Brittany Mazza

Paper 3: Resolving VWs Ethical Challenges with Software Cheating Emissions Testing

CST 373 Ethics and Communication in Technology

Professor Kevin Cahill

April 11, 2017

Ethical Issues Concerning the Volkswagen Emissions Scandal

As a full-time web developer, I have considered many ethical dilemmas

pertaining to my field without being able to articulate them well. Taking the Ethics and

Current Issues in Communication and Technology course (CST 373) through California

State University, Monterey Bay is a small portion of my online undergraduate program

in Computer Science it has helped me develop my thought process surrounding current

events and the ethical issues that are present through them. Recognizing the many

sides to each issue, where the issue is identified, and potential ways they could have

been resolved is a great skill, regardless of the industry one works in. Having insightful

conversations with coworkers concerning the rapidly changing, and often unknown,

aspects of the technology industry is incredibly beneficial to my understanding of the

world, as well as my position within the company I work for.

Bakersfield, California, my hometown, has a reputation for some of the worst air

quality in the United States. Growing up, this was a well-known fact as many of my

peers had asthma problems and we were restricted from playing outside due to the air

quality and heat. Because Bakersfield sits in a basin, the pollution from neighboring

cities, like Los Angeles, settles in Bakersfield. In 2014, Bryan Walsh reported that the
air quality is as bad as ever if not worse in Bakersfield and the surrounding San

Joaquin Valley (Walsh, 2014). My family, including my teenage sisters, still live there

and have grown up with the colored flags that indicate the air quality. When the flag for

the day is red, they cant go outside and are restricted to playing indoors. Slightly over a

decade later, the air quality remains a significant issue in Bakersfield. The Clean Air Act,

enacted in 1970, enabled the government to regulate how emissions, produced by

companies or their products, impacted the environment. Several amendments have

been made to it but because of the geography surrounding Bakersfield, it has not

benefited from the regulations much.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for upholding the

Clean Air Acts regulations and when companies violate these laws, they are reported to

the EPA. Volkswagen intentionally deceived the machines that test emissions levels to

comply with these regulations and was reported to the EPA due to the pollutant levels of

their diesel engine in 2015. In this paper, well consider the background of the EPA,

focusing on the Clean Air Act, Volkswagens motivation, the parties involved and their

ethical perspectives, and, finally, consider what the future of Volkswagen may look like.

Prior to the creation of the Clean Air Act, air pollution was a prominent issue in

the United States and particularly California. The circumstances that led Los Angeles,

California to have extremely poor air quality range from topographic to the suddenly

staggering amount of automobiles as well as factories and refineries that peppered the

Southland (Rosenberg, 2012). The air quality in Los Angeles was among the worst in

the nation. As the smog produced by automobiles and factories covered the city, the
problem was impossible to ignore. The United States was not the first nation to enact

laws allowing their government to regulate air pollutants and was undoubtedly

influenced by the laws created elsewhere when designing their own act. In fact, England

had an air quality act prior to the United States under the same name. In 1952, coal

smoke in London, England created a deadly fog that was named the Great Smog due

to animals dying and residents citing respiratory illness. This prompted action from their

government. The Parliament of England passed the new Clean Air Act, after extensive

deliberation, based on the recommendation that a Clean Air Act be enacted from the

Beaver Committee, which was assembled to present a solution to their air quality

concerns, in 1954 (Brimblecombe, 2006). These regulations and those that followed

them in many countries have frequently been challenged by politicians arguing that

imposing these restrictions violates the freedom of the citizens and that it is not the

governments job to regulate the choices companies and individual citizens make with

regards to the products theyre using or how they release emissions.

Recently, the EPA and the Clean Air Act have taken the spotlight in American

politics again, as the current president has made his disbelief in climate change known

and made promises, early in his campaign and prior to his presidency, to eliminate the

EPA. He received significant criticism for the plan to dismantle the EPA and has since

revised his position. The Washington Examiner reports President Trump now says that

he "will refocus the EPA on its core mission of ensuring clean air, and clean, safe

drinking water for all Americans" instead of dismantling it completely (Feldscher, 2016).

