PDA

View Full Version : Class-Action against MB for BlueTEC Emissions


Boxster1971
04-23-2016, 01:16 AM
After VW mess it looks like the lawyers smell money.

https://www.hbsslaw.com/cases/mercedes-bluetec-emissions

"Hagens Berman has filed a class-action lawsuit against Mercedes stating the automaker knowingly programmed its Clean Diesel BlueTEC vehicles to emit illegal, dangerous levels of nitrogen oxide (NOx) in virtually all real world driving conditions and likely contain a “defeat device” used to cheat testing."

sunnyside
04-23-2016, 01:36 AM
Oh boy, here we go!

Anchornut
04-23-2016, 02:57 PM
The key wording in that article is "low temperature" testing which means engine temperature repeated more than once, the engine needs to reach operating temperature otherwise all bets are off. These are the worlds most advanced diesels. A Gold diggers Pipe dream, case dismissed.

Boxster1971
04-23-2016, 02:58 PM
Looks like more than lawyer are investigating widespread emissions fraud.

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/smogtest-crackdown-spreads-past-vw--wsj-20160423-00001

"In Germany, Volkswagen, Audi, Porsche, General Motors'Opel, and Mercedes-Benz agreed to voluntarily recalls across Europe to fix engine-control software. The country's transport minister, Alexander Dobrindt, said the affected vehicles had engines that were tuned to suppress emissions control at low temperatures, a so-called thermal window that is allowed under European rules to protect engine components. But government tests of 53 models found a widespread practice of turning off emissions controls even at normal temperatures, he said."

Boxster1971
04-23-2016, 03:50 PM
I just noticed that I've duplicated the discussion started by Bob over in Sprinter Talk area in thread titled: "I knew it, I knew it!". I didn't recognize it from the title until I read it today. Oh well.....

MeRob
04-23-2016, 03:58 PM
I guess that European Rules are what we must live by... now that we're manufacturing less at home every day. Lawyers, bureaucrats, and technology...what a mix. What's next?...mandatory Nox Sensors for active volcanos ?

sailquik
04-23-2016, 04:14 PM
Mike,
Yes, but this thread does not seem to include "Obnoxious Bob" and all the negative drivel that surrounds his posts.
Here we can discuss this in a calm rational manner.
Roger

GeorgeRa
04-23-2016, 04:25 PM
I just noticed that I've duplicated the discussion started by Bob over in Sprinter Talk area in thread titled: "I knew it, I knew it!". I didn't recognize it from the title until I read it today. Oh well.....

I am glad you did,

George.

MeRob
04-23-2016, 05:16 PM
I agree... enough is enough. We can't change the rules here... so lets move on and enjoy our Sprinters and continue to work with what we have.

surlyoldbill
04-23-2016, 05:29 PM
Electric vehicles are just around the corner, so all this emissions crap and unreliability and extra maintenance will be history. Just waiting for that breakthrough battery technology. Any day now, any day.

OrioN
04-23-2016, 05:38 PM
:snore:




.

mikesprints
04-23-2016, 06:14 PM
Seems to happen quite a bit to O. I believe he's succumb to narcolepsy or has penchant for Ambien.

lindenengineering
04-23-2016, 10:43 PM
Guys lets be frank here and put aside that most of you are MB Sprinter owners, and face the inescapable fact that MB and others cannot at present make a diesel engine that is pollution free!
Even though there is (in the case of Sprinter) a ULEV label as certification to a point which brings up lawful and statement in civil tort law conjecture viz:
"Fitness for the the purpose intended"!
Also attached to this is Making false claims whether deliberately intended to confuse the purchaser. No matter how itsy bitsey teeny weenie between the lines you want to get!

The argument boiled down is whether they have engaged in sales puffing or deliberately went out to hood wink the customer and of course regulatory bodies.

There is also a famous test case in Anglo Saxon civil law the in the 1920's specifically about this very subject! Where a member of the British Gentry bought a Blower Bentley Tourer for European Grand Tours and it proved to NOT be to the purpose intended and the Bentley salesman made specific claims which turned out to be false!
Bentley had to pay damages!
This is a clear example of committing a tort in law and you can find it in Black's Law here in the US .

Now lets put aside the emotional bit about vehicles which so may of you seem to LOVE an look at pepper that table or cook's condiment! Nothing too emotional about a condiment you may state unless you get it up your nose or in your eyes !:laughing:

How would you feel if you went to the grocery store to buy your regular can of pepper of Mc Cormick brand which has historically been a 4 oz of pepper content in it. You get home looking at the very same can but noticed you paid the same for 4 oz historically but clearly marked on the label is 3 oz!
You would feel ripped off no doubt, and taken advantage of.
Now this is a commercial tort in law and it known as deception or deceptive practices.
Its all covered under the consumer laws thus:-
http://www.kilpatricktownsend.com/~/media/Files/articles/LPearsonAdvertisingBasics.ashx

This is an actual case currently part of a class action law suit.
Interesting reading here:-
What are the public policy reasons supporting class action suits?

