• Jun 7, 2009


In the grand scheme of things, the facilities and products of Lamborghini don't really amount to a hill of beans. After all, the company only has one main factory that produces a few thousand cars a year. While those cars are high-powered and consume a lot of fuel per mile driven, Lamborghini owners tend to drive those cars far fewer miles than the mainstream autos the rest of us hop into on a daily basis. As such, the Lambos' total emissions don't add up to much.

Nonetheless, Lamborghini is still somewhat sensitive to both social and regulatory concerns and has an ambitious plan to reduce CO2 emissions. The automaker is in the process of installing a 17,000 square meter solar array to its factory roof that, when completed later this year, will generate 1,582 MWh of electricity annually. In addition to that, changes are being made inside the plant to improve insulation, lighting, and climate control as part of a broader effort to lower factory-related CO2 emissions 30 percent by 2010.

As for the products coming out of the factory, Lamborghini is pursuing several paths towards a goal of 35-percent CO2 reduction by 2015. In addition to expanding the use of technology like the direct injection that debuted on the Gallardo LP560-4 last year, the engineers are working on improved combustion, weight reduction, auto start/stop systems, hybrid drive and biofuel use.




[Source: Lamborghini]

07/06/2009

LAMBORGHINI ANNOUNCES NEW, AMBITIOUS PROGRAMS FOR REDUCING CO2
• 35 million Euros investments

• The construction of a large photovoltaic plant, combined with an energy-saving project, will achieve a 30 reduction in CO2 emissions by 2015

Automobili Lamborghini announces its intention to complete its program of environmental sustainability in record time by presenting new plans which will enable the company:

• to achieve a 30 reduction, by the year 2015, in the CO2 emissions produced by its vehicles

The plans for reducing emissions will thus involve two areas: modifications to the Lamborghini factory in Sant'Agata Bolognese, and development in vehicle design.

To redefine its industrial processes in accordance with its policy of environmental sustainability, Lamborghini has just begun a project to complete installation of a large photovoltaic system by the end of 2009.

The roof-top plant will produce 1,582 Megawatt hour (MWh) of "green" energy per year, which translates into a 20 energy usage reduction by 2010.

These projects represent the next step in a program that began last year with the opening of the new Lamborghini
Logistics Center. The Center has already contributed to diminishing the impact caused by heavy truck traffic on the roads between Anzola and Sant'Agata Bolognese. It is calculated that this facility has achieved a reduction of emissions by over 75 kg per annum, and nitrogen oxide by over 750 kg (Sources: Standard Euro 3).

In April 2009 Lamborghini obtained the UNI EN ISO 14001 certificate, meeting the international environmental standards. It is also the first firm in the Italian automotive sector to be close to registering for the EMAS environment certificate, having successfully completed the program: EMAS regulations are set by the European Union to support organisations in their effort to evaluate and improve their own environmental efficiency.

These recent achievements support Lamborghini's commitment to protecting the environment in which it operates, and its desire to make all stakeholders aware of its actions in a transparent manner.

With regard to Lamborghini vehicles, the CO2 reduction plan aims for an additional 35 reduction in CO2 emissions.

At this point, Research & Development activities will continue in the following directions:

- decreasing vehicle mass
- improving combustion
- reducing friction
- Start-and-Stop systems
- hybrid drive train solutions
- biofuels

Lamborghini's commitment and its sense of social responsibility regarding the environment is evidenced by the numbers and by the sheer size of the investments that are planned. 35 million Euros will be appropriated over the next five years for this purpose.

Stephan Winkelmann, the President and CEO of Lamborghini, has said, "Despite the difficult situation in today's global economy, Lamborghini is committed to its policy of environmental management, since we are well aware of the great opportunities that derive from it. We have an objective to reduce CO2 emissions to the greatest possible degree. We have also set compulsory annual goals that are part of an integrated approach both considering the automobile as an element which is more considerate of the environment, in terms of emissions and the use of resources, to the accomplishment of a series of corresponding measures such as modifications to our factory. This is an important action for Lamborghini and a central opportunity for our long term corporate and product development."

