
VW engineers have admitted manipulating CO2 emissions data-paper - happyscrappy
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/08/volkswagen-emissions-idUSL8N1320KD20151108#FbBB3zEymfBBCWrs.97
======
mduerksen
So was it the rogue employee, or the conspiracy of the evil management to find
a scapegoat for the cheating they decided to do? I always read about these 2
explanations. Both quite entertaining, and a little to much Hollywood-like to
be completely true.

Management by objective is the true problem here.

Step 1: Management, moved by market, shareholder and/or own ambition, sets
unrealistic goals - probably even unknown to it.

Step 2: Employee, perhaps several levels of goal setting below, realises it
can't be done, and cheats to save his career.

I suspect this kind of systemic evil is involved in a lot of corporate
misbehaviour. Todays organisations are not ruled by command, but by goals. And
since the means to achieve that goal are not written anywhere, the management
can't be accused of unlawfulness. And the employee who is bound by such goals
finds himself in an awkward dilemma.

~~~
amelius
This could only be the case if the engineer doing the development was the same
person as the engineer doing the QA.

~~~
jacquesm
And not just the QA at the lower level, at _all_ levels. The whole VW saga is
an epic failure of process, the fact that any of these products could make it
out the door without management knowing about it is so incredible that they're
guilty simply because they let it happen _even_ if they didn't know about it.
It's a company that is totally out of control from a quality and compliance
viewpoint.

~~~
digikata
Right, if the QA didn't catch this on emissions, then all sorts of other
aspects of the vehicle quality are in question too. Are the vehicles as safe
as claimed for example?

~~~
jacquesm
Exactly. I'd hate to find out my airbags would not have passed inspection but
some QA dude figured that since I'd never find out until it was too late that
it didn't matter anyway and nobody caught that. Contrived example but you get
where I'm coming from, if the process is this broken _anything_ could happen.

That's why I said before this will damage VW's brand on much more than just
fuel consumption. So far (luckily) the other German brands seem to have
escaped association by origin.

------
sschueller
The bigger issue here is that agencies like the EPA, FCC, FDA no longer run
their own tests but instead rely on the industry to do the test for them.

How many cell phones don't adhere to set radiation safety standards?

~~~
zxexz
I have no idea. By your phrasing, it sounds like you might? I'd be interested
in being enlightened as to the state of adherence to radiation safety
standards by cell phones.

~~~
sschueller
The point I am making is that we don't know if the phones we buy meet those
standards or if just like in the VW case the tests are being manipulated.

~~~
nezza-_-
Not an expert, but relatively sure that's not true. The verification of
adherence to those standards is verified by the FCC, no?

------
Fede_V
What infuriates me about this is that the people who made that decision were
responsible for _at least_ 50 deaths due to increased pollution, and probably
even more.

If a serial killer murdered 50 people, there would be a public outcry -
instead, the most we can expect is that a few directors might retire to
'pursue different opportunities' or 'spend more time with family' and they
will lead a very comfortable life with the millions they made from their
illgotten profits.

White collar crime that results in deaths should be treated just as seriously
as any other act that results in deaths. The executives that approved or
turned a blind eye to these results should be treated as serial murderers.
Moreso, most of those people had the luxury of a very expensive education and
a nice and well paid lifestyle. They cheated because their greed told them
that the millions they made were not enough.

~~~
jl6
The trouble with that calculus is that the deaths are caused by the pollution
rather than the faking of data. If you want to blame someone for those deaths,
you need to blame every driver who contributes to that pollution.

~~~
Fede_V
No, those are the deaths cause by the _extra_ pollution due to the cheating.

In practice, as a society, we indirectly decide on pollution standards by
voting in politicians who nominate people in regulatory roles. If we are
unhappy with those standards, we can vote in other politicians who will alter
them. The system is not perfectly responsive of course.

In this case, those 50 deaths can be directly attributed to the decisions made
by a director that wanted a flashier career, a bigger bonus, or higher social
status. Those 50 deaths are on his conscience, and I hope when he goes on to
retire in his expensive villa paid by his ill-gotten bonuses his conscience
reminds him of this every single instant. It's not likely to happen.. but hey,
I can hope.

~~~
jacquesm
It doesn't really work that way with responsibility. Whether or not the number
is 50 is moot, it could be 1 it could be 500. The fact is that driving causes
deaths, directly _and_ indirectly and that we as a society have placed a cap
on the number of deaths that we find acceptable. The total number of deaths
we're ok with is staggeringly high, those 50 are a statistic derived with some
math that I'm not comfortable with based on assumptions that I'm even less
comfortable with.

If you want to have that discussion you'd have to look at the bigger picture
of the toll of traffic in general. Because if it was ok for VW to kill let's
say 50000 people per year but not 50050 then I'm not sure what the fuss is
about but if the alternative is 0 or 50 then you _may_ have a point depending
on how solid those numbers really are.

As it is that number is very handwavy.

------
edge17
I know of folks that have gone to prison for illegally passing non-streetlegal
cars with modifications for california's mandatory smog testing. I'm not a
legal expert, but does this sort of thing allow them to get a new trial since
- intent aside - there seem to be problems with the system?

