Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Extinction Rebellion and Motorsport


  • Please log in to reply
122 replies to this topic

#101 Fonzey

Fonzey
  • Member

  • 655 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 24 April 2019 - 09:29

I was at Spa when the anti-shell brigade parachuted onto the podium at the end. FOM did an absolutely amazing job of making it look like a non-issue, but it was insane how close they got to the business end of the Grand Prix! I was almost impressed.



Advertisement

#102 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 5,961 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 24 April 2019 - 11:42

The purpose of such a study would be to figure out if motorsport is a significant polluter in the grand scheme of things, and thereby figure out if motorsport becoming greener or even electric would have much of an effect on our environment.


Hmm.

Thought experiment: If every industry/company/person did such a study and concuded that their isolated environmental impact was insignificant 'in the grand scheme of things', who exactly is left to make any significant progress on curbing emissions?

Now, what would happen every industry/company/person decided, regardless of the size of their contribution, that they were to cut their emission by at least, say, half?

There's also the social impact that motorsport has which if you aks me is always part of the equation. Not just raw impact.

 

You can convert someone's electricity supply to fully renewable and assuming it is delivered reliably they are not going to notice any day-to-day difference. You also don't exactly get thousands tuning in on TV or going out to fields to watch wind turbines for entertainment.

 

What introducing environemtal aspects to motorsport does bring is exposure to the technology and what is achievable and change the perceptions. It's also not preaching entirely to the converted which is what makes it a) so controvertial and b) so valuable on a social front.


Edited by Vielleicht, 24 April 2019 - 11:43.


#103 sgtkate

sgtkate
  • Member

  • 5,559 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted 24 April 2019 - 12:01

There's also the social impact that motorsport has which if you aks me is always part of the equation. Not just raw impact.

 

You can convert someone's electricity supply to fully renewable and assuming it is delivered reliably they are not going to notice any day-to-day difference. You also don't exactly get thousands tuning in on TV or going out to fields to watch wind turbines for entertainment.

 

What introducing environemtal aspects to motorsport does bring is exposure to the technology and what is achievable and change the perceptions. It's also not preaching entirely to the converted which is what makes it a) so controvertial and b) so valuable on a social front.

Agreed, it's about trying to find that balance between where can we change things that people won't notice or won't care and where will the change be felt hard. Motorsport being forced to go electric is going to hit hard in the short term so any argument to do that is going to be lost. Maybe in 10 years when Formula E has shown how good racing can be even with an electric motor then perhaps it'll be time to hit the kill switch on most of the petrol engined events. Maybe keep some for historical events like Goodwood!



#104 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 12,548 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 24 April 2019 - 12:07

I was at Spa when the anti-shell brigade parachuted onto the podium at the end. FOM did an absolutely amazing job of making it look like a non-issue, but it was insane how close they got to the business end of the Grand Prix! I was almost impressed.


That must be the closest we’ve got to an environmental protest at a Grand Prix right? And even that was a protest at Shell - the title sponsor - rather than motorsport itself.

I do see the attitude occasionally expressed from certain motorsport fans that there is some form of green conspiracy out to ruin motorsport, but I’ve yet to see anything that even shows motorsport is even seen as a problem. Most people are focused on the bigger picture of climate change, and trying to change the world as a whole.

#105 SilverArrow31

SilverArrow31
  • Member

  • 5,046 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 24 April 2019 - 12:33

https://www.racefans...a-drone-strike/

 

Not sure if this has already been posted, would be pretty easy to get a few drones over Silverstone you would think?



#106 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 4,653 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 24 April 2019 - 12:36

Carbon credits are because they are not regulated by anyone, with no meaningful value. Offsetting by planting a load of trees which creates an incremental negative carbon load, is not.
 
There is also, the EU Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and UK Carbon Price Support (CPS) but these are levies on electricity generation only.

But where are these trees being planted, and couldn't they be planted there anyway without F1 burning a load of fossil fuels? Still seems like a load of cobblers!

#107 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 4,492 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 24 April 2019 - 16:38

But where are these trees being planted, and couldn't they be planted there anyway without F1 burning a load of fossil fuels? Still seems like a load of cobblers!

Trees wont the planted "anyway". It costs money.

 

F1 will burn loads of fossil fuel anyway. If they can be tricked to pay for planting some trees, maybe that's a good thing.



#108 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 12,034 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 24 April 2019 - 17:32

Trees wont the planted "anyway". It costs money.

 

F1 will burn loads of fossil fuel anyway. If they can be tricked to pay for planting some trees, maybe that's a good thing.

There's an argument for that.

 

But when it's used to mask the issue/delay action in reducing emissions it's also not great either. 



