Awards & Accolades

Why does Opel win so many prizes? Get the details here.

Read about our awards & accolades


Where and how to experience the exciting world of Opel at first hand. Take a look at all the upcoming events and activities.

Find out about our events

Opel Strongly Rebuts Claims of Monitor and Deutsche Umwelthilfe

Dec 3, 2015

  • Legal requirements fully met
  • Intentional deception of consumers

Opel News - Opel Strongly Rebuts Claims of Monitor and Deutsche Umwelthilfe

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.