Shifty who brought up the MTBE discussion, added to gasoline which causes massive air & H20 pollution FORCED by EPA/CARB. Gasoline emissions systems were not designed to mitigate neither MTBE nor (current) ethanol emissions! Yet both were/are seen as HEALTHY !!?? Zero concerns about those death rates?
Yes, Raymond Burr only played the fictional? lawyer Perry Mason.
Yes, I would rather pay $69.DIESEL rather than $146. per month PUG for the same ( 1,250 mo/15,000 yr ) commute miles. I wonder what the Swiss pay?
If a car exceeds its NOX limits then it is, de facto, contributing to air pollution. Every little bit counts, just like snowflakes.....AWWWWWW......
I must say I am surprised that some of you would defend VW, especially since some of you are the victims. (those with newer diesels---the old ones have already depreciated fully).
I wish I could turn back the clock and ask you to live (just for a day, because I like you all) where you live but without the EPA ever having intervened in your life. That would probably be Beijing or Naples.
Well, No! Well no & false! The EPA/CARB consider themselves the victims! Otherwise, they would collect the TBD fines & penalties and give them to affected diesel owners! (people like me) Now I share your sentiments! The old diesels (my 2003 VW Jetts TDI) by definition are unaffected! Depreciation in those scenarios are not relevant, unless VW wants to give me what I paid for it new.
Lol & the majority of it caused by gassers, as ...it still is! It will probably remain, for easily 60 years going forward! Geez, I will be 124! Think about how long electric cars has been a pipe dream: to have a significant electric PVF % ? We actually have had electric car when cars started: for @ least 136 years, or late 1800's!!? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car
I thought it was @gagrice that brought up the MTBE, not Shifty. Or maybe he was accusing the EPA of poisoning the water (meaning the EPA dug all those abandoned mines 100 years ago that leech arsenic 24/7?).
Perry Mason only played a logger on TV.
In diesel news, I got squat. Some state in India has banned diesels more than 15 years old. US crude is getting shipped to Switzerland in January. Fuel stockpiles are down unexpectedly, so a price jump in gas and diesel is imminent. Except that the bbl prices are still at a 20+ year low.
Objection your Honor. I made no reference to MTBE. My reference was to poisoning the water. gagrice bought up MTBE, but well before that it was shifty who accused VW of poisoning the water.
Metaphorically poisoning the water, not literally.
Oh, I did e-mail my friends who own TDIs just to see how they felt. Two answered and basically they do feel shafted. Only one mentioned the environmental factor; the other was more concerned with the financial impact.
They did get their gift cards, though. ' I also asked them if they would buy another diesel if theirs were bought back. Both said no, not at this time anyway.
Metaphorically poisoning the water, not literally.
Oh, I did e-mail my friends who own TDIs just to see how they felt. Two answered and basically they do feel shafted. Only one mentioned the environmental factor; the other was more concerned with the financial impact.
They did get their gift cards, though. ' I also asked them if they would buy another diesel if theirs were bought back. Both said no, not at this time anyway.
So intellectually and going forward, I should be shopping for MB/VW that will take place of the 1985/1987 MB 300 SD/TD ? I'm thinking I already have two icon models .
Mr_Shiftright said: We are talking about deliberate, malicious, premeditated intention to do harm. I must say I am surprised that some of you would defend VW, especially since some of you are the victims. (those with newer diesels---the old ones have already depreciated fully).
I seriously doubt the engineers that let the software go into production considered it a big deal. In light of the fact that CA allows over 1 million semis, that put out at least 125 times as much NOx as the average VW TDI. For millions more miles per year. They knew the EPA/CARB regs were designed to get rid of diesel passenger cars, and figured they could beat them at their own game. And for the Eco nuts it is a game to push their agenda of no cars for the masses.
I believe the engineers or pencil pushers at GM that decided not to replace a known defective ignition switch are at least 125 times as guilty as the VW engineers. I will repeat this as it went over many heads. The service people at my VW dealership have not gotten a single complaint from TDI owners. I don't feel victimized except by CARB that denied me owning a diesel VW long before now. Sadly the science used to block diesels came from a PHD at CARB that was NOT a PHD. He was a lying POC diesel hater.
