In the upcoming year, Formula 1 (F1) is set to undertake one of its most ambitious transformations yet, shifting from fossil fuels to a fully sustainable fuel mixture. This initiative is part of a broader strategy to adhere to new environmental regulations and demonstrate that the sport can, as F1 puts it, “continue without the need for new car production”.
Nonetheless, skepticism remains. As F1 contributes over 1% of the total carbon footprint in sports, experts argue that there are far more significant environmental issues that F1 must address. What are these challenges and how can we overcome them?
Switch Gears
In 2020, F1’s governing body, the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), established a timeline for race car engines to transition to 100% sustainable fuel by 2026 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2030.
From 2023 to 2024, Formula 2 and Formula 3, F1’s supporting racing series, will start utilizing 55% ‘sustainable bio-based fuels’, transitioning to 100% ‘advanced sustainable fuels’ by 2025.
F1 has developed its own ‘sustainable’ fuel for 2026, designed specifically for the hybrid engines currently used in F1 cars, which consist of both an internal combustion engine (ICE) and two electric motor generators.
According to F1, the new fuel will not raise the overall carbon levels in the atmosphere. The carbon used in these new fuels will be sourced from existing materials, such as household waste and non-food biomass, or it will be captured directly from atmospheric carbon dioxide.
This will enable the production of synthetic fuels, which are man-made fuels aimed at replacing the fossil fuel-based gasoline currently in use. In the long term, the FIA asserts that F1, 2, and 3 will all eventually adopt this “fully synthetic hybrid fuel”.
Moreover, this new fuel will be classified as “drop-in”, indicating that it will be compatible with existing internal combustion engines as well as the current fuel distribution infrastructure. This means the fuel powering F1 cars in 2026 will be the same fuel you could purchase at your local gas station today.
Is it Truly Sustainable?
However, as the term “sustainable” has gained popularity, experts have started to challenge F1’s assertions.
Dr. Paula Pérez-López, an expert in environmental and social sustainability at the MINES ParisTech Center for Observation, Impacts, and Energy (OIE), articulates that for a product to qualify as “sustainable”, it must fulfill certain environmental, social, and economic criteria, with each segment of the supply chain considering these factors.
“The term ‘sustainable’ should not be confused with ‘low carbon’. A product or process may exhibit low carbon emissions but still produce high levels of other pollutants, thus rendering it ‘unsustainable’. “
The FIA’s collaboration with the Zemo partnership, a UK-based nonprofit organization, has led to the introduction of the Sustainable Racing Fuel Assurance Scheme (SRFAS). This third-party initiative ensures that sustainable racing fuels comply with FIA regulations.
The certification mandates that the fuel comprises “at least 99 percent Advanced Sustainable Components (ASC)” that are certified to be derived from renewable energy sources such as non-biological origin (RFNBO), municipal waste, or non-food biomass.
Essentially, this means that the new fuel must be synthetic, produced from waste, or derived from materials not intended for human or animal consumption, such as specially engineered algae.
New fuels must also adhere to criteria such as the EU Renewable Energy Directive III (RED III) along with EU Delegated Law.
Fraser Browning, the founder of Curve Carbon, which advises companies on minimizing their environmental footprints, indicates that these new fuels can indeed facilitate genuine decarbonization efforts if managed appropriately.
“The overarching question pertains to F1’s complete impact,” he notes. “Is F1 pursuing synthetic fuels as a vital component of their sustainability goals, or is it merely a procedural formality?”
Browning emphasizes that advancements in motorsport have historically contributed to significant innovations in sustainable transportation. For instance, in 2020, Mercedes announced that hybrid technology would be utilized in road cars. Earlier this year, they also revealed a new battery technology capable of extending the range of electric vehicles by 25 percent.
“Without the innovations deriving from motorsport, hybrid vehicles wouldn’t have evolved at the present speed,” he contends. “However, this needs to be executed transparently and responsibly.”
Cutting Carbon
Beyond the transition to synthetic fuels, F1 is also making strides to reduce carbon emissions in other areas. Travel and logistics account for roughly two-thirds of F1’s carbon emissions, as teams, heavy machinery, and fans travel considerable distances between races each year.
To mitigate this, adjustments have been made to the F1 calendar for 2024 to lessen freight distances between events, as stated in F1’s latest Impact Report. For example, the Japanese Grand Prix has been synchronized with other Asia-Pacific races and moved to April.
Additionally, F1 has broadened the adoption of biofuels for the trucks used to transport equipment throughout Europe, resulting in a 9% reduction in logistical carbon emissions.
By the conclusion of 2024, total carbon emissions are projected to decrease by 26% from 2018 levels, although F1 acknowledges there remain “key milestones to achieve, including further investments in alternative fuels and updates to our logistics system to enhance efficiency”.
Synthetic Fuels vs. Electric Vehicles
What does it mean when F1 claims that its new synthetic fuel is a drop-in solution suitable for everyday vehicles? Could it serve as a more sustainable alternative to electric vehicles (EVs)?
Critics warn that producing synthetic fuels for internal combustion engines (ICE) is energy-intensive, costly, and may require five times the renewable electricity compared to operating a battery-powered electric vehicle.
At present, 96% of hydrogen used for these fuels within the EU is derived from natural gas, a process that releases significant amounts of CO₂. Currently, renewable hydrogen is more costly than fossil-based hydrogen.
“Obtaining pure and concentrated CO₂ poses a considerable challenge,” states Gonzalo Amarante Guimarantes Pereira, a professor at the State University of Campinas in São Paulo, Brazil, and co-author of a study comparing biofuels with pure electric vehicles.
“There is a technology known as direct air capture that can achieve this, but attaining 100% concentration comes with substantial energy costs. The estimated expense varies between $500 to $1,200 (approximately £375 to £895) per tonne, rendering e-fuels at least four to eight times more costly than operating an electric vehicle.”
Browning concurs that EVs represent a more favorable low-carbon choice for the future. “Their emissions during use and maintenance are significantly lower,” he states.
“While synthetic fuels might yield a lesser overall impact if managed wisely, we still lack a comprehensive lifecycle assessment across multiple sustainability metrics to definitively address this issue.”
In simpler terms, as long as the entire system producing synthetic fuels cannot be reliably demonstrated to have a positive environmental impact, the jury remains out on the actual extent of their effects.
Read More:
Source: www.sciencefocus.com
