$15 Billion Settlement From VW. More incentives for EV's

$15 Billion Settlement From VW. More incentives for EV's

So some VW owners will get their money back plus some. Also money may be going to CA emissions incentives. More Tesla orders?

jordanrichard | 28 juin 2016

Before people start hailing this a victory for EVs, keep in mind that when the Germans say they are going to invest "x" amount of money into "electrics". You have to keep in mind that they consider hybrids as "electrics".

Again, this still means nothing because if VW's customers (dealers) can't make the same revenue from EVs as the ICE cars, they are not going to buy them from VW. This applies to every car company.

Clearly there is a market for expensive, full size EVs. So why hasn't Nissan built a bigger Leaf?

charles_gingras | 29 juin 2016

Waiting to see what will happen with canadian customers but I'll definitly be using that VW money as cashdown on my Tesla.

Ross1 | 29 juin 2016

So the upshot is that it is unlawful (anywhere there are emission laws) to own or at least drive an affected VW.
Wonder if they will crush them?
And all the spare parts they won't need.

kzodz | 29 juin 2016

I still don't get this whole thing. Granted VW is a despicable company, and the fact that I didn't trust them is why I would never have bought a TDI in the first place. VW's actions were akin to dumping your pollution in the oceans. But, GM was willfully murdering it's own customers and they got off with under $! Billion in fines. I'm still disgusted that the government would protect GM to that extent.

Mike83 | 29 juin 2016

Unfortunately it is the money from fossil fuel industries who get Congress elected as well as Bush/Cheney. If you recall Cheney was the head of Halliburton and they made laws to protect the oil drilling companies and limit liability for large corporations. They also had an energy meeting excluding alternative energy solutions. Too big to fail may be part of it. Not sure of all the tangled web of money involved but they protect even the dealerships who sell fossil fuel using cars with tax benefits; recall the Hummer getting $25000 tax benefit.
The good thing about this is that CA incentives may be expanded, I hope.

Mike83 | 29 juin 2016

Smart move. I bet that many others will do the same.
I am hoping in CA we get more incentives from this VW cheat. There are other penalities and lawsuits but VW will be hard pressed to make a Tesla competitor.

Red Sage ca us | 29 juin 2016

jordanrichard: The Nissan LEAF was outsold by the Altima by 316,129 units during 2015 in the US. Even the Maxima outsold the LEAF by 23,090 units last year. The only two Nissan branded products that sold less than the LEAF were the GTR (1,105 units) and Cube (943 units). The Tesla Model S outsold the LEAF by 9,131 units.

Like other traditional automobile manufacturers, Nissan has no intention of releasing a viable, long range electric vehicle that is designed to be affordable or practical for mass market distribution. The LEAF sold 17,269 units in the US during 2015. And per the EPA, it is already classified as a Midsize vehicle due to 92 cubic feet passenger and 24 cubic feet cargo volume [92+24=116]. For the sake of comparison, the Altima has 102 cubic feet of passenger volume, and 15 cubic feet cargo volume [102+15=117]. The Maxima is instead 98 cubic feet passenger and 14 cubic feet cargo volume [98+14=112]. Those two are also Midsize classification, which is anywhere from 110 to 119 cubic feet of combined volume.

Mike83 | 29 juin 2016
KP in NPT | 30 juin 2016

Am I understanding correctly that if an owner has an affected car, it either must be modified to comply (likely only for 2015 models, if at all) or be taken off the road (bought back) and rendered inoperable?

I just want to be clear that owners cannot choose to continue to drive unmodified cars. And they cannot be shipped to countries with less stringent emissions standards to be driven there.

Ross1 | 30 juin 2016

Nissan has no intention of releasing a viable, long range electric vehicle that is designed to be affordable or practical for mass market distribution.

What about that gorgeous Nissan IDS?

charles_gingras | 30 juin 2016

@mp1156: From what I've read the options are: you get your car bought back by VW for the pre-scandal value + between 5100-10 000$ compensation (so they either fix them and resale them or dismantle them, maybe reuse some parts), or you get your car fixed by VW and get between 5100 - 10 000$ compensation (when/if the fix become available). If you don't get your car fixed you don't get the compensation money + you can't resell your car.

The question is will VW be able to develop a fix for the cars? And if not, what happen (and when) to owners who chose to get their car fixed? (as I will do since I need a car, my vw is paid and I want to save as max$ as possible for my tesla).

KP in NPT | 30 juin 2016

thanks @charles - it seems you'd have to get it fixed (if they come up with a fix) because how would it pass inspection, otherwise? From what I've read, they're only likely to fix 2015 models, if they can, so I was curious how it would work for those who can't get it fixed. I just want to know if they'll have to be taken off the road if they can't pass inspection.

If I had one of these cars I'd want to be rid of it. Even if it were fixed, the resale value might take a hit because of the scandal, I would think.

Nexxus | 30 juin 2016


If you didn't take it back to the dealership and have them change the software, it would still pass inspection, would it not? That's what the software was supposed to do. Do you think the emmissions station would be able to tell if it was changed or not?

How many cars prior to 2009 were affected because of how long VW was able to get away with it? They're not going to change/fix them because they are more than 8 years old this model year. So, will all those people be out of luck and forced to turn in their cars? I wouldn't think so. So the rest should still be drivable whether you fixed them or not.

Nexxus | 30 juin 2016

On the other hand, maybe you'll be forced to get a compliance sticker, to place on your car, to prove you got it fixed.

