28 ms·

GM lays off engineer who helped expose VW’s diesel fraud

431 points by sundvor 7y ago

jamesholden 7y ago
I am surprised that this guy hasn't been given job offers at other places. He did good things, is ethical, and is clearly skilled. It's a shame that people like this are not properly 'rewarded' for their good deeds. Exposing the evil of others should always be.
- sundvor 7y ago
  Yes. Those good things included saving scores of peoples' lives. Diesel particulates are very bad for the lungs, and he helped put a stop to so much of it. He deserved an award, not to be sent "home" after 17 - seventeen - years in the US.
  - blattimwind 7y ago
    > Diesel particulates are very bad for the lungs, and he helped put a stop to so much of it. Dieselgate wasn't about particulates, and unlike petrol cars every diesel car of the last 10-15 years has a particulate filter... Now petrol cars are getting particulate filters too, because new emission standards (e.g. Euro 6c) include particulate restrictions for petrol engines, which they didn't previously have, and direct injection engines utterly exceed those restrictions.
    - gambiting 7y ago
      And yet, where I'm from(Poland) it's extremely common to have the DPF removed from a new diesel car, pretty much any workshop will do it and fit a DPF emulator instead so the computer doesn't complain. All of that to avoid a potential cost few years down the line to have the filter cleaned/replaced. I'm utterly disgusted by how common this behaviour is.
      - lb1lf 7y ago
        Wouldn't you need to have the DPF retrofitted prior to any periodic vehicle control (as mandated by the EU), pretty much neutralising any savings?
        gambiting 7y ago
        No, to my knowledge you can pass the annual technical test without any issues even with the DPF filter removed, unless the engine has other issues and is literally emitting black smoke - the particulate emissions without the filter are not enough to trigger a fail(essentially the threshold is so fantastically high that modern diesels are far below it, dpf filter or not).
        lb1lf 7y ago
        -Oh. That was unexpected. Thanks!
        blattimwind 7y ago
        Honestly I've never heard of DPF removals before (edit: reason being mandatory car inspection usually finds this modification where I live, apparently it used to be a thing for some time and then the inspection protocol was changed). I only heard about people bypassing the AGR (exhaust recirculation), but that's independent of diesel/petrol (both have them nowadays). That being said DPF issues seem to mostly impact people who only use the car for short distances; I've lived with DPF diesel cars for ~10 years and no issues. That being said any ICE powered vehicle is completely unsuited for travelling short distances, not just from an ecology point of view. Some more than others, though, it seems.
        ergo14 7y ago
        Not anymore, since this year when you have DPF removed you will not pass the combustion quality check.
      - bluedino 7y ago
        It's not legal in the USA either, but it's very popular to do with diesel pickup trucks. Look up 'rolling coal' on YouTube
    - smurv 7y ago
      Strange how no one talks anymore about how much more efficient and more suited diesel engines are when it comes to everyday traffic than petrol engines. It's become all about particles, and yes, diesel is more dangerous to humans if not filtered correctly. But at the same time, diesel engines are using less fuel and there is no reason why we shouldn't use DPF when they are available. I switched to a diesel car not long ago, and I can safely say that as long diesel cars are being manufactured, I'll never go back to petrol.
      - blattimwind 7y ago
        I think for city traffic ICE cars (and more generally, cars) are just unsuited. Stop and go, very low speeds etc. are just the worst case for both fuel usage and pollution (low load = low exhaust temp = catalytic exhaust processing doesn't work properly, problem gets bigger with the engine; e.g. truck exhaust processing basically doesn't do much at all in cities). And you get a choice of "do I want to wear the engine or do I want to minimize exhaust and fuel"... For general driving I find it easier to drive a diesel for low consumption compared to petrol. I also like how diesels tend to have nice long gearing, leading to low RPMs and less noise. Pick-up from low RPMs is also quite nice, a diesel has no issues to start accelerating from, say, 1200 rpm (with practically all constant speed driving falling between 1000 and ~1600ish rpm for me, to see more you'll need the Autobahn). For petrolhead(?) purposes I have to say that diesel tend to sound like a loose bag of bolts when you rev them (which you normally won't do), obviously it's not going to sound like a race car. In that regard tiny (1 liter, 1.2 liter) non-DI, non-turbo petrol engines tend to surprise... :) though at least some of these are way worse at fuel efficiency than you'd expect.
        dsfyu404ed 7y ago
        >low load = low exhaust temp = catalytic exhaust processing doesn't work properly It's not 1970 anymore. Those cats are right behind the exhaust manifold for a reason and that reason isn't to save money on piping.
        geggam 7y ago
        Audi A8 diesel on the autobahn is fun. Smooth ride at 250 kph :)
    - djaychela 7y ago
      "Dieselgate wasn't about particulates, and unlike petrol cars every diesel car of the last 10-15 years has a particulate filter..." Not true here in the UK - I buy and sell secondhand cars of this vintage as a side job, and not all the diesels I've seen have DPFs (I'd say it was 50% have them) - lots of models didn't have them, including quite a few vans (which pollute more due to bigger engines, lower mpg, etc). And anyone who's bought anything of this age range also knows that the DPFs are a reliability nightmare. Lots of people removed them (which is now at least tested on the MOT, although it's possible to remove it in a way that is not detected by an MOT test). But most importantly, although dieselgate wasn't about particulates, it still means getting diesels off the road, which is a good thing. If particulates had been accurately measured in vehicles after a few years, I'm sure many more would be off the road, particularly 1st gen DPF cars. The problem is that most people now equate a vehicle with a DPF as being a nightmare, and then by association don't care about the effect on the environment as the effect on their wallet is a more pressing need. Much the same as EGR valves, which are a reliability issue on most vehicles regardless of fuel. People block them off, leading to increased NOx pollution and better fuel consumption, and when it can cost hundreds of pounds to get it replaced (if it has to be calibrated to the ECU, etc, often a main dealer trip is involved), it's not surprising that this happens. The sooner we can all go electric, the better, IMO. And I say that as someone who has considerable skill and experience in repairing and maintaining ICE cars.
    - Reason077 7y ago