After 27k miles in this Touareg TDI, I am really ticked that I wasted so much money on that hunk of a gas hog Sequoia. Far more of a victim of Toyota than VW .
I don't know one "eco nut" who even thinks about diesels as a top priority, what with the rest of the environment quickly going to hell in a handbasket. To the environmental activist, diesel and gas engines are all part of the same problem, along with any other device or equipment using fossil fuels. I am sure there is no conspiracy to get rid of diesels, since everyone knows they are our basic lifeline to food and supplies. To want to eliminate all diesel engines is to basically want to kill yourself. It makes no sense whatsoever.
Mr_Shiftright said: We are talking about deliberate, malicious, premeditated intention to do harm. I must say I am surprised that some of you would defend VW, especially since some of you are the victims. (those with newer diesels---the old ones have already depreciated fully).
I seriously doubt the engineers that let the software go into production considered it a big deal. In light of the fact that CA allows over 1 million semis, that put out at least 125 times as much NOx as the average VW TDI. For millions more miles per year. They knew the EPA/CARB regs were designed to get rid of diesel passenger cars, and figured they could beat them at their own game. And for the Eco nuts it is a game to push their agenda of no cars for the masses.
I believe the engineers or pencil pushers at GM that decided not to replace a known defective ignition switch are at least 125 times as guilty as the VW engineers. I will repeat this as it went over many heads. The service people at my VW dealership have not gotten a single complaint from TDI owners. I don't feel victimized except by CARB that denied me owning a diesel VW long before now. Sadly the science used to block diesels came from a PHD at CARB that was NOT a PHD. He was a lying POC diesel hater.
After 27k miles in this Touareg TDI, I am really ticked that I wasted so much money on that hunk of a gas hog Sequoia. Far more of a victim of Toyota than VW .
I don't know one "eco nut" who even thinks about diesels as a top priority, what with the rest of the environment quickly going to hell in a handbasket.
How about Mary Nichols Chair of CARB????
'Gross Miscalculation' of Diesel Emissions Sets Back Calif. Law
The pollution estimate in question was too high -- by 340 percent, according to the California Air Resources Board, the state agency charged with researching and adopting air quality standards. The estimate was a key part in the creation of a regulation adopted by the Air Resources Board in 2007
And don't say anything against CARB or you will lose your high paying job. The state is filled with lying Eco Nuts that will push their agenda of destroying the state economy to make a pristine place only the rich can afford to live in.
A California epidemiologist who lost his job with UCLA not long after challenging the science behind claims that diesel pollution was responsible for 2,000 deaths a year in the state is suing to get his job back.
The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) announced today it had filed suit Wednesday in Los Angeles against UCLA officials for violating Dr. James Enstrom’s constitutional rights:
"The facts of this case are astounding," said David French, Senior Counsel of the ACLJ. "UCLA terminated a professor after 35 years of service simply because he exposed the truth about an activist scientific agenda that was not only based in fraud but violated California law for the sake of imposing expensive new environmental regulations on California businesses. UCLA's actions were so extreme that its own Academic Freedom Committee unanimously expressed its concern about the case."
Dr. Enstrom, a research professor in UCLA's Department of Environmental Health Sciences, published important peer-reviewed research demonstrating that fine particulate matter does not kill Californians. Also, Dr. Enstrom assembled detailed evidence that contends powerful UC professors and others have systematically exaggerated the adverse health effects of diesel particulate matter in California, knowing full well that these exaggerations would be used by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to justify draconian diesel vehicle regulations in California.
One UCLA science researcher, a 34-year veteran of the school, found himself out of a job in 2011 after examining the data underlying diesel regulations proposed by a California regulator and exposing the shoddy credentials of a lead author of that regulator’s report.
James Enstrom secured victory in a two-and-a-half year legal battle against UCLA last week when the school agreed to settle the case.
