• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Their hobby is a feat of mechanichal engineering, and like I said, their prescence accounts for less than 1% of total emissions.The research and development that goes into these cars can also translate to consumer cars.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the improved aerodymics, engine efficiency, and reliability from pushing engineering practices significantly offset the emissions created by the sport

    Here is an interesting read showcasing that f1 puts out one tenth of the emissions that the world cup does and also shows that the races themselves only cover 0.7% of the sport’s emissions. So that is 0.7% of <1% of global emissions, which is negligible.

    I understand that off principle, it may seem like a waste, but thinking pragmatically for a second one can see that the benefits outweigh the environmental costs.

    • @mojofrododojo
      link
      English
      14 hours ago

      Their hobby is a feat of mechanichal engineering, and like I said, their prescence accounts for less than 1% of total emissions.

      their presence accounts for less than 1% of total emission for what? it’s far below total combustion emissions so I have no idea what you’re on about; if you’re asserting that the race itself only uses 1% of the total expended to move the cars to the next race etc., I’ve got radical advice bud:

      you could end 100% of that emission by just STOPPING. Let them mario kart, let them gran turismo ffs.

      The research and development that goes into these cars can also translate to consumer cars.

      yeah this seems like the nasa argument but the actual returns are tiny, teeeny amounts of cross-pollination from the race world to the real world, because even though the real world might benefit from something like radical aerodynamics (vacuum motors for example) don’t work on city streets, or they’re so feverishly expensive that they can’t be applied to the average car.

      Cute canard tho.

      Here is an interesting read showcasing that f1 puts out one tenth of the emissions that the world cup does and also shows that the races themselves only cover 0.7% of the sport’s emissions. So that is 0.7% of <1% of global emissions, which is negligible.

      well that’s fine because I’d like people to stop travelling massive distances for sportsball too. no need to compare, cut 'em both.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        132 minutes ago

        Less than 1% of global greenhouse gas emissions (And by my rough math, it could be lower than even 0.5%)

        While many of the engineering improvements from racing aren’t nearly as dramatic as they were previously (take the flappy paddle gearbox, for example). Nowadays, the improvements are lower level, think things like material science, manufacturing processes, and efficiency. But given the scale of the consumer vehicle market, these small changes add up very quickly.

        Also, I dont think you understand what neglibility means. We would still be well on track for net zero carbon emissions even without sacrificing these culturally/socially significant activities.

        The prime contributor to emissions by far and away is the industrial/power sector. Slight improvements there equate to decades if not hundreds of years of racing/football. A 5 percent decrease in either would easily account for thousands of years of both.

        This is my problem with the “consumers need to do their part” rhetoric. We already are. The only reason things are as bad as they have been is entirely because of greedy mega corporations and governments who refuse to change due to corruption.