Class action lawsuits are designed to advance several important public policy goals. A class action is often the sole means of enabling persons, even those with serious injuries, to remedy injustices committed by powerful, multi-million dollar corporations and institutions. As stated by former United States Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, “The class action is one of the few legal remedies the small claimant has against those who command the status quo.”

In other situations, each person within a large group may have suffered only limited damages and the cost of individual lawsuits would be far greater than the value of each claim. The total damages, however, to the class could be quite large. The wrongdoer would have the incentive to continue its fraudulent conduct but for a class action.

“In the age of mass production and mass marketing, class actions are necessary to allow individuals to take on multi-national corporations, where expenses of litigating would be otherwise prohibitive. The class becomes a de facto corporation for the purposes of suit, allowing individuals to band together and be equally matched against corporate defendants,” Lieff Cabraser partner and class action attorney Elizabeth Cabraser has observed.

Finally, where the defendant has engaged in a pattern of wrongdoing, a class action can provide an effective remedy for the group without incurring the costs of thousands of separate lawsuits and risking inconsistent decisions by the courts.

Why are class action lawsuits controversial?

Many see lawyers, both the plaintiffs’ counsel who receive a recovery only if the class prevails and defense counsel who are paid regardless of the outcome of the case, as the only “winners” when class actions are resolved.

This image of class actions is advanced by large corporations and the organizations they support financially for the purpose of undermining the ability of Americans to exercise their right to a civil jury trial under the 7th Amendment to the Bill of Rights. Without the ability to safeguard of our rights through the civil justice system, in many cases rogue corporations would be immune from liability. No compensation would be provided to those economically or physically injured by their misconduct.

Before any class action settlements may occur, the judge presiding over the case must give notice of the settlement to the class, allow all who wish to be heard to state their positions and/or objections, and approve the settlement, including the attorneys’ fees, only if the settlement and fees are fair and reasonable.

This summary of class actions is intended to give lay persons a basic overview to class actions. It is for informational purposes only and does not constitute specific legal advice. Nor is this summary intended to create, and receipt does not create, an attorney-client relationship.

Now I see the odd comment about settled out of court.
This is desirable, because in lawful circles you don't want the case of Jarndice versus Jarndice to occur! Even though its fictional from Dicken's Bleak Hose, where the litigants litigated until no money as left for settlement.
But remember Dickens got it right with
The Bar always wins and the Judge is asleep!
Must state its a caveat emptor & pick your battles
Dennis
Mechanic

showkey
04-24-2016, 02:28 AM
Electric vehicles are just around the corner, so all this emissions crap and unreliability and extra maintenance will be history. Just waiting for that breakthrough battery technology. Any day now, any day.


No ....those NOX emissions just get moved to the power plant......current govt. policy would like to close all the coal fired plants......( ask WV as the states bond rating was just down graded on the coal business restrictions and regulation) so power rates might double in the future with less capacity. Those electric cars might not look so good...

Ed463
04-24-2016, 08:26 AM
No ....those NOX emissions just get moved to the power plant......current govt. policy would like to close all the coal fired plants......( ask WV as the states bond rating was just down graded on the coal business restrictions and regulation) so power rates might double in the future with less capacity. Those electric cars might not look so good...

Correct, and we're already paying g a hefty increase to support alleged green energy in the UK. The massive investment, particularly in our distribution network, required to meet the forecast requirements for electric vehicles and embedded (hugely subsidized) private generation is eye watering. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

You could argue that all this investment is good for the economy and it will create jobs for sure. It's just a shame that apart from one energy company we've sold every other one to foreign owned company's. The wind energy sector could well be the biggest financial scam of this century which consumers will be paying for long after they have all fallen over and the revenue they have generated (good pun!) will have disappeared off shore (yep another pun, off shore wind farm's are popular here, small country full of green lovies who don't want anything like that in their back yards).

We should go nuclear, we invented of course, oh hang on we sold that too and now have no one capable of building one, thankfully our Chinese friends will help out:clapping:

flman
04-24-2016, 12:43 PM
Electric vehicles are just around the corner, so all this emissions crap and unreliability and extra maintenance will be history. Just waiting for that breakthrough battery technology. Any day now, any day.

Ha Ha, right after big oil concedes, don't hold your breath until the last drop of oil is out of the ground. :whistle:

And don't worry, they will figure out a way to make electric unreliable and tax it for some new form of imaginary pollution.

flman
04-24-2016, 12:47 PM
No ....those NOX emissions just get moved to the power plant......current govt. policy would like to close all the coal fired plants......( ask WV as the states bond rating was just down graded on the coal business restrictions and regulation) so power rates might double in the future with less capacity. Those electric cars might not look so good...

Right we even have the nut Bernie Sanders wanting to close down the clean energy nuclear power plants.

Everyone thinks an electric vehicle would end all interference and strife in our lives?