The school is paying the “diesel particulate matter” expert $140,000, reinstating his title as “Retired Researcher,” and restoring his access to UCLA resources, “effectively” rescinding his termination, according to the American Center for Law & Justice, which represented Enstrom.
Bottom line you don't make CARB look bad or you are targeted. Enstrom exposed fraud Hien T. Tran, CARB phony scientist and lead author of the October 24, 2008 CARB report on PM2.5 and premature death. Another diesel hater at the top of CARB. CARB is not above covering up misdeeds.
The California Air Resources Board has yet to honor my request to see the 38 exhibits in the Hien T. Tran academic fraud case. Tran was the lead researcher on a scientific study that was used to justify sweeping, costly new diesel emission rules proposed by the CARB staff. He admitted Dec. 10 to CARB that he lied about having a Ph.D. in statistics from UC Davis. Instead, Tran said, his Ph.D. was from "Thornhill University."
Nevertheless, the air board still voted unanimously to adopt the rules based on his research Dec. 12 -- without acknowledging Tran's deception.
Anyways, I obtained the exhibit showing Tran's fake Ph.D. from another source. How impressive -- the $1,000 got him a "magna [non-permissible content removed] laude" plaudit from Thornhill University, not just a diploma.
You would think CARB would do something about the Ships that cause 99% of the smog in the Los Angeles basin? Must be big bucks crossing palms to cover up the real polluters of our air. We don't need all that crap from China, so why not shut the ports down to these ships. It is so much easier to nit pick a handful of VW diesels. To the uneducated mind it looks like they are cleaning up the air. So much for honesty in Government.
How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world
Last week it was revealed that 54 oil tankers are anchored off the coast of Britain, refusing to unload their fuel until prices have risen. But that is not the only scandal in the shipping world. Today award-winning science writer Fred Pearce – environmental consultant to New Scientist and author of Confessions Of An Eco Sinner – reveals that the super-ships that keep the West in everything from Christmas gifts to computers pump out killer chemicals linked to thousands of deaths because of the filthy fuel they use.
As ships get bigger, the pollution is getting worse. The most staggering statistic of all is that just 16 of the world’s largest ships can produce as much lung-clogging sulphur pollution as all the world’s cars.
Ships bunker oil used to north of 25,000 ppm sulfur. 25,000 ppm is now the northern limit, the last time I checked! RUG/PUG is between 30 ppm standard, but legally can be delivered @ the pump up to 90 ppm with off line fees.
ULSD is 15 ppm sulfur, but is delivered nominally between 5 to 10 ppm sulfur to avoid massive fines if 15 ppm is exceeded. The regulatory agencies are loathed to mandate 15 ppm RUG/PUG & impose the fines for fuels that exceed the standard diesel meets.
So, practically RU/PUG is 2 times to 18 times DIRTIER than ULSD. This is routinely ignored/DENIED by diesel haters. & gasser users. Those very same folks call the dirtier gasoline fuel cleaner than ULSD! ?
So the really huge fantasy LEAP is (defacto also) is that somehow ships bunker oil is cleanerr than RUG/PUG! They also want you to believe ULSD is dirtier than ships bunker oil!? Most folks with common sense don't need a fraud & fraudulent non PH.D @ CARB. to figure these issues out!
UCLA got off cheap in the settlement preserving a part of the global warming ULSD pollution lies!
I'm not ignoring it. This just isn't a maritime site. I'm not ignoring bacon or Fukushima or glyphosate either, but just because I'm more likely to die from my love of bacon doesn't mean I should ignore the evils of diesel.
The Evils of Diesel - that has a nice ring to it. May have to try to ™ that one.
Bottom line you don't make CARB look bad or you are targeted. Enstrom exposed fraud Hien T. Tran, CARB phony scientist and lead author of the October 24, 2008 CARB report on PM2.5 and premature death. Another diesel hater at the top of CARB. CARB is not above covering up misdeeds.
The California Air Resources Board has yet to honor my request to see the 38 exhibits in the Hien T. Tran academic fraud case. Tran was the lead researcher on a scientific study that was used to justify sweeping, costly new diesel emission rules proposed by the CARB staff. He admitted Dec. 10 to CARB that he lied about having a Ph.D. in statistics from UC Davis. Instead, Tran said, his Ph.D. was from "Thornhill University."
