Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

F1: Future of ICE and Carbon Neutral aims [Merged]


  • Please log in to reply
319 replies to this topic

#1 Turboflame

Turboflame
  • Member

  • 542 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 01 November 2019 - 13:22

As we all know, according the new regulations for 2021, the current V6 turbo unit stays the same.

No allowance for higher revs, and the fuel will get more carbon neutral from 2021 onwards.

 

I am all in for a greener f1. But what will happen in 2025 when the new engine regulations arrive?

Will we get a smaller ICE engine (4-cylinder maybe?) with more advanced hybrid components and more power coming from the electric engine?

Wil they maybe keep the V6 and only concentrate on more advanced hybrid components?

Will they dare to go full electric from 2025? If not so, when we will see a full electric f1 the earliest possible?

 

I personally don't mind more advanced hybrid units. But i hope that with 100 % carbon neutral fuel the ICE somehow will stay relevant and has a future ahead.

At the end if the hybrid ICE engine becomes very environmentally friendly, why does he have to leave?

 

 



Advertisement

#2 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 12,709 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 01 November 2019 - 16:26

Higher revving 4 cylinder preferable?



#3 Turboflame

Turboflame
  • Member

  • 542 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 01 November 2019 - 16:35

That would be nice. DTM now has a 4-cylinder turbo, it's not immensely loud, but it has this agressive sound i somehow miss with the current V6's.



#4 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 6,314 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 01 November 2019 - 16:35

Higher revving 4 cylinder preferable?

Wot? You are setting yourself up for a lynching from the V12 mob!



#5 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,705 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 November 2019 - 16:55

I'd say the ICE will now stay the same until F1 goes electric.



#6 maximilian

maximilian
  • Member

  • 5,096 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 November 2019 - 17:05

Unless things change, Formula E has exclusive rights to be the top-level electric open wheel series for another 24 years, or so...



#7 Turboflame

Turboflame
  • Member

  • 542 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 01 November 2019 - 18:00

Unless things change, Formula E has exclusive rights to be the top-level electric open wheel series for another 24 years, or so...

 

Unless they choose to fuse into one championship before that. F1 has a lot more resources than FE, if they truely wanted, wouldn't they find a way to pull it off?

 

Honestely, i don't see a fundamental reason why a hybrid turbo that runs on 100 % carbon neutral should be replaced by something electric.

I hope F1 does realize there will be fans of the ICE-engine for a long time to come.

 

Maybe if fuels are getting greener, people will keep on being a hybrid car with ICE-engine.

F1 is a reference pont for the general automotive industry. I think they should wait where the major consumer market is heading.

As long as most cars being sold or produced still have a ICE, i think F1 will should retain theirs as well.



#8 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 3,609 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 01 November 2019 - 18:13

Same engines from 2025. Full electric wont be strong enough and there wont be interest in developing a new ICE.

 

Battery capacity will have been increased after 2021 cars looked slow.



#9 CornishFellow

CornishFellow
  • Member

  • 113 posts
  • Joined: July 19

Posted 01 November 2019 - 18:25

The thing is, even new fans who are teenagers watch videos of the V12 and V10 and even V8 eras on YouTube and are saying WOW at the sound. A rush of some kind is missing in all this. Would something ever replace it? Would electric engines become powerful enough to give an impressive feeling of speed and power? Probably not. Pity, but that's progress.

 

If ICE's do in fact become zero emission then maybe they will make a comeback, but that might be wishful thinking.



#10 MikeV1987

MikeV1987
  • Member

  • 6,117 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 01 November 2019 - 18:38

Would like to see them invest in alternative fuels, like hydrogen. I don’t think batteries are the end game that most people seem to think they are.

Edited by MikeV1987, 01 November 2019 - 18:40.


#11 JavierDeVivre

JavierDeVivre
  • Member

  • 1,183 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 01 November 2019 - 18:39

Electric? Why are people worrying about that? It will fade into irrelevance again before it becomes a viable alternative to ICE in F1.

 

Get rid of the fancy bits and go back to a simpler naturally aspirated or turbo charged engine. 



