F1 announces plan to be Net Zero Carbon by 2030.

[Willmaz223]

https://corp.formula1.com/formula-1-...arbon-by-2030/.

Interesting development.

[S griffin]

It's interesting a few drivers are behind it, like Hamilton and Vettel. So it's probably a step in the right direction

[Mike Bell]

There’s a sentence in Motorsport that concerns me- that the sport is planning to offset the CO2 production it cannot eliminate.......

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/n...n-neutral-2030

Let’s hope offset isn’t taken as the easy way out.

[GT6]

Yep offset has been used by companies for ages. used by criminals fpr about the same time, the bank i worked for offset carbon against all sorts of enviromental project's one was later to have turned out to be a fake water wheel in eastern europe that had it's fake off sett sold to hundreds of stupid companies. The paper industries do well out of it, the forests of trees they have been using for years now generate as much in carbon off sett as the value of wood they produce. Absolutely no difference to them and no change in anything to do with carbon but fools and money are easily parted.

[coppice]

Well it is easy to be cynical, but you'd have to be in serious denial if you imagined that motor sport will not be coming under ever tighter scrutiny for its environmental impact . But I do fear some of its supporters come from the demographic that dismisses anything not to their liking as fake news, with the usual bluster , but I feel it is about time it was seen to act .

[Richard C]

I appreciate and applaud the effort. However, if it is just window dressing, I don't think they should bother.

I find the following info (pulled from the motorsports magazine link above) interesting. It is the distribution of the F1 carbon footprint

45% Logistics Road, sea and air transport of equipment
27.7% Business travel Transport of staff
19.3% Facilities & factories Offices and factories owned by teams & F1
7.3% Event operations Broadcasting, support racers, circuit energy use
0.7% Power unit emissions From all races and testing

So as everyone would expect the logistics side is the bulk. If you combine material and staff that is 73%. I just don't see that number coming down significantly in my lifetime. Particular the air freight part. And the cars themselves. Less than 1%.

Richard

[Mike Bell]

(Coppice)- Absolutely! I’m sure there are obvious places where savings can be made, such as the 300+ trucks used to take all the paraphernalia around Europe, and it needs to happen.

As GT6 says, though, the practice of offsetting can be abused or taken as an easy option. Good money to be earned though, for instance if you’re a company like Tesla and can sell some of your ‘carbon credits’ to other car manufacturers to offset penalties being imposed on them by legislators!

[Armco Bender]

F1 Electric...

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

F1 Electric...

No the car's don't need to be electric. The planes that fly the equipment all over the globe need to be electric! An alternative step is that we move all of the teams around a single circuit and have multiple races in one location. Or better yet, just do one race for the entire season!

I say this tongue in cheek.

Overall I think its a good thing. They should try and will achieve some results. As mentioned above, I would rather it be real than bogus offsets.

Richard

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by coppice

Well it is easy to be cynical, but you'd have to be in serious denial if you imagined that motor sport will not be coming under ever tighter scrutiny for its environmental impact . But I do fear some of its supporters come from the demographic that dismisses anything not to their liking as fake news, with the usual bluster , but I feel it is about time it was seen to act .

right on!

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

...Particular the air freight part...

and made all harder as the number of races is set to increase...i would assume that also means more back to back weekends perhaps then making ground and sea transport less time effective?

agreed this is also one area where im not sure how they will bring the number down.

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/n...n-neutral-2030

also from this article:

By 2025, the sport plans to have replaced single-use plastics with recyclable and compostable materials, and to re-use, recycle or compost all waste.
Fans will be incentivised to choose greener ways of travelling to circuits, and there will be additional measures to "prioritise fan wellbeing" at circuits, which include "enhancing biodiversity, improving air quality and offering healthier food options".

no doubt, a big source is also from us the fans.

so i was at the Indy 500 this year (a longer event with more people at it then an F1 weekend mind you). naturally had an amazing time and when i got back home i spent some time googling the event/catching up on news surrounding the event which i may have missed while i was there.

one story in particular really got to me though was the amount of trash, plastic and clean up required after the event. for sure i wasnt really that surprised by this but at the same time i was really shocked by it....maybe for the first time in my life really.

i suppose sensibilities are changing and i now happen to be more aware of my own footprint then in days past. it was an eye opener for me to think about how much of that garbage i might have been responsible for.

anyways, nice to see that FOM has taken the effect of and on fans into consideration. hopefully this leads to a better fan experience by creating a more sustainable environment for us to be in so that we may continue to visit these circuits for many more years to come.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by coppice

Well it is easy to be cynical, but you'd have to be in serious denial if you imagined that motor sport will not be coming under ever tighter scrutiny for its environmental impact . But I do fear some of its supporters come from the demographic that dismisses anything not to their liking as fake news, with the usual bluster , but I feel it is about time it was seen to act .

