Here's What California Wants Volkswagen to Do With Its Penalty Cash

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

The California regulator that played an important part in uncovering Volkswagen Group’s emissions cheating plot detailed a list of options on how the automaker will be required to spend the $800 million penance by advancing green tech and nonpolluting cars.

Some of the choices the California Air Resources Board came up with are truly terrible.

On Thursday, the CARB said Volkswagen’s choices for the mandatory investments to be made over the next ten years include installing electric car chargers and providing services for ride-sharing or shuttle services in zero-emission vehicles. Bloomberg reports that CARB also scheduled a workshop for today to gather public input and additional suggestions.

The 10-year spending plan for the $800 million will be separated into four 30-month spending cycles.

CARB would like to see Volkswagen support the shift to EVs — something the company has been doing since getting into trouble — by expanding the green vehicle market and improving access to zero-emission cars for disadvantaged communities. Although I would hazard a guess that most extremely low income people aren’t particularly concerned with what type of powerplant their car makes use of, so long as it is affordable.

Another approved investment is the installation of hydrogen stations for fuel cell vehicles. Even suggesting this is ridiculous, considering VW’s big push toward battery electric vehicles and the extremely limited appeal of hydrogen-powered cars. CARB also suggested VW create public education and awareness campaigns that would not be allowed to feature or favor its own brand — perhaps resulting in something akin to D.A.R.E., only for automotive pollution.

“We urge VW to make early, visible progress in the beginning of the first 30-month cycle,” a CARB representative said during its presentation. After Friday’s workshop and a final board hearing, Volkswagen is required to submit an outline of its plan to California regulators by February 22nd.

Odds are Volkswagen won’t be spending a dime of that money on something silly like expanding the hydrogen fueling network. However, it could make the potential mistake of providing EV access to disadvantaged neighborhoods. While altruism — forced in this case — is a wonderful practice, what happens in ten years when VW packs up, moves on, and those communities are left with nothing? I suppose without the ride-sharing option, all of those people will suddenly be in the market for a new car.

It might not be worth the bad publicity stemming from the countless local news reports of angry mothers now incapable of delivering their children to school.

While there is a lot of wiggle room in some of these guidelines, the smart money is on VW pumping most of the cash into the power grid. The company has already teamed up with other automakers to enhance the vehicle charging network in Europe, so it would make sense to see the same occurring in the states. The move would fulfill the terms of its atonement while making EV ownership a lot more appetizing — something Volkswagen could benefit from, as it hopes to sell one million electric vehicles per year by 2025.

While the company may have settled many of its legal issues since dieselgate began, it isn’t even close to being out of the woods yet. VW still has to spend up to $10 billion to compensate drivers and buy back affected units, settle additional consumer claims surrounding the 3.0-liter vehicles, and cope with the criminal investigation being conducted by the Justice Department.

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
5 of 42 comments
  • Kosmo Kosmo on Dec 03, 2016

    Riddle me this, Batman: Leaving aside all topics like VW is/isn't a crook; we need more/less government "investment", can anybody explain to me why California specifically is getting all this money from VW? Shouldn't it be a settlement with the USA in total?

    • See 2 previous
    • Heavy handle Heavy handle on Dec 04, 2016

      @kosmo There may be 50 such cases if state AGs think they can get judges to agree, but California's case is definitely stronger. They've had their own emissions regime since the 1960s, which VW clearly violated, they have well-documented air quality issues, their market for VW TDI cars was significant, and so on. Certainly any state that doesn't test car emissions would have a very weak case by comparison.

  • Dartman Dartman on Dec 03, 2016

    Because Cali is the 6th largest economy in the world. They/We may not be able to swing a presidential election with 2 million votes, but when it comes to global business, economic power talks.

  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
  • Lou_BC "That’s expensive for a midsize pickup" All of the "offroad" midsize trucks fall in that 65k USD range. The ZR2 is probably the cheapest ( without Bison option).
  • Lou_BC There are a few in my town. They come out on sunny days. I'd rather spend $29k on a square body Chevy
  • Lou_BC I had a 2010 Ford F150 and 2010 Toyota Sienna. The F150 went through 3 sets of brakes and Sienna 2 sets. Similar mileage and 10 year span.4 sets tires on F150. Truck needed a set of rear shocks and front axle seals. The solenoid in the T-case was replaced under warranty. I replaced a "blend door motor" on heater. Sienna needed a water pump and heater blower both on warranty. One TSB then recall on spare tire cable. Has a limp mode due to an engine sensor failure. At 11 years old I had to replace clutch pack in rear diff F150. My ZR2 diesel at 55,000 km. Needs new tires. Duratrac's worn and chewed up. Needed front end alignment (1st time ever on any truck I've owned).Rear brakes worn out. Left pads were to metal. Chevy rear brakes don't like offroad. Weird "inside out" dents in a few spots rear fenders. Typically GM can't really build an offroad truck issue. They won't warranty. Has fender-well liners. Tore off one rear shock protector. Was cheaper to order from GM warehouse through parts supplier than through Chevy dealer. Lots of squeaks and rattles. Infotainment has crashed a few times. Seat heater modual was on recall. One of those post sale retrofit.Local dealer is horrific. If my son can't service or repair it, I'll drive 120 km to the next town. 1st and last Chevy. Love the drivetrain and suspension. Fit and finish mediocre. Dealer sucks.
  • MaintenanceCosts You expect everything on Amazon and eBay to be fake, but it's a shame to see fake stuff on Summit Racing. Glad they pulled it.
Next