European Parliamentarian Guido Sacconi, President of the European Commission on Climate Change, recently paid a visit to Lamborghini headquarters in Sant'Agata. At that time, he said that, "The commitment shown by Lamborghini with its efforts to reduce environmental impact and develop vehicles with less polluting technologies confirm the company's goal of following the right path toward complying with the directives of the European Union. To safeguard the DNA, history and technology of niche car manufacturers on a European level, a series of exceptions have been passed for manufactures of 'specialty' vehicles (with fewer than 10,000 new cars made per year) who run their own production facilities and design centres, even though they are part of a group of associated producers. This is the exact situation in which Lamborghini finds itself. We have been particularly satisfied with the actions it has taken thus far, because they illustrate this company's desire to embrace a new industrial vision which combines competitiveness and performance with social responsibility."


Partner companies:

Located in Casalecchio di Reno, Sinergia Sistemi S.p.A. is a leader on the Italian market of services that help companies save energy. The company specializes in energy certification of buildings and the construction of large systems that take advantage of renewable energy sources. Sinergia Sistemi also acts as an E.S.Co. (Energy Service Company) that finances the plant systems and energy requalification projects it offers to its customers, in a relationship of total Energy Management.

The finalized project was built from a design based on a preliminary study carried out by the CENER National Center for Renewable Forms of Energy of Spain. This study involved a broad evaluation of the feasibility and size of the project.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 28 Comments
      • 5 Years Ago
      I am tired of companies doing this! This is for THEIR benefit, this has nothing to do with the environment. Companies exist to do ONE thing, make money. If adding panels to a roof to get free electricity does that, guess what?! They do it! Not to mention I bet some stupid tax payer is paying for them through some dumb government program!

      Let me also explain how stupid this is. As an example: Obama gave a speech the other day in front of a new 250 million dollar Air Force solar array. He claims it saves the Air Force one million a year. He couldn't say enough good things about this!

      Ok liberals, lets do some math!

      So we spend 250 million to save one million a year, in how many years will we have the system paid off? 250 years! Sweet! This is something some stupid politican like Obama would like.

      Why does going green ALWAYS have to cost more - usually twice or 3 times more?

      Driving a car that costs more initially saves oil sure, but you just paid for it up front!

      Another example: CFL bulbs. They cost 7 bucks each - just bought a bug light one, yes I am an idiot. A normal one costs no where near that. Instead of paying for electricity you are paying for the bulb. Its a wash!

      Plus now if you break the bulb the EPA says clear the area for 15 minutes because of mercury!!!

      Going green always costs more, is more complicated, and ultimately less friendly in the long run.

      Its nice lambo did this, but don't kiss their ass. There is a reason for everything and it had NOTHING to do with CO2.

      p.s. - Autoblog, how many of my email addresses are you going to delete because I mention Obama in my comment? I can keep creating email accounts all day, don't bother me. I will never stop preaching what a mistake electing him was!
      • 5 Years Ago
      Actually, I think Lamborghini has done enough to save the environment already. They had built the largest collection of striking & beautiful paper weights that do nothing for the owners except sitting in the garage with other look-fast-but-never-driven models. While Toyota Prius encourages people to drive a lot to make sense of their purchase, Lamborghini builds hyper cars that give satisfaction even if the batteries are dead, all sorts of oil are leaking, and the A/C that never works.
      • 5 Years Ago
      @Nick Is that all you pathetic liberals can come up with? bla bla bla...redneck....bla bla....fox news..bla bla and then you come with low personal attacks. on a guy and it's folks. that should be funny. Unlike small liberals like you who reproduce the crap that big liberals are saying. I form my own opinion by processing the information I hear or read. And omg, ur stereotyping people, I thought that we, the cons are the "evil monsters" stereotyping people without knowing them. Don't get me wrong, your small insults didn't hurt me at all, just amused me, and reminded me how fake, blind and foolish liberals are.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Kudos for Lambo (should I say Audi?) for trying to make some changes.