Nevertheless, the air board still voted unanimously to adopt the rules based on his research Dec. 12 -- without acknowledging Tran's deception.
Anyways, I obtained the exhibit showing Tran's fake Ph.D. from another source. How impressive -- the $1,000 got him a "magna [non-permissible content removed] laude" plaudit from Thornhill University, not just a diploma.
The Secret Science Reform Act passed the House in March 2015, but appears to be bogged down in the Senate. Thanks Republicans. It would prevent using info that has not been fully vetted and exposed to be used in making laws and regulations, etc.
Thanks for posting this. Apparently no national news orgs. picked this up as I have not seen it elsewhere. May have just missed it.
The San Diego Tribune article was, I have to admit, the most amazing display of ranting, irrational journalism that I've seen in a long time. Thanks for the laugh. I especially liked the link between CARB and child molesters living in Israel. This certainly deserves a Pulitzer for investigative journalism. In any event, it raises the term "nut" to new levels. If this is the quality of criticism of CARB, well, it's frankly pathetic.
Worse yet, Enstrom is no saint, indeed, as his e-mails encouraging colleagues to conspire against a Harvard professor who wrote a book severely criticizing the tobacco industry, have been brought to light.
Apparently, this martyr for academic freedom has no problem in suppressing the academic freedom of people he doesn't agree with. If nothing else, it sheds more light on why UCLA moved against him in the first place.
Like any story, the deeper you dig the more interesting it gets, doesn't it?
The point I was trying to make before getting sidetracked into conspiracy theories was that diesel emissions are a subset of all ICE emissions and that all ICE emissions are cumulatively "targeted" by government agencies throughout the world as hazards to health. It's not like diesels are somehow individually persecuted to a more severe degree, or that there is some conspiracy to rid the earth of diesels. Obviously, diesel power is an integral part of the global economy and no rational sane government would attempt to destroy themselves and their countries' economies, any more than these governments would move to eliminate electricity.
I'm not ignoring it. This just isn't a maritime site. I'm not ignoring bacon or Fukushima or glyphosate either, but just because I'm more likely to die from my love of bacon doesn't mean I should ignore the evils of diesel.
The Evils of Diesel - that has a nice ring to it. May have to try to ™ that one.
I was merely proving that there are diesel haters in CA. And in very high places. They ignore the real polluters and pick on me personally for owning a diesel.
I didn't see a link between CARB and the pedo who ran away to hide in our best friend "ally" who has done so much to bring peace and justice to that part of the world. But I do see a link between the fraudster and the aforementioned dirtbag
I bet he'll collect a 6 figure pension, too. Makes me wonder what it really takes to get ahead amongst the public sector warriors and heroes in California.
I wonder if a born lucky - never spent an hour in the real world woman who sucks down public funds at the UN would also be "delighted" at this.
The SJW types who have done so much for society will also claim other pollution is irrelevant, when it is not. They are wrong. Complain about it all or be a hypocrite.
The evils of diesel, or the evils of the "for thee and not for me" demographic,
Comments
(picking mouth up off the floor)
I think VW diesel owners will have to face it---they got screwed by a company they trusted and admired.
Lower running costs were/are certainly one reason ( one of mine certainly) to consider diesels. Once the transitions are made, the execution is really rather boring! So for example, I only put 21 mpg, PUG vs 36-38 mpg, ULSD ( like model) in context on this board. Day to day, I expect 36 mpg, I only note the exceptions, for lessons learned.
I dunno--some of you guys are pretty forgiving. I think VW's actions were outrageous, not just to the owners, but to everyone who breathes the air.
Would you really support a company that say sold you a product that poisoned your drinking water?
And what about other diesel makers, who "played fair"? Shouldn't they be held in higher esteem?
& before that, there was LEADED gasoline! Each haven been exponentially far worse than diesel!! Diesel got a bad rap because EPA/CARB refused to implement ULSD in the 1970's than in late 2006 !!!
