February 16, 2009 by andrew macdonald

Consumers continue to have questions about what is truly ‘responsible’ when considering the impact of material purchases. I think people, even in this economic climate, remain curious about the solutions and available options and are interested in what might be the ‘right’ direction to pursue. However, the myriad green certification, labeling and brand rhetoric can confuse and frustrate an interested party. Cars are certainly not immune to this challenge.

I agree with you about pollution. We have California to thank for driving the dialogue and direction of the established rating systems while credit for the regulation of tailpipe emissions goes to the Nixon administration of the 70’s which certainly kicked off improved health for millions in urban air sheds.

Today we are at the point where we are seeing incredibly small emission numbers in a broad range of vehicles. I am not defending the industry here, only suggesting that the overall emission strategy for the past 30 years has had distinct smog as opposed to carbon focus and they have done a decent job of lowering these impacts significantly however the direction today appears to be climate focused.

http://www.tdicurious.ca/2008/11/the-origins-of-cafe-corporate-average-fuel-economy/

I may have confused readers with an assumption, emissions = pollution, when in fact emissions are both smog AND greenhouse gases (GHG) which in fossil fuels is primarily carbon, CO2 (for more detail check this earlier post).

http://www.tdicurious.ca/2008/11/auto-emissions-101-smog-and-ghg%E2%80%99s/

The GHG rating, measured as grams per kilometer – g/km, is directly proportional to the consumption rating, the CAFE or fuel economy number. This of course assumes you are burning fossil fuel; adding a biofuel blend could further lower the emission numbers. When a fossil fuel is burned carbon is released at a fixed rate per unit of liquid energy. Which is to say, the less fuel we burn over a set distance the lower the carbon and other GHG’s emitted.

http://www.tdicurious.ca/2008/11/b5-%E2%80%93-what-is-it/

Like you and me, consumers walking into a dealership even today have an interest in the personal impact of a product or what is commonly referred to as footprint. They are interested in things like efficiency, durability, the recyclability of a vehicle AND the business practices of the global brand. What are the Corporate Sustainability actions of the manufacturer on waste, water and energy – climate change etc? What actions has the branded dealership business taken to improve the footprint of the business?
On this front many initiatives are underway beyond the manufactured product. I know that Subaru is working to increase the number of zero waste assembly plants. Porsche heats most of its facilities with thermal recovery technology while last year in Truro, Nova Scotia, the new VW store opened with a Geo-Thermal heating and cooling unit reducing the carbon footprint of the facility to near zero.

Environmental impact questions are becoming part of purchasing decisions across all industry. The conscious, aware, interested consumer is still with us and most likely will continue to grow as a market segment. Fortunately for everyone most automobile manufacturers are responding to the point where consumers now have a selection of advanced, more responsible and cleaner transportation options from corporations who have begun to shift business practices towards a more sustainable direction; A good thing for all of us.

We appreciate the interest.

Thanks for engaging.