Is F1 about to experience a climate change debate related existential crisis?

[Fulcrum]

Given the current circumstances, I think there is a better than even-money chance of at least a small protest in Melbourne by the radical elements advocating for change (at any cost).

I wouldn't expect anything widespread though. Australian's love their SUVs.

[3jawchuck]

... but Liberty is a media company so they get it...

Do they though? What exactly have Liberty done to improve the brand, or the spectacle, or the racing, or the public perception of the sport..? A whole lot of toothless window dressing is all I see. The worst part, there has never been more restricted access in an era when access is everything.

Oh I'm not defending Liberty generally, but they have set out this net zero carbon footprint policy, with local hubs, sea transport, less plastic and all that, non-fossil fuel and more efficient engines. And that's obviously to try and protect their brand as it all becomes more and more of an issue

Wasn't it the FIA that set out on the carbon neutral route, not Liberty?

[AJI]

Given the current circumstances, I think there is a better than even-money chance of at least a small protest in Melbourne by the radical elements advocating for change (at any cost).

I wouldn't expect anything widespread though. Australian's love their SUVs.

Oh, there'll be protests. There have been protests in Albert Park about the GP before it even shifted from Adelaide 30 years ago...

[Fulcrum]

Given the current circumstances, I think there is a better than even-money chance of at least a small protest in Melbourne by the radical elements advocating for change (at any cost).

I wouldn't expect anything widespread though. Australian's love their SUVs.

Oh, there'll be protests. There have been protests in Albert Park about the GP before it even shifted from Adelaide 30 years ago...

Based on some of your recent posts you may be in attendance.

[AJI]

Given the current circumstances, I think there is a better than even-money chance of at least a small protest in Melbourne by the radical elements advocating for change (at any cost).

I wouldn't expect anything widespread though. Australian's love their SUVs.

Oh, there'll be protests. There have been protests in Albert Park about the GP before it even shifted from Adelaide 30 years ago...

Based on some of your recent posts you may be in attendance.

At the race, possibly, but that track is truly horrible for racing and spectators. Top 5 for deletion from the season.
Based on your posts I have no idea where you stand. "...change (at any cost)" and then a jibe about Australians and SUV's...

[izzy]

Wasn't it the FIA that set out on the carbon neutral route, not Liberty?

They're in it together but it's mainly Liberty doing it. Chase is the one being quoted and he's the one Lewis has been harassing too

[Andres125sx]

An interesting article. "Two-stroke engines & eco-fuel: F1 aims to be greener than Formula E"

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/news ... -formula-e

Only the tire comparison (1 set of tires for each GP and car in FE vs 13 set of tires for F1) will make it impossible. Manufacture and transport of 1040 F1 tires (plus spares) all around the world vs 80 FE tires will make it impossible. Manufactuing 960 tires and its transport all around the world for 22 venues will pollute so much F1 will never have a chance to be greener than FE, and that´s before even considering the motor-engine comparison

[Andres125sx]

Anycase, focusing on F1 or FE impact today is like being diagnosed with Cancer, and ignore it while you first solve your little finger scratch

Setting an example is important, but we should never loose perspective, the problem are millions tons emissions, if we focus on reducing some hundreds or thousands tons from an specific source wich can´t be scaled up, we simply are missing the point

Prioritizing is crucial at any analysis, and F1 or any other motorsport is so far from what we should consider our priorities I think not even Greta will care about F1 ever, or she shouldn´t at least.


For example, heating systems are the biggest polluting source by far, it could have been solved decades ago with no big investment or cost for anyone, but no country has solve it yet. Why?. Because energy companies are too powerful and no politician will legislate against them. It would be as simple as banning houses wich are not passive (passivehaus standard or any other) wich supposes a 5-10% increase in cost wich is paid off is just 5-7 years and we would basically erradicate the biggest polluting factor in the world. But houses wich bascially don´t need any energy are not interesting for energy companies, so politicians don´t legislate in the direction they should. Meanwhile citicens who have no money for a new car are criminalized

Politicians are experts manipulating, they don´t do their job, they harm millions people, but they manage to face citizens against each other because while we´re fighting ourselves we will never fight them.

[Andres125sx]

Reading my post I want to clarify two things...

It would be as simple as banning houses wich are not passive (passivehaus standard or any other)

Banning houses I meant banning any new buiding wich does not comply with those standards so any new building is ecofriendly. Obviously that will not solve the problem magically, it will take decades while the percentage of old and polluting buildings is reduced, but there´s no magic solution wich solves the problem instantly, and this solution could have been implemented decades ago. Then the problem today would be minor, but even if they didn´t do it decades ago, what´s the reason they didn´t do it some years ago, or this year, or heck why they won´t do it for next year either?

The technology is far from new or expensive, actually it´s an investment wich is extremelly profitable even if we only analyse it from and economical point of view. The savings in heating will pay-off in a tenth of building life, then all the rest will be savings for the owner. Environementally it´s profitable from day one to last. And there are even more benefits like air quality into the house wich is much much better on passive buildings as they´re hermetic and air is filtered

Politicians are experts manipulating

About this, probably it´s not that all politicians are experts manipulating, but some (a lot) of them are manipulated theirselves by powerful companies/statements who have the power, motivation and opportunity to do it from their privileged position. We humans are easy to manipulate, both citizens and politicians, we don´t need to be a moron to be manipulated, only hidding those facts wich don´t support your point of view you can easily manipulate anyone, or be manipulated. The only way to prevent this is if you have the interest, knownledge and time to check all facts, and that´s far from usual on both citizens or politicians

[nzjrs]

Argh, please not another CC thread.

[strad]

You guys are just trying to wind me up aren't you?

[Brake Horse Power]

Is F1 about to experience a climate change debate related existential crisis?
Your honest opions on the subject are valued.

Personally, I think yes!

Ps Maybe the mods can move some of the debate from '2020 Australian GP might be threatened' to here?

I don't know the exact plans for F1, but if there is a model which is kind of sustainable they should be OK. It is not realistic to think any time soon the total F1 operation is carbon neutral. However big steps can be made if only a few percent of the total budget is being invested in sustainable energy sources for compensation. If the future plans are not sufficient obviously they will have a serious problem, no matter how large the global impact is. You know that the pinnacle of motorsports will be getting a lot of attention on this subject, it will have an impact sooner or later. I hope F1 will lead by example..

Ps. Regarding countries which impact on global CO2 are 'negligible'.. all these countries combined account for 40% of global emissions. I tought it was mire than USA and China combined. So I agree with AJI this is not really a good argument.

[Big Tea]

Maybe a rule adjustment to allow recovery from other sauces such as a sterling engine filling the battery off from what would otherwise be 'waste' heat they need to get rid of anyway?
This would be a good development path for things such as ships and factories which are seen as polluters. Just to show 'something is being done' and could easily become a very important green technology