      I'm sure Al Gore would buy a Lambo in '15.
        • 5 Years Ago
        @AngeloD and Motor_Yazuka

        Interesting comments from the amateur climate change deniers, interesting also that you chose to believe reports made by lobbyists and lawyers than the world's highest scientific centers. You're the kind of people who said smoking was good for the health too eh?

        Al Gore consumes a lot of energy privately, which is a bad example, but he has done more to reduce foreign oil consumption, improve air quality and fight climate change.

        Good lord, you guys haven't even glanced over scientific reports, all that matters is the garbage you see on TV.
        • 5 Years Ago
        I didn't except my lame joke to make any discussion ... but this is going overboard lol
        • 5 Years Ago
        @Motor, im all for nuclear and such advancements. its just that the paranoia around nuclear fuel and all the What If questions that come with it that will cause it to never happen for a really long time. the hoops they would have to jump through to get the stuff alone would be immense. I dont even know if its possible for a company without military contracts to get the fuel.

        and they are efficient cost and fuel wise when compared to using many smaller ships to transport the same amount of goods. would you rather take 2 cars on your long trip that get 25 mpg or the suv that gets 20, which produces less co2... get my point.

        Heck point the finger at china's coal mine fires that are producing more co2 then all the cars. which means its worse then the ships and its not getting us anything in return.
        • 5 Years Ago
        @ccdoggy eficient to make money, but not clean air

        Just make the gaint cargo ships nuclear first, and then turn your face to us and say that cars are big polluters, u darn hippies
        • 5 Years Ago
        Motor, according to WSJ the biggest global warming denying newspaper in USA, autos by themselves contribute about 35+ % of CO2.

        Look i support strict environmental laws, Clinton and Gore were very much pro environment, so companies knew that the nation was willing to elect environmentalists into the office. Bush was Prez for 8 years, which was more than enough time to prepare for inevitable. They had all the time in the world and they got what they wanted, D3 were pushing for Ethanol, and they got it.

        If you ever paid attention to what McCain said he also was close to Obama with strict regulations. Everyone knew this would come, so any company that is still not ready simply has a moron for a CEO.


        • 5 Years Ago
        @Nick

        Sigh…Nick, spare us your religious rant. Not everyone is a member of your green-religion Church any more than they are all a Muslim or a Christian.

        The best scientific centers in the world would have to include M.I.T. wouldn't you agree? There, one of the world's preeminent climate scientists, Richard Lindzen, the Alfred Sloan Professor of Meteorology, has weighed in repeatedly against your religious mythology of anthropogenic global warming.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-440869/Global-warming-bogus-religion-age.html

        There are many other eminent scientists like him who doubt anthropogenic global warming, indeed, who doubt that we are even in a warming period. Global mean temperature has fallen for the past 10 years.

        You're the denier here Nick. You're the one shrilly shouting down any skeptic, just like the rabid, religious fundamentalist you are.

        Oh, and are you denying that Al Gore owns such a boat?

        http://www.greendaily.com/2008/09/16/al-gore-draws-flack-for-his-100ft-houseboat/
        • 5 Years Ago
        @Motor

        "Screw Al Gore and all this idiots who don't know or do not want to know that all the cars on the planet, pollute less fuel then 16 big transport cargo ships. And how many ships are in the world? You do the math, so most of this idiotic twips who are blaming cars for "global warming", are just a bunch of ignorant hypocrites."

        Do the math? Sure, let's do the math, you'll probably learn something:

        Shipping is responsible for 18-30% of all the world's nitrogen oxide (NOx) pollution and 9% of the global sulphur oxide (SOx) pollution.
        Shipping is responsible for 3.5% to 4% of all climate change emissions

        There's 90,000 cargo ships. 16 cargo ships would emit 0.0007111% of all greenhouse gases.