While the importance of the Clean Air Act was not initially recognized by the president, it
seems that he believes differently now. As a member of the public, I am not aware of

the exact situations that caused him to recognize its importance. However, I believe that

he simply wasnt very well informed with regards to the responsibilities of the EPA and

the importance of the Clean Air Act. This is likely the case for the general population

over time as well. While the poor air quality is visible in the air, understanding the cause

of it can be difficult since the possible sources seem endless, as you dont always see

the pollutants going into the air from the source. Advances in science and the visible

difference in air quality that resulted after these regulations were put in place have led

more Americans to accept these environmental laws.

In 1990, a large set of amendments were made to the Clean Air Act. These

amendments revised the standards for emissions of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide,

NOx, and particulates from heavy-duty vehicles or engines, and within seven years the

EPA began reporting that heavy-duty diesel automobiles were a large source of

nitrogen oxide (NOx) and particulates (Morriss & Yandle, 2004). There were many

automobiles running on diesel but not nearly as many as were running on gasoline. The

statements began to give diesel a negative image and led to fewer Americans buying

diesel cars. The restrictions presented them as underpowered and dirty. However, the

development of a new, clean diesel engines with better fuel economy than previously

existed was an exciting prospect for diesel running cars in the United States beginning

around 2008.

Several car companies were promoting their improved diesel-engine cars when

the Volkswagen Jetta GTI won the award for Green Car of the Year at a the Los
Angeles Auto Show in 2008. It was the first time a diesel-powered car has taken the

industry's top environmental honor (Groom, & Krolicki, 2008). This

environmentally-friendly diesel car with good gas mileage was great news for the diesel

industry, in addition to other advanced diesel cars debuted around the same time,. It

symbolized a change in the American perspective surrounding diesel-running cars and

created hope that diesel would once again become an option for American buyers.

Volkswagen reported their best sales in 2010 since 2003 with 22 percent of

Volkswagen models sold with TDI Clean Diesel engines (Volkswagen of America,

Inc., 2010). The new diesel engines were selling well and Volkswagen had a growing

image. In 2011, they surpassed Toyota as the largest automaker, globally (Shunk,

2012). Volkswagen had solidified a great reputation and the world looked positively

upon their accomplishments.

The IRS began offering tax credits for clean diesel cars in 2006, covering the

2010 Volkswagen Jetta TDI and Volkswagen Golf TDI with tax credits ranging from

$1,300 to $1,700 (Hunting, n.d.). This was an effort by the government to promote

driving environmentally-friendly cars to reduce overall emissions. While the government

was promoting these clean diesel cars, the general media was as well. Wired magazine

called one of their new diesel cars as sexy as it is efficient since it gets 42 mpg and

emits about as much CO2 as a Toyota Prius, and it is emissions-legal in all 50 states so

even car-crazy Californians could buy one (Squatriglia, 2009). Even as the competition

was growing against Volkswagen for diesel-running cars, Green Car Reports still said

theyd put their money on Volkswagen as the one manufacturer who can continue to
sell diesels in volume and profit from [small diesels] (Voelker, 2009). Green Car

Reports was correct in that Volkswagen would profit from this tremendously.

That perspective changed when reports were released stating that Volkswagen

may have cheated on their emissions tests. A research lab at West Virginia University

had been granted funds to test diesel cars against their claimed emissions output on the

road and found that in none of their road tests could they get their two Volkswagen cars

to meet the claims, even though a BMW they tested did fine (Glinton, 2015). This team

was not intentionally looking for a false claim, they were simply researching diesel

engines. The had produced the emissions claimed when under a testing environment,

but far exceeded California limits when on the open road. The team reported their

findings to the EPA, as well as the California Air Resources Board. It turned out that

there was a particular set of software created to sense when the car was being tested.

When that was the case, it would adjust the car to emit an amount of emissions lower

than the legal limit. This was not always engaged because it hinders performance and

fuel economy (Gates, Ewing, Russell, & Watkins, 2017). Their image in the media

quickly turned negative as they denied the claims that they were intentionally cheating

on their emissions test. Bloomberg reported a 23% drop in market value after they

admitted to cheating on American emissions tests (Kresge & Weisse, 2015). The car

company could no longer hold an image of being an earth-friendly vehicle.

Environmental activists and members of the technology industry were disappointed and

outraged. A 2015 MIT study found that software to evade emissions standards in more

than 482,000 diesel vehicles sold in the U.S. will directly contribute to 60 premature
deaths across the country (Chu, 2015). Volkswagen was receiving very bad press.

Cheating on the emissions test was deceitful to the public and harmful to the

environment. Additionally, this scandal put the vehicle owners in an unpleasant position.

