Shares of German auto maker BMW dropped sharply on Thursday after a German newspaper claimed its diesel engines were "significantly" exceeding regulatory limits.
Auto Bild - a publication owned by Axel Springer - said Thursday in an exclusive report that BMW engines were emitting nitrogen oxide levels that were 11 times more than the current limit set by the European Union. However, it later reported that there was no indication of tampering with the vehicles. Citing road tests by the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT), it said that a model of the BMW X3 was emitting more poisonous gases than the Volkswagen car that is currently at the center of the emissions scandal. "All measured data suggest that this is not a VW-specific issue," Peter Mock, the Europe Managing Director at the ICCT, told the publication.
See: CNBC.
[In trying to track down additional references for this story, I came upon: Kein Indiz für Manipulation bei BMW which, according to my very rusty German, suggests there was no manipulation on the part of BMW. German readers are invited to reply in the comments with translations and/or clarifications. - Ed.]
Related Stories
A rally in Tesla shares [...] briefly vaulted the company's market capitalization past the German luxury carmaker in early Friday trading. The amount of ground Tesla covered was vast: BMW was valued at a $30 billion premium as of early December.
[...] Short interest represented about one fourth of the shares as of the latest quarterly filing.
According to The Drive the three most valuable auto makers are "Toyota, Daimler, and Volkswagen."
Tesla stock sat at $357.32 after market close after trading as high as $376.87 on Friday.
—Silicon Valley Business Journal
related stories:
Tear-Down/Reviews on new BMW i3 Electric Car
BMW X3 May be Emitting a Greater Amount of Poisonous Gases than VW
Electric, Autonomous Cars Will Drive BMW's Continued Growth
BMW Boosts i3 Battery Capacity by 50 Percent—and it's Retrofitable
VW Responds to Diesel Scandal, Says "the Future is Electric"
Bob Lutz Thinks Tesla is Doomed
One in Seven New BMWs Sold in the US is an Electric Vehicle
Elon Musk's "Top Secret Tesla Masterplan, Part 2"
Elon Musk's Tesla Offers to Buy Elon Musk's SolarCity, Shares Tumble
Wall Street Values Tesla Motors at $620,000 for Every Car Delivered Last Year
Tesla Soars on Financials and Ratings
Tesla Stock Price Falls as Sales Target Cut to as Few as 50,000 Vehicles
Tesla Reaches 325,000 Preorders for Model 3, But Can It Deliver?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Friday September 25 2015, @10:07AM
Here's one for the conspiracy theorists:
1 - US gov sets emissions limits for diesels unreasonably high "to protect the environment" (because the US is sooo big on regulating industry to save the environment)
2 - All foreign manufacturers fudge their results to get around restriction. US manufacturers don't bother, because they don't give a shit about diesels anyway. All red-blooded americans should drink gasoline, not diesel.
3 - US gov catches the dirty foreigners at it, fines them billions.
4 - Profit! (for the US gov, who've just netted billions in fines)
5 - Foreign manufacturers say "fuck this", pick up their toys and go home.
6 - Moar Profit! (for US manufacturers, who now have the domestic market to themselves.)
Of course that doesn't in any way absolve anyone who cheated on the test, unless you want to go full-tinfoil and suggest that the US gov in some way encouraged or enabled the manufacturers to do so over a period of years in order to set them up for a fall.
Also, I wonder if the hypothetical mastermind behind this hypothetical scenario considered step 7:
7 - Europe / Asia retaliates, either at the legislative level or the patriotic consumer level, and US car exports plummet. What's worth more, I wonder - the domestic or export market?
(Score: 5, Informative) by RedBear on Friday September 25 2015, @10:36AM
Uhhh, okay. Except the Europeans were just behind the times a bit because they thought diesels were somehow better than gas vehicles and left their diesel regs a bit lax for a few years. But now the "Euro 6" regs have taken affect and are functionally equivalent to the EPA "Tier 2, Bin 5" regs that VW were violating, so if the European automakers can't make diesels that that can be sold legally in the US they also won't be able to sell them in Europe anymore.
Europe itself has been acknowledging for some time now that they haven't seen the positive effects on emissions that they were expecting when they decided to support widespread use of diesel engines, and even the cleanest diesels they have are much dirtier than expected. I think it's becoming more clear every day that the only rational course forward if we really want to reduce emissions is to go all electric, or at least strong-hybrid like the Chevy Volt so that overall fossil fuel usage can be reduced by at least 80-90%. I strongly believe this VW fiasco is going to drastically accelerate the timetable for the electrification of every manufacturer's entire lineup. We are going to see a lot more Volt-like hybrids and all-electrics by 2020 than we would have otherwise. Which is great.
¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Myrddin Wyllt on Friday September 25 2015, @12:57PM
go all electric, ... so that overall fossil fuel usage can be reduced by at least 80-90%
Does this reduction take into account that 67% of US electricity [eia.gov] (and 75% of UK electricity [energy-uk.org.uk]) is currently produced from fossil fuels?