Feel the Bern as your money goes up in smoke. :shifty:

T-Montana
04-24-2016, 03:18 PM
AP article today states MB admits the US Justice Dept. has opened an investigation of its Bluetec engines for all the reasons and issues VW has admitted to. If MB is proven to have deceived, our vehicle depreciation will accelerate so I fully intend to pursue MB for any losses as Dennis explains is my right.

As far as electric vehicles, my Tesla 3 reservation will provide me with a clean, nearly maintenance free car that I power for free from the solar power system on my garage roof. My now eliminated home electric bill more than pays for the system so it's excess capacity is just gravy to pipe into my EV. Hopefully someday dump my Sprinter RV for an electric RV.

I think based on a few comments above I would like coin a new term to describe people who scoff at electric vehicles and home solar. "EV deniers" might just work, do you think?

lindenengineering
04-24-2016, 03:29 PM
Terry
As we know places like Montana, Wyoming and Colorado enjoy around 300 days a year of sunshine.
A short while ago I was running a converted Prius Gen 1 with exterior plug in rechargeable batteries. This rechargeable feature was powered by the solar panels we used for the experiment.
As long as I took the back way to my shop and didn't exceed 30 mph the car would make it to the charge station. I never paid for gas for a month and some folk I know at the NREL lab who have Volts have never put distilled fuel in their cars for months.
In short its coming!
Dennis
Mechanic

lindenengineering
04-24-2016, 03:57 PM
Correct, and we're already paying g a hefty increase to support alleged green energy in the UK. The massive investment, particularly in our distribution network, required to meet the forecast requirements for electric vehicles and embedded (hugely subsidized) private generation is eye watering. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

You could argue that all this investment is good for the economy and it will create jobs for sure. It's just a shame that apart from one energy company we've sold every other one to foreign owned company's. The wind energy sector could well be the biggest financial scam of this century which consumers will be paying for long after they have all fallen over and the revenue they have generated (good pun!) will have disappeared off shore (yep another pun, off shore wind farm's are popular here, small country full of green lovies who don't want anything like that in their back yards).

We should go nuclear, we invented of course, oh hang on we sold that too and now have no one capable of building one, thankfully our Chinese friends will help out:clapping:

Ed
I would/could argue the case that much of the problems now faced by Brits (as a Brit) is that the current energy situation has been brought about by & enacted by feckless politicians of both political reflections and policies enacted ever since M Thatcher.

For starters!
As an engineering exchange student in France in the late 1970's the liberal studies professor who obviously hated Brits and Yanks singled me out chided me in class for the fact that Quote:-

"Your island has been given a gift of North Sea oil but history will prove that you will squander as nation. It to pay for gross inefficiency, propping up of British Industries and providing a military you can't afford. You had an Empire, you have lost it to competition and you have a diminished identity!
You will then be forced to us French for nuclear energy and we will take you the poor house because you will have to pay for it not steal it a like you have been doing for centuries" !
Phew it was a put down I have never forgotten!

Well that prediction created a tumultuous applause from the mainly French alumni and sadly much of his words have come to fruition except its more the Chinese and the Indians who are the masters these days .
Dennis

xmerv
04-24-2016, 04:24 PM
A lifetime battery, this will be pretty cool if it ever comes to fruition.

http://www.iflscience.com/technology/new-battery-can-be-recharged-hundreds-thousands-times

GeorgeRa
04-24-2016, 05:12 PM
A lifetime battery, this will be pretty cool if it ever comes to fruition.

http://www.iflscience.com/technology/new-battery-can-be-recharged-hundreds-thousands-times

Thanks for sharing.

This is actual data from the experiment of increasing the life of the nano-wires, it is a long road to an actual battery but it could be as big of a breakthrough as the blue LED. A lot of folks research batteries based on nano-wires and nano-wire fragility is a key issue, it seems she indeed run into a potential breakthrough. https://news.uci.edu/research/all-powered-up/

George.

Ed463
04-24-2016, 05:51 PM
Ed
I would/could argue the case that much of the problems now faced by Brits (as a Brit) is that the current energy situation has been brought about by & enacted by feckless politicians of both political reflections and policies enacted ever since M Thatcher.

For starters!
As an engineering exchange student in France in the late 1970's the liberal studies professor who obviously hated Brits and Yanks singled me out chided me in class for the fact that Quote:-

"Your island has been given a gift of North Sea oil but history will prove that you will squander as nation. It to pay for gross inefficiency, propping up of British Industries and providing a military you can't afford. You had an Empire, you have lost it to competition and you have a diminished identity!
You will then be forced to us French for nuclear energy and we will take you the poor house because you will have to pay for it not steal it a like you have been doing for centuries" !
Phew it was a put down I have never forgotten!

Well that prediction created a tumultuous applause from the mainly French alumni and sadly much of his words have come to fruition except its more the Chinese and the Indians who are the masters these days .
Dennis
Wow he was pretty close to the truth:cry: we're about to sign up for nuclear power from EDF (French government owned energy company) and Chinese funded power plants. Cost? Double the current price for the next 50yrs I think.

