Thought of the Day: TDI Disposal Options

Welcome to Thought of the Day! Join Nikki Gordon-Bloomfield as she poses a question for you all to think about and answer.

Today, following the Dieselgate settlement made at the end of last month, we’re asking if the deal was too lenient on Volkswagen — and if allowing it to ship affected cars to other markets where emissions standards are less stringent is simply shifting the problem elsewhere?

Watch the video above, and leave your thoughts in the Comments below.


Want to keep up with the latest news in evolving transport? Don’t forget to follow Transport Evolved on Twitter, like us on Facebook and G+, and subscribe to our YouTube channel.

You can also support us directly as a monthly supporting member by visiting

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on LinkedInDigg thisShare on RedditEmail this to someonePin on Pinterest

Related News

  • David Zaluski

    As a tdi owner I find it incredulous that Vw is being treated as the worst possible infringement on emissions. Further that they emit 40 times more pollution is the worst case scenario and only at certain times in the operating cycle. FYI my car gets between 45 and 63 mpg depending on the time of year and driving route and conditions. I would like to know the total emissions of all greenhouse gases for the tdi operated as I do accelerating slowly and driving at or below the posted limit. I would like to compare this to similar year (2013) vehicles. IE Dodge, Ford, GM diesel pickups driven in a similar fashion and all vehicles driven as most driver do. That is like a race is on and you accelerate as fast as you can to the next light only to hammer the brakes on and waste all that inertia. I also have an old Dodge (2000) 2500 with a Cummins 5.9 L 24 valve (2nd gen) engine. It gets 24 mpg and most of the new trucks average about 11 or 12 from what I hear at the pump from their owners. I would like to know what the totals are for this type of advanced emissions control architecture vs the old school. I would also like to know the difference adding a previous truck I owned before the 2000. It was a 1991 Dodge Ram 2500 12 valve Cummins 5.9l engine. It got 30 mpg. I it would seem to me that the more fuel consumption there is the emissions must all go up. Granted I also know from experience that many diesel owners love the sight of black smoke coming out of their tail pipe while they burn the rubber off their tires. I always drove and continue to drive watching my mirrors for any sign of smoke assuming this I sunburned hydrocarbons and a disgusting site. Further the newer engines are so much more unreliable and expensive to repair. Is this added to the lifecycle costs? For. Example an injector for the 12 valve engine cost around $75.00 the new engines have injectors that can cost $1500.00 each. Perhaps we should be penalized for wasting fuel and driving like a redneck and rewarded for reducing consumption. And emissions. . The sad truth is it will nevertheless go that way. Ford, FCA and GM make way too much money on their fuel guzzling trucks and too may people drive them as a grocery getter. I drive a truck only when it is required to do so. IE moving a heavy load. The fuel efficient car is my default vehicle. So far my lifetime fuel average is around 55 mpg on the VW. I have never seen or smelled anything out of the tailpipe. What I really believe is happening is the NA automakers want VW to be crippled so they can gobble up market share from them. Sure they were deceptive but is is reason enough to try to ruin a company and where is the fine going? If it was all used to develop better technology to reduce emissions that would be one thing. The sad truth is it will be wasted in the general revenues of government for the most part. FYI I am no anti environment redneck . I have a cogen installed in my business that is 90% efficient and I plan on adding 10 kW of solar PV this year. All without any subsidies. In the past I was a builder that pioneered energy efficiency in homes and built some of the first “green” home available. I was raised in an environment that was incredibly pro fossil fuel. I remember hearing for customers that insulation was a waste of money because natgas is so cheap and we have an inexhaustible supply here in Alberta. So please don’t write me off summarily. I had curly cue compact fluorescent bulbs in my sockets before theywere coiled, they were straight and $20 each. Let’s please add to the discussion the actual emissions over the lifecycle of all vehicles driven both ways. Including the materials and actual manufacturing, transport and development of the mines etc. Then let us compare vehicles as truly informed consumers.