175 replies to this topic

[Romulan]

Nonesuch

 

 

"Although hybrid vehicle production is more energy-intensive and results in higher production emissions, hybrid vehicles are still the greener choice overall. . ."

 

The full-electric to petroleum-powered comparison is more dramatic:

 

The author of the video used government and industry data to conclude that 100% petroleum-powered cars make 450 grams of CO2 per kilometer, while 100% coal-fired electric powered cars produce 40 grams of CO2 per kilometer.

 

Fully Charged

 

There's no free lunch.  According to Forbes (2013), the energy-cost to extract oil from the ground was 9:1.  Again, the energy return on investment (EROI) is one (1) barrel of oil to extract nine (9) barrels of oil.  According to Wikipedia, "modern pumpjacks are powered by a prime mover.  [The prime mover] is commonly an electric motor . . ."

 

Forbes  Wiki

 

When the facts show the opposite is true, the proponents of petroleum industry tell us to accept the 'hybrid as dirtier' argument.  When the facts show the opposite is true, the proponents of the petroleum industry tell us to accept the 'tailpipe to smokestack' argument as good cause to dismiss full-electric technology.

Edited by Romulan, 05 April 2014 - 01:08.

[Nonesuch]

Inaction is your prerogative, but denial is kind of naive.

 

I'm not denying anything, just wondering whether it isn't already too late to 'do something'. After all, people like the man linked to have been saying for years that we need to change now - before it's too late! There is curiously never really a date given on that, though. As for finding ways to decrease the use of oil and gas - I'm all in favour of that, even if it's merely to free Europe from being dependent on the loathsome regimes that just so happen to sit on top of these natural resources.

 

The full-electric to petroleum-powered comparison is more dramatic:

 

The author of the video used government and industry data to conclude that 100% petroleum-powered cars make 450 grams of CO2 per kilometer, while 100% coal-fired electric cars produce 40 grams of CO2 per kilometer.

 

Fully Charged

 

There's no free lunch.  According to Forbes (2013), the energy-cost to extract oil from the ground was 9:1.  Again, the energy return on investment (EROI) is one (1) barrel of oil to extract nine (9) barrels of oil.  According to Wikipedia, "modern pumpjacks are powered by a prime mover.  [The prime mover] is commonly an electric motor . . ."

 

Forbes  Wiki

 

When the facts show the opposite is true, the proponents of petroleum industry tell us to accept the 'hybrid as dirtier' argument.  When the facts show the opposite is true, the proponents of the petroleum industry tell us to accept the 'tailpipe to smokestack' argument as good cause to dismiss full-electric technology.

 

Interesting, thanks.

[nicholasc]

Then you havent understood a word ive written. I dont like the green talk bullshit in F1 force fed by the FIA in the fans throats, and I dont like the FIA making a mess each and every season of the rules, so much that we need mid season changes, as its most likely heading that way with these engines. 

 

Its just a sport with highly sophisticated prototypes build for one purpose: going fast. Even Adrian Newey says that, see post above.  Any manufacturer, including Porsche, that says it isnt road relevant enough oughta stay out. 

Do you really think the FIA has jammed this down the engine manufacturers throats?

Your polarised view of the sport (world?) is so simplistic as to be laughable; the use of the term "highly sophisticated" is the ultimate irony.

 

It surely has to be horrifying to a large chunk of the F1 world that prides itself on its sophistication and technology that they had become a nostalgia series without even realising it.

[nonobaddog]

In order to become really 'politically correct' Formula 1 will have to get much greener and have a lot more gay drivers.  And maybe knock off this racing stuff too.

[RealRacing]

"Q: You’ve obviously worked under a lot of different types of technical regulations in your years in Formula One. How do you rank these rules among others that you’ve designed cars to?
AN: ...From a sporting point of view, to me, efficiency, strategy etc, economy of driving, is very well placed for sportscars, which is a slightly different way of going racing. Formula One should be about excitement. It should be about man and machine performing at its maximum every single lap."

Exactly, F1 should be entertainment first and foremost and as relevant to road cars as a game of football...

[growers]

I'm not denying anything, just wondering whether it isn't already too late to 'do something'. After all, people like the man linked to have been saying for years that we need to change now - before it's too late! There is curiously never really a date given on that, though. As for finding ways to decrease the use of oil and gas - I'm all in favour of that, even if it's merely to free Europe from being dependent on the loathsome regimes that just so happen to sit on top of these natural resources.

Fair enough   I'm all in favour of addressing climate change at a government level as well as doing my bit, but when I watch F1 it's an escape from all that and I want to see (and hear) flame-spitting full-blooded race cars.

[uffen]

Might as well get used to it, the EU's green ideology has a firm grip, expect things to get much greener.

