8 ms·
Mechanic put in prison for selling 14000 truck emission bypass devices
- ck2 4y agoThe problem is this is happening somewhere in many many cities in the country and it all adds up. So many trucks in my town obviously going around with highly bypassed exhaust now and there's no enforcement so they get away with making life toxic for everyone else. Many states don't even have inspection anymore and even if they did they just switch it off.
- throwaway0a5e 4y agoStatistically nobody goes out of they way to defeat emissions devices on comparable gas vehicles. Sure some people will neglect to replace stuff that fails over time but nobody is going looking for emissions delete stuff for gas cars and trucks whereas with diesels even new truck buyers who wouldn't consider touching anything consider "tuners" Why is that?
- lokar 4y agoSome people with sports cars bypass for performance
- hnov 4y agoBut a gas car with no cats, tuned for maximum power is not really comparable to a diesel truck rolling coal. One might leave soot on its own rear bumper, the other covers everything behind it in disgusting soot.
- TylerE 4y agoThere are tons of exhaust pollutants that are not visible.
- sudosysgen 4y agoThose are all exarcebated by the incomplete pollution of trucks rolling coal far more.
- bumby 4y agoTo say they are "all exacerbated" isn't quite accurate. Air/fuel mixture affects the various emissions differently. For example, going from lean to stochiometric will increase NOx but decrease CO.
- sudosysgen 4y agoLean/Stoichiometric is one thing, you still can (in theory) have perfect combustion on that part of the axis. Running very rich will increase both NOx and CO, for example.
- bumby 4y agoIt's a bit more complicated than just air-fuel ratio. The primary mechanism in NOx formation is combustion chamber temperature, while the primary mechanism in CO formation is incomplete combustion of HC. If you look at most emission maps, the NOx is decreasing rapidly while CO is relatively flat or increasing. My main point is that combustion is complicated and not as simple as "just do this thing to reduce all emissions". It's often a balancing act, which is why European regulations may be more favorable to diesels than American regulations and the opposite is true for gasoline.
- sudosysgen 4y agoI definitely agree that within reasonable combustion regimens it's a balancing act. However, when you run your fueling extremely rich like someone that is rolling coal, NOx is going to be higher than in any reasonable tradeoff, because if the irreversible damage to the catalytic converter. It will be far worse than any conceivable lean air mixture.
- chucksta 4y agoAlso generally speaking the volume of the motors, diesels are usually larger displacement engines
- bumby 4y agoDiesel and gas have different emission profiles and the regulations don't get evenly applied. For example, harsher regulations on oxides of nitrogen will impact diesels more than gas. As someone else eluded to, "soot" may not be the best proxy for "emissions".
- hnov 4y agoTrue, there are plenty of invisible emissions causing chronic air quality issues, but um an over-rich diesel exhaust in your vicinity is rather acute.
- arprocter 4y agoEGR is bled pre-turbo - disabling EGR increases the amount of exhaust going to the turbine It's possible to tune a diesel without making smoke - normally this is done by leaving the wastegate closed for longer to make more boost and then adding more fuel. Any smoke is too much extra fuel.
- kedikedi 4y agoMaybe a bit anectodal, but the reason is that diesel emission devices are more complex and more prone to failure or require more maintenance (perceived as annoyance by the user). Here is more explanation: with the diesel emission devices, you are trying to control soot and NOx gasses. For example the EGR (exhaust gas recirculation) system reintroduces a bit of exhaust gas back to intake to reduce combustion temperature to reduce NOx gasses. However, this means that you are introducing sooty gas back to the intake, where it messes with other stuff like swirl flaps. Swirl flaps are there to create a small tornado inside the cylinder for more efficient mixing and burning. But these are mechanical flaps and, in the best case, they stop working when they soot up. In the worst case, however, they go inside the cylinder and cause catastropic damage, requiring an engine rebuild/replacement. Then another emission device for diesels is the particle filter. This is a very fine filter to catch soot exiting the exhaust. The engine puts a bit more fuel every now and then to burn them off properly. But the engine needs to run under a certain load and operating temperature for this operation to succeed, and if not, it gets permanently blocked and you need to visit a garage to force it or to have it cleaned/replaced. This happens if you only drive short distances and never let the engine to warm up, or if you idle for too long, or if you always drive in stop and go traffic. And sometimes, the filter collects ash instead of soot and that can't be burned off. This happens when you use incorrect sort of oil in a modern diesel car or if the fuel is bad. The only cure is cleaning or replacement of the filter. Then you have another emission device: the ammonia. Newer cars spray a bit of ammonia (AdBlue) every now and then on the exhaust gasses to reduce NOx emmisions. This adds one more thing to refill every now and then and the car reduces power if you don't comply. Now compare this to the gasoline car emission device: the catalyst. This one fails if you overheat it, or if it goes too old by age. The overheating happens if the combustion is too rich (too much fuel for the amount of air) for a long time but the engine controller prevents it anyway. Catalyst is there to burn any unburnt fuel and turn carbon monoxide into carbon dioxide. Some newer cars also have EGR in them like a diesel car AFAIK, but I am not aware of the relevant failures of that bit.