Besides, we are not talking about government incompetence here, or the firemen who couldn't find the fire, or the man who chopped down the tree onto his house.
We are talking about deliberate, malicious, premeditated intention to do harm.
So who is doing the denying in defense of far more egregious WILLFULL actions????? Well again, that does meet your definitions ! Nexus here? EPA/CARB WALKS! Will VW? The markets handed VW some of its body parts on a platter!
It remains to be seen what pounds of flesh EPA/CARB will exact from VW.
VW is in trouble for deception rather than causing physical harm.
It's already known, proven actually, that gas emissions exhaust will kill you FASTER than diesel emissions exhaust! Somehow in the argument, it's casually forgotten or more willfully...ignored.
Sure, run 100000 lawnmowers for an hour. The problems will evaporate in time and be irrelevant to the overall environment. Just like cheater diesels, which are both an insignificant amount of overall pollution and an insignificant amount of the automotive fleet.
Like I said before, VW isn't in trouble for harm, it is in trouble for lies.
It's not diesel vs lawnmowers vs ICE vs wildfires and it's not a zero sum game. You can't shut the volcano down but you can regulate the "artificial" smog and punish those who ignore or willfully violate the regs.
My fintail predates all emissions equipment and its basic engine family never had it, good luck smogging it.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I saw a VW themed TV lawyer ad this morning, it only mentioned lies, nothing about emissions harm.
In fact, OVER USE of gasoline has been, is & continues to be the policy now ! Current percentages of the PVF, (95 to 97% gasoline, gas hybrid) in fact force & guarantee more gasoline use: both volume & % wise STRUCTURALLY than Europe does ( with 49% gasoline/51% plus ULSD) , all things being equal!
So, keeping the current % PVF ratios guarantees far greater gasoline use & much greater %'s & more barrels of oil that need to be refined, than IF the US had app 35% + plus PVF diesels!
You diesel HATERS might be LOATHED to hear this, but the current policy ( 95 % to 97% gasoline use) , actually GUARANTEES (artificially) high DIESEL production volumes + %'s !!!
Slow diesel News Day out here @ $ 1.98 per gal ULSD, (spot 12/21/15, NYC harbor ULSD $1.05/ gasoline $1.21)
$2.19 RUG, $2.45 PUG!
So given like model gas, gas hybrid / ULSD which would I prefer & chose? We already know which the overwhelming majority chooses (gasoline & more gal use) !
TMI: 21 mpg vs 36 mpg @15,000 miles per year ( our) commute ( more importantly avg US drivers mileage) = 714 gal vs 417 gals, = 71% more. Would one chose more or less gals, mpg? @ today's prices $ 1,749. vs $ 824. = 112 % more. Would one rather pay more or less?
Do you all wonder where it is going @ $4.00 gasoline?
Merry Christmas!
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Perry Mason only played a logger on TV.
In diesel news, I got squat. Some state in India has banned diesels more than 15 years old. US crude is getting shipped to Switzerland in January. Fuel stockpiles are down unexpectedly, so a price jump in gas and diesel is imminent. Except that the bbl prices are still at a 20+ year low.
Yes, Raymond Burr only played the fictional? lawyer Perry Mason.
Yes, I would rather pay $69.DIESEL rather than $146. per month PUG for the same ( 1,250 mo/15,000 yr ) commute miles. I wonder what the Swiss pay?
I must say I am surprised that some of you would defend VW, especially since some of you are the victims. (those with newer diesels---the old ones have already depreciated fully).
I wish I could turn back the clock and ask you to live (just for a day, because I like you all) where you live but without the EPA ever having intervened in your life. That would probably be Beijing or Naples.
Well no & false! The EPA/CARB consider themselves the victims! Otherwise, they would collect the TBD fines & penalties and give them to affected diesel owners! (people like me) Now I share your sentiments! The old diesels (my 2003 VW Jetts TDI) by definition are unaffected! Depreciation in those scenarios are not relevant, unless VW wants to give me what I paid for it new.
