Summary
The earth is going through a warming cycle that may or may be due to automotive emissions. Despite of the uncertainty, the Big 3 car companies (and the automotive industry as a whole) are under the gun to respond to the problem. This response is already well underway, however there is a difference between technical advancements at an automotive manufacturer and that automaker receiving the public recognition as a result (sales of improved vehicles). New regulations if poorly conceived may inhibit this progress.
Analysis
The popular explanation for global warming is that it is primarily (and perhaps only) caused by vehicle exhaust emissions. Clearly the earth is going though a warming cycle and average global yearly temperatures are increasing. This sort of thing has happened many times in the past and certainly over the eons. But it takes an enormous leap of faith to claim that Americans use of automobiles is the cause of the increases in average temperature. Scientific evidence for this assertion is either non-existent or at best very circumstantial. If the cause of the current cycle of warming is not known, what makes anyone believe that they know what action (if any) that we can take that will influence the result. I know that this is extremely politically incorrect opinion, and contrary to what the largely uninformed public has been led to believe by an alarmist press, but it is never the less true. There I got that off my chest!
However the automotive industry is an easy target for politicians. They recognize an opportunity to demonstrate their "deep" concern for the environment by piling on this issue. Thus the car companies must be prepared to respond to this problem before painful (and perhaps unworkable) "solutions" are legislated on to them. Toyota has utilized its hybrid-powered vehicles to create a very positive public image. While these vehicles represent only a miniscule portion of the total Toyota automotive production, the company as a whole is perceived to be a socially concerned and responsible corporation with "green" products. The Detroit automakers have been slow to develop their own hybrid vehicles and thus have just the opposite public perception. In particular over the years, Bill Ford has made many promises to the environmental advocates to produce green vehicles. However Ford has also repeatedly failed to deliver on these promises. Similarly General Motors has suffered negative press for the cancelation of it all electric EV-1 vehicle program. Daimler Chrysler has been strangely silent on this issue. As a result the Detroit Big three are now under the gun to demonstrate dramatic progress on environmentally friendly vehicles. Are they up to the challenge in these deeply troubled financial times?
First all of the big three are committed to producing large number of flexible fueled vehicles. This is motivated by the way the government treats these vehicle in computing corporate average fuel consumption numbers. However given the very limited availability of alternative fuels, these vehicles currently have very little practical effect on the problem. Increased availability of alternative fuels may change that over time, but that depends on the actions of others, not the Big 3 Ford has had limited success in it hybrid vehicle offerings (fundamentally similar to the Honda and Toyota designs) on smaller vehicles. General Motors and Chrysler will be introducing hybrid vehicles that offer advantages over the Toyota system on its larger vehicles for a substantial fuel economy boost. However, thus far, these actions have not had much impact on the general public perception of these companies. General Motors has an opportunity to change this view if it can successfully commercialize the Chevrolet Volt concept car shown at the North American Automotive Show in Detroit. This plug in hybrid vehicle has a very different power train architecture and can operate in an all electric battery powered mode and after depleting the battery continue on with a gas powered engine generating the electric power needed. The vehicle is capably of fully recharging it batteries from a 110-volt electric outlet in about six hours and has a range in excess of 600 miles with a ten-gallon fuel tank. The design is a technical triumph even with limited battery capability. Can General Motors communicate the significance of this vehicle and turn around the negative perceptions? That is a big question.
Finally back to the question raised in the title to this commentary. I think the automotive industry is poised and already highly motivated to make the product changes that will reduce its impact on the environment in areas such as global warming, emissions, and recycling. Governmental regulations are not necessary to motivate this progress and could inhibit it if poorly conceived. Standardization of current regulations within our country and harmonization of them across the globe can increase the effectiveness of the improvements. Given all of that, the impact of the total elimination of automotive emission by itself may have only a small impact on reducing global warming. There are a host of other man made emissions and a large amount of natural carbon dioxide emissions that would remain. Society will have to focus on the areas it can control, but the impact on global warming is uncertain.