I'm not saying that electric and hybrid cars aren't a good idea, just that their impact is significantly dulled without an overall change in the way electricity is generated.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday September 25 2015, @01:41PM
When transportation stops using fossil fuels in engines, all the oil refining byproducts are going to go through a big upheaval to find replacements.
Besides, transportation is small potatoes - watch some Cowspiracy and find out why.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Friday September 25 2015, @05:54PM
We power cars with 99.99999% fossil fuels right now. Reducing that to 67% would be a dramatic improvement (33%).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @11:07AM
The Asian market, definitely. That's where the greatest profits are.
I wonder, apart from Ford (and GM indirectly through Opel), is there any American car manufacturer selling a non-negligible number of cars in Europe?
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Friday September 25 2015, @11:27AM
Not really. Ford and GM / Opel / Vauxhall are about it. Most Euros would struggle to name another US manufacturer.
You see the occasional Dodge on the road, are they still US-owned? Chrysler & Jeep are now half-Italian, so I don't know if they count any more. Not many on the roads anyway. I saw a Tesla dealership in the UK a while back, but I think I've only ever seen one Tesla car in the wild. Who am I missing?
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Friday September 25 2015, @01:25PM
I like your tinfoil hatting. Brings to my mind how much the federal gov't ballooned the toyota acceleration problems which helped to sell Volts which allowed GM to pay back their 'bailout' ahead of schedule.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Friday September 25 2015, @02:23PM
Uhhh people died because of that issue, including a cop which if a fricking patrol cop couldn't recover the thing what chance would anybody else have? I wouldn't consider that "ballooning" the issue, that was a deadly issue with those vehicles.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 2) by Dr Spin on Friday September 25 2015, @05:06PM
Except that the VW diesel vehicles were still polluting far less than others that are five or more years old, including gasoline powered ones.
Of course, it makes a difference which pollution you consider worse: gasoline engines spew out CO2 (harmless, but contributes to global
warming) massive amounts of unburned hydrocarbons (very unpleasant) and NOx in small quantities - causes irritation to eyes, nose and throat.
Older diesels spew out large unburned carbon (looks nasty, but harmless), and about 1/2 the CO2 of a comparable gasoline engine, and not much
else.
Newer diesel engines spew out less CO2 than older ones, invisible fine unburned carbon particles (probably deadly, but no one really knows)
and NOx. Also ammonia, which is supposed to cancel the NOx, but only does so in lab tests, not on the road.
This story is so full of spin, it could be mistaken for a gyroscope.
Apart from global warming and smoke, older diesels are massively better than gasoline or new diesel engines. Heavily bribed
people may disagree.
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday September 25 2015, @06:49PM
"Dr Spin" doin' what he does best, I guess.
NOx in small quantities - causes irritation to eyes, nose and throat.
Just some minor irritation, that NOX gettin'a bad rap, pay no attention to the 9,500 [theguardian.com] corpses (per year) [scribd.com] in the corner there...
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Friday September 25 2015, @08:09PM
Uhhhh DaFuq? What does that have to do with the Toyota deadly acceleration, which was what we were talking about?
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 5, Informative) by choose another one on Friday September 25 2015, @02:10PM
I think it is more a question of different standards driven by different ideologies and the mfrs (really doubt it is just vw) had only one way out - the J T Kirk approach (Kobayashi Maru), because the US tests were arguably biased against diesels.
* EU mfrs have to meet EU fuel economy standards, which are a lot tougher than those in the US, because fuel is cheap in the US and global warming is just a pinko liberal myth in the US
* Effectively they _have_ to sell diesels, and small diesels, to meet the EU standards, US mfrs who are not in the EU market do not
* Diesel and petrol (gasoline) engines produce different pollutants, for instance petrol has more carbon monoxide which is rapidly lethal...
* EU emissions standards are different for petrol and diesel because of the above
* US emissions standards are not - because no one made or cared about small diesels in the US (there are established technologies to meet the US standards on diesel _but_ they are big and heavy and therefore only work for larger diesels - but that is fine for US mfrs as those are the only ones they make)
So that is the _why_, the real question is why _now_... I mean it's not like the US and EU are in the middle of negotiating a secret treaty that would standardise such regulations... oh wait
And while all the attention is on VW it slips out largely unnoticed that US and EU car safety standards are far from equivalent, and guess who comes off worse? - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/new-ttip-scandal-car-industry-buried-report-revealing-us-car-safety-flaws-10514716.html [independent.co.uk]
So, US pre-emptive strike ? Next EU response - http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/23/us-ireland-eu-privacy-idUSKCN0RN0O720150923 [reuters.com] ?
VW are just pawns in big political games.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @04:36PM
If diesel cars can't meet US pollution standards, then just sell gasoline engines in the US. It's not as if gasoline engines are some new technology the Europeans haven't mastered.
