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.

  • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    14 hours ago

    The antipollution on a diesel engine (at least a big one) essentially reroutes the exhaust back through the engine and reburns it again. Before the antipollution devices were in place it wasn’t uncommon for big diesels to get 500,000 miles before they needed to be replaced. Now with the antipollution devices they’re getting somewhere in the neighborhood of 100k before they start having problems of significance.

    Those engines and their maintenance are expensive as hell. It saves a whole lot more than the $4,500 having that done. It saves them hundreds of thousands of dollars over the long haul.

    • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      or they could run on propane, which doesn’t make a whole lot of particulates in the first place and is cheaper anyway

      • jqubed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        14 hours ago

        I’m assuming the engine would need some modification to run propane? If not to the cylinders themselves, to the fuel supply? I assume propane would be largely similar to LNG vehicles? I really only see that on city buses and assumed there was a range reason for that.

        • hank_the_tank66@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Propane is way less energy dense per volume than diesel, so it isn’t feasible for long-haul trucking. CNG/LNG is more energy dense than propane, but still nowhere near that of diesel fuel, which is why you see it in busses and garbage trucks. I know a few massive fleets (UPS comes to mind) that use CNG for some of their local routes, but that is probably more for the “green” optics than anything else.

          • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            propane is like 3/4 density of petrol and gram per gram carries more energy (propane 0.58g/ml, petrol 0.7ish g/ml) it’s slightly greener because it contains more hydrogen so more energy per carbon emissions

            LNG is cryogenic, has even lower density (0.41 to 0.5 g/ml depending on temperature) and CNG is less dense still depending on pressure

        • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          petrol engines need little modification, what is def necessary is another tank for LPG. different fuel supply system is required, but if original is kept in place either petrol or LPG can be used as needed. propane is a liquid under pressure and much denser than gaseous compressed methane, and not cryogenic like LNG. diesel engines can also be converted, but it gets harder and requires either small amount of normal diesel used or installation of spark plugs (it’s still diesel cycle)

      • madcaesar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 hours ago

        God I hate comments like this, that are so un charitable. He’s giving us more information and context which is important and adds to discussion and here you are trying to start shit.

        This happens way too often on here, people providing nuance or a different perspective and some douche sliding in “so you think everyone should DIE!!!” putting words into OP’s mouth and attributing malice…

        • NewNewAccount@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          42 minutes ago

          A point was trying to be made. One - the information provided is absolutely biased and possibly untrue. Performing maintenance on your vehicle is a fact of life. Using emissions as a scapegoat and justification to pollute bothers me more than my comment bothers you.

          Fuck polluters and fuck their apologists.