        You truly are a piece of human excrement, you are so dumb you don't even realize it. I bet you're in a small town somewhere in the middle of redneck county. I feel sorry for you, your parents couldn't afford a proper education for you, you're now so dumb and brainwashed by Faux News that you can't even think for yourself. For the sake of progress, please shut up and let others do the thinking you amateur.
        • 5 Years Ago
        Motor, you do relaize that those transport ships are some of the most efficient motors in the world. think about how much they transport compared to the fuel usage. Without such ships we would have to use many more smaller less efficient ships and thus use more fuel, so how does that make sense. Or we could just stop trading with other countries and save all that fuel. Stupid argument unless you back it up with something.

        As far as Gore making money on his presentations, well thats what happens when people have a job and do it well. So are you saying that someone that gives speeches to large groups of people on the effect and possible prevention of AIDS should not be paid, because well its AIDS. What if they have some investment in a drug company that makes a drug that helps suppress AIDS transmissions, is this wrong? people know this ahead of time but it is still a very influential topic worth listening to and learning about what we can do about it.

        Also yea he has a huge and awesome boat, how many times a year does he use it? maybe he just bought it so that no one else could drive the heck out of it and pollute more. (joking...)

        Sometimes i just get pissed that people only look at things related to Gore/global warming as a one sided absolute issue. like the ships which are extremely efficient for what they are doing.

        If you want something to attack go after the US policy of letting companies pay for polluting the air/water/ground in stead of implementing cleaner practices. the fine for not being clean is cheaper then implementing the fix, so yea industry is not going to clean up. it should be way more expencive to not implement the new standards of clean air and water.
        • 5 Years Ago
        @Nick Is that all you pathetic liberals can come up with? bla bla bla...redneck....bla bla....fox news..bla bla and then you come with low personal attacks. on a guy and it's folks. that should be funny. Unlike small liberals like you who reproduce the crap that big liberals are saying. I form my own opinion by processing the information I hear or read. And omg, ur stereotyping people, I thought that we, the cons are the "evil monsters" stereotyping people without knowing them. Don't get me wrong, your small insults didn't hurt me at all, just amused me, and reminded me how fake, blind and foolish liberals are.
        • 5 Years Ago
        @ccdoggy:

        ""If you want something to attack go after the US policy of letting companies pay for polluting the air/water/ground in stead of implementing cleaner practices. the fine for not being clean is cheaper then implementing the fix, so yea industry is not going to clean up. it should be way more expencive to not implement the new standards of clean air and water.""


        God, what crap. The US has the cleanest industrial sector of any nation with comparable economic output.

        You remind me of the Liberals who can never seem to give credit for improved race relations in the US. Even with the election of Obama, the most they'll concede is: "well, at least it keeps the issue of America's deep seated racisim at the forefront" LOL. To them, like you apparently, it's still 1966, with Bull Conner spraying the firehose at Dr. King, and US Steel killing Lake Erie.

        Get a clue amigo.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Still, I wonder what made you react like that, maybe your Al Gore's secret boyfriend.
      • 5 Years Ago
      AngeloD

      "The best scientific centers in the world would have to include M.I.T. wouldn't you agree? There, one of the world's preeminent climate scientists, Richard Lindzen, the Alfred Sloan Professor of Meteorology, has weighed in repeatedly against your religious mythology of anthropogenic global warming."

      -> Oh yeah, 2 prominent guys at MIT don't agree with the hundreds of other top-notch scientists, so that must mean that Climate Change isn't real eh? Deniers are a tiny minority (approx 3%). You argument is about as smart as what follows (hint: it's quite dumb).

      "Global mean temperature has fallen for the past 10 years."

      ->Not sure which shouting head said that, my bet is on O'Reilly, and you little retard had to believe it? The global mean temperature has risen 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.33 ± 0.32 °F) during the last century.


      Oh, and are you denying that Al Gore owns such a boat?"

      No.

