Jump to content


Photo

Should F1 turn to hydrogen?


  • Please log in to reply
86 replies to this topic

Poll: Should F1 turn to hydrogen? (99 member(s) have cast votes)

  1. Yes (31 votes [31.31%])

    Percentage of vote: 31.31%

  2. No (52 votes [52.53%])

    Percentage of vote: 52.53%

  3. Not sure (16 votes [16.16%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.16%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,308 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:27

Reading this sort of made me wonder:

http://news.bbc.co.u...ess/7456141.stm

Why doesn't F1 turn to hydrogen?

One of the things that really confuses me is if F1 is to go green, why not do it properly? I think the general gist behind KERS is actually fairly sound, just the implementation a bit wack. But why stop at KERS? Why not make a real statement and tackle the biggest problem - fossil fuels?

I'm not sure of the absolute specifics or even technical feasibility of powering an F1 class car by hydrogen, but wouldn't that be technical challenge worth setting teams?

Wouldn't that _really_ appeal to the manufacturers? Wouldn't it be cool to return back to the turbo style years where fuel conservation was a key skill and do away with the need for fuel stops. Force teams to trade off power vs efficiency?

I must admit to being somewhat taken with the recent Lemans race. Never been a huge fan of it but over the weekend I couldn't tear myself away from Eurosport. While F1 should never become an 'endurance' series, it would be good to again see, at least in fuel terms, a return to the conundrum of speed vs efficiency.

And wouldn't it be good for all that money that F1 teams stuff into the ether went to help change perceptions of, and better yet, the technology of, road going zero emission cars?

Advertisement

#2 JForce

JForce
  • Member

  • 13,841 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:33

Hydrogen isn't really a solution to the fossil fuel problem.

But more importantly, I for one would rather drive a hydrogen vehicle and have F1 retain a petrol powered internal combustion engine.

After all, F1 doesn't contribute to the problems of either global warming (F1 has been carbon-neutral since 1997) or fuel-use, compared with hundreds of other activities.

#3 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 9,117 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:35

I agree.

Given that development is inevitable (otherwise F1 cars still wouldn't have seat belts) I think that the sport may as well get itself ahead of the curve, as we will, inevitably, one day go beyond KERS and see gas/electro powered F1 cars anyway.

#4 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,308 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:36

The only thing I would really worry about is the noise or lack thereof.

Hydrogen/electric cars, really, are ghostly quiet.

Although maybe that's a good thing with racing events at places like Brands and Monza under threat because of the noise.

#5 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,741 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:37

I hate the "Make F1 Green" thing... They are raceing cars....

#6 JForce

JForce
  • Member

  • 13,841 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:37

Plus you'd force budgets to go into the billions to even get anywhere near feasible

#7 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,741 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:38

Originally posted by kar
The only thing I would really worry about is the noise or lack thereof.

Hydrogen/electric cars, really, are ghostly quiet.

Although maybe that's a good thing with racing events at places like Brands and Monza under threat because of the noise.


If you hear the Audi R10 first hand it is quiet too!!!

#8 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,308 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:39

Originally posted by Mika Mika
I hate the "Make F1 Green" thing... They are raceing cars....


Generally I agree here, but I really think it would be better if emphasis was put back on the motors and drive train rather than the aero.

Teams are going to spend a fixed amount no matter what the regulations are. I reckon it would be a great thing to instead spend that money on something that at least has a remote possibility of being applied to the real world than designing bits of carbon fibre body work.

#9 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,741 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:44

Originally posted by kar


Generally I agree here, but I really think it would be better if emphasis was put back on the motors and drive train rather than the aero.

Teams are going to spend a fixed amount no matter what the regulations are. I reckon it would be a great thing to instead spend that money on something that at least has a remote possibility of being applied to the real world than designing bits of carbon fibre body work.


Yes the aero is getting a bit to nasty now...

Maybe if thay added some equalavency, like at the begining of the turbo era that would be cool...

I agree with your first post this years LeMans was great... Love the fact that it was 2 big non F1 manafactures.