#12 Turboflame

Turboflame
  • Member

  • 542 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 01 November 2019 - 18:40

I'd say the ICE will now stay the same until F1 goes electric.

 

 

I agree that, if their endgoal is electric, why should they invest in another new ICE? If it's let's say within 10/12 years when they do introduce the full electric unit.

It all depends when they can go full electric, when battery capacity allows it and what their timing/plan is.

If it's another 24 years wait before they do so, it would be an absurd long time with the current V6. In that case they may choose to invest in let's say a 4-cylinder.

F1 wants to do something renewing from time to time, i don't see them keep the current ICE for another 20/25 years in exact the same configuration to be honest.



#13 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,705 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 November 2019 - 18:58

 

I agree that, if their endgoal is electric, why should they invest in another new ICE? If it's let's say within 10/12 years when they do introduce the full electric unit.

It all depends when they can go full electric, when battery capacity allows it and what their timing/plan is.

If it's another 24 years wait before they do so, it would be an absurd long time with the current V6. In that case they may choose to invest in let's say a 4-cylinder.

F1 wants to do something renewing from time to time, i don't see them keep the current ICE for another 20/25 years in exact the same configuration to be honest.

 

 

I was rather thinking that the manufacturers parent companies are not really that interested in ICE development. But, equally, F1 is not (at the present) very interested in going electric. So, right now, there is an impasse. I doubt the existing manufacturers want to develop a new ICE and I doubt there are many others that might want to step in either. So I expect the current ICE spec to be carried forward.

 

Any new F1 PU, in my opinion, is going to be electric. When that will happen, I don't know, but I don't see it happening any time soon. The car market is changing and that will impact on the amount of money that is available for motorsport and where any spend will be directed. I don't think that direction is towards a new ICE for F1.


Edited by pdac, 01 November 2019 - 19:00.


#14 Izzyeviel

Izzyeviel
  • Member

  • 445 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 01 November 2019 - 23:14

Would like to see them invest in alternative fuels, like hydrogen. I don’t think batteries are the end game that most people seem to think they are.

 

This hopefully. Electric batteries are fine, but Hydrogen is the future and F1 should jump on that train.



#15 ClubmanGT

ClubmanGT
  • Member

  • 2,310 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 01 November 2019 - 23:27

Hydrogen is a fool's errand which is propped up by massive government subsidies that should have been repealed long ago.

F1 needs a point of difference. The V12s were too heavy and too complicated, the V6 hybrid era is stupidly expensive and no one wants to blink and admit it. 

 

High-reving V10s are the smart middle ground. You could go four cylinder hybrid if you want, but I struggle to see how that would resolve the cost/complexity issues we have now. Tens of millions of dollars for an engine is just not sustainable. 



#16 pizzalover

pizzalover
  • Member

  • 759 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 01 November 2019 - 23:44

F1 should give Carbon Engineering the contract to supply the fuel. Go back to high reving NA V10s and smaller, lighter cars. F*** the manufacturers. Sorted.

 

https://www.forbes.c...-make-gasoline/



#17 goldenboy

goldenboy
  • Member

  • 6,474 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 02 November 2019 - 08:45

I think F1 will die and eventually be reborn with viewers in mind rather than manufacturers pushing their development point of view.

I think the crossover between performance on the track in F1 and car sales will not be as great when less people are interested in watching what looks and sounds like glorified RC cars.

Strange times for F1 coming up in the next 10 years.

Edited by goldenboy, 02 November 2019 - 08:45.


#18 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,509 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 02 November 2019 - 09:10

Hydrogen is a fool's errand which is propped up by massive government subsidies that should have been repealed long ago.

F1 needs a point of difference. The V12s were too heavy and too complicated, the V6 hybrid era is stupidly expensive and no one wants to blink and admit it. 

 

High-reving V10s are the smart middle ground. You could go four cylinder hybrid if you want, but I struggle to see how that would resolve the cost/complexity issues we have now. Tens of millions of dollars for an engine is just not sustainable. 

 

Citation needed, massively. Hydrogen is also a very clean fuel, available in abundance and can be used to generate electricity.

