Just saw this up on the beeb F1 site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/formula_one/13285976.stm Looks like he is trying to worm into F1 again, this time as a green engine supplier in 2013. What are your views? I would rather see a Lambo!
If they are trying to make the sport green then concentrate on the logistical aspect of it and arrange calenders in such a way to minimise the air distance between races and help the teams streamline their supply chains to a similar effect, thats where the real fuel burning happens. This pandering to the green lobbyists through changing the racing itself really is endangering the very ethos of the sport without any tangible benefit. The fuel used by all teams combined in an F1 season is less than that used by one Boeing 747 trans-atlantic flight so they really are barking up the wrong tree. On the subject of Craig, em a load of Pollocks, has he had a successful foray into the sport yet?
Making a greener sport? Lets do as Martin Brundle suggested a while ago - reduce the race distance to say 150 miles (approx). Also why not reduce the tyre allocation to 5 sets for Quali and the race.
The sport is green and has been since the 90's. The FIA carbon offsets all the emissions by the cars during testing, practice, quali and racing. Further more they also off set all the CO2 from the team travel and go one further by off setting the CO2 footprint created by the fans. This was all begun long before carbon trading and off-setting was properly conceived. Therefore F1 is probably the greenest sport of all. What the FIA are trying to do is increase the green image of the sport, not the sport itself. Personally I don't mind 4 cylinder turbo charged engines, but the teams should have a choice like they did in the 80s. Turbo charged 4 pot reduced capacity engines, or NA V8's with a capacity limit.
'Top Tip:a 747 is far greener than a domestic car per person/mile .' I wish it were as simple as running cost. What about the energy/materials used in development, what about the disposal issues, what about road repair, what about airport terminal buildings, de-icing, staff transport blah blah blah....
Why doesnt he drive for HRT if he badly wants to be in F1 again. He has always failed and had a great car in his first 2 years and only won (just) one of them
No. For once, I do not agree with Brundle over this. It would be far greener to ban air travel within F1. Then we could go back to the Horse and Cart to freight it by road, rail and canal systems. And if the (un)greens still aren't happy while they fly their political flag, the drivers could line up on the grid, suits gloves, helmets and all, and run around the track without the nasty 4 cylinder car of the near future. One wonders whom amongst the political numbskulls would be first to volunteer to a return to the cave without electricity or gas supply, hoping only for a dripping ceiling…
'It would be far greener to ban air travel within F1.' Well, yes. So you would effectively abandon racing outside Europe? Or have 3 week gaps to any other location? I think you have over reacted a little?
In the future would it be wiser to have F1 bases in Asia and America aswell as in Europe? They could just build the car there and not have to export it off on a massive jumbo jet anymore, but all designs and development still at the main compound.
Thats me - an enigma inside a riddle. Can't remember who 'coined' it. I think you are teasing us more than we realise?