Unfortunately my views on Margaret Thatcher can't be repeated on a public forum except to say it's taken 30yrs for her legacy to really bite. You can only sell the family silver once. And an economy based on finance and "service" industries, I really don't hold out much hope:thinking:

An example being (and you may have guessed from my previous posts my career has been in the energy industry)

Until March 2nd I worked for a Spanish company who owned one of the "big 6" the energy companies in the UK. There were around 2,500 people in the UK division from CEO to craftsman. 1,500 of those will leave/retire over the next 5 years. There is NO plan or funding to replace these people. The lights may well go out!
BTW the same company owns North America energy companies as well.

lindenengineering
04-24-2016, 07:54 PM
Ed
We are right off topic here but M thatcher gutted our industries and threw well trained engineers and high tech people onto the scrap heap only to be scooped up by countries needing talent.

What a waste of educational investment in the population only to basically say "Get lost"!

Tired of being hungry and unemployed the Ven government came beckoning me to a super well paid job to run the bus tech side of Metro de Caracas on an eight year contract. I got lost fast!

One thing about this country the USA and the privilege the country & its people gave me to live here is "Pres Kennedy said "the business of the USA is business!

Now I have had some additional business training in the UK, valuable skills in the auto related repair business but taking advantage of American business training skills has shown me that its a commodity in short supply on your side of the pond.

I only wish I had been shown the door earlier when I was younger, because then the USA was like an open door in the 1960's when I first came here. Courtesy of the USAF.

I have never regretted the flight up to Miami from Caracas and the words "Welcome to the USA MR Williams" :thumbup:
Take care and drop me a PM if you wish & all the best
Cheers Dennis

flman
04-24-2016, 08:15 PM
So Dennis, is the USA still the best place in the world to go? I hear others say different.

avanti
04-24-2016, 10:19 PM
Oh, for heaven's sake. Obviously, electric cars per se don't solve the carbon problem. What they do do is to decouple the transportation system from the primary energy production system, making the introduction of environmentally-acceptable production systems possible. This is not sufficient to solve the problem, but is it necessary. The political/economic problems are real, but that is not an argument against taking the necessary first step.

Graphite Dave
04-24-2016, 11:59 PM
The political/economic problems are real, but that is not an argument against taking the necessary first step.

Correct statement.

The world needs to reduce the number of humans. People and their toys create pollution. Less people would reduce the pollution. It is a pipe dream to expect that to happen until it happens naturally.

OrioN
04-25-2016, 12:05 AM
Correct statement.

The world needs to reduce the number of humans. People and their toys create pollution. Less people would reduce the pollution. It is a pipe dream to expect that to happen until it happens naturally.
Assuming you are volunteering to take your life... will your coffin be stealth?




.

lindenengineering
04-25-2016, 01:06 AM
So Dennis, is the USA still the best place in the world to go? I hear others say different.

That is a hard question to answer.
First I have lived & worked in many countries some were democracies of the Western kind most are familiar with, and all of sorts others including absolute monarchs and dictatorships including places like Cuba, Iraq, & Libya.
Much depends upon your financial resources. like most places if you are independently wealthy life can be good but---boiled down its the quality of life and personal liberty that counts .

Believe it or not the USA has the strong personal liberty quota and with a bit of hard work you can become surprisingly wealthy in a short space of time. Taxes are reasonable and so are the rewards which can be hard to achieve in some places.

Its not utopia far from it, but is a darn sight better than some places I have been to and worked.
For me the place works.

I have a brother that went to Auz years ago; he thinks it the tops!
He's a right digger Auzzie these days.

I have raised six kids in the USA and two are grown adults with medical & business degrees which would have been hard for me to see if I had stayed in the UK.
So I am backing the USA!
Hard work equals success here !
If that's alright with you chaps!
:cheers:Dennis

Graphite Dave
04-25-2016, 01:16 AM
Assuming you are volunteering to take your life... will your coffin be stealth?
.

So stealth the ashes can be dumped out the window of a moving Transit.

Bobnoxious
04-25-2016, 07:54 AM
Right we even have the nut Bernie Sanders wanting to close down the clean energy nuclear power plants.

Everyone thinks an electric vehicle would end all interference and strife in our lives?

Feel the Bern as your money goes up in smoke. :shifty:

:2cents:I respectfully disagree. Nuclear energy is certainly not clean and much too dangerous. Consider how long the Rooskies have been dealing with the toxic consequences of Chernobyl. Worst yet, examine Fukushima.

Electric vehicles were more popular in the early days in contrast to the infernal combustion counterpart. Cleaner, quieter and less complicated. The electric starter and Standard oil were the demise of electric vehicles.

Certainly, electric vehicles cannot be considered pollution free either but coal, natural gas, solar, etc powered by proxy depending the source of electricity for charging. Considering the petroleum input related the the exploration, oil well production development, transportation of crude from source to refineries and subsequently gasoline to consumers. Electricity is more efficient to transport to end user and just one of numerous examples of the benefits of electric vehicles.

