The Volkswagen emissions cheating scandal exposed possible shortcomings in the Environmental Protection Agency’s emissions tests, which the auto industry says do not accurately represent real-world driving conditions and modern vehicles.
The emissions testing system was set up years ago when more pollutants needed to be reduced and driving patterns were different, said Allen Schaeffer, executive director of Diesel Technology Forum, a pro-clean diesel technology group in Frederick, Md.
Related Story: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2575923
The new technology that has been developed to comply with lowered emissions standards and technical factors built into the tests over the years also complicate things, Schaeffer said.
“Taking together all of these factors, it makes it more challenging than ever to certify these technologies that increasingly have lower levels of emissions,” he said. “There is somewhat of a disconnect in how we look at these issues. We’re continually focusing on reducing the standard to lower and lower levels.”
The EPA is under scrutiny following the revelation that Volkswagen was cheating on emissions tests with lines of code, called “defeat devices,” built into vehicles’ software. The software could tell when a vehicle was undergoing emissions testing and subsequently limited emissions of nitrogen oxide to pass the test.
However, as researchers from West Virginia University discovered, the Volkswagen vehicles would emit far more pollutants than allowed by law when driven normally, up to 40 times over the legal limit in some cases. Volkswagen has since admitted to also lying about the amount of carbon dioxide emitted in some of its vehicles. The EPA is investigating both violations.
The scandal put the spotlight on the German automaker, but the EPA also caught some heat from congressional leaders who wondered why the agency didn’t catch the violations. Republican Louisiana Sen. David Vitter, chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s transportation and infrastructure subcommittee, was among those who said the EPA’s regulations were partly to blame for the scandal.
“While I do not condone breaking the law, it is quite clear that the far-left environmental liberals who run the EPA have gone out of their way to hurt job creation and economic growth,” he said.
Part of the issue with the emissions testing is the EPA’s weighted system, which measures 55 percent of emissions at city driving conditions and 45 percent at highway driving conditions, Schaeffer said. Many motorists spend more time driving in highway conditions than they do in city conditions.
Another problem is the EPA pushes stricter standards for pollutants such as nitrogen oxide and particulate matter while requiring more fuel efficiency, according to Dan Simmons, vice president for policy at the pro-fossil fuels Institute for Energy Research in Washington.
It’s a double-edged sword for automobile engineers because vehicles with better fuel economy, such as “clean diesel” vehicles, often emit more nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. At the same time, vehicles that cut down on those pollutants have worse fuel efficiency and put more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, he said.
“EPA wants to do two things at once,” Simmons said. “The more you reduce pollution from the car, the more energy it takes and the more difficult it is to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. It’s a real challenge.”
Simmons believes it’s time for the EPA to relax its greenhouse gas emissions standards, though he recognizes that’s unlikely with President Obama or another Democrat occupying the White House. Obama has made reducing greenhouse gases a centerpiece of his late-term policy push. Many scientists blame the burning of fossil fuels for releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and causing climate change.
Despite that push, Simmons said it’s more important for the EPA to focus on pollutants than greenhouse gas emissions, he said.
“It’s incredibly difficult to meet the greenhouse gas standards and the pollution control standards [at the same time], and that’s really what Volkswagen ran into,” he said.
Another idea could be a new testing procedure that takes into account factors that can’t be replicated in a lab such as driver behavior and traffic conditions.
Schaeffer acknowledged those factors might make only a little bit of a difference, but given how much emissions have already been cut, that little bit might matter a lot.
Vehicles “are incredibly efficient and effective, and a lot of these test procedures and standards and things … were never envisioned in a complex system that is so close to zero emissions,” he said.
The EPA contends the emissions standards are not the problem and some enterprising automakers have worked within the system to come up with cleaner engines.
Early last week, Chevrolet and GMC won EPA approval of their model year 2016 Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon pick-up trucks. The agency pointed to the vehicles as proof the standards are workable.
“One company designed software to thwart emissions tests and broke the law,” said an EPA representative. “However, we know that a well-designed diesel engine is capable of meeting the standards under any operating conditions.”
The agency says many major automakers supported the standards when they were proposed. Automakers had seven years to comply with the current standards, which were published in the Federal Register in 2000.
“EPA thoroughly assesses technological feasibility before proposing standards, and goes through a public process before adopting them,” an agency spokesman said.
Schaeffer said the emissions standards themselves are not necessarily the issue as much as the testing process. He said the Colorado and Canyon’s success shows the EPA’s tests are passable.
“You can meet these standards. It’s possible,” he said.