      Modern diesels are supposed to have particulate filters installed. Yet just yesterday, in “ultra low emission zone” Central London, I saw a Ford diesel van with a 16 plate (meaning, it’s a late-2015 Model at the earliest) spewing a cloud of black soot every time it pulled away at an intersection. It’s clear that there are still too many DPF removals going on, and lax controls about monitoring emissions from supposedly-compliant vehicles. (Motorcycles are another huge issue. They may be compliant with noise and emissions regs at the factory gate, but too many people swap the exhaust for a loud, polluting, illegal one.)
      - sundvor 7y ago
        What!? Cars/trucks that have been modded this way ought to have a mandatory crush penalty. Complete forfeiture of the asset, zero compensation. Then let's see how popular the practice would remain. Diesel cars should have a mandatory pre sale environmental inspection to root out buyers getting stuck in the 2nd hand market.
        RankingMember 7y ago
        > Cars/trucks that have been modded this way ought to have a mandatory crush penalty. Complete forfeiture of the asset, zero compensation. I feel like you might get a wee bit of pushback on the idea of crushing people's modes of transport because they stuck a non-regulation exhaust on there. All-or-nothing regulations such as the one you propose are rarely sustainable. Even CARB (the California Air Resources Board), the bane of California automotive enthusiasts, isn't that draconian.
        sundvor 7y ago
        Why should people be allowed to act so selfishly? It would stop the practice dead in its tracks, and from then a non issue. I dare say that makes it worth it. Furthermore making it strictly illegal to perform the work would assist.
        bluGill 7y ago
    - ody4242 7y ago
      The way DPF works results in more <PM10 particulate than not having a DPF at all. (It does burn most of the soot, but results in more small particles at then end, and we know that those small particles are the ones that are causing most of the troubles in the lungs and blood stream)
      - selimthegrim 7y ago
        Can you cite anything that proves it’s worse
        ody4242 7y ago
        Tom Denton: Automotive Technician Training: Theory page 213 no proof, just a statement though, but the same phrasing is seen all around the net, even on the DPF wikipedia page (without source though)
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- tdsamardzhiev 7y ago
  Perhaps other places don't want their shady practices exposed.
- Xelbair 7y ago
  He is ethical, and known to expose wrongdoings. No way in hell that he is getting hired in that industry.. and even if he is - no way that he'll have any kind of access to incriminating information.
  - mcv 7y ago
    He should be hired by regulators. They need more people who can expose wrongdoings.
    - philpem 7y ago
      The sad fact is, the regulators are so underfunded they probably can't afford to hire him.
      - usrusr 7y ago
        Cherry on top, in a perfectly cynical (and hopefully hypothetical!) world: "After five years at the regulator, the car industry had paid him more than he would ever have earned as their employee"
    - negamax 7y ago
      Underrated comment. This seems like a great closure for this, which is a seriously embarrassing development
  - navigatesol 7y ago
    >No way in hell that he is getting hired in that industry.. So you're saying that no one in the auto industry is ethical, and that they deliberately hire unethical people? Out of the millions of employees across the country and globe? Deplorables, all of them? That's rich. Silicon Valley is hypocritical and out-of-touch.
    - matz1 7y ago
      They are all ethicall, it's just might not have the same ethics as you. Ethics is relative afterall.
- kenneth 7y ago
  Hiring a known whistleblower is a risk not worth taking, even if you are not doing anything wrong. The risk vs. reward ratio is just too high.
  - richardhod 7y ago
    It is unclear whether you approve of this decisionmaking heuristic
  - cyphar 7y ago
    I am sure that this is the logic executives like to go through, but whistleblowers aren't people who compulsively reveal company secrets. They reveal secrets which the public should know about, and usually have to be very large and important in order to justify the personal risk involved. If your company is so ethically bankrupt that you can't afford the risk of someone who would only reveal things that are of critical importance to the public, then maybe you aren't the "good guys" anymore.
    - Krasnol 7y ago
      Is this a variation on "you don't need to be afraid if you have nothing to hide" thing?
      - cyphar 7y ago
        It's more like "you don't need to be afraid of whistle-blowers unless you're killing people through your actions". VW didn't make a small mistake -- their evasion of emission standards has directly resulted in thousands of preventable deaths due to air pollution (they also decided to unethically poison monkeys in order to "prove" that the gasses weren't toxic). Again, whistle-blowers don't just reveal secrets willy-nilly -- there is significant personal risk to being a whistle-blower and very few people make such decisions lightly. The thing is -- everyone has something to hide, which is why that adage is wrong. But not everyone is hiding a scheme they've cooked up to flaunt laws (and lied to regulators for years when they came knocking) which resulted in tangible deaths as a result. If you are worried that you have a scheme like that on your books, then yeah you should avoid hiring whistle-blowers.
- roenxi 7y ago
  Devils advocate for this one; to put a little meat on sibling comments. A whistleblower has demonstrated that there are circumstances where they will short-circuit the chain of command and attempt to attract external intervention. The only way a corporate hierarchy can react to such a person is to see them as a risk to be managed; ideally by not hiring them. Large scale corporations have hiring processes with all sorts of weird informal risk-mitigation measures built in (which is usually expressed as discrimination on weird traits). So people with that sort of whistle-blowing initiative who want to be employable need to build a strong informal network of people who will hire them because they think they understand what circumstances would trigger that behavior and that they are not present in the hiring corporation.
  - richardhod 7y ago
    This may be true, but it's not how good business, corporations and executives should behave.
    - fredsir 7y ago
      When profit is king...
  - bdhess 7y ago
    He’s not a whistleblower, and didn’t short circuit his management chain. FTA he was an engineering student at WVU the time, not employed by VW.
    - Ygg2 7y ago
      He has ethics, we can't allow that at our CORP. -- Some CEO probably.
      - cowsandmilk 7y ago
        Yeah, I'm sure the 4,000 person layoff was just to let go of this one engineer...
- coldtea 7y ago
  You'd expected them to be rewarded for doing a good ethical deed that hurts the company they were working for? I'm not sure other companies would jump to hire him, that's not how capitalism works...
  - smt88 7y ago
