Certainly there are many solutions. That’s not in doubt. Companies often don’t like spending money if they don’t have to. Given they haven’t tried to address this for so long suggests as much.
It's a shame and defect of our legal system that complying with an accusation arguably constitutes agreement, because it creates the perverse incentive to delay or avoid potentially time-sensitive remediation, with the much broader implication that human caused climate change very much has a bill that responsible parties must foot.
In Ontario we have the apology act, which makes it possible to apologize for something without implying fault or guilt. I think that demonstrates how tricky and unfortunate it can be that there’s legal disincentives to do the right thing.
I don't think anyone believes that the company will do this out of the kindness of their hearts but rather are hoping that this attention spurs new regulations. The company basically admits that's what it would take in the article:
"Melvin Keebler, general manager of the Jack Daniel Distillery, said in a statement that the company 'complies with all local, state, and federal regulations regarding the design, construction, and permitting of our barrelhouses.'"