 

But the rest of your post just shows that you're not interested in anything but your particular favourite brand of past F1.



#19 MadYarpen

MadYarpen
  • Member

  • 4,763 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 02 November 2019 - 09:28

I have bought a new car couple of months ago. It is Honda Civic, with ice turbo engine. I plan to use it for 6 years. I am really curious what car I will be buying next. Because it seems more and more it could be something different than ice. Even if I hate the idea. Driving with cvt for a week in a replacement car was terrible, can't imagine electric motor in my car... 6 years seems like a long time considering how these changes are going now.

Will the manufacturers be interested in ice engines for the next Gen engine? If they will be pushing for alternatives with their products? I don't know.. But I think at some point f1 will have to stop being marketing tool for manufacturers if we want to enjoy watching it. Only then we could dream to continue with ice, IMO.

Advertisement

#20 Gambelli

Gambelli
  • Member

  • 467 posts
  • Joined: February 19

Posted 02 November 2019 - 10:01

You've all got it wrong, it will be full electric with a 3 cylinder "range extender" engine that is not allow to power the drivetrain but can only power the batteries!  Then they can claim to be an electric series but with an ICE circumvent Formula E's contract, get the performance and range out of electric, and improve on their 'green' credentials!!! :)



#21 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,509 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 02 November 2019 - 10:09

I tend to think that FE's exclusivity contract will fall foul of anti-competition laws if pushed anyway.



#22 crooky369

crooky369
  • Member

  • 427 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 02 November 2019 - 12:31

Unless things change, Formula E has exclusive rights to be the top-level electric open wheel series for another 24 years, or so...

It would be very F1 in say 15 years time for them to get around this exclusive right by putting a tiny 50cc engine in the car just to say it’s not fully electric.



#23 GrumpyYoungMan

GrumpyYoungMan
  • Member

  • 5,866 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 02 November 2019 - 12:57

Given the environmental damage done to get the materials to make the batteries and dispose of once they have reached there natural end of life I can see the ICE coming back - with a greener fuel.

In my opinion this has the hallmarks of the old Fat and sugar!

#24 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 13,725 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 02 November 2019 - 14:08

Citation needed, massively. Hydrogen is also a very clean fuel, available in abundance and can be used to generate electricity.

 

But the rest of your post just shows that you're not interested in anything but your particular favourite brand of past F1.

Where can you get hydrogen from without releasing Co2, without putting more energy in than you get out ? 



#25 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,509 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 02 November 2019 - 14:19

Where can you get hydrogen from without releasing Co2, without putting more energy in than you get out ? 

 

Electrolysis can use electricity generated from carbon neutral sources, renewables or even nuclear power.



#26 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,705 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 02 November 2019 - 14:31

Given the environmental damage done to get the materials to make the batteries and dispose of once they have reached there natural end of life I can see the ICE coming back - with a greener fuel.

In my opinion this has the hallmarks of the old Fat and sugar!

 

I thought one of the points/issues about Lithium batteries was that there's not that much Lithium available, so they are already taking about recycling old batteries and recovering the Lithium to be re-used in new ones.



#27 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 6,314 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 02 November 2019 - 17:40

I tend to think that FE's exclusivity contract will fall foul of anti-competition laws if pushed anyway.

Be that as it may.FE  now has  a very strong  foothold  far as leccy powered race cars are concerned. They set the precedence.



#28 BuddyHolly

BuddyHolly
  • Member

  • 3,449 posts
  • Joined: December 15

Posted 02 November 2019 - 17:45

Lets just drop this hybrid junk and go back to V10's, problem solved.



#29 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 6,314 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 02 November 2019 - 17:47

I thought one of the points/issues about Lithium batteries was that there's not that much Lithium available, so they are already taking about recycling old batteries and recovering the Lithium to be re-used in new ones.

Extrapolating your argument....Way back then,did they know the extent of the oil reserves or just winging it? The mentality of recycling  or preserving natural resources wasn't there was it? 



#30 ArrowsLivery

ArrowsLivery
  • Member

  • 3,218 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 02 November 2019 - 17:48

Be that as it may.FE now has a very strong foothold far as leccy powered race cars are concerned. They set the precedence.