Respectfully,
Treehugger Bob

Ed463
04-25-2016, 10:57 AM
I respectfully disagree. Nuclear energy is certainly not clean and much too dangerous. Consider how long the Rooskies have been dealing with the toxic consequences of Chernobyl. Worst yet, examine Fukushima.

Electric vehicles were more popular in the early days in contrast to the infernal combustion counterpart. Cleaner, quieter and less complicated. The electric starter and Standard oil were the demise of electric vehicles.

Certainly, electric vehicles cannot be considered pollution free either but coal, natural gas, solar, etc powered by proxy depending the source of electricity for charging. Considering the petroleum input related the the exploration, oil well production development, transportation of crude from source to refineries and subsequently gasoline to consumers. Electricity is more efficient to transport to end user and just one of numerous examples of the benefits of electric vehicles.

Respectfully,
Treehugger Bob

Far more people die as a consequence of coal, oil, gas than nuclear, plus far greater environmental damage.

Contrary to popular belief electricity generation, transmission and distribution is extremely inefficient. But if someone cracks battery storage or hydrogen production it would be a good solution.

flman
04-25-2016, 11:16 AM
I respectfully disagree. Nuclear energy is certainly not clean and much too dangerous. Consider how long the Rooskies have been dealing with the toxic consequences of Chernobyl. Worst yet, examine Fukushima.

Electric vehicles were more popular in the early days in contrast to the infernal combustion counterpart. Cleaner, quieter and less complicated. The electric starter and Standard oil were the demise of electric vehicles.

Certainly, electric vehicles cannot be considered pollution free either but coal, natural gas, solar, etc powered by proxy depending the source of electricity for charging. Considering the petroleum input related the the exploration, oil well production development, transportation of crude from source to refineries and subsequently gasoline to consumers. Electricity is more efficient to transport to end user and just one of numerous examples of the benefits of electric vehicles.

Respectfully,
Treehugger Bob

Chernobyl had no containment for their reactor, it was simply inside of a tin building, and smart as the Japs are, it was very stupid to locate their reactors on the beach.

Besides that, point to some other dangerous reactor melt downs?

The argument of the dangers of nuclear power is about as bad as the argument that flying in commercial air lines is more dangerous than driving cars.

johnshmit
04-25-2016, 12:23 PM
Chernobyl had no containment for their reactor, it was simply inside of a tin building, and smart as the Japs are, it was very stupid to locate their reactors on the beach.

Besides that, point to some other dangerous reactor melt downs?

The argument of the dangers of nuclear power is about as bad as the argument that flying in commercial air lines is more dangerous than driving cars.

Plus it was a stupid human error made by stupid ignorant creature and today, just 30 years later,
they took all that radioactive equipment and sent it to Donbass so Ukrainians can kill Ukrainians.
So I guess driving a radioactive tank or truck from Chernobyl is not a big deal.


75894

Midwestdrifter
04-25-2016, 12:47 PM
X2, Chernobyl is actually an argument FOR nuclear power (though I am a solar fan :tongue:).

Chernobyl was a carbon moderated reactor which was not self regulating and had no secondary containment. It was operated by untrained workers. The "experiment" they did was literally the worst thing they could have done. While the results were truly terrible, the loss of life was no where near doomsday predictions. Radiation contamination was contained to an area smaller than originally predicted by the "doomsday" scenario. Honestly that reactor never should have been built. Outside the USSR the only carbon moderated reactors were smaller units for testing and plutonium production. The reason for this was the known design deficiencies of this type.

Modern reactor designs are light years ahead of Chernobyl. Molten salt reactors may even be able to re-process high radioactive waste into low radioactive waste while still making power.

The real issue is that no one wants the stigma of being associated with he construction of a new nuclear plant. So the late 60s designs (basically scaled up submarine reactors in some cases) continue to run long past their designed retirement.

Coal is not a solution unfortunately. The particulate emissions have measurable effects on health. The coal fly ash is really nasty stuff. It contains heavy metals is slightly radioactive, and poisonous. It is often stored is massive ponds under water. Nasty stuff if it gets into surface or ground water.

As energy storage technology and solar panel efficiency increases, it is very possible that the grid will become almost completely decentralized. In many countries solar power has reached parity or lower cost than grid power. Even in the USA some states are this way. Hawaii for example.

T-Montana
04-25-2016, 02:42 PM
One must always come back to the bottom line when discussing energy production. Only one source provides energy independence for the individual. That is home solar. (and for some wind). You do not have to pay anyone for your electricity. With any other source of energy someone else produces it and you pay them to deliver to your home or car. Nuclear, coal, gas, solar farms, etc. all make you dependent on them. Even fuel cells mean you have to buy hydrogen from a "gas" station. Course we are far off course from discussing MB and their legal troubles but those legal troubles hi lite just one of many flaws in a oil and power pole based energy system. Biggest flaw of course is wars for oil.