#10 FonzCam

FonzCam
  • Member

  • 762 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:46

If F1 actually wants to help reduce emissions then fuel efficiency is the thing to focus on. KERS is a good idea but I think it needs to be more open so teams find more innovative methods.

Hydrogen is a nice idea but until we get more and much better renewable sources of electricity, build lots of fission plants or master fusion we are just shifting the fossil fuel burning to large power plants and loosing a lot in transmitting all that energy.

Better fuel efficiency and carbon negative hydrocarbon fuels are the best technologies to focus on for the realistic future. The bio-fuels being created at the moment are mostly straight replacements for current fossil fuels so switching F1 or any other racing series is mostly just a PR exercise.

Making F1 cars more energy efficient is the best way for F1 to push the development of environmentally friendly technologies. KERS is a good starting point but they need allowing new areas to recover energy and then open up the engine regs (with fuel limits) to make the engines more efficient.

#11 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,956 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:49

I want fast cars that demand the highest skills to be piloted and raced, and that bring true excitement to the fans. Whatever power they use doesn't bother me.

#12 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 9,117 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:51

Originally posted by Mika Mika
I hate the "Make F1 Green" thing... They are raceing cars....


But that's a judgement you make based on your experience.

My son, on the otherhand, is only 6 months and will probably grow up thinking that Green Racing is perfectly normal.

#13 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,741 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:55

Originally posted by Rinehart


But that's a judgement you make based on your experience.

My son, on the otherhand, is only 6 months and will probably grow up thinking that Green Racing is perfectly normal.


True,

It's my opinion that F1 cars should run on unicorn tears... and not water... :-)

#14 MichaelPM

MichaelPM
  • Member

  • 2,590 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 13:59

I would like to see a diesel F1 car, just out of personal interest.

Electric would just be sticking all the driver aids and more back into the sport as they have a lot more direct influence on power being put to the ground over any kind of combustion engine.
Also having done reasearch into alternative fuels I found the emission issues is just getting passed on to the power stations creating the electricity to run the cars, although ofcourse a power station is much more effiencient at burning fossil fuels then a vehicles engine... it is all just a temperary fix to slow down the consumption of fossil fuels rather then a genuine alternative.



http://videos.street...tric_163899.htm

#15 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 1,995 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 16 June 2008 - 14:08

I used to think no way would I be enthused watching a diesel engined racing car..Untill yesterday.

Hydrogen power. Bring it on!

#16 Josta

Josta
  • Member

  • 2,237 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 14:09

Originally posted by Mika Mika
I hate the "Make F1 Green" thing... They are raceing cars....


Exaclty, this is the only green f1 car I would be happy to see.

#17 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,308 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 16 June 2008 - 14:10

Originally posted by Fatgadget
I used to think no way would I be enthused watching a diesel engined racing car..Untill yesterday.

Hydrogen power. Bring it on!


That was my feeling too actually. :up:

#18 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,741 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 14:20

Originally posted by Fatgadget
I used to think no way would I be enthused watching a diesel engined racing car..Untill yesterday.

Hydrogen power. Bring it on!


Off/Topic
I really want so see what Audi do next, I think the R10 has seen it's last LeMans, went out in style too!

#19 Frogman

Frogman
  • Member

  • 5,980 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 16 June 2008 - 14:33

Originally posted by Atreiu
I want fast cars that demand the highest skills to be piloted and raced, and that bring true excitement to the fans. Whatever power they use doesn't bother me.

Second that! :up:
Besides, hydrogen isn't completely green as it still requires electricity to produce hydrogen from water.

Advertisement

#20 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 16 June 2008 - 14:43

Power all the better to use another sources


Hey when Rubber comes in short supply, and wheels have to be made of plastic or something, then that'll effect the racing.

But I'm a green person, f1 will be around as long as the human race is around, so we gotta do our part. :smoking:

Petrol/Oil are in the past this century, everyone is worried about climate this and that, at least when we watch f1, it can be seen as setting a example, all the that money they shed on building cars, now it's about ethically building cars for the next generation of f1 fans, because they maybe more at risk in 20/30 years by changes going on in the world.