People purchase cars for all kinds of reasons. Their reasons may include

financial considerations, the generous miles-per-gallon fuel efficiency, the feel of driving

the vehicle, and others may be concerned about the environmental impact.

Unfortunately for the car owners, this new revelation meant that they would have to deal

with getting their car to standard to getting a new car though Volkswagen. They

additionally worried about their cars losing value and the reduction to fuel economy and

performance once the cars were fixed (Krisher & Durbin, 2015). Volkswagen

desperately needed to retain their customer base that they were quickly losing. In

addition to offering a buy-back of the affected cars or fixing them, they offered affected

owners of two-liter cars cash compensation of $5,100 to $10,000, depending on the

model and year of the vehicle (Ewing, 2017). The settlement offered a decent sum of

money to the car owners, but the car owners are still unhappy with the loss of resale

value. Kim Johnson, an owner interviewed by NPR, tried to sell the car and was unable

to. NPR reported that less than a year after the scandal, the value of her car [had]

dropped more than 4 percent (2015). While there were still not happy with the

settlement, others told a different tale. Jeremy Malcsyk told Bloomberg News that he

bought the car before he found Jesus, financially and that it would allow him to reset

his finances (Stock, 2016). Financial differences and situations had different impacts on

the car owners. Those that were financially struggling seemed to find happiness in the
settlement, while the more financially sound didnt see it that way. Instead, they seemed

to view it as a loss in profit, even if they took the settlement.

Understanding and evaluating the actions of those involved or impacted by the

scandal can be easier to do when considering them from an ethical perspective. My

initial perspective considering how Volkswagen went about implementing this deception

device is negative. They seem clearly in the wrong and they shouldnt have released

their clean diesel car without first complying with the laws. Additionally, after the

settlements were in place, the car owners should be happy that they were able to

receive the settlement and move on. Many ethical frameworks can be applied to this

situation but a few are particularly relevant. Considering Volkswagen through an Egoism

and Utilitarianism perspective may provide additional insight and understanding of the

Volkswagens choices. Similarly, applying the ethical framework of cultural relativism to

the car owners will allow us to better understand their position.

The first is the concept of egoism or the self-interest ethics, says that it is ethical

for a party, in this case, Volkswagen, to behave in their own interest as long as it is

allowed within the designated rules for which they are working. As far as we know,

Volkswagen followed this ethical framework up until the point when they decided to

create the software to defeat the emissions test. They were working on a clean diesel

engine that would be beneficial to the company, through profits, by running a cleaner

diesel engine than what was previously available and getting better gas mileage to

attract customers. If we assume that they believed they would reach this objective and

have made progress toward it, they would have stayed within this ethical framework.
Unfortunately, they realized that their engine was not in compliance with the Clean Air

Act in the United States at some point in the process. Instead of selling the cars where it

was legal to do so and market their actual emissions, they chose to install software to

cheat the tests in the cars that sold internationally and blatantly lie about the emissions

produced by the vehicles. It was at this point that they broke the ethical framework and

acted purely out of self-interest without staying within the confines of the law. My

personal view has not changed after considering Volkswagens actions with the

definition of self-interest ethics but expanded how Volkswagen acted unethically to

include both that they broke the laws and that they deceived their customers. They

played unfairly against their competition and proved themselves untrustworthy.

When solving conflicts under utilitarianism ethics, it is ethical for the

decision-maker to determine what the best solution is based on the number of those it

benefits, given many affected parties. Once the public was well aware of the

implementation of the deceptive software in the vehicles, many car owners were

concerned regarding what would happen to their car and the likely loss of value.

Volkswagen, in a civil court case, had to develop a settlement that would be approved

by a United States judge in order to properly reimburse the affected car owners.

Volkswagen proposed a settlement that allowed the car owners to sell the car back to

Volkswagen for the value it held prior to the scandal or repair the cars, which would

likely impair both the cars great gas mileage and performance. Fixing the car alone

does not comply with the utilitarianism ethical framework because it is not in the best

interest of their consumers, as their cars would have fewer features than previously
advertised and the consumers would undoubtedly be unhappy. Offering to buy the cars

back, however, is in the best interest of their customers and I believe this is what the

judge recognized when he approved the proposed settlement.