Oh, I shot my eye out!

Don't worry, you'll get used to it.

[Eff One 2002]

I want to see (and hear) flame-spitting full-blooded race cars.

Ditto and sadly at the moment, we simply don't have that.

[Lazy]

Adrian Newey, is he obtuse too?

 

 

 

"Q: You’ve obviously worked under a lot of different types of technical regulations in your years in Formula One. How do you rank these rules among others that you’ve designed cars to?
AN: Ah well, that’s a very complicated question is the truthful answer to that. I guess the other obvious answer to that is probably whether you have a Mercedes engine, a Ferrari engine or a Renault engine will cloud your answer to it, in truth. Such is the nature of Formula One.

 

 

I think that sentence is the 1st thing you should consider from that statement. It should be remembered that Newey has dominated the sport for a long time with aerodynamics. Engines and electronics are not his thing. RB has struggled with kers since they came in.

 

 

My opinion of it is that from a technical aspect first of all you have to question whether…the whole thing behind. When you get into things like batteries then an electric car is only green if it gets its power from a green source. If it gets its power from a coal-fired power station then clearly it’s not green at all. A hybrid car, which is effectively what the Formula One regulations are then a lot of energy goes into manufacturing those batteries and into the cars which is why they’re so expensive. And whether that then gives you a negative or a positive carbon footprint or not depends on the duty cycle of the car - how many miles does it do, is it cruising along the motorway at constant speed or stop-starting in a city. So this concept that a hybrid car is automatically green is a gross simplification. 

 

 

All this is true, imo the Prius, for example, is very dubious as a green car, but it is a necessary 1st step towards a truly green car. The mguh is very much a strong step in that direction, it will recover enough energy to make carrying around the extra weight of an electric motor worthwhile. 

 

On top of that there are other ways, if you’re going to put that cost into a car, to make it fuel efficient. You can make it lighter, you can make it more aerodynamic, both of which are things that Formula One is good at. For instance the cars are 10 per cent heavier this year, a result, directly, of the hybrid content. So I think technically, to be perfectly honest, it’s slightly questionable.

 

 

I think that's the point, this years cars are heavier because of the hybrid, as immature technologies tend to be, but, as he says, F1 is very good at making things lighter. Very soon this stuff will be made tidier, more compact and lighter. This is what the manufacturers want from it.

 

 

From a sporting point of view, to me, efficiency, strategy etc, economy of driving, is very well placed for sportscars, which is a slightly different way of going racing. Formula One should be about excitement. It should be about man and machine performing at its maximum every single lap."

 

 

This is why we should give the formula time. F1 has always had these aspects to it, the noughties were the exception rather than the rule, with the result of processional races and the aerodynamic domination everyone was getting so frustrated with. We are only 2 races into this formula, the teams will adapt and very soon get on top of these technologies and racing will come back to the fore, as it did in the fuel controlled turbo days of the 80's and always has.

 

No he's not obtuse, he's a human being.

Edited by Lazy, 05 April 2014 - 06:18.

[Lazy]

There were other voices at that PC too:

 

http://www.f1fanatic...w-engine-rules/

 

But Williams’ chief technical office Pat Symonds said it had been necessary for Formula One to adopt the new engine rules to reflect developments in road car manufacturing.

“The road car industry – rightly or wrongly – has to hit CO2 per kilometre targets and those are very difficult targets to meet,” said Symonds. “And they will have to employ technologies such as we are using in Formula One.”

“So we are moving things forward, we are more relevant than we used to be and I think that’s very important. I think there was a great danger – and I mentioned this in one of these press conferences last year – that we would become irrelevant. We would become the focus of gas-guzzling and not having social responsibility. And I think it was really important that we did move away from that.”

Force India’s deputy team principal Bob Fernley endorsed that view, adding: “one thing that is important is that Honda are coming in next year and it’s the first time we’ve had another major motor manufacturer coming back into Formula One for a long long time, so that’s a tick in the box that says that actually Formula One has got it right”.

Ferrari has begun a PR offensive against the sport’s new rules, claiming they are widely disliked by fans. However Fernley pointed out the new cars are visibly harder to drive, which makes for a more exciting spectacle.

“I think that it’s great that we’re seeing cars that are difficult to drive, that are on the limit, that are breaking away at the rear end, which is something that we’ve not done for a long, long time, so I think the show is good.”

Mercedes’ executive director for technical Paddy Lowe refuted the claim the change in technology has drastically altered the quality of racing:

“From our perspective, the racing is just as it was. I don’t understand either the stories about economy drives, etc… Formula One has always been a formula in which you had to manage your fuel through the race.