Anchornut
04-25-2016, 02:59 PM
Nuclear power is the way forward but not what you think. Currently 10% of the planets power generation comes from nuclear power, these are all fission reactors which generate huge amounts of radio active waste and subject to thermal runaway.
Tokamak reactors are being explored and one in particular ITER in southern France will yield a net energy output of 10!
It is powered from a fuel similar to our sun/star, plasma is contained in a magnetic donut vessel designed to provide the pressure required for containment, like the Suns gravity.
https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines

There are others in the pipe like a thorium fission reactor which has promise, safer but what is unique about this is it has the potential to use current nuclear waste as fuel. The waste this produces is significantly less and and the half life decaes very quickly instead of the current 10's of thousands of years.

I say build thorium to burn the existing waste we so haphazardly produced and develope the tokamak. There is another like the Tokamak but everything in life has a trade off, the other is simpler but control is compromised, the Tokamak is complicated but has control.

Jchirchirillo
04-25-2016, 05:12 PM
Ya gotta like the timing of this mess though. When it is all said and done, Trump will be president and most of the emission bs holding back the US will be swept under the rug . maybe then i can get this damn 82mph restrictor removed. hahaha...

Bobnoxious
04-25-2016, 05:55 PM
The argument of the dangers of nuclear power is about as bad as the argument that flying in commercial air lines is more dangerous than driving cars.

Respectfully, I disagree comparing the dangers of airline and automobile travel to the dangers associated with nuclear power a fair, parallel analogy.

For example, the consequences and legacy of a nuclear mishap, as demonstrated by Chernobyl and Fukushima, will linger long after a plane crash or automobile accident. Not to mention the quanitive threat to human life far greater. Three-mile Island had a containment building and still released radiation, remains irreparably damaged and offline.

Additionally, I live less than 100 miles as the crow flies from San Onofre nuclear power plant. If it had went kaput like Chernobyl or Fukushima, most likely, my family would be forced to relocate at great personal expense and loss. Fukushima had a containment structure but failed. I am confident you or anyone else were confronted with similar circumstances would agree that would just plain suck?

Finally, I was very happy San Onofre was decommissioned and not adverse to paying a little bit more on my electric bill as a result. The escapable fact remains, anything created by humans is not 100% fail safe.:2cents:

Bob

Boxster1971
04-26-2016, 02:40 AM
... ...The escapable fact remains, anything created by humans is not 100% fail safe.:2cents:

Bob

Yes - and in line with the subject of this thread can you imagine the class-action lawsuits that will result from autonomous vehicles.

flman
04-26-2016, 01:18 PM
X2, Chernobyl is actually an argument FOR nuclear power (though I am a solar fan :tongue:).

Chernobyl was a carbon moderated reactor which was not self regulating and had no secondary containment. It was operated by untrained workers. The "experiment" they did was literally the worst thing they could have done. While the results were truly terrible, the loss of life was no where near doomsday predictions. Radiation contamination was contained to an area smaller than originally predicted by the "doomsday" scenario. Honestly that reactor never should have been built. Outside the USSR the only carbon moderated reactors were smaller units for testing and plutonium production. The reason for this was the known design deficiencies of this type.

Modern reactor designs are light years ahead of Chernobyl. Molten salt reactors may even be able to re-process high radioactive waste into low radioactive waste while still making power.

The real issue is that no one wants the stigma of being associated with he construction of a new nuclear plant. So the late 60s designs (basically scaled up submarine reactors in some cases) continue to run long past their designed retirement.

Coal is not a solution unfortunately. The particulate emissions have measurable effects on health. The coal fly ash is really nasty stuff. It contains heavy metals is slightly radioactive, and poisonous. It is often stored is massive ponds under water. Nasty stuff if it gets into surface or ground water.

As energy storage technology and solar panel efficiency increases, it is very possible that the grid will become almost completely decentralized. In many countries solar power has reached parity or lower cost than grid power. Even in the USA some states are this way. Hawaii for example.

So it sounds like we could have even more safe nuclear plants now a days if we were actually allowed to replace the old ones, but we need the old technology to fail from old age just to prove how bad it is? :dripsarcasm:

Bobnoxious
05-02-2016, 09:20 PM
So Dennis, is the USA still the best place in the world to go? I hear others say different.

Move to Cuba, I'll buy the ticket. One way.

Bobnoxious
05-02-2016, 09:23 PM
Yes - and in line with the subject of this thread can you imagine the class-action lawsuits that will result from autonomous vehicles.

Yup, I just can't wait.$$$:lol:all the way to the bank.

lindenengineering
05-03-2016, 01:46 AM
Move to Cuba, I'll but the ticket. One way.

Totally off topic
Cuba is shaping up to be a boom island in a few years.
The mouldering Corniche is a prime real estate boom rehab projecting the making. Better even than the Viejo district of Panama City in my opinion.
It will bring back all the American time share money and a few folk are going to get "boucoup" rich.
I worked there ( 9 month assignment) in the early 70's and lived in an apartment over an "abasto" where Castro gave boring 5 hours speeches on a Russian TV.
I never though all those decades ago, many visits by Reporter Peter Jennings and Kissinger would bring the day when there would be direct flights and ferry boats to the island.