To be honest, I am pleasantly surprised this thread is not full of strong criticism from the fake news/get off my lawn crowd. I am waiting for the first time I see "Ok Boomer" here on the forum!

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Fans will be incentivised to choose greener ways of travelling to circuits

Like walk or swim?

I am all for this initiative, but it is easy to make fun of.

Richard

[MGDavid]

I for one wouldn't shed a tear if the whole F1 circus imploded and disappeared as I think it's virtually unjustifiable in present or forseeable form.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Like walk or swim?

Apparently it's either or as long as you wear British racing green while travelling.

[steve_r]

If 120,000 spectators attend at Silverstone, I presume that their carbon footprint for getting to and from the circuit will dwarf the carbon directly generated by the on-track action. Even more so when you take into account all the helicopters and the like that seem to buzz around non-stop.

I take my hat off to the powers that be anyway. It is only to be encouraged.

Do all the unused F1 race tyres still get scrapped at the end of every weekend, or has that practice now stopped?

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Do all the unused F1 race tyres still get scrapped at the end of every weekend, or has that practice now stopped?

Sure I read somewhere this week that they are shredded, then sent to a facility to be burned at high temps and produce fuel for cement factories.....

[steve_r]

Expensive cement that. Not exactly "green" either!

[Mike Bell]

‘Tyre Derived Fuel’ is common, apparently.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tire-derived_fuel

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

‘Tyre Derived Fuel’ is common, apparently.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tire-derived_fuel

So from that article and given the quantities of tyres used by F1 it would seem that CO2 produced from the exhaust gases is a negligible problem.

"While environmental controversy surrounding use of this fuel (used tyres) is wide and varied, the greatest supported evidence of toxicity comes from the presence of dioxins (carcinogens) and furans (harmful at 50ppt parts per trillion) in the flue gases. Zinc has also been found to dissolve into storm water, from shredded rubber, at acutely toxic levels for aquatic life and plants"

So environmental vandalism is fine as long as it isn't CO2.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

right on!
and made all harder as the number of races is set to increase...i would assume that also means more back to back weekends perhaps then making ground and sea transport less time effective?

Is this the height of cynicism, increasing their carbon footprint while trying to convince everyone that they are good fellows and neutralising it. Is this the present footprint or the one they are going to increase through more scheduled races? If they reduced the number of races they would surely meet the target earlier but that ain't gonna happen. I doubt they can actually meet their target but if releasing this program makes them feel better then so be it. This is simply a preemptive move to ward off criticism that they may be subject to during the current rise on awareness concerning climate change which they hope not to become embroiled in, fat hope of that happening though I would think. Lewis Hamilton sure does have some influence that's for sure.

[helgi]

We should search for more ecological power - that's the fact.
All the marketing departments and politicians just use obvious masses anxiety to make some profit out of hype - unfortunately that's the fact too if you check some real data.
It's more important to make reliable and long serving ICE and stop buying new cars every 2-3 years. CO emissions are not as harmful as some plastic recyclable stuff in form of batteries. You need lots of energy to produce a battery and even more energy to try recycling even a part of it. They still do not know what to do with smartphone cells. They have only projects or small factories to cope with 1-2% of batteries. What to do with millions of tons of wasted accumulators from an electrofleet in 2030's? It's not so difficult to plant new forests to help the Nature with CO "recycling", to consume less natural resources, to use long life-cycle vehicles. Instead they are trying to invent some plastic (generally) stuff which Nature can not cope with at all, produce toxic energy storage devices and so on and on. Just to make some profit.
And yes, F1 should better think of clever logistics and use less planes. Azerbaijan-Canada-France or Italy-Singapore-Russia-Japan combinations are superbly ridiculous from real eco point of view.
So, all "eco" motives are targeting those who are driven by slogans not logic. Pure marketing, no real sense or help for the Nature in it.