Lol & the majority of it caused by gassers, as ...it still is! It will probably remain, for easily 60 years going forward! Geez, I will be 124! Think about how long electric cars has been a pipe dream: to have a significant electric PVF % ? We actually have had electric car when cars started: for @ least 136 years, or late 1800's!!? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Oh, I did e-mail my friends who own TDIs just to see how they felt. Two answered and basically they do feel shafted. Only one mentioned the environmental factor; the other was more concerned with the financial impact.
They did get their gift cards, though.
'
I also asked them if they would buy another diesel if theirs were bought back. Both said no, not at this time anyway.
At least MB and Chevy didn't cheat (as far as we know), so they would warrant the consideration of the current diesel shopper.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
We are talking about deliberate, malicious, premeditated intention to do harm.
I must say I am surprised that some of you would defend VW, especially since some of you are the victims. (those with newer diesels---the old ones have already depreciated fully).
I seriously doubt the engineers that let the software go into production considered it a big deal. In light of the fact that CA allows over 1 million semis, that put out at least 125 times as much NOx as the average VW TDI. For millions more miles per year. They knew the EPA/CARB regs were designed to get rid of diesel passenger cars, and figured they could beat them at their own game. And for the Eco nuts it is a game to push their agenda of no cars for the masses.
I believe the engineers or pencil pushers at GM that decided not to replace a known defective ignition switch are at least 125 times as guilty as the VW engineers. I will repeat this as it went over many heads. The service people at my VW dealership have not gotten a single complaint from TDI owners. I don't feel victimized except by CARB that denied me owning a diesel VW long before now. Sadly the science used to block diesels came from a PHD at CARB that was NOT a PHD. He was a lying POC diesel hater.
After 27k miles in this Touareg TDI, I am really ticked that I wasted so much money on that hunk of a gas hog Sequoia. Far more of a victim of Toyota than VW .
How about Mary Nichols Chair of CARB????
'Gross Miscalculation' of Diesel Emissions Sets Back Calif. Law
The pollution estimate in question was too high -- by 340 percent, according to the California Air Resources Board, the state agency charged with researching and adopting air quality standards. The estimate was a key part in the creation of a regulation adopted by the Air Resources Board in 2007
And don't say anything against CARB or you will lose your high paying job. The state is filled with lying Eco Nuts that will push their agenda of destroying the state economy to make a pristine place only the rich can afford to live in.
A California epidemiologist who lost his job with UCLA not long after challenging the science behind claims that diesel pollution was responsible for 2,000 deaths a year in the state is suing to get his job back.
The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) announced today it had filed suit Wednesday in Los Angeles against UCLA officials for violating Dr. James Enstrom’s constitutional rights:
"The facts of this case are astounding," said David French, Senior Counsel of the ACLJ. "UCLA terminated a professor after 35 years of service simply because he exposed the truth about an activist scientific agenda that was not only based in fraud but violated California law for the sake of imposing expensive new environmental regulations on California businesses. UCLA's actions were so extreme that its own Academic Freedom Committee unanimously expressed its concern about the case."
Dr. Enstrom, a research professor in UCLA's Department of Environmental Health Sciences, published important peer-reviewed research demonstrating that fine particulate matter does not kill Californians. Also, Dr. Enstrom assembled detailed evidence that contends powerful UC professors and others have systematically exaggerated the adverse health effects of diesel particulate matter in California, knowing full well that these exaggerations would be used by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to justify draconian diesel vehicle regulations in California.
Whitewashed by UCLA, no surprise there.
http://dailybruin.com/2015/03/05/former-ucla-researcher-james-enstrom-reaches-settlement-with-uc/
One UCLA science researcher, a 34-year veteran of the school, found himself out of a job in 2011 after examining the data underlying diesel regulations proposed by a California regulator and exposing the shoddy credentials of a lead author of that regulator’s report.
James Enstrom secured victory in a two-and-a-half year legal battle against UCLA last week when the school agreed to settle the case.
