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.

    • clockwork_octopus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 days ago

      Money. It’s always money.

      From the article:

      Achtemeier charged as much at $4,500 per truck for work that often took him two hours or less. Achtemeier advertised his services on social media nationwide, doing business as Voided Warranty Tuning (VWT) or Optimized Ag. Between 2019 and 2022 his company took in more than $4.3 million in gross profits.

    • ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 days ago

      When you run out of DEF or the DPF is clogged, you can’t run your truck for more than a brief while. You get half output in a limp-mode to go refill your DEF or have the DPF serviced. DEF is the reactant for the exhaust that makes diesel burn cleaner, but means modern trucks have 2 tanks now. Users hate it, but it cuts emissions massively. Also adds a few grand to the vehicle exhaust system in hardware and sensors and control units. Anyways:

      Time = money.

      For a commercial or even semi private vehicle if you bypass even one indicent of downtime by doing this is paid for itself.

      That said, the DPF is a filter, and can physically clog and cause an exhaust fire if there is no monitoring software. I hope at least this guy had it wait till it was almost critical and then stop, not entirely disable the stop signal. Otherwise there is a serious risk to the vehicle and passengers.

    • Mac@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      Reduced running costs, ease of maintenance, engine efficiency.

    • Diesel engines can be tuned to be 10% more efficient ie better engine performance and better fuel economy if u modify the engine tuning to ignore the environmental tuning requirements that have been forced upon the manufacturers.

      as much as this guy sounds like an asshole should ownership not mean u can modify your own property as u see fit?

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      21 days ago

      Right, a Republican, exactly.

      The way they’ve all reacted to climate change denialism by actively trying to make pollution as bad as possible is wild. Even if the entire world’s scientific community was somehow wrong about global warming, shit like this and “rolling coal” would still be terrible for air quality, but these fucknuts apparently don’t care as long as they get to “own the libs”. This is peak “eating a shit sandwich to force other people to smell your breath” energy.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        21 days ago

        People are dumb. I once saw a kid on a field trip shit his pants out of spite because we had to leave a petting zoo. It wasn’t an accident. He looked the teacher in the eye and letterrip

        • beansbeansbeans@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          21 days ago

          That’s a child who hasn’t learned how to emotionally regulate. It’s much worse when it’s an adult who is emotionally unintelligent. These people aren’t necessarily stupid, they’ve just never been taught how to manage themselves or given the tools to self soothe.

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            21 days ago

            I’m saying millions of adults haven’t moved beyond pant shitting.

            • beansbeansbeans@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              21 days ago

              I understand. I’m highlighting that it’s not that these people are “dumb” - they’re capable of learning why climate change is an important subject matter - but rather that their inability to emotionally regulate results in them doubling down like a child, even if deep down they know they’re wrong.

              They react to their emotions rather than taking a moment to ask themselves why that is their response in the first place; this needs to be taught.

              • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                21 days ago

                I think we’re generally aligned.

                They are capable of understanding what climate change is but refuse any action on it. Even towards their own detriment.

                (Shit pants, roll coal)

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        21 days ago

        It’s not an anti environment thing, it’s a money saving thing (as in, they don’t do it to intentionally harm the environment, it’s collateral damage). You spend 4.5k to make your engine reliable for hundreds of thousands of miles instead of having to spend 10k (if you’re lucky) every 100k miles to keep it running.

  • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    21 days 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.

    • mlg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      21 days ago

      I actually decided to search this because I thought the whole point of DEF was so trucks wouldn’t need to use an EGR like every car does.

      Apparently emissions is complicated and expensive lol, so lots of trucks have both.

      Newer models however have started creating systems that remove the EGR and instead rely solely on the SCR with a bigger DEF tank and a cleanup catalyst.

      I think DEF is still the right direction. Exhaust recycling has a ton of downsides that took car OEMs a while to hack their way around (or give up and plan for 150k mile expectancy).

      4,500 for a mod though is still pretty expensive for something you can do yourself. Most of that cost was probably due to it being illegal, not because it’s hard to accomplish.

