Amazon.com Widgets

Do automobile companies need to reduce emissions from their factories, not just their automobiles, to combat rising levels of air pollution?

  • Automobile Companies Should Have Green Factories

    Automobile companies should focus not only on creating reduced emission vehicles, but also on reducing the emissions that their factories produce as the cars are being manufactured. There is an responsibility on companies to be environmentally aware and responsible to the country and to the consumers that they service. Reducing factory emissions is a great step forward in the automobile industry's contribution to a 'greener' America.

  • Yes, automobile companies need to reduce emissions from their factories.

    Yes, car manufacturers should reduce emissions from their factories as well as their automobiles. Manufacturing is a huge cause of air pollution and the illnesses that accompany it. Areas with large manufacturing hubs generally suffer from poor air quality due to factory pollution. Companies should be responsible for reducing pollution from their products and manufacturing processes to prevent asthma and other respiratory issues for those that live near factories.

  • Look at LA.

    Yes, automobile companies need to reduce emissions from their factories, not just their automobiles, to combat rising levels of air pollution, because the problem of air pollution is not one that exists by itself. Automobile companies have a real problem with pollution, and they should combat it in any way that they can, including by evaluating their factories.

  • Yes They Do

    I believe automobile companies do need to reduce emissions from their factories, not just their automobiles, to combat rising levels of air pollution. I think the emissions from cars are far worse, so that should take precedent. There are many different types of factories and they all need to address the problems the create for the world.

  • The free market will not support this.

    Although clean air is, in itself, a noble pursuit, thought must be given to the economic impact of green initiatives. Making factories run cleaner is not free and every viable clean air initiative will reduce the efficiency of the plants in question. This means increased costs passed on to consumers who already consider vehicle purchases to be a major expense. The fact that we live in a world market must be considered. If expensive restrictions are placed on production in one country, then the plants will simply relocate to another country without the restrictions and the vehilces produced will be shipped. This obviously results in many lost jobs and lost opportunities as companies will not want to create new plants in nations with heavy restrictions. I would point out that the regulation-heavy United States has seen a rapid decline in manufacturing capacity in the last 35 years, while the near-regulationless China has seen a massive industrial boom in recent years.

  • The free-market doesn't support this.

    Although cleaner air, in itself, is a noble pursuit, every initiative to combat harmful emissions comes also with a reduction in thermal efficiency. In other words, more power is required to do the same job. Controlling emissions is not free of costs, and those costs are steep. These same costs are, by necessity of business, passed on to consumers buying cars. Placing increasingly strict restrictions on the automobile market is a part of what has lead to the colapse of the automobile industry in the US. Further restrictions on manufacturing make it cheaper to produce cars overseas (where whatever of these green-laws are not in effect) and export them to the US for sale. Shipping jobs overseas is something that should be avoided and environmentalists need to better understand the economic impacts of the restrictions for which they fight. Political energy for this particular initiative would be better spent fighting to replace coal power plants with nuclear power plants.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.