#109 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 6,966 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 24 April 2019 - 20:59

https://www.racefans...a-drone-strike/

 

Not sure if this has already been posted, would be pretty easy to get a few drones over Silverstone you would think?

And then what?  Anyway,I seem to remember some Irish priest protesting about something or other finding an easier way....He just walked onto the track in the middle of a  race! :eek:



#110 PeterScandlyn

PeterScandlyn
  • Member

  • 347 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 25 April 2019 - 03:50

https://www.racefans...a-drone-strike/

 

Not sure if this has already been posted, would be pretty easy to get a few drones over Silverstone you would think?

 

I don't know whether they were the first to float this idea or not.

What I do know is how dumb they were to carry it.

 

The world is full of sad folk looking for entertainment to brighten their day and other folks similarly brain dead.

Could even stream it on-line.........



#111 absinthedude

absinthedude
  • Member

  • 5,709 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 25 April 2019 - 07:45

25 or so years ago on the grand prix date, Silverstone was the busiest airport in the UK with all the helicopters flying in and out.....due to expansion by Heathrow and Gatwick that's no longer the case but it's still a pretty busy "airport" during the GP weekend. I would imagine there's plenty of measures in place which would detect drones. But then one would think that of Gatwick too....

 

I'd also say that anyone flying a drone over a racetrack without permission and training is at least as foolish as those engaging in Extinction Rebellion's road blocking antics. The thought of even a light drone striking a racing car and the injuries that could be caused to the driver even with a halo just don't bear thinking about. It's one thing to risk yourself, quite another to put at risk competitors, officials and spectators. One slip of the finger on the part of a drone's controller.....it could even be totally accidental. What if a drone operator making some sort of protest thinks that it's OK to hover a few metres above the racetrack but the drone is caught in the aerodynamic guff caused by F1 car's wings? It could fly totally out of control.

 

As for running across a racetrack in the manner of Neil Horan or the German fellow a few years later.....practically suicidal....at the time there were some who said they should be strapped into a chair and forced to watch Tom Pryce's fatal crash....while I wouldn't wish that on anyone, it does need pointing out that what happens when a 200mph F1 car hits a human being is not pretty and is incredibly dangerous for all concerned. 


Edited by absinthedude, 25 April 2019 - 07:46.


#112 F1matt

F1matt
  • Member

  • 3,230 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 25 April 2019 - 09:59

We had a drunken spectator get onto the track at Singapore a few years ago, by nature tracks are pretty open and if someone put some thought into it they could easily get onto the track. The only really secure place is the entrance to the paddock but clearly that has been breached as mentioned above. If protests are going to take place then it is likely to be through social media, targeting sponsors and manufacturers but I still think events need to be alert to demonstrations. 



#113 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 12,034 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 02 August 2020 - 17:47

A bit of reporting here on that Extinction Rebellion banner at the British GP today. 
 
Police investigating environmental protest during British GP | https://www.motorspo...mpaign=widget-2
 
Including this interesting comment: 

Extinction Rebellion Cambridge's Donald Bell praised F1's commitment become carbon neutral by 2030, with the stunt apparently designed to send a message to the EU governments and the UK leaders.

"Today was an opportunity to remind the world that the climate and ecological crisis hasn't gone away and is intensifying every day.

"Although we applaud Formula 1 for taking the bold steps and pledging to go net zero by 2030, this strong leadership makes a mockery of the EU and UK governments' own 2050 target.

"By the Grand Prix's own standards, 2050 is far, far too late. It's time the worlds' governments show some leadership of their own."



#114 Jordan44

Jordan44
  • Member

  • 10,709 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 02 August 2020 - 19:16

Donald thinks a private organisation going carbon neutral in a decade can be compared to entire states. That's funny.

#115 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 12,034 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 02 August 2020 - 19:25

Did anyone tell him about how that F1 carbon neutral pathway is largely dependant on the hope of using 'advanced sustainable fuels' and that they have a new massive sponsorship deal with Saudi Aramco, one of the largest oil and natural gas companies in the world? 

 

It's a genuine question that. 



#116 Jordan44

Jordan44
  • Member

  • 10,709 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 02 August 2020 - 19:27

Did anyone tell him about how that F1 carbon neutral pathway is largely dependant on the hope of using 'advanced sustainable fuels' and that they have a new massive sponsorship deal with Saudi Aramco, one of the largest oil and natural gas companies in the world?

It's a genuine question that.


I don't see how being carbon neutral is dependent on the fuels. Neutral, not zero.

#117 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 12,034 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 02 August 2020 - 19:29

I don't see how being carbon neutral is dependent on the fuels. Neutral, not zero.