      • madcaesar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        21 days 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
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          21 days 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.

          • FabledAepitaph@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            21 days ago

            Everything is on a scale. The pollution control equipment only trades air pollution for increased throughout in landfills, increased industrial emissions to the air, water, and land by necessitating more frequent replacements, as well as more funds in the pockets of capitalists. Pick your poison because you’re never going to come away squeaky clean.

    • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      21 days ago

      The summary says he was having accomplices connect a laptop to the vehicle and then remotely accessing that laptop. Sounds like regular old ssh or rdp.

    • Arbiter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      21 days ago

      If you read the article he was remotely connecting to laptops that were plugged into the vehicles.

    • hank_the_tank66@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      21 days ago

      Manufacturers try really hard to stop their proprietary software from getting out into the world, because when it does this is exactly what happens.

      Case in point: I have a $35 phone app that lets me change software configurations on my BMW, and it is great. Can’t change anything related to engine, aftertreatment, or safety though…which is a good thing.

      • ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        21 days ago

        Flipside of this coin: this results in repair monopolies because users cannot repair their own vehicles and equipment and manufactures use this exact excuse to claim they HAVE to run a monopoly cause the EPA. Literally John Deere has said this.

        In truth, illegal vehicle mods have been and will always be a thing. Manufacturers should still provide all the tools to users to repair, and emissions checks on trucks will have to be smarter to catch cheaters. Make the penalty for a deliberate violation (willful not accidental) so egregious that no one would consider it, even if it saved 50k+ per truck.

    • BlueLineBae@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      21 days ago

      Most cars come equipped with a sim card these days and there’s lots of news about how car companies are sending data about your driving habits to insurance providers. So um… Yeah.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    21 days ago

    Why? Just Why?

    I mean sure, there is some money aspect to it, fine.

    But why spend all that time and energy just to be able to pollute more. I mean, that is the benefit of more pollution? Even if you don’t believe climate change, polluii less shouldn’t be that hard to understand as something positive?

    I’m just… Not getting this. I’m assuming the guy has a mental illness that would explain this, maybe?

    • CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      20 days ago

      Believe it or not there is a subset of the far right who vehemently believe we are ruining the atmosphere but not pumping ENOUGH carbon into it.

      It’s a weird reverso climate change belief. These people blame all the historic hurricanes, wildfires and changing temperature on the completely unfounded idea that humans are limiting their CO2 output.

      EDIT: https://www.mediamatters.org/neil-cavuto/fox-contributor-calls-more-coal-plants-solution-extreme-heat

      • andrewta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        I’ve heard of deleting. But I wasn’t sure why anyone would do this. Scary if what you are saying is true.

        • CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          21 days ago

          During the July 20 edition of Your World with Neil Cavuto, Fox contributor Brian Brenberg called for more coal plants as a solution to extreme heat, claiming, “I think most of America wishes the coal plant was still there because… more people could be in a cool environment and be safer.” [Fox News, Your World with Neil Cavuto, 7/20/22]

          Climate denier Patrick Moore, a right-wing media darling who works as a nuclear energy consultant, has refuted the idea that carbon dioxide levels are “getting too high” due to human activity. In 2022, Moore wrote on X, “It has been known since at least 1920 that adding CO2 to greenhouses and even to open air causes a huge increase in plant growth, with no harm caused to plants or animals.

          https://www.mediamatters.org/joe-rogan-experience/joe-rogan-continues-cast-doubt-climate-science-joe-rogan-experience

          • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 days ago

            We need to put laws in place to limit free speech for either companies or people with large followings. If you have a large following you should not be allowed to say what you want because it ALWAYS ends bad.

            You can say what science knows to be true and if you make bullshit claims that can be disproven you van either admit that you don’t know what you’re talking about and people stlhould stop listening to you, or you go to jail

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    21 days ago

    coconspirators

    It’s okay to keep the hyphen in there. It’s more readable, and also it’s once again a word.