KP in NPT | 30 juin 2016

@Go_Peddle - it seems like it would defeat the purpose if you could just drive it without getting it fixed. I certainly hope they have to if they want to keep their cars on the road.

charles_gingras | 30 juin 2016

@mp1156 and it will probably happen, the customers are not responsible (they were cheated as well). There is a penalty for each % point of the car that is not bought back or fixed that VW will have to pay at the end of 2018 (not sure about the date)

Bill Korea | 30 juin 2016

Yes they cheated, and are being penalized. Now what about all the light trucks that are sold in much higher numbers, and consume several times the fuel of these diesel cars. The diesel trucks don't come close to meeting the same emissions standard, but these are of no concern?

carlk | 30 juin 2016


There is more to the story then what VW has told us. Not only for diesel cars that got caught they would have problem to meet emmision stardard for gasoline cars too. They probably either already had done, or are attempting to do, the same cheating with gas engines when they agreed on future even tougher standards. Now they all know there is no way they could get around it and eventually has to go the EV route.

Other German companies likely know that too. The only way out for them is to lobby German government to promote German made EV instead of anything else. That's pretty much what they are doing now. Only some stupid US politicians still don't see it coming.

tfay412 | 30 juin 2016

I'm one of those affected by the VW diesel Scandal. I'm using my money from the settlement to buy my model 3. I just pray, Mine will be delivered before 12/31/18 to be able to sell my VW back.

Tropopause | 30 juin 2016

Reading the implications for the California usage of the VW money- the funds will be used to build more hydrogen charging stations.

Of course this is a complete mismanagement of the money strictly for political gains.

There was a side it's that some of the money would be used to build EV charging stations in CA, but this does not equate to Tesla Super chargers.

Yep, the CA politicians are going to waste this large sum primarily on promoting hydrogen. :(

Mike83 | 30 juin 2016

Where did you see that?

Mike83 | 30 juin 2016

Where did you see that? | 30 juin 2016

For Hydrogen, at the current spending rate in CA, it's about $1M of taxpayer money per car. About 200 hydrogen cars have been sold, and our wonderful CA government has been conned into spending $200M for fueling stations around the state for these 200 cars. Glad no other states have been fooled by this scam.

Mike83 | 30 juin 2016

Could you post a link as to how the VW settlement is to be used for H2 cars? | 30 juin 2016

There is no money yet from VW to California or clarity where it may go. Lawsuit is in progress. It may go to the Air Resources Board, which dispenses money to EV/Hydrogen vehicle purchasers as a rebate (although the fund is exhausted right now) and pays for the Hydrogen fueling stations (which I think is funded).

Tropopause | 30 juin 2016


Sorry, I checked out for awhile.

Here's the link to the hydrogen tidbit...

"The $2 billion portion of VW’s settlement will help competitors the most. In California, for example, it will be used to promote zero-emission vehicles, to support development of hydrogen filling stations and electric-car charging stations, and to encourage ride-sharing services that use non-polluting vehicles."

Mike83 | 30 juin 2016

Here is some concrete information.

Mike83 | 30 juin 2016

Posted at the same time. Thanks.

Tropopause | 30 juin 2016

I believe Toyota and California are pretty tight, thus the hydrogen filling stations will be built. Who knows if Tesla will get any benefit from this beyond standard level 2 EV chargers; i.e. - Superchargers are not typically funded by the government.

Mike83 | 30 juin 2016

But the $2500 incentives should be funded. Maybe more or less dependent on income. The H2 funding I hope is proportional to the number of cars.

Tropopause | 30 juin 2016

Agreed. Your link appears to be more precise in wording. Thanks.

carlk | 30 juin 2016

Toyota definitely got some good connections with CA ARB. Those hydrogen charge stations are expensive and each can serve only limited number of cars a day. Even though it takes minutes to fill up one car it takes much longer time to compress enough hydrogen on site for one car. That's what they never want to tell you. And hydrogen cars got twice the amount of rebate as BEV plus it does not have an income limit. It's totally out of control.

Sleepydoc1 | 30 juin 2016

@mike - I just received notice about my (approved) rebate:
If you applied on or before June 9, 2016: We typically issue rebate checks within 90 days of application approval. You will receive an email when we mail your check.

If you applied after June 9, 2016: You were placed on a rebate waitlist when you applied online. Payment for applications on the rebate waitlist is contingent upon the project receiving more funding. If we receive funding for the rebate waitlist, we will issue a rebate check to the address on your application. All status updates are communicated through your email.

Just waiting for my check.

Mike83 | 30 juin 2016

Cool. My check took a month. They are very helpful. Sleep is good.

Red Sage ca us | 1 juillet 2016

The $200,000,000 amount for Hydrogen Fueling Stations was approved in 2013 by the California Legislature. It was to be distributed at $20,000,000 per year for 10 years. Traditional automobile manufacturers were actually disappointed by this, because they wanted the State to spend more, sooner. I believe that a $50,000,000 total amount, or $5,000,000 annual amount was also approved to pay for EV charging stations in the State.

It has been theorized that though the participants in the HFCEV programs are all established firms that are extremely profitable, they insist upon government assistance to build Hydrogen Fueling Stations in order to avoid potential litigation and regulatory issues should there ever be a major accident at these facilities. Also, the government can grant itself the necessary waivers to allow construction of these facilities in neighborhoods near residential areas. When something goes wrong, no one else wants to be caught holding the bag.

Mike83 | 5 juillet 2016

This article makes sense. Tesla's success with the Superchargers can spread EV adoption.