Still time to see what is left of Buenavista Social Club--many have since passed away.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JEdf7XsV5g

Ritmo carbibeno
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onpJ6fLBif8

avanti
05-03-2016, 02:01 AM
We visited Cuba a few months ago. Change is certainly imminent, but I wouldn't bet on what form it is going to take in the near term. The important thing to understand about Cuba today is that (at least among the intellectuals), pretty much everybody who wanted to leave has long since moved to Miami. The folks who still live there, although desperate for change, are pretty proud of their country and of the accomplishments of the Revolution. They all know that their economy doesn't work and that change is inevitable. But they are determined that Havana not be turned into the next Cancun. Nobody has a clear vision of the future, but there is a lot of determination to move slowly and not screw it up. The cruise ships scare them silly--they are not ready for them. We heard a story that when the first big one showed up, Havana literally ran out of beer.

lindenengineering
05-03-2016, 03:00 AM
Yes I can confirm!
Two summers ago on a beach down in the Keys I spoke to some older Cubans who were not part of the Mariella Boat lift . I fact one of the guys was about my age & fought in Angola with Cuban Forces; finding his way into the USA through some sort of immigration program out of Uruguay.
I can honesty state that the conversation overall was guarded ( how can a Gringo speak Spanish politically and hit certain Latino hot spots ???) was the impression I got!
Maybe I am more used to other Latin nationals who love to chat about politics and social affairs with strangers.
Even though I introduced the fact that I lived and worked in Venezuela for years I got the distinct impression that waves of tourists & foreigners onto Cuban shores would be not as welcome as say Aruba !.
Just as you mentioned !
Good post on observancy !
Cheers Dennis

Tomcat728
01-12-2017, 03:33 PM
Sorry for bringing this back on track. I have read that this low temperature emission issue is the driving force for MB move to the M1 0W30 229.52 oils. The theory is that the thinner oil will get the engine up to temp faster.

My concern is that the 0W30 has lower TBN, lower HTHS and the flash point spec is not given (perhaps because it is so low?)

Compound this with ever increasing OCI recommendations.

Could this be contributing to engine life issues, sludge build up, etc.?

moondawg14
01-12-2017, 08:26 PM
Well, well! curiouser and curiouser.

https://www.epa.gov/fca

Grand Cherokees and EcoDiesels with the 3.0 V6 are allegedly equipped with "defeat devices."

Looks like Cummins' stock got caught in the crossfire before the EPA clarified which diesel vehicles were being targeted.

https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ACMI&ei=IfR3WIGmHZb2jAGKtJ-gBg

showkey
01-13-2017, 01:05 AM
Well, well! curiouser and curiouser.

https://www.epa.gov/fca

Grand Cherokees and EcoDiesels with the 3.0 V6 are allegedly equipped with "defeat devices."

Looks like Cummins' stock got caught in the crossfire before the EPA clarified which diesel vehicles were being targeted.

https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ACMI&ei=IfR3WIGmHZb2jAGKtJ-gBg

To be clear..........Those 3.0 liter V6 in question are Fiat diesel motors not MB motors at least for now from the Chrysler Benz marriage from prior years back.

sleeper bird
01-13-2017, 01:43 AM
That second video had me wanting a boat drink.You know,i think i might have one.

hkpierce
01-13-2017, 03:02 PM
On-topic: an older article from a pissed-off owner of a fleet of 47 Sprinters regarding the BlueTec related maintenance costs: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fatal-flaw-mercedes-benz-sprinters-tom-robertson

Bobnoxious
07-26-2017, 10:04 PM
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/07/18/business/daimler-diesel-emissions.html?referer=


I would not want my Sprinter "Updated!"

showkey
07-27-2017, 01:14 AM
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/07/18/business/daimler-diesel-emissions.html?referer=


I would not want my Sprinter "Updated!"


Me too............software update with a 200,000 miles ( no time limit) full emissions and drive train warranty or buy it back.

eeazye
07-27-2017, 01:52 PM
They can pry my Sprinter away from my cold dead hands.

showkey
07-27-2017, 03:22 PM
Can you begin to imagine the problems with software update and then the owner experiences any EGR, swirl valve, DEF, DPF or any other emissions issues in the next 1000-10,000 miles.

MB is inconsistent on the emissions warranty now...........

Those VW owers are not complaining too loud as they cash their checks.

Bobnoxious
07-27-2017, 05:57 PM
Can you begin to imagine the problems with software update and then the owner experiences any EGR, swirl valve, DEF, DPF or any other emissions issues in the next 1000-10,000 miles.

MB is inconsistent on the emissions warranty now...........

Those VW owers are not complaining too loud as they cash their checks.

According to the article, it was alleged Mercedes-Benz programmed the ECU to protect the engine. If true, will the update remove the protection?

showkey
07-27-2017, 09:01 PM
Protect their balance sheet might be more accurate............