The point is that creating a truly carbon neutral combustion fuel isn't an easy task.



#118 Jordan44

Jordan44
  • Member

  • 10,709 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 02 August 2020 - 19:30

The point is that creating a truly carbon neutral combustion fuel isn't an easy task.


You don't have to. If they plant enough trees. They're technically carbon "neutral"

#119 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 12,034 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 02 August 2020 - 19:39

You don't have to. If they plant enough trees. They're technically carbon "neutral"

Tree planting as a means of offsetting was not mentioned in F1's 2030 Net Zero Carbon Announcement though.
 
Delivering "the world’s first net zero carbon hybrid internal combustion engine", on the other hand, is.



Advertisement

#120 Jordan44

Jordan44
  • Member

  • 10,709 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 02 August 2020 - 19:40

Tree planting as a means of offsetting was not mentioned in F1's 2030 Net Zero Carbon Announcement though.

Delivering "the world’s first net zero carbon hybrid internal combustion engine", on the other hand, is.


Well they wouldn't have used the word NET if they weren't going to do offsetting.

#121 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 12,034 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 02 August 2020 - 19:53

F1 has been 'offsetting' since 1997, so that would be nothing new. 

 

That would imply that the PU they seek to deliver by 2030 already exists in the current cars. 

 

I think it's quite clear that they are talking about the PU as a closed system. 


Edited by Ben1445, 02 August 2020 - 19:59.


#122 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 5,961 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 02 August 2020 - 20:50

In fairness, the announcement for net zero encompassed the entire impact of the business. That includes initiatives such as "ultra-efficient logistics", running offices and factories on renewable energy, sustainable transport options to events for fans and eliminating single use plastics to name but a few. Offsetting will liekly remain a part of reaching the 2030 net zero target for the entire business.

 

I would agree though that the way they F1 has talked about the future PU and sustainble fuels in particular is that they are aiming for it to be truly carbon neutral in operation rather than merely incuded in any separate offset. As to whether that can be achived and what societal value it may have... we shall see.

 

Ofsetting is a massive minefield becasue it can form part of the solution if done well, but can also be so easily absused to justify not doing more (F1 in 1997) or the initiatives can so be poorly run such that it provides little or even a negative benefit in emissions reduction. It is not a solution in itself, but a tool that needs careful consideration on where and how it is used to avoid doing more harm than good. To be responsible about engaging with it, I think F1 must be transparant about any offset inititve they are involved with and carefully choose initiatives which provide real value. It cannot be a box ticking exercise to be 'carbon neutral... (technically)'.

 

The sponsorship deal with Aramco is also a little suspect to me and I would really like more answers from Formula One explaining exactly why this is not in contradiction of their 2030 targets.



#123 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 12,034 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 02 August 2020 - 21:05

In fairness, the announcement for net zero encompassed the entire impact of the business. That includes initiatives such as "ultra-efficient logistics", running offices and factories on renewable energy, sustainable transport options to events for fans and eliminating single use plastics to name but a few. Offsetting will liekly remain a part of reaching the 2030 net zero target for the entire business.

 

I would agree though that the way they F1 has talked about the future PU and sustainble fuels in particular is that they are aiming for it to be truly carbon neutral in operation rather than merely incuded in any separate offset. As to whether that can be achived and what societal value it may have... we shall see.

 

Ofsetting is a massive minefield becasue it can form part of the solution if done well, but can also be so easily absused to justify not doing more (F1 in 1997) or the initiatives can so be poorly run such that it provides little or even a negative benefit in emissions reduction. It is not a solution in itself, but a tool that needs careful consideration on where and how it is used to avoid doing more harm than good. To be responsible about engaging with it, I think F1 must be transparant about any offset inititve they are involved with and carefully choose initiatives which provide real value. It cannot be a box ticking exercise to be 'carbon neutral... (technically)'.

 

The sponsorship deal with Aramco is also a little suspect to me and I would really like more answers from Formula One explaining exactly why this is not in contradiction of their 2030 targets.

But the announcement doesn't actually talk about any form of offset, so it's merely an assumption that they will use it to achieve 'net zero'. Indeed by most accounts they already have been doing this. 

 

The true proof and value of these sustainable fuels would be their application in the wider world. They could aim achieve net zero by having all of F1's combustion fuel using processes running on such fuels (assuming they actually work).

 

The thing is it helps all of the large oil and gas companies if they can get loads of funding and improve their market/brand value by promising development of these fuels. That helps them slow down a transition away from burning fossil fuels regardless of whether this magical, problem solving fuel is actually produced come 2030, 2050 or never.

 

That's why the Aramco deal is shady for me. 


Edited by Ben1445, 02 August 2020 - 21:06.