The opposite is true - the manufacturing process is responsible for an average of 7-10 tonnes of CO2, while the same vehicle over its lifetime will emit more than 50 tonnes from the exhaust.
Moreover manufacturers have been reducing their carbon footprint lately. As an example VW reports that 70% of the energy the use in plants is provided by renewable sources.
That being said while emissions rules have been getting more stringent over the years, they're increasingly being followed through introducing EVs, not improvements in engine efficiency.
> As an example VW reports that 70% of the energy the use in plants is provided by renewable sources.
This is a great start, but not where most of the carbon embodied in a new vehicle comes from. The energy used by the VW plants keeps the lights on, air conditioned, and powers tools for assembly. Most of the carbon embodied in a car comes from the energy it takes to mine raw materials and process them into useful metals.
This pales in comparison to the 20 tonnes of fuel a typical car is going to work itself through throughout its lifetime. And all this fuel has to be first extracted and refined.
This seems to be the crucial bit that is always missing from these discussions. I don't doubt that the CO2 emitted in the assembly of the car is less than in the driving. But I'm curious about all the other environmental impacts (of which CO2 is just one small bit). The destruction of wildlife habitat, the poisoning of ground water, etc, that's involved in the retrieval and processing of the raw materials, on up through the chain.
Moreover manufacturers have been reducing their carbon footprint lately. As an example VW reports that 70% of the energy the use in plants is provided by renewable sources.
That being said while emissions rules have been getting more stringent over the years, they're increasingly being followed through introducing EVs, not improvements in engine efficiency.