      Your mega-church pastor, your favorite TV commentator might say otherwise, but you really do belong to the dumbest people of this country, that makes you easy to manipulate with conspiracy theories. So the world is flat? The end of the year in 2012? May god (if he exists!) save you from your profound retardation.
      • 5 Years Ago
      @AngeloD,
      true, we may be cleaner then anyone else but what i am trying to say is that instead of implementing so much of the reform in the public (personal solar stuff, E85 crap) aim more towards industry then anything. If they must. I am not a fan of pointless Green stuff (E85, solar {till its more efficient for home usage}, recycling {lookinto energy and resources for it before complaining i listed it}) and more towards large scale usage and use. Maybe push for more efficient factories and development, better use of what we do use.

      there will always be a push to be better, more efficient, less polluting because well thats the way of the world.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Bakka: you are the kind of person that is impossible to please and your (noble) goals become unattainable due to your own ignorance.


      Lamborghini could put up panels made of recycled cardboard that generates electricity, cleans the atmosphere, and emits nothing but puppies and smiles, and you would STILL not be pleased.

      You are like the kid at Christmas that is pissed off because he didn't get that one toy that was not even out yet. They (Lambo) does something good and you piss on them for it.

      If you are going to be so negative and so fanatical over something like this that obviously wasn't cheap for Lamborghini, you might want to put a plastic bag over your head for about 5 minutes - after all what do you think you are exhaling as you read this?
        • 5 Years Ago
        WRONG! I just asked a question. I am pleased as it is.
      • 5 Years Ago
      I hope the Lambo corporation was able to steal some good $$$ from some green legislation for the BS trouble of installing these useless panels.
        • 5 Years Ago
        @Justin

        "I hope the Lambo corporation was able to steal some good $$$ from some green legislation for the BS trouble of installing these useless panels."

        LOL! Yeah they're useless, they generate electricity, reduce power bills, improve the image of the company, improve air quality, do not send money away to hostile regimes and the list goes on.

        Now let me tell you, Justin, what is useless: It's the knee-jerk nevergreens like you, someone told them that doing something for the environment would make them look uncool, so they find nothing else to do but spit venom on it. That's it for now, you can go back to your pig farm and F* your obese wife, retarded dicklicker.
      Quantumphysics
      • 5 Years Ago
      As far as I'm concerned, every single building that faces the sun for long periods of the year should have solar cells on them... or windows with photovoltaic tints.
        • 5 Years Ago
        @Quantumphysics
        indeed. I feel every windy city should be taking advantage of the wind as well. (CHICAGO AND SAN FRAN!!!)
      • 5 Years Ago


      Yep, all is good, the air here in Houston couldn't be better, our water more abundant and cleaner, our natural landscape and wildlife couldn't be thriving more. There's really no reason for action, really.
        • 5 Years Ago
        I'd add to that our industry, truly the standard of the world.

        Wait, it's in shambles, manufacturing went to China years ago, efficiently.
      • 5 Years Ago
      First: Lamborghini would be smarter if they used the solar panels on their roof to charge a Lamborghini electric concept. Gasoline is yesterday's fuel. Although if they did flex fuel lambos I would already be happy, ethanol, from a wide variety of plant sources, would be fine.

      Second: Nobody denies climate change. It's called seasons. And we have more than global warming, since most of it is from a solar source it's actual solarsystem warming! Holy crap, better turn down that dangerous star up there, hold on, where's the knob? Yes, there's nothing we can do.

      Thirdly, CO2 is not pollution, plants breathe it. Instead of taxing for CO2 emittance just give incentives for plant growth. Pay for people with lot's of land to plant green stuff, you know, life on it. Because a good volcano will spew more than mankind in decades, our contribution is not the sole cause of the problem, not even a relevant factor. Our harmfull impact on the planet is the problem, and that comes from destruction, not emissions. But I'm sure that those that want us to pay carbon taxes to a global bank don't care about these details, for them this has always been about control, not environment.

      Fourthly: Al Gore is a very well paid elitist shill, messing with your minds, bewitching you with false environmentalism. He is a phoney and a liar, and an insult to the real environmentalists out there, those that know that the problem is particulate pollution, direct biosphere destruction, out of control garbage emissions due to excessive production, shabby quality of products due to planned obsolescence (a capitalist created bane on society and technology) and not enough recycling. This is not about individual carbon emissions, it's about out of control corporations run by out of control elitists. They are the elephant in the room, not some poor dude barbequeing his lunch.
    • Load More Comments