The school is paying the “diesel particulate matter” expert $140,000, reinstating his title as “Retired Researcher,” and restoring his access to UCLA resources, “effectively” rescinding his termination, according to the American Center for Law & Justice, which represented Enstrom.
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/21611/
The California Air Resources Board has yet to honor my request to see the 38 exhibits in the Hien T. Tran academic fraud case. Tran was the lead researcher on a scientific study that was used to justify sweeping, costly new diesel emission rules proposed by the CARB staff. He admitted Dec. 10 to CARB that he lied about having a Ph.D. in statistics from UC Davis. Instead, Tran said, his Ph.D. was from "Thornhill University."
Nevertheless, the air board still voted unanimously to adopt the rules based on his research Dec. 12 -- without acknowledging Tran's deception.
Anyways, I obtained the exhibit showing Tran's fake Ph.D. from another source. How impressive -- the $1,000 got him a "magna [non-permissible content removed] laude" plaudit from Thornhill University, not just a diploma.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/weblogs/americas-finest/2009/apr/30/thornhill-university-where-the-air-boards-diesel-e/
How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world
Last week it was revealed that 54 oil tankers are anchored off the coast of Britain, refusing to unload their fuel until prices have risen. But that is not the only scandal in the shipping world. Today award-winning science writer Fred Pearce – environmental consultant to New Scientist and author of Confessions Of An Eco Sinner – reveals that the super-ships that keep the West in everything from Christmas gifts to computers pump out killer chemicals linked to thousands of deaths because of the filthy fuel they use.
As ships get bigger, the pollution is getting worse. The most staggering statistic of all is that just 16 of the world’s largest ships can produce as much lung-clogging sulphur pollution as all the world’s cars.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1229857/How-16-ships-create-pollution-cars-world.html
RUG/PUG is between 30 ppm standard, but legally can be delivered @ the pump up to 90 ppm with off line fees.
ULSD is 15 ppm sulfur, but is delivered nominally between 5 to 10 ppm sulfur to avoid massive fines if 15 ppm is exceeded. The regulatory agencies are loathed to mandate 15 ppm RUG/PUG & impose the fines for fuels that exceed the standard diesel meets.
So, practically RU/PUG is 2 times to 18 times DIRTIER than ULSD. This is routinely ignored/DENIED by diesel haters. & gasser users. Those very same folks call the dirtier gasoline fuel cleaner than ULSD! ?
So the really huge fantasy LEAP is (defacto also) is that somehow ships bunker oil is cleanerr than RUG/PUG! They also want you to believe ULSD is dirtier than ships bunker oil!? Most folks with common sense don't need a fraud & fraudulent non PH.D @ CARB. to figure these issues out!
UCLA got off cheap in the settlement preserving a part of the global warming ULSD pollution lies!
The Evils of Diesel - that has a nice ring to it. May have to try to ™ that one.
Anyone give a Thomas the Tank Engine toy or book for Christmas?
Thanks for posting this. Apparently no national news orgs. picked this up as I have not seen it elsewhere. May have just missed it.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Worse yet, Enstrom is no saint, indeed, as his e-mails encouraging colleagues to conspire against a Harvard professor who wrote a book severely criticizing the tobacco industry, have been brought to light.
Apparently, this martyr for academic freedom has no problem in suppressing the academic freedom of people he doesn't agree with. If nothing else, it sheds more light on why UCLA moved against him in the first place.
Like any story, the deeper you dig the more interesting it gets, doesn't it?
I didn't see a link between CARB and the pedo who ran away to hide in our best friend "ally" who has done so much to bring peace and justice to that part of the world. But I do see a link between the fraudster and the aforementioned dirtbag
I bet he'll collect a 6 figure pension, too. Makes me wonder what it really takes to get ahead amongst the public sector warriors and heroes in California.
I wonder if a born lucky - never spent an hour in the real world woman who sucks down public funds at the UN would also be "delighted" at this.
The SJW types who have done so much for society will also claim other pollution is irrelevant, when it is not. They are wrong. Complain about it all or be a hypocrite.
The evils of diesel, or the evils of the "for thee and not for me" demographic,