    In some situations in the US, whistleblowers receive a portion of the money the government makes from fines. https://www.whistleblowersinternational.com/what-is-whistleblowing/rewards/ https://www.whistleblowersinternational.com/what-is-whistleb...
thrownaway954 7y ago
"no good deed goes unpunished" - unfortunately this is how things are in the world. i hope things turn out good for him.
carmate383 7y ago
So, the guy did his job like every other employee. Why should he get special treatment?
- Insanity 7y ago
  Perhaps because some people would just "pretend not to see" when they discover something like this? Just look at the history between Snowden and the NSA. Snowden was not the first guy to know about what was going on, but the first one to come out with it.
  - neuronic 7y ago
    Kind of replying to you as well as parent. One should note that the "pretend not to see" part is often a result of expecting heavily negative consequences in face of uncovering the truth. I am German and I really do enjoy the newest VW models, in fact I am rooting for their electric approach - but let's face it. Volkswagen is one of Germany's top brass international companies, therefore heavily politically intertwined, and I am certain that they would recede to shady methods to prevent from such damaging news ever going public. I have little doubt that Volkswagen is as unethical as comparable international companies in other nations. So it tremendous takes personal risk and, yes, bravery to take such a step. And that is why this is not just "normal work".
nicolas_t 7y ago
US visa laws are barbaric. Giving only 60 days to find a new job when one has been laid off without prior notice. How is that supposed to be fair? H1B visa have the effect of creating indentured slaves by placing all of the power on the employers and prevent employees from having any negotiation power since they are always under the threat of losing their visa... While the US is still seen in a way as a dreamland to live and work in by people in poorer areas, it seems to me anecdotally that more and more people in developed countries no longer have any interest in moving there due to the many issues surrounding visas, work conditions, living conditions, fun things like CBP and overzealous immigration officers, etc... This is not a good thing for a country that has long been successful in attracting the best and the brightest.
- vr46 7y ago
  On another perspective, perhaps it will be good for India to have an influx of skilled and experienced people back. The West has long poached talent from everywhere else.
  - atemerev 7y ago
    Not “poached”, they were moving voluntarily, because of much better conditions and attitudes. So no, it won’t be good for anybody. They were not needed at home, and they are not needed now.
    - simonh 7y ago
      When discussing recruitment, poaching implies enticement rather than coercion.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
    - mapcars 7y ago
      What makes you think they were not needed at home?
pif 7y ago
> He said he had a lead on a job with another automaker [...] But the industry is suffering a slowdown, I wonder how much of the slowdown is caused by more and more aggressive emission regulations. Cars used to be definitely more responsive, and they get more sluggish and more expensive to maintain with every new Euro standard published. Edit: I'm addig this to reply to some commenters. I'm not stating that car comfort is more important than public health. It's just a fact that emission regulations have pushed much fun away from the driving experience. And I honestly wonder how this impacted the car making industry.
- CydeWeys 7y ago
  Public health is more important than cars getting sportier. Particulate emissions are a real health hazard, causing respiratory illnesses for millions of people each year. The negative externalities of air pollution are huge, and it's not an exaggeration to say that air pollution is directly causing the deaths of 6 figures of people every year, who would otherwise not have died. Every single one of us has lungs and breathes the air around us. Stricter emissions controls are better for all of us.
  - nullc 7y ago
    Fun fact: there are non-trivial differences in air quality from place to place-- that's how it's possible to estimate the impact on mortality. If you have any freedom at all in choosing where you live, air quality should be a factor.
- neuronic 7y ago
  Do I misinterpret you or does it sound a bit as if you value the responsiveness of your car over the emission standard which exists to protect the health of people as well as the environment? Obviously one can discuss the numbers and limits defined in the emission standard and how much sense they make but I would find it odd if someone put car performance over its negative impact on others.
  - georgerobinson 7y ago
yitchelle 7y ago
I wonder if his role in exposing VW got him the job at GM. I am also wondering why he is so focused on returning to the US. With his skills and knowledge, there should be some opportunities in other parts of the world.
- lawlessone 7y ago
  >wondering why he is so focused on returning to the US. says he spent half his life there
- throwayEngineer 7y ago
  Have you lived outside the US? Even in Europe it seems standard of living is less (for professionals)
  - yitchelle 7y ago
    Not sure why you assumed that I am living in the US. I am not, I am living in Europe.
vsskanth 7y ago
It is important to note that this engineer is from India and has been legally in the US for 17 years and still on a temporary H1B visa (conveniently not mentioned in NYT) If this person was from any other country, he would have a green card by now. But now, he has to leave everything behind and go back. This is all too familiar for Indian nationals working in the US. It has become way more precarious for Indian families now due to the current administration arbitrarily denying visa extensions for people in tech. Hopefully he finds a good job in India, Canada or Europe.
- winter_blue 7y ago
  I don't think enough people know about this. People from India have to wait for 150+ years to get permanent residency via the employment-based route.This website does a great job at explaining this: https://siia.us/ https://siia.us/ People from most other countries can get employment-based green cards in a matter of months. These people have approved (I-140) green card applications, yet cannot "receive" their green card unless they wait 150+ years. Moreover, until recently, their spouses were prohibited from working. The Obama administration issued regulation that granted permission to work for spouses of people with approved (I-140) green card applications, who've been waiting for over a year. In a cruel and sadistic manner, the current administration, decided to revoke these authorizations, so that their spouses don't "enter the labor market early"[1]. > But now, he has to leave everything behind and go back I don't think this is necessarily true. Can't he try to find another company that will sponsor him for an H-1B? If he has an approved I-140, he's cap-exempt, practically forever. [1] https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201810&RIN=1615-AC15 https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=2018... Quote: > Anticipated Costs and Benefits: > DHS anticipates that there would be two primary impacts that DHS can estimate and quantify: the cost-savings accruing to forgone future filings by certain H-4 dependent spouses, and labor turnover costs that employers of H-4 workers could incur when their employees’ EADs are terminated. Some U.S. workers would benefit from this proposed rule by having a better chance at obtaining jobs that some of the population of the H-4 workers currently hold, as the proposed rule would no longer allow H-4 workers to enter the labor market early."
