• 7
2011 Kia Cadenza - click above for high-res image gallery

Several years ago, Kia decided to adopt total lifecycle analysis (LCA) for the carbon footprint of all future products. LCA takes into account the greenhouse gas emissions that accrue from the production and disposal of cars as well as the time the customers use the vehicles. The first new Kia product to get a carbon footprint label from the Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute (KEITI) is the Cadenza mid-size sedan, which just launched in its home market.

According to the LSA, production the raw materials for the Cadenza causes the emission of 3.48 tons of carbon dioxide with another 0.531 tons coming during actual vehicle production with 0.012 tons during recycling. The bulk of the total 29.5 tons is emitted during driving, with 25.5 tons being produced during 80,000 miles of driving.

The Cadenza gets more efficient engines than the outgoing Optima along with reduced weight, lower rolling resistance tires and better aerodynamics. We'll get the Cadenza in North America for 2011.


[Source: Kia]


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
  • 7 Comments
      • 5 Years Ago
      What is the purpose of LCA? If you have a popular car won't that model emit more total CO2 than a less popular model with the same LCA?
        • 5 Years Ago
        Say What?

        Popularity shouldn't really affect LCA. It is energy/emissions taken to produce raw material (ie Steel) and energy to shape it into a car (stamp steel) PER CAR.

        LCA is great thing to have, especially if it can help shut up the idiots that claim manufacturing a car takes more energy/emissions than driving it.
        • 5 Years Ago
        The purpose of the LCA is probably to try and limit the pollution levels of cars based on the number produced. It can help Kia improve process and operational efficiency of the cars it makes and fine tune processes of specific cars according to how many are made.

        Granted, all cars made should be held to an equal standard...the least polluting and least waste. But in the world we live in, that's unfortunately not the way greed allows us to work.
        • 5 Years Ago
        I am thinking about total emissions for a particuler model. Doesn't it make more sense to talk about the total output a particular model makes? If this Kia only sells 10k cars per year, and say a Camry has the same LCA but sells 400K per year, which model is worse for the enviroment?
        • 5 Years Ago
        That makes no sense at all.

        It sounds like some kind of nitwit scheme to claim the Prius is worse for the environment than a Lamborghini Reventon, because they sell so few Reventons.

        It makes a hell of lot more sense to be concerned about emissions per car when you are making a buying decision. If YOU buy a Prius , you will emit a lot less than if you buy a Reventon, and that is what counts.
      • 5 Years Ago
      Well...at least the LCA pretty much puts to rest the stupidity of some idiots who think a Hummer produces less CO2 and pollution than a Prius...thanks CNW and all your dumbass sheep followers!

      • 5 Years Ago
      Yup, it's great to have more confirmation that 75%-90% of the pollution from a vehicle occurs during its OPERATION, not its PRODUCTION, as all other reputable studies show. This Kia study puts it at 86%, but 80,000 miles seems low.

      It saddens me that some people are so clueless with basic physical principles that they truly ardently "know" that producing 500 pounds of batteries and shipping them 18,000 miles, somehow produces MORE pollution than operating a 3,000 pound vehicle for 150,000 miles.

      Travelling 150,000 miles at 40mpg requires about 22,500 pounds of gasoline (the production and distribution of which is itself very polluting) and produces 71,500 pounds of CO2. But somehow many car fans think those 500 pounds of batteries are the devil incarnate, complete with an old picture of the nickel mine at Sudbury looking like nuclear winter and vague muttering about toxic mining.

      Buying a more fuel-efficient car (and allowing your old one to replace a gas guzzler) does make a difference.