#21 ex Rhodie racer

ex Rhodie racer
  • Member

  • 3,002 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 16 June 2008 - 14:44

Originally posted by Frogman

Second that! :up:
Besides, hydrogen isn't completely green as it still requires electricity to produce hydrogen from water.


Wind can produce electricity.
Even if the oil dried up tomorrow, I would still want to see an internal combustion engine powering racing cars and bikes. Fuels can be made from bio scources.

#22 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 16 June 2008 - 14:50

You could have a car use solar, hydro and wind in one. Don't need to be one source.

And add Rubbish as well, methane like at the end of Back to the future, get rid of the world's rubbish in a cool way. :smoking: :up:

#23 Mauseri

Mauseri
  • Member

  • 7,531 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 16 June 2008 - 15:00

Originally posted by JForce
Hydrogen isn't really a solution to the fossil fuel problem.

Partly true, producing hydrogen requires energy, but you dont need fossil fuels for that. Nuclear, solar, wind will do it as well.

But even if it was produced with fossil fuel, this is still a good thing if it helps to use fossil fuel more efficiently. I dont know does it?

#24 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,620 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 16 June 2008 - 17:55

Originally posted by Mika Mika


Off/Topic
I really want so see what Audi do next, I think the R10 has seen it's last LeMans, went out in style too!


still o/t but only for a second, a diesel coupe's on the cards isnt it? There was talk of Honda of course (Dr. Ullrich (?) let it slip over the weekend in a press conference apparently.....apologies for lack of knowledge, detail, and the time to check whether this was discussed in the weekend thread lol) but I was fascinated by this weekend's race, and yes i've wondered about diesel for F1 too........

#25 DOHC

DOHC
  • Member

  • 11,860 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 16 June 2008 - 18:50

Originally posted by kar
Why doesn't F1 turn to hydrogen?


Because the "zero emission," water vapor, is a greenhouse gas. In fact, it causes 36–70% of the greenhouse effect on Earth. ;)

In addition, hydrogen production consumes huge amounts of energy.

#26 Languedoc

Languedoc
  • Member

  • 52 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 17 June 2008 - 02:58

Hi friends:

Article talks about hydrogen fuel-cell powered vehicle (an electric car), but Hydrogen can also be used (as BMW is doing) to power an internal combustion engine.
This way, there would not be a radical change in technology and F1 cars could keep their cool sound, as well as being "green".
It could be interesting...

Main problem could be the storage of very high pressure hydrogen aboard (in both cases, fuel cell and ICE).

Languedoc

#27 Josta

Josta
  • Member

  • 2,237 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 17 June 2008 - 03:06

Originally posted by Languedoc
Hi friends:

Article talks about hydrogen fuel-cell powered vehicle (an electric car), but Hydrogen can also be used (as BMW is doing) to power an internal combustion engine.
This way, there would not be a radical change in technology and F1 cars could keep their cool sound, as well as being "green".
It could be interesting...

Main problem could be the storage of very high pressure hydrogen aboard (in both cases, fuel cell and ICE).

Languedoc


No point. At the end of the day, the flights to the GP's will always produce FAR more carbon than the cars. The same can be said for football matches. For instance, here in Zurich the place is ram packed with football fans. Most of these flew from their countries. This creates a massive amount of extra polution, so what is more needed is for football to go green. At the moment it creates more polution than F1.

#28 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,798 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 17 June 2008 - 05:22

actully i remmber reading/hearing that internal combustion engines where more effiecent than powerstations, powerstations just provide vast volume in comparison to normal car engines.

what the world really needs is cheap, eco friendly solar panels, wind turbines, wave turbines, water wheels etc, effeciency isnt so important, if u can literaly plaster everything with solar panels, preferably white matt coloured solar panels to reflect the heat back into space and to not blind pilots :lol:

the teams and the fia could club together and build the required proccessing plant and green energy generation equipment...

btw floating offshore windfarms would probably help rehibilitate the oceans too, fish etc like abit of shelter :)

#29 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 7,750 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 17 June 2008 - 06:16

Originally posted by Mika Mika
I hate the "Make F1 Green" thing... They are raceing cars....