- bluGill 4y agoWithout a turbo there is only minimal power gains you can get from computer changes. Diesel engines almost all have a turbo, gas engines almost never to. In addition some of the emissions stuff on diesels does cut efficiency by a significant amount, there isn't much gain in a gas engine if you are willing to ignore emissions. Don't confuse the above with zero gain from custom tuning a gas engine, just that the gains are not nearly as great as you can get with a diesel. If you are running a gas car on a track you can get measurable results from custom tuning - but it isn't nearly as noticeable in day to day driving.
- breadloaf 4y ago> Diesel engines almost all have a turbo, gas engines almost never to In USA are humungous engines (5.0l +) without a turbo In EU are mini engines (1.0l ~ 3.0l) and almost always with turbo. Is it better fuel economy?
- bluGill 4y agoFor gas engines, but this is about diesel which have very different properties. Even when talking about gas engines, if you are towing (this is about diesel where towing is more likely than normal) your turbo is running all the time anyway and there is no savings over a bigger turboless engine, and the bigger engine will last longer. The bigger engine can also run at lower rpms which brings up power. In the end for a lightly loaded gas engine a small turbo is more efficient.
- hnov 4y agoIn CA, trucks are (were) exempt from smog checks. Hopefully law enforcement will send those caught rolling coal to a date with the state referee.
- happyopossum 4y agoThey most definitely are not exempt - I've had to do the same smog checks on my (smog compliant) diesel 2006 F-250, my 36' RV, and my current '06 light duty truck as I do on my minivan or sedan.
- hnov 4y agoYou're right, you'd need an F450 to hit the 14k lbs GVW, not sure why I thought they were exempt.
- kayodelycaon 4y agoThe title is misleading. He didn’t pay taxes, illegally used his business accounts for personal expenses, and ignored a fine for making the devices. (By writing new software for existing parts.)
- Drunk_Engineer 4y agoHe did $10 million in sales, but has to pay only $2 million in fines. This is not even a slap-on-the-wrist.
- yorwba 4y agoHe was already fined $4 million before. Also, $10 million in sales ≠ $10 million in profit.
- sdfhdhjdw3 4y agoThat's 20%... Can you imagine if google, who to date must have done say $2tr in sales (guesstimate), got a $400bn slap-on-the-wrist?
- giarc 4y agoHe was also fined $4 million but then sold his company "In 2017 the EPA hit Geouge with a $4 million fine, after which he sold Spartan to another company." However, the $10m is revenue, not profit, so between the $2m plus the $6m he likely won't come out ahead.
- timbit42 4y agoWhat do you expect from a drunk?
- nfriedly 4y agoI'd say the year in jail is more than a slap on the wrist. That's in addition to the fines.
- falcolas 4y agoNow go after the buyers. A nice big “deterrent” fine would suffice.
- lokar 4y agoNo, revoke their ability to be the registered owner of a motor vehicle
- Gigachad 4y agoIt’s crazy how this is seen as such an unacceptable move and yet for virtually any other licensed activity where you had committed such an offence it would be the first action.
- jstarfish 4y agoIt's ill-advised. We do this for repeat DUI offenders, but you need a car to get around most of America-- so even when suspended or unlicensed, people drive anyway. At that that point they are both (a) uninsurable and (b) illegally operating, and now have more reasons to flee the scene of an accident than they do to remain. If it's some rich kid perpetrator, there won't even be a manslaughter charge if the victim dies. All arbitrary license revocation does is make the roads twice as dangerous for everyone else.
- Gigachad 4y agoSo why have a license at all if it’s not possible to revoke?
- salawat 4y agoBecause it's one of the closest things to a UUID in American life, and is the keystone to various well architected surveillance nets. Remember, drivers licenses were originally born out of law enforcement complaints that the automobile made their lives so much harder.