  - 7y ago
chengiz 7y ago
Playing the devil's advocate here a little bit. We dont know the whole story. Perhaps he was not good at the job GM hired him for, perhaps he didnt get along with people, perhaps it was just as GM says, a blind restructuring. Things like this happen all the time. The only difference here is the VW scandal, for which all we know is he did good experimental work as part of a team that turned out to be groundbreaking. If the emissions had amounted to nothing, he'd be like any other experimental researcher. Was he instrumental in opening the results to the public in any way? As in he strived against the odds and backlash etc, playing a whistleblower of sorts? The article doesnt say so I assume not. So I cant say the article has convinced me that he deserves special treatment because of his role in the VW scandal.
- AnthonBerg 7y ago
  I agree that we don’t know the reasons he was let go. But!: Of course he deserves special treatment for his role in the VW scandal, because of course we desperately want and need to build a society that always actively encourages and never discourages actions like those he took. – But: Of course the car industry cannot be relied on to give him that special treatment. And we haven’t yet built the kind of society that does. So it is incumbent on us here and now to give him that special treatment. Not least to give the signal that we will help you if you help us. Keep you safe. To remove doubt of that. As it stands, that doubt has increased, and the expectation that the auto industry will retaliate has increased, so on the table there is less apparent safety to do what he did.
  - barry-cotter 7y ago
    That’s not how this world works. Whistleblowers have their lives ruined, almost uniformly. Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, William Binney, Jesselyn Radack, Frank Ford, Joe Darby. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers
    - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
      He's not a whistle-blower though. He exposed the VW fraud as part of his prior job studying emissions
agumonkey 7y ago
It astonishes me how society is so against exposing hurtful realities. At least this way.
RickJWagner 7y ago
Such is life in corporate America. It rains on the just and the unjust.
ptaipale 7y ago
When I saw the NYT headline, it seemed to suggest that the GM engineer was singled out precisely due to helping out in exposing the scandal. But when I read the article, it turns out he's just one out of 4,000 other engineers. We could probably make many other scandalous headlines from the same group of people: "GM lays off engineer who contributed to trade union organising his colleagues" "GM lays off engineer who only two years earlier contributed to patent XXX which saved $$$ for the company" "GM lays off engineer who was recovering from cancer and is now at risk of relapse" "GM lays off engineer whose seven dependents are now facing an uncertain future" This is not to belittle what Hemanth Kappanna did, but there are four thousand stories out of which one is now lifted up, even though what he did previously is, as far as we know, not at all connected to this position being terminated. Contribution of Kappanna and his colleagues was to first to WVU and then the world as a whole, not GM. So perhaps a job at GM shouldn't be his "reward"; something else should be. But I hope that the NYT headline might help him with that.
- SolarNet 7y ago
  Except that in this case his life is being uprooted due to the power the company wields over his life. Citizenship (or at least a green card) should be his reward.
  - ptaipale 7y ago
    My point was that the same is probably the case with many among these 4,000.
    - hello_friendos 7y ago
      They all exposed that GM lied? No, they didn't
      - ptaipale 7y ago
        Did GM lie? I know some people did accuse GM of emission cheating, but haven't heard of any actual proof.
sgjohnson 7y ago
re: H1-B et al immigration issues. What the United States need to do is to completely abolish all welfare programs and go back to Ellis island style immigration system. Kills 2 birds with one stone.
temac 7y ago
It is always crazy to read those layoff stories with people let go overnight for no reason and escorted out of building by security. Must be hard to work knowing that can happen.
unixhero 7y ago
He should join Tesla :)
- eznoonze 7y ago
  No emission issue for Tesla I guess. But they may have battery issues.
  - unixhero 7y ago
    An engineer with strong critical thinking skills is what I imagine he can bring to the table.
jedberg 7y ago
This is the perfect example of the flaws in our immigration system. This man came here for grad school, was educated in America at a public institution (paid for in part by tax dollars), then worked here for years, contributing to our economy as both a worker and consumer (and probably putting in far more tax dollars than he ever consumed), and now after 17 years, we send him back to India. We should be giving this man citizenship, not a ticket home.
- makotech222 7y ago
  No, this is a feature. The point is to keep a highly skilled immigrant workforce as precariously as possible, so that they have absolutely no bargaining power when profits dip. This is capitalism. Edit: I should point out, in case it isn't obvious, that capitalism is bad, folks.
maxhedrome 7y ago
Clearly they have nothing to hide.
victor106 7y ago
This is so sad temporarily for Hemanth but permanently for the US. Hemanth is already a hero and he's done more than what most would only dream of doing. He has a bright future expect that bright future won't be in the US. In the long term its more of a loss for the US if you consider the fact that he already "earned" the US $23 billion
GreaterFool 7y ago
17 years in US and still no permanent residence of any sort?! That's why I'd never consider moving to US! If I chose a country to live in and they let me in I want to have a possibility of either becoming a citizen or at least have permanent residency (actually permanent; often permanent just means long-term). Is Green Card that hard to get?
- ip26 7y ago
  Discussed elsewhere in this thread, but it depends on where you are from b/c there is a per-country quota. There are many applicants for a Green Card from India so it's hard if you are Indian. But if you are from e.g. Singapore there are far fewer applicants competing with you so it's easier.
raincom 7y ago
He should have applied for perm residency under EB-1. This EB-1 has many loopholes, which many postdocs and Ph.Ds exploit. Bunch of citations, h-index, review articles, letters from peers would do.
camil211 7y ago
test