I don’t think even 1/10th of race fans know anything about FE, so I disagree.

#31 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,705 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 02 November 2019 - 19:43

Extrapolating your argument....Way back then,did they know the extent of the oil reserves or just winging it? The mentality of recycling  or preserving natural resources wasn't there was it? 

 

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Lithium batteries have taken off big time in the past decade or so and it's become immediately obvious to all concerned that Lithium resources are limited. That is why recycling measures are being put in place to recover the Lithium in spent batteries for re-use.

 

Oil, though, is just used up. There's no recovering oil once it goes up in smoke. So, I'm not sure what you are extrapolating or trying to suggest.



#32 ElectricBoogie

ElectricBoogie
  • Member

  • 677 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 02 November 2019 - 19:48

As technology develops, the ICE/ERS ratio should improve. 
Since F1 limits the ERS output for the most part, I suspect the ratio is actually moving the other way. NOT road relevant.

The AMG Project One hypercar will have a weaker F1-derived ICE and triple the electric power output, pretty much. It's bound to be a triumph in fuel efficiency. 
If F1 cars somehow need to be so amazingly heavy, why have only a very small part of it in the battery? Much more could be done there. Especially if peak power of ERS is allowed to be greater, with a lower peak power for the ICE. Using the energy wisely, similarly to Formula E, would get them much faster to the finish line on the same amount of fuel.

In recent years they've gotten more fuel to play with. What they should have gotten was more ERS to play with. We're 5-6 years on. At the same weight of the first year's units, more power and energy should be possible by now.

Longer braking distances, if they find the wisdom to find less capable but more affordable and durable brake discs as standard parts, will help the PUs to harvest more energy. And thus, save more fuel. Or suffice on lower fuel flow managing the same laptimes.
Imagine a max fuel flow of 80L/h and simply double the ERS in every way. Accompanied by longer braking distances which help overtaking and harvesting.

Road relevant would be regenerative braking on the front axle. Nor having it is a huge waste of energy. 
The MGU-H does a lot right now, but the MGU-K might as well be moved to the front axle to get the most from it. Best of course is to have at least one per axle. The front one could be allowed to drive the wheels but even as just a harvesting device it would be so useful. Bigger battery, of course. 

It was a bit too easy for the new rules team that they feared the PUs would get less efficient if they messed with them. They're 50% efficient DESPITE the ERS regs, not thanks to them being fixed for a while! The PUs are ERS limited. Too little harvesting power, too little energy capacity, too little peak power to make it more of a factor in the racing.

Turbines engines are making a bit of a comeback. How might those fit F1 with maximized hybrid potential? Could be crazy efficient.
Gas/steam power stations are now over 60% efficient. And those don't even benefit from regenerative braking.


Edited by ElectricBoogie, 02 November 2019 - 19:52.


#33 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 4,034 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 02 November 2019 - 19:49

I tend to think that FE's exclusivity contract will fall foul of anti-competition laws if pushed anyway.

How much does it being specifically a contract with the FIA matter in this instance? As far as I can tell there's nothing stopping a single seater electric series being run with a different sanctioning body. 



#34 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 4,034 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 02 November 2019 - 19:50

In recent years they've gotten more fuel to play with. What they should have gotten was more ERS to play with. We're 5-6 years on. At the same weight of the first year's units, more power and energy should be possible by now.

Agree 100%. 



#35 F1Lurker

F1Lurker
  • Member

  • 1,444 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 02 November 2019 - 23:41

How much does it being specifically a contract with the FIA matter in this instance? As far as I can tell there's nothing stopping a single seater electric series being run with a different sanctioning body.

Formula E can't stop F1 from going electric if electric powertains are required for F1 to be the premier racing series sanctioned by the FIA. Being the top racing series is the essence of the F1 commercial rights holder's agreement with the FIA.

If the FIA somehow screwed up its contracting with Formula E (by completely underestimating the advance of technology and climate policy changes) then Formula E would have to seek damages from the FIA but I can't see any chance of Formula E obtaining an injunction to stop F1 from going electric.