- 4y ago
- rsync 4y agoGood. Urban apartment dwellers LARPing as ranchers and cattlemen are one of the most asinine and embarrassing aspects of 21st century America. We used to have a term for individuals like this: all hat, no cattle … … imagine being so childish and shameless as to ignore that moniker.
- birdyrooster 4y agoYou’ve just described a gigantic contingent of Texans
- atwebb 4y agoI was thinking Tennessee, though they are probably pretty similar nowadays.
- selimthegrim 4y agoG.W. Bush clearly thought so
- monetus 4y agoCherokee and mulungeon cultures are starting to be a bit more prominent in east Tennessee at the least. The accent diversity is really something else too - but yeah, plenty of Texan mentalities here I think.
- bumby 4y ago>We used to have a term for individuals like this: all hat, no cattle … The phrase I've heard in cattle country is "dimestore cowboy" or "drugstore cowboy"
- cafard 4y agoIn Colorado when I was I kid, one heard "goat roper".
- JTbane 4y agoI like the term for urban lifted trucks and Jeeps: mall crawlers.
- bumby 4y agoI couldn't tell from the article, are the "defeat devices" just tuners used inappropriately? I.e., is it just a special (illegal) application of fuel mapping optimization?
- aaaaaaaaata 4y agoWell, de-optimization, in particular ranges. But, yes.
- bumby 4y agoLike all optimization problems, I guess it depends on the cost function. E.g., optimizing for performance may be "de-optimizing" for emissions and vice versa.
- bedast 4y agoA late model diesel truck capable of "rolling coal" almost certainly has an emissions defeat device or tune, or has otherwise been modified. These devices are not always about trying to extract the performance lost to emissions control. These larping ranchers also want to be able to produce thick black clouds because it's funny to them to mess up someone's day, possibly even their health. It's a point of pride. Hitting one of the sources of this technology is great. I just wish law enforcement would also go after the offenders buying them and using them on public roads as well. The unfortunate truth is I suspect the venn diagram of people who would buy this for the lolz and cops who have the same mentality has significant overlap.
- googlryas 4y agoIt's annoying that my state(Colorado) government actually did something about it, but they decided it would be a $100 fine, but first the government will ask you nicely to "fix" your truck(as if anything is broken, vs intentionally modified) first.
- no-s 4y ago> A late model diesel truck capable of "rolling coal" almost certainly has an emissions defeat device or tune, or has otherwise been modified. These devices are not always about trying to extract the performance lost to emissions control. However I tuned my diesel pickup to increase efficiency and torque which included what is known as an “EGR Defeat” and a “Texas Cat”. It’s registered outside of an enforcement area, however just for grins I ran it through an emissions check and dyno and it passed with flying colors without tweaking it for emissions. That’s because between the “tune”, the turbo, and now-mandatory everywhere low-sulfur diesel the emissions are way reduced. Mine is a pre-DEF model. I imagine it will produce substantial NOx if I gun it on a hot day with a heavy load, but that also results in 3MPG performance so I just don’t do that except when absolutely necessary. Not everyone is trying to choke people with black smoke, some of us “ranchers" just want to stop strangling on pointless micro-regulation that doesn’t fit the situation.
- jamespo 4y agoWhat do you need a pickup for?
- noasaservice 4y ago
- Cd00d 4y agoDownvoted you for the hyperbole. You're arguing that all crimes that have fines and jail time should be capital crimes instead?
- noasaservice 4y ago> You're arguing that all crimes that have fines and jail time should be capital crimes instead? No. I'm making the point that this punishment is effectively a capital punishment. He'll have a felony following him around for the rest of his life, unless he pays the bribe to have it expunged. Good luck getting most jobs or renting anywhere. And if he owns a home, 1y prison will get that foreclosed on. And in addition $2.5m is nigh unpayable, unless youre a 10x sw eng at a FAANG. But he's a mechanic. This fine is literally unpayable even at the best mechanic salaries. So once he gets out of prison, even IF he can get a job, he'll be in destitution for the rest of his life. It's the cruel and unusual punishment they did against him, that I'm comparing to a slow capital punishment. You can call it hyperbole if you wish. And, HE wasn't running vehicles that emitted the pollution, but he's blamed for it. Go after the actual people whop bought and installed. As much as it would suck, go confiscate the vehicles from the owners, and then charge appropriately larger individual fines against these 17000 people.