The final framework well consider is one of cultural relativism in the context of

the Volkswagen car owners that were affected. Cultural relativism indicates that ethical

standards are applied based on the law, which guides social norms. The software to

defeat the emissions test was included in cars that were not only under United States

law and because of this, it was not unethical under this framework for Volkswagen to

include this software in all of the countries where the cars were sold. Volkswagen may

have been unethical in the United States, under this framework, but they werent being

so in the countries where there wasnt a law in place to regulate these emissions.

However, the emissions law in the United States wasnt necessarily in place for the car

manufacturers but rather the individual car. While those car owners in other countries

may not need to seek fixes or exchanges on their car because its not unethical for them

to drive the car in their country, those in the United States would need to as the law

indicates that its required. Upon reviewing this framework, I realize that the car owner is

only ethically responsible for making the proper adjustments to their car (or getting a

new car) if they live in a country that has specific emissions laws. Because of this, the

car owners within the United States must do something to be in compliance with the

law, ethically speaking.

The Clean Air Act laws are regularly amended and become more difficult to

comply with, requiring companies to innovate in order to satisfy them. Because of this, it
becomes more appealing for these companies to cheat their way into compliance until

they can appropriately comply with the laws. I suspect that there is a lot of cheating that

were unaware of, as the public, that more cheating mechanisms will surface, and that

there isnt an end in sight. In fact, I believe the problem will only get worse. Five years

from now, we may see a few new systems that give false positives but I anticipate much

more to surface twenty years from now. However, the system for testing these

requirements will also improve and become more robust. Each new exploit is an

opportunity for the testing software to improve and make it difficult to defeat. In

response to this scandal, regulators in the United States and Canada are significantly

expanding their on-the-road emissions tests to cover all makes and models of diesel

cars (Hakim & Mouwad, 2015). The new requirement of randomly testing diesel cars is

a great example of how exploiting vulnerabilities like this helps improve the emissions

tests for those that come in the future. These tests will continue to improve as stories

are emerging in increasing frequency in which companies are applying the same skills

they use to brings us wonderful products and services, to cheating, deceiving or in

simply trying to be clumsily smart (Simpson, 2015). Bounty hunters have been hired by

large companies, like Google and Yelp, to intentionally look for exploits in their systems

where hackers can harm them. The bounty hunters are paid based on the size of the

exploit. This situation may warrant a new set of bounty hunters that work for our

government organizations, like the EPA, to help find the problems before theyre

exploited by large companies. While this wont completely stop the issue, it will help

curb it if implemented well.

 After Volkswagen admitted to installing software to defeat the emissions tests,

they worked to resolve the issue in an admirable way. While they were unethical in

installing the software, to begin with, their actions later concerning their customers are

ethically supported. Ideally, there wouldnt have been an issue and they would have

been more considerate toward the public, the environment, and their customers.

Volkswagen is working toward regaining everyones trust and is doing it well by focusing

themselves on the production of electric vehicles. Through the process of evaluating

this scandal, I would likely be more hesitant to believe any bold claims made by the

company or any advertisements that indicate that they are producing vehicles with

anything but their profits in mind. Prior to this, that may not have been the case as I

wasnt extremely familiar with the situation. For Volkswagen to regain my trust, I need

exceptional transparency from the company, in addition to numerous third-party tests.

 References

Brimblecombe, Peter. (2006, November). The Clean Air Act after 50 years. Weather, 61

(11), 311314.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1256/wea.127.06/asset/2006611105_ftp.pd

f;jsessionid=669BB7991F2AC543C4D0ABA5F53EED1C.f04t02?v=1&t=j1ctbnoe

&s=ad5f261159a9408f1bf59b8e02afe15ae22250df&systemMessage=Pay+Per+

View+on+Wiley+Online+Library+will+be+unavailable+on+Saturday+15th+April+fr

om+12%3A00-09%3A00+EDT+for+essential+maintenance.++Apologies+for+the

+inconvenience

Chu, Jennifer. (2015, October 28). Study: Volkswagens emissions cheat to cause 60

premature deaths in U.S. MIT News. Retrieved from

http://news.mit.edu/2015/volkswagen-emissions-cheat-cause-60-premature-deat

hs-1029

Emissions Scandal is Hurting VW Car Owners Trying to Resell. (2015, October 28).