431 points by sundvor 7y ago

I am surprised that this guy hasn't been given job offers at other places. He did good things, is ethical, and is clearly skilled. It's a shame that people like this are not properly 'rewarded' for their good deeds. Exposing the evil of others should always be.

sundvor 7y ago
Yes. Those good things included saving scores of peoples' lives. Diesel particulates are very bad for the lungs, and he helped put a stop to so much of it. He deserved an award, not to be sent "home" after 17 - seventeen - years in the US.
- blattimwind 7y ago
  > Diesel particulates are very bad for the lungs, and he helped put a stop to so much of it. Dieselgate wasn't about particulates, and unlike petrol cars every diesel car of the last 10-15 years has a particulate filter... Now petrol cars are getting particulate filters too, because new emission standards (e.g. Euro 6c) include particulate restrictions for petrol engines, which they didn't previously have, and direct injection engines utterly exceed those restrictions.
  - gambiting 7y ago
    And yet, where I'm from(Poland) it's extremely common to have the DPF removed from a new diesel car, pretty much any workshop will do it and fit a DPF emulator instead so the computer doesn't complain. All of that to avoid a potential cost few years down the line to have the filter cleaned/replaced. I'm utterly disgusted by how common this behaviour is.
    - lb1lf 7y ago
      Wouldn't you need to have the DPF retrofitted prior to any periodic vehicle control (as mandated by the EU), pretty much neutralising any savings?
      - gambiting 7y ago
        No, to my knowledge you can pass the annual technical test without any issues even with the DPF filter removed, unless the engine has other issues and is literally emitting black smoke - the particulate emissions without the filter are not enough to trigger a fail(essentially the threshold is so fantastically high that modern diesels are far below it, dpf filter or not).
        lb1lf 7y ago
        -Oh. That was unexpected. Thanks!
        blattimwind 7y ago
        Honestly I've never heard of DPF removals before (edit: reason being mandatory car inspection usually finds this modification where I live, apparently it used to be a thing for some time and then the inspection protocol was changed). I only heard about people bypassing the AGR (exhaust recirculation), but that's independent of diesel/petrol (both have them nowadays). That being said DPF issues seem to mostly impact people who only use the car for short distances; I've lived with DPF diesel cars for ~10 years and no issues. That being said any ICE powered vehicle is completely unsuited for travelling short distances, not just from an ecology point of view. Some more than others, though, it seems.
        ergo14 7y ago
        Not anymore, since this year when you have DPF removed you will not pass the combustion quality check.
    - bluedino 7y ago
      It's not legal in the USA either, but it's very popular to do with diesel pickup trucks. Look up 'rolling coal' on YouTube
  - smurv 7y ago
    Strange how no one talks anymore about how much more efficient and more suited diesel engines are when it comes to everyday traffic than petrol engines. It's become all about particles, and yes, diesel is more dangerous to humans if not filtered correctly. But at the same time, diesel engines are using less fuel and there is no reason why we shouldn't use DPF when they are available. I switched to a diesel car not long ago, and I can safely say that as long diesel cars are being manufactured, I'll never go back to petrol.
    - blattimwind 7y ago
      I think for city traffic ICE cars (and more generally, cars) are just unsuited. Stop and go, very low speeds etc. are just the worst case for both fuel usage and pollution (low load = low exhaust temp = catalytic exhaust processing doesn't work properly, problem gets bigger with the engine; e.g. truck exhaust processing basically doesn't do much at all in cities). And you get a choice of "do I want to wear the engine or do I want to minimize exhaust and fuel"... For general driving I find it easier to drive a diesel for low consumption compared to petrol. I also like how diesels tend to have nice long gearing, leading to low RPMs and less noise. Pick-up from low RPMs is also quite nice, a diesel has no issues to start accelerating from, say, 1200 rpm (with practically all constant speed driving falling between 1000 and ~1600ish rpm for me, to see more you'll need the Autobahn). For petrolhead(?) purposes I have to say that diesel tend to sound like a loose bag of bolts when you rev them (which you normally won't do), obviously it's not going to sound like a race car. In that regard tiny (1 liter, 1.2 liter) non-DI, non-turbo petrol engines tend to surprise... :) though at least some of these are way worse at fuel efficiency than you'd expect.
      - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
        >low load = low exhaust temp = catalytic exhaust processing doesn't work properly It's not 1970 anymore. Those cats are right behind the exhaust manifold for a reason and that reason isn't to save money on piping.
      - geggam 7y ago
        Audi A8 diesel on the autobahn is fun. Smooth ride at 250 kph :)
  - djaychela 7y ago
    "Dieselgate wasn't about particulates, and unlike petrol cars every diesel car of the last 10-15 years has a particulate filter..." Not true here in the UK - I buy and sell secondhand cars of this vintage as a side job, and not all the diesels I've seen have DPFs (I'd say it was 50% have them) - lots of models didn't have them, including quite a few vans (which pollute more due to bigger engines, lower mpg, etc). And anyone who's bought anything of this age range also knows that the DPFs are a reliability nightmare. Lots of people removed them (which is now at least tested on the MOT, although it's possible to remove it in a way that is not detected by an MOT test). But most importantly, although dieselgate wasn't about particulates, it still means getting diesels off the road, which is a good thing. If particulates had been accurately measured in vehicles after a few years, I'm sure many more would be off the road, particularly 1st gen DPF cars. The problem is that most people now equate a vehicle with a DPF as being a nightmare, and then by association don't care about the effect on the environment as the effect on their wallet is a more pressing need. Much the same as EGR valves, which are a reliability issue on most vehicles regardless of fuel. People block them off, leading to increased NOx pollution and better fuel consumption, and when it can cost hundreds of pounds to get it replaced (if it has to be calibrated to the ECU, etc, often a main dealer trip is involved), it's not surprising that this happens. The sooner we can all go electric, the better, IMO. And I say that as someone who has considerable skill and experience in repairing and maintaining ICE cars.
  - Reason077 7y ago