#36 THEWALL

THEWALL
  • Member

  • 2,169 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 02 November 2019 - 23:54

At some point F1 is going to have to decide between remaining "road relevant" (which many think it isn't anyway) and becoming completely electric or whatever is the relevant technology at that point, or becoming a sort of retro spectacle with really loud, powerful and wasteful gasoline engines, V8s, 10s, 12s. I know which one I would watch.



#37 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,509 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 02 November 2019 - 23:55

At some point F1 is going to have to decide between remaining "road relevant" (which many think it isn't anyway) and becoming completely electric or whatever is the relevant technology at that point, or becoming a sort of retro spectacle with really loud, powerful and wasteful gasoline engines, V8s, 10s, 12s. I know which one I would watch.

 

It's already there for you to watch: https://www.mastersh...1/championship/



#38 scolbourne

scolbourne
  • Member

  • 521 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 03 November 2019 - 02:59

I would say use hydrogen or methane as fuel and then let the teams decide whether to use a fuel cell, gas turbine/hybrid or even a V12 ic engine. Maybe give an extra fuel allowance for ic engine to encourage a more spectator friendly sound.



#39 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,862 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 03 November 2019 - 03:27

I would say use hydrogen or methane as fuel and then let the teams decide whether to use a fuel cell, gas turbine/hybrid or even a V12 ic engine. Maybe give an extra fuel allowance for ic engine to encourage a more spectator friendly sound.

 

 

Hydrogen and Methane don't have the capacity/energy density unless they are highly compressed in tanks. I do not think you want highly pressurised hydrogen or methane tanks inside the chassis during a crash. They would probably explode. Gasoline or synthetic gasoline can be stored at atmospheric pressure.


Edited by ARTGP, 03 November 2019 - 03:27.


Advertisement

#40 scolbourne

scolbourne
  • Member

  • 521 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 03 November 2019 - 03:46

Hydrogen and Methane don't have the capacity/energy density unless they are highly compressed in tanks. I do not think you want highly pressurised hydrogen or methane tanks inside the chassis during a crash. They would probably explode. Gasoline or synthetic gasoline can be stored at atmospheric pressure.

"CNG is less likely to ignite on hot surfaces, since it has a high auto-ignition temperature (540 °C), and a narrow range (5–15%) of flammability. also accidents due to spill is less comparing to gasoline or LPG because it easily disperses with air.

The flashpoint for gasoline is 250 degrees Fahrenheit, whereas the flashpoint for natural gas is 1100 degrees Fahrenheit, making the risk of a vehicular fire in an accident much lower.

Also It releases comparatively less pollutants and is eco-friendly comparing to the other fossil fuels.

All the above properties make CNG a safer fuel comparing to Gasoline, LPG and Diesel by all means"


Edited by scolbourne, 03 November 2019 - 03:47.


#41 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,509 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 November 2019 - 09:28

I would say use hydrogen or methane as fuel and then let the teams decide whether to use a fuel cell, gas turbine/hybrid or even a V12 ic engine. Maybe give an extra fuel allowance for ic engine to encourage a more spectator friendly sound.

 

I can't imagine methane would gain much traction anyway given that it also produces CO2 when burned.



#42 GrumpyYoungMan

GrumpyYoungMan
  • Member

  • 5,866 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2019 - 09:50

I can't imagine methane would gain much traction anyway given that it also produces CO2 when burned.

That’s the whole point - they are spending billions on electricity when all you need to do is make a more environmentally friendly fuel for the already existing ICE - which already more or less exists.

And isn’t the tyres that produce a lot of CO2 from vehicles anyway... that’s before we start looking at air travel...

As I said this is all Fat vs Sugar over again and history will judge us!

Edited by GrumpyYoungMan, 03 November 2019 - 09:50.


#43 F1Lurker

F1Lurker
  • Member

  • 1,444 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 03 November 2019 - 09:56

Hydrogen and Methane don't have the capacity/energy density unless they are highly compressed in tanks. I do not think you want highly pressurised hydrogen or methane tanks inside the chassis during a crash. They would probably explode. Gasoline or synthetic gasoline can be stored at atmospheric pressure.