- salawat 4y agoNot how it works. Authorities will always crack down on upstream simply for the paperwork savings. Easier to investigate and make an example of one guy than 17000. This is why our manufacturing sector is the primary target for regulatory action. The government can nip activity in the bud by pressuring manufacturers to never "make the problematic thing at scale". That's why if you stumble on something and are like "why hasn't anyone made this?" and you aren't an industry insider with active links to regulatory authorities, you can end up in precarious legal straits if you aren't careful. Just one more way our system is tilted toward incumbents vs. new entrants.
- LeifCarrotson 4y agoI have no problem with fining the idiots who remove particulate filters and sensors to be able to 'roll coal' at urban stoplights. That's senseless. But expensive emissions control systems are a problem. One part of this issue is that regulations to require expensive emission control systems work for OEMs, but they are much harder to apply to an individual with a truck at >200,000 miles. The regulations are designed for new vehicles, and the components in those new vehicles are designed to last for 10 years or 100,000 miles. It's one thing to roll the costs of installation and purchasing these particulate filters and catalytic converters onto the OEM (who gets to install them on new, clean steel with working fasteners) and another thing entirely to ask it to be done two or three times on the same vehicle. An advantage of a diesel truck is that the engine may last for 300,000 miles, but if you're looking at a bill of $5,000 on a truck that's only worth $5,000, and you already have a welder...that particulate filter, EGR cooler, catalytic converter, etc. are awfully hard to justify compared to a big steel pipe. I just helped my brother install a 'bypass kit' for offroad use on his 2009 Toyota Sequoia (which has a 5.7L gas engine). The 'smog pump' valves are known to be failure points - Toyota got sued over the 2005-2007 engines and recategorized the system into the powertrain to extend the warranty. The system costs almost $3,000 to repair, because you need to remove the entire intake to get at the valves. This system only exists to pass OEM emissions tests - specifically, while the engine is completely cold, the first 60 seconds of exhaust contains methane slightly in excess of the legal limit. The programming only cycles the valves once, for only 60 seconds, only when it's been more than 7 hours since the last start-up, only when the engine is cold, only when the ambient temperature is under 5 degrees C. The bypass kit removes this problem, it just lies to the engine and tells it that the temperature is above the threshold. It's June; none of these things applied when he, his wife, and his 4 kids under 4 were stuck in the humidity and sun with the truck in limp-home mode trying to pull their camper home because the 12-year old system with 180,000 miles on it freaked out while leaving the gas station. I wish that we could have repaired the system to work properly. I don't want to emit excess methane, neither does he! But there's no calculus in which spending either $3,000 on that vehicle or spending $600 on parts and taking 3 days off work to replace them ourselves makes sense for those 60 seconds of recirculation on cold winter mornings. What do you want him to do, buy a new $60,000 truck off the dealership and send the old one to the junkyard? I'm pretty confident that would be a lot worse for the environment than keeping the old one going another 6 years. The problem is that Toyota has no incentive to care that these limited-lifetime components are inaccessible because they're off the hook after the truck is out of warranty.
- FrameworkFred 4y agoI can see the tax charges and I get that the behavior and consequences his device and/or software enables is bad on a few levels, but it's not clear to me that it should be illegal to sell something that allows others to modify their equipment toward their own ends. Or, rather, I think it's a pretty slippery slope. I can imagine wanting to buy an aftermarket controller for a tesla and I can see Elon Musk being upset enough about it to push the EPA to fine the company under the same set of laws, but I don't think it would be good for consumers if it happened that way. Should Linus be fined for creating an operating system that gives me the ability to turn off energy-saving configurations on my laptop?
- hellisothers 4y agoThe energy saving config is a good reference, it made me think about your post more seriously. I think the answer here is just because a slope can be slippery doesn’t mean it’s not important to get on it. Selling a device that allows a car to be “100s if times” more polluting is not the same as turning off energy savings (which you can already usually do as part of the OS).
- FrameworkFred 4y agoand what about mining crypto? I'd bet it's a worse offender by a mile (https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index). why wouldn't the EPA fine the company behind this mining rig? https://www.amazon.com/SOONTECH-Complete-Motherboard-Including-EXCLUDING/dp/B09F2PDVCM/ https://www.amazon.com/SOONTECH-Complete-Motherboard-Includi...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoI'm in NH but grew up in RI. Anecdotally I think that RI had far more trucks rolling coal. I wonder why.
- throwaway0a5e 4y agoRolling coal is not a statement of "f-the system" in northern new england like it is in southern new england. No need to "own the libs" when the libs aren't making the rules that govern your life.