    Modern diesels are supposed to have particulate filters installed. Yet just yesterday, in “ultra low emission zone” Central London, I saw a Ford diesel van with a 16 plate (meaning, it’s a late-2015 Model at the earliest) spewing a cloud of black soot every time it pulled away at an intersection. It’s clear that there are still too many DPF removals going on, and lax controls about monitoring emissions from supposedly-compliant vehicles. (Motorcycles are another huge issue. They may be compliant with noise and emissions regs at the factory gate, but too many people swap the exhaust for a loud, polluting, illegal one.)
    - sundvor 7y ago
      What!? Cars/trucks that have been modded this way ought to have a mandatory crush penalty. Complete forfeiture of the asset, zero compensation. Then let's see how popular the practice would remain. Diesel cars should have a mandatory pre sale environmental inspection to root out buyers getting stuck in the 2nd hand market.
      - RankingMember 7y ago
        > Cars/trucks that have been modded this way ought to have a mandatory crush penalty. Complete forfeiture of the asset, zero compensation. I feel like you might get a wee bit of pushback on the idea of crushing people's modes of transport because they stuck a non-regulation exhaust on there. All-or-nothing regulations such as the one you propose are rarely sustainable. Even CARB (the California Air Resources Board), the bane of California automotive enthusiasts, isn't that draconian.
        sundvor 7y ago
        Why should people be allowed to act so selfishly? It would stop the practice dead in its tracks, and from then a non issue. I dare say that makes it worth it. Furthermore making it strictly illegal to perform the work would assist.
        bluGill 7y ago
  - ody4242 7y ago
    The way DPF works results in more <PM10 particulate than not having a DPF at all. (It does burn most of the soot, but results in more small particles at then end, and we know that those small particles are the ones that are causing most of the troubles in the lungs and blood stream)
    - selimthegrim 7y ago
      Can you cite anything that proves it’s worse
      - ody4242 7y ago
        Tom Denton: Automotive Technician Training: Theory page 213 no proof, just a statement though, but the same phrasing is seen all around the net, even on the DPF wikipedia page (without source though)
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
tdsamardzhiev 7y ago
Perhaps other places don't want their shady practices exposed.
Xelbair 7y ago
He is ethical, and known to expose wrongdoings. No way in hell that he is getting hired in that industry.. and even if he is - no way that he'll have any kind of access to incriminating information.
- mcv 7y ago
  He should be hired by regulators. They need more people who can expose wrongdoings.
  - philpem 7y ago
    The sad fact is, the regulators are so underfunded they probably can't afford to hire him.
    - usrusr 7y ago
      Cherry on top, in a perfectly cynical (and hopefully hypothetical!) world: "After five years at the regulator, the car industry had paid him more than he would ever have earned as their employee"
  - negamax 7y ago
    Underrated comment. This seems like a great closure for this, which is a seriously embarrassing development
- navigatesol 7y ago
  >No way in hell that he is getting hired in that industry.. So you're saying that no one in the auto industry is ethical, and that they deliberately hire unethical people? Out of the millions of employees across the country and globe? Deplorables, all of them? That's rich. Silicon Valley is hypocritical and out-of-touch.
  - matz1 7y ago
    They are all ethicall, it's just might not have the same ethics as you. Ethics is relative afterall.
kenneth 7y ago
Hiring a known whistleblower is a risk not worth taking, even if you are not doing anything wrong. The risk vs. reward ratio is just too high.
- richardhod 7y ago
  It is unclear whether you approve of this decisionmaking heuristic
- cyphar 7y ago
  I am sure that this is the logic executives like to go through, but whistleblowers aren't people who compulsively reveal company secrets. They reveal secrets which the public should know about, and usually have to be very large and important in order to justify the personal risk involved. If your company is so ethically bankrupt that you can't afford the risk of someone who would only reveal things that are of critical importance to the public, then maybe you aren't the "good guys" anymore.
  - Krasnol 7y ago
    Is this a variation on "you don't need to be afraid if you have nothing to hide" thing?
    - cyphar 7y ago
      It's more like "you don't need to be afraid of whistle-blowers unless you're killing people through your actions". VW didn't make a small mistake -- their evasion of emission standards has directly resulted in thousands of preventable deaths due to air pollution (they also decided to unethically poison monkeys in order to "prove" that the gasses weren't toxic). Again, whistle-blowers don't just reveal secrets willy-nilly -- there is significant personal risk to being a whistle-blower and very few people make such decisions lightly. The thing is -- everyone has something to hide, which is why that adage is wrong. But not everyone is hiding a scheme they've cooked up to flaunt laws (and lied to regulators for years when they came knocking) which resulted in tangible deaths as a result. If you are worried that you have a scheme like that on your books, then yeah you should avoid hiring whistle-blowers.
roenxi 7y ago
Devils advocate for this one; to put a little meat on sibling comments. A whistleblower has demonstrated that there are circumstances where they will short-circuit the chain of command and attempt to attract external intervention. The only way a corporate hierarchy can react to such a person is to see them as a risk to be managed; ideally by not hiring them. Large scale corporations have hiring processes with all sorts of weird informal risk-mitigation measures built in (which is usually expressed as discrimination on weird traits). So people with that sort of whistle-blowing initiative who want to be employable need to build a strong informal network of people who will hire them because they think they understand what circumstances would trigger that behavior and that they are not present in the hiring corporation.
- richardhod 7y ago
  This may be true, but it's not how good business, corporations and executives should behave.
  - fredsir 7y ago
    When profit is king...
- bdhess 7y ago
  He’s not a whistleblower, and didn’t short circuit his management chain. FTA he was an engineering student at WVU the time, not employed by VW.
  - Ygg2 7y ago
    He has ethics, we can't allow that at our CORP. -- Some CEO probably.
    - cowsandmilk 7y ago
      Yeah, I'm sure the 4,000 person layoff was just to let go of this one engineer...
coldtea 7y ago
You'd expected them to be rewarded for doing a good ethical deed that hurts the company they were working for? I'm not sure other companies would jump to hire him, that's not how capitalism works...
- smt88 7y ago
  In some situations in the US, whistleblowers receive a portion of the money the government makes from fines. https://www.whistleblowersinternational.com/what-is-whistleblowing/rewards/ https://www.whistleblowersinternational.com/what-is-whistleb...

