The Union of Concerned Scientists has issued a warning to General Motors, saying its image as a green and sustainable company is at risk due to its stance on the new Trump-era emissions regulations.
Late last year, GM, Toyota and a number of other major automakers sided with the Trump Administration in its fight against California over emissions regulations. As the White House prepared to loosen Obama-era fuel economy regulations, California sought to set its own, separate set of emissions laws. California was previously granted a waiver under the Clean Air Act that would allow it to set its own emissions regulations, but the White House sought to revoke the waiver. This caused a rift in the automotive industry as some automakers, including Ford, sided with California, while GM and Toyota put themselves in the Trump Administration’s camp.
Now the UCS is attempting to warn GM of the negative impact its stance on the emissions row could have on its image as a green company. The science advocacy group commissioned Matt George Associates to conduct a study on the matter, which found that GM’s image as a “green and sustainable” company falls by 53% after they learn of its recent actions.
“The number of GM owners who said that they might consider purchasing from another brand or would definitely choose another manufacturer rose from 30% at the beginning of the poll to 67% after learning more about GM’s corporate behavior — more than doubling the number who would consider another brand,” the UCS’ study found.
The study also took into account other recent controversial GM actions, such as its decision to close Lordstown Assembly and a number of its other U.S. plants.
The UCS had previously sided with California in the fight over the Clean Air Act waiver, attempting to stop the White House from revoking the state’s ability to set its own emissions regulations. GM, Toyota and several other automakers have said previously that they desire one set of emissions laws for the United States, as trying to adhere to different emissions regulations depending on the state could be costly and complicated. A dozen other states have sided with California over the Clean Air Act waiver issue and adopt the state’s stricter set of regulations.
In a statement sent to The Detroit Free Press, GM said it is still pushing to reduce emissions with its “vision zero” initiative, in which it’s working toward a future with zero vehicle emissions.
“Climate change is a global concern and the best way to remove automobile emissions from the environmental equation is an all-electric, zero emissions future on a national and global level,” the automaker said. “We have demonstrated our commitment to EVs. For the U.S., we continue to believe an electric vehicle program across all 50 states is what’s needed to help accelerate our transition to EVs, and for us to gain all the environmental and societal benefits. It would also position the U.S. as a leader in electrification, create economic growth, and make EVs more affordable for more customers, more quickly.”
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM green initiatives news and ongoing General Motors news coverage.
Source: The Detroit Free Press
Comments
This seems like the least of their worries, as far as reputation is concerned.
Most people know next to nothing about cars, let alone which companies supported some regulation or not.
What can you buy for about $40K, you can get a Chevrolet Bolt Premier or you can get a Chevrolet Blazer RS AWD; even with new battery technology, the price for new upcoming electric vehicles will far exceed their gasoline powered counterpart which is apparent with Cadillac’s upcoming Celestiq EV which will command a price of over $200K which is twice the price of a 2020 BMW 740I which base price of $86,450 is cheap compared to the Celestiq which makes you wonder how many of the Cadillac vehicles will anyone buy.
Yeah, the Celestiq better be the most amazing thing ever. Maybe it will be ridiculously fast or something.
There is nothing to indicate Celestiq is planned as a mere 7 series competitor. Eyewitness descriptions tell us that much; indeed many used the words “enormous” and “huge”. Celestiq is not a successor to CT6.
Also, GM is apparently close to ICE/EV cost parity so I imagine the high price has more to do with its luxury offerings and super exclusivity than recouping the cost of its EV drivetrain. EVs are mechanically far more simplistic requiring less parts and labor to assemble. It seems to me it won’t be long and EVs will be the cheaper alternative to build and sell.
What is it today that everyone is trying to turn science into a religion?
Science this and science that.
Don’t get me wrong I value research but I also know for every discovery there are 99% of failure first.
Folks science get more wrong than right and over time they eliminate things with failure till they find something that works.
They are like doctors as in medical science there are few absolutes and many variations. This is why they give grand pa some heart Medication and then adjust it as we all react differently.
So I take this with a grain of salt. It us more just activist trying to be heard.
I can understand the concern from GM, Toyota, etc. In theory, every state could establish their own rules with all being a little different. One would think they would build according to the most aggressive ruleset but you would have to have a large team of lawyers and engineers just dedicated to keep track of what each state is doing. What do you do when a state like Wyoming that has less than 600,000 people statewide has the greatest restrictions in the country? Stop selling cars there because the engineering and production costs could never be recovered there?
Something called the Commerce Clause in the Constitution gives Congress the sole power to regulate interstate commerce. Regulations like these fall precisely under this umbrella (i.e., Clean Air Act). The only reason California has anything to say about it is because they are the only state that can apply for an exemption under the Clean Air Act.
Respectfully…don’t “Scientists” drive Volvo’s or Prius’s anyways?
Yes because the scientists know more about their cars than the builders. As a scientist myself I drive a Fusion Hybrid and I get over 40 MPG a day. I believe in advanced engineering but I don’t believe in foreign brands. I support Ford because they will follow California’s lead over the POTUS, and will prove their commitment with several new hybrids, plug-ins and electrics beginning this year.
Sucking-up to the orange baboon will certainly not help in the long run. Why would GM associate itself with a conman and criminal who will enrich himself at all costs.