[grantp]

If they really want to come up with something relevant to the message they could look back to 40 or so years ago and check the scale of operations at the time.

The way things are looking, like it or not, by 2030 and in much of the world, the concept of car "ownership" for personal use may well be under severe threat and may have been replaced. It seems to me quite likely that the numbers of manufacturers of motor vehicles will be much reduced even if brand names somehow survive.

Transport around the world may be quite distinctly split between electrified and ICE with perhaps some sort of intermediate systems involving Hydrogen.

Much will depend on the practicalities of making an electricity based energy structure available in places with rather different geography, ecology, geology and economies.

In which case the relevance of F1 as anything other than gladiatorial entertainment would be questionable. Thus the show could develop into almost anything.

Or nothing.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Casper

...Is this the present footprint or the one they are going to increase through more scheduled races? If they reduced the number of races they would surely meet the target earlier but that ain't gonna happen....

for sure fewer races would be the most expedient way to reduce the footprint. it is certainly a preemptive move but i cant blame them. and i agree, it remains to be seen if FOM are genuine in their goals. personally i hope so because i would like to continue to be a fan and supporter of F1.

also i do think it is possible to be both genuine in combating climate change while pursuing a profit...im free market like that!

Originally Posted by helgi

We should search for more ecological power - that's the fact. ...

So, all "eco" motives are targeting those who are driven by slogans not logic. Pure marketing, no real sense or help for the Nature in it.

while you are to a large extent correct, i dont think anyone expects FOM/F1 to save the planet on its own. as such i dont think its fair to dismiss their attempts as just being a part of the problem.

for them it may just be a slogan, it may just start out as a slogan, but if that slogan succeeds in attracting an ever growing number of environmentally conscious consumers, if it succeeds in creating a better product to sell to those consumers, if it succeeds in encouraging more sustainable purchasing and travel habits then surely this is a positive...both for the consumer as well as for their profit statement.

if we add this initiative to every other company trying to capitalize on the hype and anxiety then we may actually be looking at real and substantive change in our consumption behavior..

is this not how ecological power is created and accumulated?

great slogans and marketing made the world this way...surely it can also remake it.

Originally Posted by grantp

If they really want to come up with something relevant to the message they could look back to 40 or so years ago and check the scale of operations at the time.

interesting.

we have the turbo engines now and some of the new rules are suggesting less aero sophistication and a return to more mechanical grip. a slower development cycle (less updates to be allowed each season) and a smaller budget should theoretically mean less wind tunnel and supercompter/CFD time...

from a certain point of view i wonder if Brawn (perhaps unintentionally) is attempting to reset the clock back to the early 80s?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

from a certain point of view i wonder if Brawn (perhaps unintentionally) is attempting to reset the clock back to the early 80s?

IMHO, yes and no. They are picking and choosing things. Some might be from prior eras. But a big reset? No. See below

Originally Posted by grantp

If they really want to come up with something relevant to the message they could look back to 40 or so years ago and check the scale of operations at the time.

Scale of the operations for sure. The sport is just "bigger" in all ways. Making the overall circus smaller would reduce it's footprint. Or as you say (or I think you are saying) it shouldn't have grown as big as it has in the first place.

Richard

[Armco Bender]

....and of course the drivers will be trading in their private jets in for solar powered electric bicycles..

[grantp]

A few of the people involved in F1 a long time back were also into private aviation.

It seemed sort of natural at the time.

Graham Hill for one.

Francois Cevert, Derek Gardner, David Purley.

There will be others that do not spring to mind.

Colin Chapman?

But not the scale that we have today, probably because the money was not there.

The problem that any current or recent owners have faced is that to be a meaningful "brand" generating a LOT of revenue these days things have to be BIG.

If it reverts to 'small is beautiful' it's not much of a business - especially if one has paid significant sums to buy it and, perhaps, is saddled with debt to pay for it.

But more problematically there is the question about how one makes the product relevant.

If the next target generation for F1 goes all Greta T, how can Liberty re-shape the product to be in any way relevant and meaningful to the coming generations?

Or, alternatively, how can they reshape the coming generations to be less Greta T?