thrownaway954 7y ago

"no good deed goes unpunished" - unfortunately this is how things are in the world. i hope things turn out good for him.

carmate383 7y ago

So, the guy did his job like every other employee. Why should he get special treatment?

Insanity 7y ago
Perhaps because some people would just "pretend not to see" when they discover something like this? Just look at the history between Snowden and the NSA. Snowden was not the first guy to know about what was going on, but the first one to come out with it.
- neuronic 7y ago
  Kind of replying to you as well as parent. One should note that the "pretend not to see" part is often a result of expecting heavily negative consequences in face of uncovering the truth. I am German and I really do enjoy the newest VW models, in fact I am rooting for their electric approach - but let's face it. Volkswagen is one of Germany's top brass international companies, therefore heavily politically intertwined, and I am certain that they would recede to shady methods to prevent from such damaging news ever going public. I have little doubt that Volkswagen is as unethical as comparable international companies in other nations. So it tremendous takes personal risk and, yes, bravery to take such a step. And that is why this is not just "normal work".

nicolas_t 7y ago

US visa laws are barbaric. Giving only 60 days to find a new job when one has been laid off without prior notice. How is that supposed to be fair? H1B visa have the effect of creating indentured slaves by placing all of the power on the employers and prevent employees from having any negotiation power since they are always under the threat of losing their visa... While the US is still seen in a way as a dreamland to live and work in by people in poorer areas, it seems to me anecdotally that more and more people in developed countries no longer have any interest in moving there due to the many issues surrounding visas, work conditions, living conditions, fun things like CBP and overzealous immigration officers, etc... This is not a good thing for a country that has long been successful in attracting the best and the brightest.

vr46 7y ago
On another perspective, perhaps it will be good for India to have an influx of skilled and experienced people back. The West has long poached talent from everywhere else.
- atemerev 7y ago
  Not “poached”, they were moving voluntarily, because of much better conditions and attitudes. So no, it won’t be good for anybody. They were not needed at home, and they are not needed now.
  - simonh 7y ago
    When discussing recruitment, poaching implies enticement rather than coercion.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - mapcars 7y ago
    What makes you think they were not needed at home?

pif 7y ago

> He said he had a lead on a job with another automaker [...] But the industry is suffering a slowdown, I wonder how much of the slowdown is caused by more and more aggressive emission regulations. Cars used to be definitely more responsive, and they get more sluggish and more expensive to maintain with every new Euro standard published. Edit: I'm addig this to reply to some commenters. I'm not stating that car comfort is more important than public health. It's just a fact that emission regulations have pushed much fun away from the driving experience. And I honestly wonder how this impacted the car making industry.

CydeWeys 7y ago
Public health is more important than cars getting sportier. Particulate emissions are a real health hazard, causing respiratory illnesses for millions of people each year. The negative externalities of air pollution are huge, and it's not an exaggeration to say that air pollution is directly causing the deaths of 6 figures of people every year, who would otherwise not have died. Every single one of us has lungs and breathes the air around us. Stricter emissions controls are better for all of us.
- nullc 7y ago
  Fun fact: there are non-trivial differences in air quality from place to place-- that's how it's possible to estimate the impact on mortality. If you have any freedom at all in choosing where you live, air quality should be a factor.
neuronic 7y ago
Do I misinterpret you or does it sound a bit as if you value the responsiveness of your car over the emission standard which exists to protect the health of people as well as the environment? Obviously one can discuss the numbers and limits defined in the emission standard and how much sense they make but I would find it odd if someone put car performance over its negative impact on others.
- georgerobinson 7y ago

yitchelle 7y ago

I wonder if his role in exposing VW got him the job at GM. I am also wondering why he is so focused on returning to the US. With his skills and knowledge, there should be some opportunities in other parts of the world.

lawlessone 7y ago
>wondering why he is so focused on returning to the US. says he spent half his life there
throwayEngineer 7y ago
Have you lived outside the US? Even in Europe it seems standard of living is less (for professionals)
- yitchelle 7y ago
  Not sure why you assumed that I am living in the US. I am not, I am living in Europe.

vsskanth 7y ago

It is important to note that this engineer is from India and has been legally in the US for 17 years and still on a temporary H1B visa (conveniently not mentioned in NYT) If this person was from any other country, he would have a green card by now. But now, he has to leave everything behind and go back. This is all too familiar for Indian nationals working in the US. It has become way more precarious for Indian families now due to the current administration arbitrarily denying visa extensions for people in tech. Hopefully he finds a good job in India, Canada or Europe.