------
shoo
Meanwhile, shifting context back to the bigger picture:

[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-01/climate-
pl...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-01/climate-pledges-seen-
holding-temperature-closer-to-2-degree-goal)

[http://climateactiontracker.org/](http://climateactiontracker.org/)

How's your country doing with regard to its greenhouse gas emission pledges?
Consider hassling your political representatives in the lead up to the Paris
talks. Hassle your friends to participate in political action.

------
lclemente
Does anyone know how putting diesel into the motor oil causes the engine to
"[run] more smoothly and [use] less fuel"?

~~~
kenz0r
It thins the oil, so there are less frictional losses, at least until the
bearing surfaces get damaged.

~~~
chrismbarr
So why isn't oil like this normally? Are the downsides to doing this?

~~~
jacquesm
Yes, it shortens engine life.

------
dovdov
The whole auto industry needs a checkup.

~~~
mtgx
They have, and the bodies responsible for that decided "It's cool guys, we'll
just raise the emissions levels in our tests so you can 'meet' them". _Problem
solved._

[http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/09/mercedes-...](http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/09/mercedes-
honda-mazda-mitsubishi-diesel-emissions-row)

------
Serow225
To VW mgmt re setting unrealistic goals with huge consequences to employee
careers/progression/etc: play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

~~~
mschuster91
It's not just VW that set internal, unrealistic goals - it was the politicians
setting said unrealistic goals as laws.

A 2-ton SUV will always gulp more fuel than a 800kg Smart, but it is NOT the
job of the carmakers to get people to buy fuel efficient vehicles (as
politicians intended to do by imposing "fleet CO2 limits"), it is the job of
the politicians.

So instead of e.g. taxing cars with much CO2 emissions, which would be hated
by the population because they want to drive SUVs, the politicians went to the
carmakers instead and now everyone wonders how this could happen.

~~~
adrianN
The car makers had the option not to offer 2 ton vehicles if they can't make
them obey the emission laws. In fact, I think fleet emission standards are too
weak and we should just put a steadily decreasing upper limit on the
emissions.

~~~
mschuster91
How about politicians listen to and communicate properly with the population?
If the target of the politicians is to reduce CO2 emissions, they should say
so. If the target is to get rid of huge, ugly, oversized SUVs in cities, they
should say so.

Secretly embedding stuff in unrelated other stuff is bad politics, yet the
trend to do this is rising :/

~~~
msvalkon
I don't follow your arguments. Is there an actual move of trying to ban SUV's
in cities or is this something you've concluded yourself?

Why shouldn't the industry be able to produce a huge oversized SUV if it can
maintain emissions under the limits dictated by the law?

This discussion should not even touch the type of car. The emission hack was
originally discovered in the smaller end of VW models like the Jetta and Golf
with a small (<=2.0) TDi engine and now seems to span the entire range of
models the concern produces. My guess is that the fuel consumption and CO2
emission manipulation also affects the entire range of models.

The problem here is that it seems to be _really_ hard to come up with a
marketable engine that can meet the requirements. I guess that's why VW will
be moving towards electric in the future. I hope the requirements for emission
control will get stricter in the future.

------
spooningtamarin
So much for engineers and their morals. People indirectly died because of
their tampering.

Seems money can buy you all.

~~~
emilburzo
> People indirectly died because of their tampering.

How?

~~~
swombat
Air pollution leads to increases in various diseases of the respiratory tract
(and other kinds too). Some of those are deadly. The difference is measured in
thousands or maybe tens of thousands of people per year (unverified stat, but
I think it's in the right ballpark).

~~~
gambiting
So are people who work on huge V8 engines morally responsible for people dying
due to air pollution?

~~~
swombat
If they declare that those V8 engines have been manufactured to meet emissions
standards set by governments to try and reduce the health and environmental
toll of emissions, and therefore allow those V8 engines to be mass-
manufactured and included in hundreds of thousands of new cars that would
otherwise have contained less polluting engines, then obviously yes?

It's not working on the V8 engines that's the problem, it's lying about their
emissions.

I'm not sure how you don't see this? Based on your tone you seem to think
you're making some sort of sarcastically clever point, but I'm not sure what
it is? (or maybe I'm misreading this)

~~~
gambiting
Your're saying that higher pollution causes more deaths and is therefore
morally wrong, so have a look at Mercedes C-Class - you can have it with a
relatively small 2.0L petrol(or even 1.8L if I remember correctly) or a
massive 6.3L V8 petrol engine. The V8 will always pollute more. So why would
it matter, if the V8 is "meeting emissions standards" \- it's still poluting
more than the 2.0L engine. So my question is - if lying about emissions of the
2.0L engine is "being morally responsible for people dying due to pollution",
how is that not true for their 6.3L V8 engines(which are fully compliant, but
pollute more nevertheless)?

~~~
swombat
The difference is that the government has put in place systems to deal with
these higher polluting vehicles. It taxes them more, to discourage people from
owning them. By lying about the pollution levels, the engineers are
encouraging people to own more polluting engines. Not only is this obviously
unethical since it involves lying with the purpose of breaking a law, but this
law also happens to be designed to try and reduce the deadly effects of
pollution. So such behaviour is, I say again, obviously indirectly linked to
more people dying.