CJPJ
07-28-2017, 03:16 PM
Me too............software update with a 200,000 miles ( no time limit) full emissions and drive train warranty or buy it back.
A observed reluctance to get the update; a incentive ~ included with the software update; the oil change ASSYST will extend the interval another five thousand miles.::dripsarcasm:

Wrinkledpants
07-28-2017, 03:44 PM
If it's anything like the Audi/VW issue, you'll be well-compensated. Go for a buyback if you want, or take a cash settlement. Since our van will be a Sportsmobile, I'll happily take the cash and keep driving it.

Wrinkledpants
07-28-2017, 04:06 PM
Only some of the VW's were actually fixable. The repair didn't change the power or fuel economy. The others would have resulted in noticeable power or fuel economy changes, and those were simply provided the option to buy back.

showkey
07-28-2017, 05:30 PM
Only some of the VW's were actually fixable. The repair didn't change the power or fuel economy. The others would have resulted in noticeable power or fuel economy changes, and those were simply provided the option to buy back.


But when they add EGR, DEF or DPF or any combination or software to alter any of the systems now the consumer is on the hook for the bad design and high maintenance and costs in the future.
If it did not alter power, MPG or overall efficiency..........why didn't they put it on in the first place ?
Now the corporate line these systems are ready for prime time.......most of us know or have experienced they are not quite ready.

Another example was in several manufacturers hybrids.....where software was changed to help with battery life........customers freaked when the lost 2 mpg.

Wrinkledpants
07-28-2017, 05:55 PM
But when they add EGR, DEF or DPF or any combination or software to alter any of the systems now the consumer is on the hook for the bad design and high maintenance and costs in the future.
If it did not alter power, MPG or overall efficiency..........why didn't they put it on in the first place ?
Now the corporate line these systems are ready for prime time.......most of us know or have experienced they are not quite ready.

Another example was in several manufacturers hybrids.....where software was changed to help with battery life........customers freaked when the lost 2 mpg.

The information and details about what changed and what options are available for the owners is out there for you to read. Increasing the duty cycle for the cooling fan, shift pattern changes, DEF duty cycle changes, and on and on. DEF usage may increase from a few posts to 15%. Part of the fix will involve changing emission-related parts. The warranty on those parts will be 5 years and 60k miles from when the part was changed. And I believe the overall warranty has gone up to 11 years and 160K miles for emissions stuff on cars that qualify for the fix.

If you own a vehicle that is covered by the settlement, most people are of the opinion they were more than fairly compensated, no mater which option they chose. Since VW lied and the result of that lie was a substantial increase in pollution, there is no way they were getting off with any type of increase in costs or maintenance liability to the owner.

I would even dare say most TDI owners are in a better position post settlement than they were prior, at least from a financial standpoint.

Wrinkledpants
07-28-2017, 06:00 PM
Here is a link to the document explaining the details of what's changed on the engine that qualifies for the fix. Keep in mind this isn't marketing dribble as the gov and lawyers all had to sign off that this was true. Part of the reason they couldn't fix the earlier motors was because there would be changes in drivability, reliability, mpg, power, etc and an agreement could not be reached with the various stakeholders.

If MB goes through the same process, and our compensation is similar to what VW went through, I fully anticipate being in a better position post settlement than prior to it.

https://www.vwdiesellookup.com/pdf/VWCourtSettlement_Emissions_Disclosure_Gen3_Final. pdf

OffroadHamster
07-28-2017, 06:24 PM
I would even dare say most TDI owners are in a better position post settlement than they were prior, at least from a financial standpoint.

The people who got screwed were owners of non VW brand light vehicle diesels when the bottom dropped out of light vehicle diesel market. I took a bath on our ML350 bluetec when I sold it after the VW scandal broke. Three months later the dealer I sold it to had it marked for $1 over what they gave me for it. I am guessing they took a bath on it too.

Solera2012
08-24-2017, 01:41 AM
If, MB gets slammed by the EPA, research the lawyer payout in the VW case. Those scum bags take way more $$ than should be approved by the judge. Hint, the judge is a scum bag lawyer. Class action lawsuits are a major money grab for the scum lawyers. Oh, and guess who stops any reform, from the huge money grab in class actions, the Trial Lawyer Association.

Biggest single donor by $$ amount to the democrats, you guessed it, the trial lawyers. The most common occupation of elected house of representatives, and US Senators, yep, lawyer.

It will never stop, and only has a chance if a movement starts and a non- politician get into high office. What, that happened. Then that happened and will see the true colors of the current politicians emerge. What, that happened too.

So, regardless of your political thoughts, this movement is real. Only time will tell whether it takes hold. I can tell you one thing, those politicians are scarred. That is just wonderful to watch.

To the EV crowd, the laws of thermal dynamics governs. All the other poo poo I read, is noise. Unless something like fusion power becomes practical science, fossil fuel is the solution in our, and our childrens, children lifetimes.