Compressed hydrogen tanks are incredibly safe. The issues are weight and volume. Liquid hydrogen
storage might be better (with respect to weight and volume) but I can't say whether that is the true or not. Also I'm not sure about the difference in safety between liquid and compressed hydrogen.

#44 Widefoot2

Widefoot2
  • Member

  • 452 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 03 November 2019 - 10:25

 

Oil, though, is just used up. There's no recovering oil once it goes up in smoke. So, I'm not sure what you are extrapolating or trying to suggest.

Potentially there's ways of recovering excess hydrocarbons from the atmosphere to make new "gasoline" fuels.  That's exactly what Carbon Engineering claims to be able to do: https://www.national...eutral-science/

 

As to whether the totally energy balance makes sense, that's TBD.  But the possibility is there...



#45 GrumpyYoungMan

GrumpyYoungMan
  • Member

  • 5,866 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2019 - 11:54

Compressed hydrogen tanks are incredibly safe. The issues are weight and volume. Liquid hydrogen
storage might be better (with respect to weight and volume) but I can't say whether that is the true or not. Also I'm not sure about the difference in safety between liquid and compressed hydrogen.

I could be wrong but anything compressed sounds more dangerous than anything uncompressed - but that is just my opinion.

#46 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,705 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 November 2019 - 13:02

For those of us who are old enough to remember the moon landings ... there's a reason why stages II and II of the Saturn V rocket were hydrogen powered, but stage I (the one that got the thing off of the ground) used a petroleum-derived propellant.



#47 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 21,509 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 November 2019 - 15:20

That’s the whole point - they are spending billions on electricity when all you need to do is make a more environmentally friendly fuel for the already existing ICE - which already more or less exists.

And isn’t the tyres that produce a lot of CO2 from vehicles anyway... that’s before we start looking at air travel...

As I said this is all Fat vs Sugar over again and history will judge us!

 

Sorry I really don't understand what you're trying to say. Methane, like other hydrocarbons, burns to produce CO2 and water. We're trying to reduce the CO2 we produce so methane isn't exactly environmentally friendly.

 

Electricity has the advantage of having many ways to generate it, many of which are carbon neutral. I don't know why you're talking about tyres and cleaner air travel is also being heavily developed.



#48 GrumpyYoungMan

GrumpyYoungMan
  • Member

  • 5,866 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 03 November 2019 - 17:34

Sorry I really don't understand what you're trying to say. Methane, like other hydrocarbons, burns to produce CO2 and water. We're trying to reduce the CO2 we produce so methane isn't exactly environmentally friendly.

Electricity has the advantage of having many ways to generate it, many of which are carbon neutral. I don't know why you're talking about tyres and cleaner air travel is also being heavily developed.

I wasn’t disagreeing with you, I was just raising the point that tyres generate a lot of CO2 which will still be there even if we go full electric - I also seem recall that they (tyres) produce more CO2 than what comes from the ICE... but I can’t remember where I saw/read/heard it...

If we are serious about reducing CO2 start at air travel as I bet that causes more pollution than the ICE does...

Edited by GrumpyYoungMan, 03 November 2019 - 17:35.


#49 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 13,725 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 03 November 2019 - 17:45

I wasn’t disagreeing with you, I was just raising the point that tyres generate a lot of CO2 which will still be there even if we go full electric - I also seem recall that they (tyres) produce more CO2 than what comes from the ICE... but I can’t remember where I saw/read/heard it...

If we are serious about reducing CO2 start at air travel as I bet that causes more pollution than the ICE does...

Tyres are at the moment a necessary component in cars, whereas the ICE is not. Just because tyres are also a problem doesn't mean that we shouldn't look to solutions for other problems. 



#50 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 4,935 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 03 November 2019 - 17:46

If we are serious about reducing CO2 start at air travel as I bet that causes more pollution than the ICE does...

Take a read about Air Race E, it's supposed to start next year with first aircraft revealed... in a few weeks actually. It aims to push electric aviation technolgy and is backed by Airbus.

 

The electrification of aviation is a serious area of research for all of the major players. I don't know why it keeps being talked about here as if it isn't.