|
Bill, and
others , I’m mostly
a lurker and a poster of announcements and rarely enter the fray around some of
the issues that get aired here. Let me dare to venture forth into this one. I confess
to a limited knowledge of the complexities of the issues. I would argue that
along with the environmental criteria Bill is suggesting that be considered in a
true life-cycle assessment of the production of the autos in question, there
also be a major social component added. Whose employees are better cared for - salaries,
benefits, opportunities for advancement, ratio between salaries of managers
versus laborers, etc; How do these companies treat their communities –
investments, pollution, taxes, longevity, etc.; And how much transportation is
involved in the bringing of parts back and forth across the planet. I don’t
know, but these are questions I feel should be part of the sustainability equation. What
troubles me about the excuse from most of the auto companies (my dad worked for
Ford and Chrysler for a combined 35 years) about reacting to the demand by
consumers is they spend millions creating the demand. When the first minivan
was created, Chrysler spent a fortune marketing the hell out of it. The same is
true of the SUV, and the Pontiac Transam, yada, yada, yada. The Toyota folks
put almost nothing into marketing the Prius. I see Ford is all of a sudden
marketing the Focus. They must need to bring up the fleet average fuel economy
at the end of the year. This is how my young family would buy the old Ford
Escorts. The lack of marketing is a major reason for the lack of consumer
demand for these types of vehicles. Until a company feels it has developed a
product and is willing to invest heavily in a marketing approach, they will remain
a small part of the market. Doesn’t
anyone on this list think there is a market of a “green car”? Now I know
that begs the question of whether we should rely on either non-fossil fueled
vehicles, or mass transit, or other choices than single-occupant vehicles. And
if we have “greener cars” would we then feel better about driving and thus
negate the gains by driving more? You see I have more questions than answers…. Terry Link, Director Office of Campus
Sustainability 525 S. Kedzie Michigan State
University East Lansing, MI
48824 1-517-355-1751 1-517-432-9555(fax) link@msu.edu www.ecofoot.msu.edu -----Original
Message----- As a
Ford employee and an environmentalist (I hope this is not an oxymoron), I do
everything I can to influence the interests of higher fuel economy within
the scope of both my job and my personal life. And I get very frustrated
about this. And NO, I have no influence on decisions to build this or
that. However, the grim reality is that Ford is in business, first to
survive, and also hopefully to make some profit again some day. You
may have read about the struggling to meet the first objective, and of the
many thousands and thousands of jobs lost to valued employees. The other
reality is the Toyota's Prius sold only about 15,000 units in the
entire United States last year, and I believe this was with substantial
tax incentives to help Toyota sell these cars. Given that there was
essentially no competition, this is not a resounding
marketplace endorsement. I have read about the hoopla of the Prius
II, and IF the numbers are true, then Toyota is to be congratulated on their
technical achievement. However, I have yet to find anything but
technical pap regarding the means used to achieve the numbers. It is
much to early to see if the American marketplace will make this a financial
success as well. Success in the Tokyo market doesn't really mean much. I
wonder if anyone has had the chance to do the entire environmental assessment
from cradle to grave? I truly have not seen one. This not only
includes energy consumption from cradle to grave including manufacturing
and disposal, but also the reality that batteries and electronics are
not exactly environmentally clean on the manufacturing and disposal ends of the
process. Another issue is repair and environmental costs involving
battery pack replacement. Without a strong battery pack, the Prius
concept doesn't work. I believe an average car today lasts substantially
longer than any existing battery technology. Battery replacement,
you know, is a little bit more than a couple of
EverReadies. Will old Priuses go to the junkyard early?
At what total environmental cost? I haven't seen these assessments; but I
also expect that it won't come out too pretty from an environmental
perspective. The
bottom line is that Ford as a manufacturer will go where they perceive and
find profitability. Profitability comes from consumer demand. You
may have noticed that Toyota is getting into the big car, big SUV, big truck
market more and more. Why? Where is your criticism of that
move? I would
suggest that instead of beating up on only Ford, that you beat up on Toyota for
moving to larger vehicles, and you beat up on GM for making Hummers, and you
beat up on Daimler Chrysler for making 1000 HP cars. And most of all, you
should beat up on the American consumer for his/her preference for these
behemoths. How about an educational campaign to bring about a substantial
consumer demand for a fuel efficient but well built car?
Genuine demand that will support pricing so that any company can actually
afford to make them without taxpayer subsidy? Ford is
not without blame, but it is not nearly as lopsided as you present. Yeah,
I know. We're in league with the oil companies surpressing the 60mpg
carburetor. |