According to records filed in the case, Achtemeier conspired with mechanics in garages and operators of truck fleets to disable the anti-pollution software installed on diesel trucks.

Coconspirators who wanted to disable their trucks’ pollution control hardware system—a process commonly known as “deleting”—sought Achtemeier’s help to trick the truck’s software into believing the emissions control systems were still functional, a process known as “tuning.”

Monitoring software on a deleted truck will detect that the pollution control hardware is not functioning and will prevent the truck from running. Achtemeier disabled the monitoring software on his client’s trucks by connecting to laptops he had provided to various coconspirators. Some of the coconspirators would pass the laptop on to others seeking to have the anti-pollution software disabled on their trucks. Once the laptop was hooked up to the truck’s onboard computer, Achtemeier could access it from his computer and tune the software designed to slow the truck if the pollution control device was missing or malfunctioning. Achtemeier could “tune” trucks remotely, which enabled him to maximize his environmental impact and personal profit.

  • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    15 hours ago

    I genuinely would like to know if the increase in CO2 emissions is worth the decrease in NOx emissions, but acid rain is a now problem and climate change isn’t.

    • cecilkorik@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Climate change is absolutely a now problem, it’s affecting far more people right now than acid rain ever has or ever will, it’s costing trillions and you’re already paying for it in taxes, insurance, and other ways. The fact that people don’t understand it or appreciate how significant it is doesn’t mean it’s not a “now” problem, it just means it’s not a problem that’s ever going to get fixed because people like you don’t and won’t ever consider it a “now” problem. Enjoy the challenge of struggling your way through the increasingly impossible economy, it’s not going to get better.

    • StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Don’t quote me on it, but I believe that the emissions tech is efficient enough that even with the increased fuel consumption there is an overall reduction in emissions across the board. That was my understanding when the tech was first being fazed in back in the mid to late ‘00’s. Whether that was true or just propaganda, don’t know. I just knew that full compliance was required to run in California and a few other states.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        If it lowers MPG, it increases CO2 per work done. There’s no getting around that.

        I always thought that the way auto manufactures went about meeting emissions by adding more parts(that will break and need replacing, $$$) and lowering fuel economy(I wonder who benefits from that?) to be at best, lazy and at worse, suspicious. I recently learned about a Swedish engine manufacture called Scania that’s managed to meet emissions without DEF. I’m definitely gonna keep an eye on that company.

        For now, I’m just gonna keep making biodiesel for my farm and burning scrap wood for heat. The emissions tech they’re piling on to diesels actually precludes running biodiesel in them, so it’s not exactly like I’d ever be getting any new. Not like I’d want to buy a one ton piece of spyware anyway.