“For us, that’s not different, so there are good stories around fuel saving whilst maintain the spectacle and I think we should be talking more about that.”

[Jazza]

 

 

The mguh is very much a strong step in that direction, it will recover enough energy to make carrying around the extra weight of an electric motor worthwhile. 

 

....

 

I think that's the point, this years cars are heavier because of the hybrid, as immature technologies tend to be, but, as he says, F1 is very good at making things lighter. Very soon this stuff will be made tidier, more compact and lighter. This is what the manufacturers want from it.

 

The problem is that the size, weight, and heat issues of the new units are a result of the battery. I don't see how F1 can add to the development in this area. It is not as if battery development does not have billions being spent on it already. It is also not an if that development is not aimed at making batteries smaller, lighter, and cooler, as it is EV/hybrid road cars and small portable electric devices driving this development. In this area F1 can only sit back and wait for someone else to develop the technology. But I don't see the technology moving fast enough that an F1 car will see an actual performance benefit from the electric system in the near future.

 

It would be an interesting experiment, as I strongly suspect that if you took all the electric stuff out of these car and ran only the V6T engine that lap times would drop considerably. Surely that 160HP cannot make up for all the extra weight, lack of ballast, extra cooling, as well as the impact on aero due to packaging, plus the increase wear on the tyres, of not having the electric system. If that is the case then this whole development is a farce. No hybrid road car is deigned to have poorer performance with the hybrid than without. I don't mean in 0-100 times but in all round benefit from having the system vs not having it. But in F1 this year the hybrid system isn't improving performance, but has created a situation of who can design a car that is least affected by having to have these extra systems.          

Edited by Jazza, 05 April 2014 - 07:00.

[0Fritz]

Do you really think the FIA has jammed this down the engine manufacturers throats?

Your polarised view of the sport (world?) is so simplistic as to be laughable; the use of the term "highly sophisticated" is the ultimate irony.

 

It surely has to be horrifying to a large chunk of the F1 world that prides itself on its sophistication and technology that they had become a nostalgia series without even realising it.

 

Well, driving 4 seconds a lap slower in race conditions because cars cant make it to the race end with 100kg of fuel is not that sophisticated, is it?

[0Fritz]

There were other voices at that PC too:

 

http://www.f1fanatic...w-engine-rules/

 

But Williams’ chief technical office Pat Symonds said it had been necessary for Formula One to adopt the new engine rules to reflect developments in road car manufacturing.

“The road car industry – rightly or wrongly – has to hit CO2 per kilometre targets and those are very difficult targets to meet,” said Symonds. “And they will have to employ technologies such as we are using in Formula One.”

“So we are moving things forward, we are more relevant than we used to be and I think that’s very important. I think there was a great danger – and I mentioned this in one of these press conferences last year – that we would become irrelevant. We would become the focus of gas-guzzling and not having social responsibility. And I think it was really important that we did move away from that.”

Force India’s deputy team principal Bob Fernley endorsed that view, adding: “one thing that is important is that Honda are coming in next year and it’s the first time we’ve had another major motor manufacturer coming back into Formula One for a long long time, so that’s a tick in the box that says that actually Formula One has got it right”.

Ferrari has begun a PR offensive against the sport’s new rules, claiming they are widely disliked by fans. However Fernley pointed out the new cars are visibly harder to drive, which makes for a more exciting spectacle.

“I think that it’s great that we’re seeing cars that are difficult to drive, that are on the limit, that are breaking away at the rear end, which is something that we’ve not done for a long, long time, so I think the show is good.”

Mercedes’ executive director for technical Paddy Lowe refuted the claim the change in technology has drastically altered the quality of racing:

“From our perspective, the racing is just as it was. I don’t understand either the stories about economy drives, etc… Formula One has always been a formula in which you had to manage your fuel through the race.

“For us, that’s not different, so there are good stories around fuel saving whilst maintain the spectacle and I think we should be talking more about that.”

 

Hah! I was waiting for someone to quote the replies to Newey, thanks

 

At the end of his quote, Symonds quoted Ratner, and that its not good to talk negative about your product. With that line he implies there are things wrong in F1, and clearly states he isnt prepared to go as far as Newey. In short, he says his opinion isnt to be taken seriously. The other team guys also mired down in vague genealrities how this new technology is 'good'.

 

I like Newey for speaking up. You might not agree, but at least he did it, in a very mild way too, and with sound arguments.

[xmoonrakerx]

Bahrain lights will waste more gas than all the saved fuel from these engines in the whole year...hipocricy??

Edited by xmoonrakerx, 05 April 2014 - 14:59.

[pdac]

Q. V6 green tech era - when will it end ?

A, When more 'greener' tech is introduced (heralding the 'super-green' era)

Edited by pdac, 05 April 2014 - 15:31.