I have no sympathy for their fraud and pollution spewing crap cars.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @10:09AM
In other news, Soylent Editors rape puppies. Let's see that corporate equity plummet, baby.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday September 26 2015, @07:54AM
(Score: 2) by fritsd on Friday September 25 2015, @10:42AM
Nitpick: "Kein Indiz für Manipulation bei BMW" sounds more like "no proof of manipulation" or "no indication of manipulation" than "no manipulation".
Mentally, I'd append the words "so far" to that sentence :-)
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday September 25 2015, @11:34AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @12:03PM
I forgot to include the link to the story, must have had a brain fart when that VW TDI drove by.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/24/bmw-shares-slip-on-report-of-high-emission-levels.html [cnbc.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @12:19PM
Smog tests are static, they are tailpipe tests at specified speeds and loads at best. Some tests are at idle and midrange RPMs at no load. Some tests are an OBDII scan only, with no tailpipe sniffer. What isn't tested is what happens under heavy acceleration. When you floor the accelerator pedal, the ECM kicks in full rich mode. In easy to understand terms, driver habits ultimately determine what comes out of the tailpipe. If you treat the accelerator pedal like an egg shell, you get clean emissions and great fuel mileage. Conversely, if you play Ricky Racer, you shoot more crap out the tailpipe than Uncle Eddies Edsel and get crappy mileage.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @12:46PM
Electric vehicles need to be a thing as soon as possible. Centralizing all of this pollution will make it drastically easier to measure and therefore manage.
It is clear that we suck at managing pollution on current scale.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 26 2015, @12:38AM
s/drastically/dramatically
"Drastic" has a negative connotation.
Otherwise, yeah.
-- gewg_
(Score: 1) by lars on Friday September 25 2015, @03:44PM
I'm under the impression that, while they use a "rolling road," they simulate various kinds of driving, acceleration, vehicle weight, and wind resistance.
It should also be noted that the optimum for best fuel economy, and least emissions are not the same.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @06:56PM
The dyno test is in no way equivalent to real world driving. If it was, no car would pass the way most people drive. One solution would be to build smog check detection equipment into every car, and have it transmit periodic totals of pollutants to whatever state agency the car is registered in. I can see this happening in the future since the current smog check procedure is nothing but a joke.
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Friday September 25 2015, @01:22PM
Seems to me that the best way for VW to defend itself in this is to prove that other companies are doing the same thing, allowing them to claim it was industry standard. In court, as VW, I'd like to be able to claim "well WE all thought you knew about this, because you didn't correct US then the terms of what is allowable in US markets changed".
I did find it interesting the staggering number that the EPA said VW could be liable for.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anne Nonymous on Friday September 25 2015, @01:33PM
Auto Bild has retracted their story.
(Score: 2) by Rich on Friday September 25 2015, @02:12PM
On the day the story broke, German news had statements by other big auto makers. I particularly remember the Daimler comment was so incredibly weasely worded that it could be read as a direct confirmation that they cheat too. IIRC, almost the same for BMW. Which, in retrospect strikes me a bit odd for Daimler, as they've been pioneering the Urea ("AdBlue") thing, which seems to be at the heart of the issue now.
Daimer might have been caught by surprise though, with no one responsible for talking to the press being able to connect to engineering fast enough to actually figure out what is going on.
I think there's another big topic waiting to come up, though: The car makers agreed to meet certain CO2 levels. So far the industry has lobbied for ways to cheat around that, i.e. they have the NEDC which already has nothing to do with real life. If someone challenges that, or someone figures out that they recognize and run consumption tests too lean (hello NO2), they're probably found to be 40% above the agreed levels. At the scale of the car industry, this will blow up all the CO2 bartering schemes.
(Score: 2) by Ken_g6 on Friday September 25 2015, @03:53PM
"BMW - The Ultimate Polluting Machine"?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @08:13PM
I had posted this link in the thread about VW. Before the VW story broke, an NGO reported that they had tested diesel cars from various manufacturers, on the road. At least one model from each maker exceeded the new EU pollution standards; of the 23 cars they tested, only 3 passed.
http://www.transportenvironment.org/publications/dont-breathe-here-tackling-air-pollution-vehicles [transportenvironment.org]
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @08:46PM
The Germans have some prior history on using gaseous poisons on people. Did anyone check the emissions for Zyklon-B?
(Score: 2) by dltaylor on Friday September 25 2015, @09:28PM
This and VW sound like they outsourced the ECU code. The spec' should say it had to pass the missions tests AND provide specified power. When tested separately, as it would have been at the manufacturers, the code would meet the spec'. I've had to test/refuse/clean up enough junk outsourced code to think this is very likely. The exec's simply do not know how to write a purchased-code spec'.
(Score: 1) by SanityCheck on Saturday September 26 2015, @01:25AM
Good god, I will laugh from now till January if that is the case.
(Score: 2) by choose another one on Sunday September 27 2015, @07:59PM
looking good for a long laugh then - latest news/rumours say the software was from Bosch who warned VW not to misuse the test modes...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 27 2015, @12:17AM
I can totally see it. Some dude in Hyderabad might be this century's Thomas Midgley, Jr. [wikipedia.org]