NPR. Rertrieved from

http://www.npr.org/2015/10/26/450238773/emissions-scandal-is-hurting-vw-owne

rs-trying-to-resell

Ewing, Jack. (2017, February 1). What Volkswagen Settlements Mean for Vehicle

Owners. The New York Times. Retrieved from

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/business/volkswagen-compensation-settle

ment-bosch-audi-porsche.html
Feldscher, Kyle. (2016, September 22). Trump Backs Off Plan to Eliminate EPA.

Washington Examiner. Retrieved from

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-backs-off-plan-to-eliminate-epa/articl

e/2602581

Gates, G., Ewing, J., Russell, K., & Watkins D. (2017, March 16). How Volkswagens

Defeat Devices Worked. The New York Times. Retrieved from

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/business/international/vw-diesel-emissi

ons-scandal-explained.html

Glinton, Sonani. (2015, September 24). How A Little Lab In West Virginia Caught

Volkswagen's Big Cheat. NPR. Retrieved from

http://www.npr.org/2015/09/24/443053672/how-a-little-lab-in-west-virginia-caught

-volkswagens-big-cheat

Groom, N., & Krolicki, K. (2008). Volkswagen diesel car wins "Green Car of the Year".

Reuters. Retrieved from

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-greencar-idUSTRE4AJ7S120081120

Hakim, D., & Mouwad, J. (2015, November 8) Galvanized by VW Scandal, E.P.A.

Expands On-Road Emissions Testing. The New York Times. Retrieved from

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/09/business/energy-environment/epa-expands

-on-road-emissions-testing-to-all-diesel-models.html

Hunting, Benjamin. (n.d.). Top 5 New Car Clean Diesel Tax Credit Rebates. Autobyel.

Retrieved from
 http://www.autoblog.com/2012/01/13/volkswagen-beats-toyota-takes-2011-sales-

crown/

Kresge, N., & Weiss, R. (2015, September 21). Volkswagen Drops 23% After Admitting

Diesel Emissions Cheat. Bloomberg. Retrieved from

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-21/volkswagen-drops-15-after

-admitting-u-s-diesel-emissions-cheat

Krisher, T., & Dublin, D. (2015, September) Sell, sue or stay put: considerations for

Volkswagen owners. Dallas News. Retrieved from

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/business/2015/09/27/sell-sue-or-stay-put-c

onsiderations-for-volkswagen-owners

Morriss, A. P., & Yandle, B. (2004). Regulation by Litigation: Diesel Engine Emissions

Control. The Independent Review, 8 (3).

http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?a=16

Rosenberg, Jeremy. (2012, February 13). How Los Angeles Began to Put its Smoggy

Days Behind. KCET. Retrieved from

https://www.kcet.org/history-society/how-los-angeles-began-to-put-its-smoggy-da

ys-behind

Shunk, Chris. (2012, January 13). Volkswagen beats Toyota, takes 2011 sales crown.

Autoblog. Retrieved from

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/01/13/volkswagen-beats-toyota-takes-2011-sales-

crown/
Simpson, Tom. (2015, October 9). Toxic innovation: Volkswagen is the tip of a

destructive iceberg. The Conversation. Retrieved from

https://theconversation.com/toxic-innovation-volkswagen-is-the-tip-of-a-destructiv

e-iceberg-48485

Squatriglia, Chuck. (2009, January 11). A 42-mpg VW Diesel Roadster As Sexy As It Is

Efficient. Wired. Retrieved from

https://www.wired.com/2009/01/vw-42-mpg-diese/

Stock, Kyle. (2016, July 26). The Only Winners in Volkswagen's Diesel Mess Are

Drivers. Bloomberg. Retrieved from

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-26/the-only-winners-in-volksw

agen-s-diesel-mess-are-drivers

Voelcker, John. (2009, May 5). Dare To Be Diesel? Volkswagen Launches TDI Truths

And Dares Site. Green Car Reports. Retrieved from

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1020440_dare-to-be-diesel-volkswagen-la

unches-tdi-truths-and-dares-site

Volkswagen of America, Inc. (2011, January 14). Volkswagen of America Closes 2010

With Best Overall Year Sales Since 2003. PR Newswire. Retrieved from

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/volkswagen-of-america-closes-2010-

with-best-overall-year-sales-since-2003-112884599.html

Walsh, Bryan. (2014, September 21). See the Worst Place to Breathe in America. Time.

Retrieved from

http://time.com/3399134/air-pollution-climate-change-bakersfield-caifornia/