[Fourjays]

Exactly, F1 should be entertainment first and foremost and as relevant to road cars as a game of football...

Reading comments like this I remember the whining that has been on these boards over "gimmicks" like DRS, KERS, etc that were brought in for "entertainment". F1 fans really need to make their minds up...

 

I watch F1, V8 Supercars, WEC and the BTCC and enjoy them all almost equally (does annoy me when BTCC races turn into "crash-to-pass" though... that isn't racing). My favourite series (V8s) checks many of the boxes F1 fans claim they want from a motorsport series - pure racing, good racing, overtaking, tough tracks, strategy, powerful, fast, loud, no-gimmicks, etc. Then I'll see the same fans moaning that the V8s are boring. 

 

Can only conclude on this evidence that 90% of motorsport fans either have unreal expectations for their series or just like to moan. Maybe we could start a new motorsport series powered entirely by people whining about motorsport.

 

And I personally wouldn't pay much attention to Newey. It reads as "the new rules make it difficult me to design a car the way I want". If he's half the engineer he's cracked up to be, he should be able to find a solution.

Edited by Fourjays, 05 April 2014 - 16:38.

[F1matt]

F1 has to be at the front of auto technology, if that means using less fuel, lighter and stronger, and more hybrid technology then so be it, when cars are banned from the centre of Paris due to pollution (without proof that cars caused the problem) and political leaders saying petrol and diesel cars should be banned from London in the next twenty years (deputy PM) then you know the petrol engine is on borrowed time just like we all knew tobacco sponsorship was on borrowed time twenty years ago.

In answer to the original question, I think F1 and Formula E will eventually merge.

[eronrules]

we need 'ethanol produced from Algae' or 'bio gas' ... but more immediately , NIssan ZEOD RC has already left F1 field behind in terms of innovativeness and greenness. 

 

http://nissannews.co...d-rc-powerplant

[Romulan]

In order to become really 'politically correct' Formula 1 will have to get much greener and have a lot more gay drivers.  And maybe knock off this racing stuff too.

 

Sarcasm_on

 

Anyone who doesn't agree with you is a politically correct, green, non-racing homosexual.

 

Sarcasm_off

 

Good gravy man, what's more politically correct than bashing greens in an auto racing forum?

[Aubwi]

The speed difference is mostly because of aero regulations, IMO.  It's more for safety than enviro reasons.  Can't forget there were a couple track worker fatalities and some very serious driver injuries in the 3.0L period.

[Jazza]

The speed difference is mostly because of aero regulations, IMO.  It's more for safety than enviro reasons.  Can't forget there were a couple track worker fatalities and some very serious driver injuries in the 3.0L period.

But those incidents were not directly related to the engine. The engines these days are giving straightline speeds comparable to the V10's.

320kph with a 3L engine or 320kph with a 1.6LT hybrid makes no difference to safety if we are talking about cars running into each other at speed and wheels flying out of the track limits. If straight speed is an issue then these engines are more dangerous than the 2.4L ones last year.

[rallye3]

Talking about Adrian Newey's comments yesterday during FP3, Anthony Davidson informed us that the current F1 technology had already made it into road cars in the form of the Mclaren P1 super car and the Porsche918.

Must pop out and buy one tomorrow.

The recovery systems clearly depends on high energy being fed in. No one has suggested how any of this might work on mass produced small family cars. It won't just work in a proportional way .

[Tourgott]

According to AMuS the secession from the FIA is getting even more realistic.

 

source: http://www.auto-moto...er-8292550.html

[johnmhinds]

Hah! I was waiting for someone to quote the replies to Newey, thanks

 

At the end of his quote, Symonds quoted Ratner, and that its not good to talk negative about your product. With that line he implies there are things wrong in F1, and clearly states he isnt prepared to go as far as Newey. In short, he says his opinion isnt to be taken seriously. The other team guys also mired down in vague genealrities how this new technology is 'good'.

 

I like Newey for speaking up. You might not agree, but at least he did it, in a very mild way too, and with sound arguments.

 

Maybe if he had spoken up when the current regulations were being written (a couple of years ago) he might have had some kind of impact on them.

 

It's a little late in the day for someone like Newey to be bringing up his concerns about the sport heading in the wrong direction.

[nonobaddog]

Sarcasm_on

 

Anyone who doesn't agree with you is a politically correct, green, non-racing homosexual.

 

Sarcasm_off

 

Good gravy man, what's more politically correct than bashing greens in an auto racing forum?

 

 

I didn't say anything about agreeing with me or not.  Just read the black part.

[krod]

Q. V6 green tech era - when will it end ?

A, When the I4 green tech era starts...