winter_blue 7y ago
I don't think enough people know about this. People from India have to wait for 150+ years to get permanent residency via the employment-based route.This website does a great job at explaining this: https://siia.us/ https://siia.us/ People from most other countries can get employment-based green cards in a matter of months. These people have approved (I-140) green card applications, yet cannot "receive" their green card unless they wait 150+ years. Moreover, until recently, their spouses were prohibited from working. The Obama administration issued regulation that granted permission to work for spouses of people with approved (I-140) green card applications, who've been waiting for over a year. In a cruel and sadistic manner, the current administration, decided to revoke these authorizations, so that their spouses don't "enter the labor market early"[1]. > But now, he has to leave everything behind and go back I don't think this is necessarily true. Can't he try to find another company that will sponsor him for an H-1B? If he has an approved I-140, he's cap-exempt, practically forever. [1] https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201810&RIN=1615-AC15 https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=2018... Quote: > Anticipated Costs and Benefits: > DHS anticipates that there would be two primary impacts that DHS can estimate and quantify: the cost-savings accruing to forgone future filings by certain H-4 dependent spouses, and labor turnover costs that employers of H-4 workers could incur when their employees’ EADs are terminated. Some U.S. workers would benefit from this proposed rule by having a better chance at obtaining jobs that some of the population of the H-4 workers currently hold, as the proposed rule would no longer allow H-4 workers to enter the labor market early."
- 7y ago

chengiz 7y ago

Playing the devil's advocate here a little bit. We dont know the whole story. Perhaps he was not good at the job GM hired him for, perhaps he didnt get along with people, perhaps it was just as GM says, a blind restructuring. Things like this happen all the time. The only difference here is the VW scandal, for which all we know is he did good experimental work as part of a team that turned out to be groundbreaking. If the emissions had amounted to nothing, he'd be like any other experimental researcher. Was he instrumental in opening the results to the public in any way? As in he strived against the odds and backlash etc, playing a whistleblower of sorts? The article doesnt say so I assume not. So I cant say the article has convinced me that he deserves special treatment because of his role in the VW scandal.

AnthonBerg 7y ago
I agree that we don’t know the reasons he was let go. But!: Of course he deserves special treatment for his role in the VW scandal, because of course we desperately want and need to build a society that always actively encourages and never discourages actions like those he took. – But: Of course the car industry cannot be relied on to give him that special treatment. And we haven’t yet built the kind of society that does. So it is incumbent on us here and now to give him that special treatment. Not least to give the signal that we will help you if you help us. Keep you safe. To remove doubt of that. As it stands, that doubt has increased, and the expectation that the auto industry will retaliate has increased, so on the table there is less apparent safety to do what he did.
- barry-cotter 7y ago
  That’s not how this world works. Whistleblowers have their lives ruined, almost uniformly. Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, William Binney, Jesselyn Radack, Frank Ford, Joe Darby. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    He's not a whistle-blower though. He exposed the VW fraud as part of his prior job studying emissions

agumonkey 7y ago

It astonishes me how society is so against exposing hurtful realities. At least this way.

RickJWagner 7y ago

Such is life in corporate America. It rains on the just and the unjust.

ptaipale 7y ago

When I saw the NYT headline, it seemed to suggest that the GM engineer was singled out precisely due to helping out in exposing the scandal. But when I read the article, it turns out he's just one out of 4,000 other engineers. We could probably make many other scandalous headlines from the same group of people: "GM lays off engineer who contributed to trade union organising his colleagues" "GM lays off engineer who only two years earlier contributed to patent XXX which saved $$$ for the company" "GM lays off engineer who was recovering from cancer and is now at risk of relapse" "GM lays off engineer whose seven dependents are now facing an uncertain future" This is not to belittle what Hemanth Kappanna did, but there are four thousand stories out of which one is now lifted up, even though what he did previously is, as far as we know, not at all connected to this position being terminated. Contribution of Kappanna and his colleagues was to first to WVU and then the world as a whole, not GM. So perhaps a job at GM shouldn't be his "reward"; something else should be. But I hope that the NYT headline might help him with that.

SolarNet 7y ago
Except that in this case his life is being uprooted due to the power the company wields over his life. Citizenship (or at least a green card) should be his reward.
- ptaipale 7y ago
  My point was that the same is probably the case with many among these 4,000.
  - hello_friendos 7y ago
    They all exposed that GM lied? No, they didn't
    - ptaipale 7y ago
      Did GM lie? I know some people did accuse GM of emission cheating, but haven't heard of any actual proof.

sgjohnson 7y ago

re: H1-B et al immigration issues. What the United States need to do is to completely abolish all welfare programs and go back to Ellis island style immigration system. Kills 2 birds with one stone.

temac 7y ago

It is always crazy to read those layoff stories with people let go overnight for no reason and escorted out of building by security. Must be hard to work knowing that can happen.

unixhero 7y ago

He should join Tesla :)

eznoonze 7y ago
No emission issue for Tesla I guess. But they may have battery issues.
- unixhero 7y ago
  An engineer with strong critical thinking skills is what I imagine he can bring to the table.

jedberg 7y ago

This is the perfect example of the flaws in our immigration system. This man came here for grad school, was educated in America at a public institution (paid for in part by tax dollars), then worked here for years, contributing to our economy as both a worker and consumer (and probably putting in far more tax dollars than he ever consumed), and now after 17 years, we send him back to India. We should be giving this man citizenship, not a ticket home.

makotech222 7y ago
No, this is a feature. The point is to keep a highly skilled immigrant workforce as precariously as possible, so that they have absolutely no bargaining power when profits dip. This is capitalism. Edit: I should point out, in case it isn't obvious, that capitalism is bad, folks.

maxhedrome 7y ago

Clearly they have nothing to hide.

victor106 7y ago

This is so sad temporarily for Hemanth but permanently for the US. Hemanth is already a hero and he's done more than what most would only dream of doing. He has a bright future expect that bright future won't be in the US. In the long term its more of a loss for the US if you consider the fact that he already "earned" the US $23 billion

GreaterFool 7y ago

17 years in US and still no permanent residence of any sort?! That's why I'd never consider moving to US! If I chose a country to live in and they let me in I want to have a possibility of either becoming a citizen or at least have permanent residency (actually permanent; often permanent just means long-term). Is Green Card that hard to get?

ip26 7y ago
Discussed elsewhere in this thread, but it depends on where you are from b/c there is a per-country quota. There are many applicants for a Green Card from India so it's hard if you are Indian. But if you are from e.g. Singapore there are far fewer applicants competing with you so it's easier.

raincom 7y ago

He should have applied for perm residency under EB-1. This EB-1 has many loopholes, which many postdocs and Ph.Ds exploit. Bunch of citations, h-index, review articles, letters from peers would do.

camil211 7y ago

test