You can hate it, but to keep this sport viable, to continue to attract attention beyond hardcore fans such as yourself and also investors, I do believe F1 has to respond to this irreversible trend.

To illustrate: This friend of mine used to think F1 is just a wasteful pointless exercise. When I told him that F1 was moving to energy recovery systems he said 'now that is interesting' as he immediately saw the relevance of such a move.

Energy recovery will be a significant selling point for F1 in the years to come.

#30 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,581 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 17 June 2008 - 08:04

I wouldn't want to be involved in a car accident with a hydrogen powered vehicle. That would be nasty.

#31 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,334 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 17 June 2008 - 09:14

Originally posted by kar
Reading this sort of made me wonder:

http://news.bbc.co.u...ess/7456141.stm

if F1 is to go green, why not do it properly?


You could ask the same question of the multinational energy companies and governments and the simple answer would be that it doesnt suit them yet.

Why be an early investor in a new technology, take all the risk and not be guarenteed a return? Unfortunately capitalism rewards those who pick the lowest hanging fruit and only climb the ladder when necessary.

#32 Josta

Josta
  • Member

  • 2,237 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 17 June 2008 - 09:18

Originally posted by Owen
I wouldn't want to be involved in a car accident with a hydrogen powered vehicle. That would be nasty.


Something like this?

Posted Image

#33 tidytracks

tidytracks
  • Member

  • 1,569 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 17 June 2008 - 09:26

If F1 wants to go green, what about ethanol? Nick Fry's already said Honda would back it, and Bernie's allegedly been to see Brazil's biggest ethanol company about a potential deal...

#34 Josta

Josta
  • Member

  • 2,237 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 17 June 2008 - 09:35

Originally posted by tidytracks
If F1 wants to go green, what about ethanol? Nick Fry's already said Honda would back it, and Bernie's allegedly been to see Brazil's biggest ethanol company about a potential deal...


Yeah, lets help the environment and **** the poor people. Sorry mate, I know you are like starving but we need to use vast areas of crop to make F1 look green.

#35 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,581 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 17 June 2008 - 09:37

something like this?



Yeh, that kind of thing... :eek:

#36 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,308 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 17 June 2008 - 09:39

You think F1 using ethanol will push the price of corn up all that much Josta?

People are staving because of incompetent/corrupt government more so than any single other reason. Running a race series on biofuels isn't going to make one extra person go hungry.

#37 tidytracks

tidytracks
  • Member

  • 1,569 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 17 June 2008 - 09:52

Originally posted by Josta


Yeah, lets help the environment and **** the poor people. Sorry mate, I know you are like starving but we need to use vast areas of crop to make F1 look green.


That was actually part of Fry and Honda's proviso... that a source could be found for ethanol which could not also be used as a source of human food.

So would you still be against the idea?

#38 DOHC

DOHC
  • Member

  • 11,860 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 17 June 2008 - 10:06

Why turn to ethanol when methanol is a better solution?

#39 Perigee

Perigee
  • Member

  • 895 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 17 June 2008 - 10:10

Originally posted by Josta


Something like this?

Posted Image

Oh the ....

Advertisement

#40 Josta

Josta
  • Member

  • 2,237 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 17 June 2008 - 10:13

Originally posted by tidytracks


That was actually part of Fry and Honda's proviso... that a source could be found for ethanol which could not also be used as a source of human food.

So would you still be against the idea?


When farmers switch to more lucrative non food crops such as sawgrass, less food is being produced. When supply goes down, price goes up. It also damages the soil.

#41 Perigee

Perigee
  • Member

  • 895 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 17 June 2008 - 12:33

Originally posted by tidytracks


That was actually part of Fry and Honda's proviso... that a source could be found for ethanol which could not also be used as a source of human food.

So would you still be against the idea?

But, that would also need to be grown in an area where crops-for-food can not be grown, in order for it to not decrease food production at put up food prices.

#42 Frogman

Frogman
  • Member

  • 5,980 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 17 June 2008 - 12:54

Ethanol can also be won from leftover pieces of wood that remain after, for instance, production of furniture and the like. In many European forests trees are replaced after being cut down, using all the leftovers for ethanol pruduction could offer a stable and renewable supply of ethanol without affecting the production of food crops.

