In the wake of VW dieselgate journalists are also investigating testing regimes and other makers; Opel has strongly denied accusations

In the wake of VW 'dieselgate' journalists are also investigating testing regimes and other makers; Opel has strongly denied accusations

Opel has strongly denied a German media report that suggested it has understated CO2 emissions on a diesel variant of its Zafira model range by 15%.

Opel said in a statement that it "strongly and vigorously rebuts the claims put forward by TV magazine Monitor and the non-governmental organisation Deutsche Umwelthilfe". The claim, it said, that the CO2 emissions of the Opel Zafira 1.6 CDTI are apparently 15% higher than the official data is false. "The CO2 values published by Opel are correct," Opel said.

German broadcaster ARD's Monitor documentary said on Thursday fuel consumption and CO2 emissions from Opel's Zafira 1.6 CDTi had been found to exceed the carmaker's certified data by 15% on average.

The report also said that three tests of the Zafira conducted by Opel itself in October had shown the discrepancies, Monitor said. It also said its own tests of a 1.6-litre diesel-powered Zafira conducted at an emissions laboratory in Switzerland had found the model's CO2 emissions exceeded Opel's official data by about 20%.

Opel pointed out that the CO2 and consumption measurements are "clearly defined by the law". The CO2 values are determined in the presence of an independent verification service and certified by the regulatory authorities, it said.

Opel also suggested that the journalist concerned got the story wrong. "We made it clear to the journalist on numerous occasions, both verbally and in writing, that his conclusions are not permissible and scientifically untenable," Opel said. "In our opinion, this kind of coverage is neither objective nor thorough and is only intended to disorient the consumers and damage Opel's reputation. The TV magazine Monitor has thus apparently allowed itself to be used by the Deutsche Umwelthilfe whose accusations have already been proved false and deceptive on numerous occasions."

Show the press release

Opel Strongly Rebuts Claims of Monitor and Deutsche Umwelthilfe

2015-12-03

Legal requirements fully met

Intentional deception of consumers

Rüsselsheim.  Opel strongly and vigorously rebuts the claims put forward by TV magazine Monitor and the non-governmental organization "Deutsche Umwelthilfe". The claim that the CO2 emissions of the Opel Zafira 1.6 CDTI are apparently 15 percent higher than the official data is false. The CO2 values published by Opel are correct.

The CO2 and consumption measurements are clearly defined by the law. The CO2 values are determined in the presence of an independent verification service and certified by the regulatory authorities. Opel meets the respective requirements.

Compliance with the CO2 values is part of a legally regulated continuous assessment of conformity. In the scope of the approval process, Opel regularly conducts "Conformity of Production" (COP) measurements, which see vehicles taken from production and tested randomly. The COP measurements confirm our certified CO2 values. The German Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA) audits our processes on a regular basis. The last spot-check took place in the spring of this year.

According to certification and the Certificate of Conformity (COC) provided with the vehicle, the tested vehicle needs to adhere to a CO2 value of 119 g/km. Our own measurements referred to by Monitor show continuous values within the 10 percent tolerance framework. Monitor's claim, that the values are 15 percent higher than the certification value, can thus only be explained by Monitor assuming a wrong certification value.

Opel provided freelance journalist Peter Onneken with the report in question itself. The test results were intended to disarm other deceptive claims resulting from questionable experiments. They prove that Opel does not deploy any software that recognizes whether the vehicle is on a test bench.

We made it clear to the journalist on numerous occasions, both verbally and in writing, that his conclusions are not permissible and scientifically untenable. In our opinion, this kind of coverage is neither objective nor thorough and is only intended to disorient the consumers and damage Opel's reputation. The TV magazine Monitor has thus apparently allowed itself to be used by the Deutsche Umwelthilfe whose accusations have already been proved false and deceptive on numerous occasions.

Original source: Opel