#43 Andy Donovan

Andy Donovan
  • Member

  • 1,015 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 17 June 2008 - 13:01

Until it's clearer which of the seventeen thousand different alternative fuels available are actually realistic propositions, I think it's too early for F1 to switch fuel type entirely. In the short term pursuing fuel efficiency (through KERS, turbo-diesels, etc) is more important, and then when it becomes obvious which fuels are workable and which are pipe dreams F1 can think about switching to give the good ones the final technological push to overtake petrol engines.

The idealistic (but completely unworkable) solution for me would be to allow all different fuels (petrol, diesel, hydrogen, biofuels, electric etc etc) and let the cream rise to the top, as it were. The problem of course is that in order to avoid completely destroying the racing there'd have to be some level of equalisation between them, and seeing as the ACO can't even get that right for two fuels you can guarantee the FIA wouldn't be able to cope with seven or eight.

#44 CaptnMark

CaptnMark
  • Member

  • 1,015 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 17 June 2008 - 13:06

Originally posted by kar
The only thing I would really worry about is the noise or lack thereof.


Mount some speakers. :)

There's a calculation in the Technical forum, the amount of energy required is not that big, compared to moving the car.

#45 AyePirate

AyePirate
  • Member

  • 5,818 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 17 June 2008 - 13:17

Originally posted by Owen
I wouldn't want to be involved in a car accident with a hydrogen powered vehicle. That would be nasty.


As opposed to gasoline?

Gasoline falls to the ground, forms nice pools and then when ignited burns on the ground and you along with it.

Hydrogen rises and burns off quickly.

The Hindenberg (and its volatile silver oxide skin) really did a number on people

:lol:

#46 Youichi

Youichi
  • Member

  • 3,000 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 17 June 2008 - 13:39

Originally posted by AyePirate
The Hindenberg (and its volatile silver oxide skin) really did a number on people


Little known fact, 62 of the 97 people on the Hindenburg survived.

Most of those who died, died due to injuries from jumpping out of the airship.

#47 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,581 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 17 June 2008 - 13:54

Originally posted by AyePirate


As opposed to gasoline?

Gasoline falls to the ground, forms nice pools and then when ignited burns on the ground and you along with it.

Hydrogen rises and burns off quickly.

The Hindenberg (and its volatile silver oxide skin) really did a number on people

:lol:

From the Encyclopedia:
Hydrogen poses a number of hazards to human safety, from potential detonations and fires when mixed with air to being an asphyxant in its pure, oxygen-free form.[93] In addition, liquid hydrogen is a cryogen and presents dangers (such as frostbite) associated with very cold liquids.[94] Hydrogen dissolves in some metals, and, in addition to leaking out, may have adverse effects on them, such as hydrogen embrittlement.[95] Hydrogen gas leaking into external air may spontaneously ignite. Moreover, hydrogen fire, while being extremely hot, is almost invisible, and thus can lead to accidental burns.[96]

#48 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,798 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 17 June 2008 - 14:35

luckly petrol isnt like that at all.... oh wait ;)

there is a free(ish) source of biomass actully, supermarkets dispose of tons of stock (expired/near expirey) daily, as they cant give it to charity because of risk of being sue'ed, so F1 could use that :)

#49 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 17 June 2008 - 14:38

Go Nuclear like Doc Brown's Delorean in Back to the future.

Might not be safe, but imagine a nuclear pits team, for purposes of style and flamboyancy change.

Actually maybe the teams could harness wasted nuclear from plants which costs billions to get rid of, and with the billlions saved on it, the governments can spend even more money then f1 does to implement renewable energy solutions.


:up: :smoking: :smoking:

#50 DVtriple6

DVtriple6
  • Member

  • 71 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 17 June 2008 - 15:12

I lost a bit of interest when they used V8 instead of V10 and I don't even know what happens if they start to use stuff like Hydrogen or *shudders* bio diesel... :rolleyes:

Please don't ruin it anymore, if anything.. strip out all electronics that doesn't make the car go.