RE: Final EU vote on 2035 engine phaseout delayed
Discussion
GT9 said:
I enjoyed that.
The last question from the graduate engineer about thermal efficiency is the one that matters to road cars.
Put one of these '50% at full power' engines into a passenger car application, feeding through a multi-ratio gearbox and operating a typical drive cycle at an array of different speed and torque settings, and it's no longer 50% unfortunately.
The only way to make best use of that 50% efficiency would be to use the engine as a range extender directly driving a constant speed generator, but the complexity of such a vehicle that has both a fuel system and an electrical system is an eternal issue. In any case you've lost the driving feel of an ICE.
Once you go through the motions of comparing the lifetime emissions, production cost, operating cost, kerb mass and effects on packaging and weight distribution of that approach vs just adding more mass to an existing battery, objectively it almost always leads the conclusion that the larger battery pathway is the superior engineering solution.
It's a disappointing and boring outcome I know.
The efficiency rev range is there because thats the area most important for the application, it doesn't mean with a wider target range you cant or wont make huge gains.The last question from the graduate engineer about thermal efficiency is the one that matters to road cars.
Put one of these '50% at full power' engines into a passenger car application, feeding through a multi-ratio gearbox and operating a typical drive cycle at an array of different speed and torque settings, and it's no longer 50% unfortunately.
The only way to make best use of that 50% efficiency would be to use the engine as a range extender directly driving a constant speed generator, but the complexity of such a vehicle that has both a fuel system and an electrical system is an eternal issue. In any case you've lost the driving feel of an ICE.
Once you go through the motions of comparing the lifetime emissions, production cost, operating cost, kerb mass and effects on packaging and weight distribution of that approach vs just adding more mass to an existing battery, objectively it almost always leads the conclusion that the larger battery pathway is the superior engineering solution.
It's a disappointing and boring outcome I know.
The most interesting thing from the talk was the very high compression and lambda targets being deployed, and how those could go as high as lambda 2.0 in the new 2026 engines.
I've said for decades going away from lean burn to cats was the wrong move, and here we see the smartest engineers on the planet making that work.
It's also important where he discusses politicians dictating method rather than end game, and how thats idiotic.
otolith said:
I want to see this ICE drivetrain which consists only of a fuel tank and doesn’t require several hundred kilograms of engine and gearbox in order to function.
Personally I'm more concerned that a poster with that particular username may have at some point been near the controls of an aeroplane.bigothunter said:
500TORQUES said:
911hope said:
Do they mention the fuel they burn moving the whole circus around the globe every couple of weeks and how irrelevant the car fuel and efficiency is?
That is already carbon neutral.
F1 have reduced the travel impact with some current measures such as running the broadcast from a fixed location for all races now, rather than transport the studio and staff to site. They have also implemented smaller travelling staff numbers for the teams.
The fuel used from 2026 will be carbon neutral, it's recently moved to a 10% biofuel prior to the big change in 2026, and there is a commitment for the whole circus to be carbon neutral by 2030.
F1 is one of the major innovative environments that is going to help the move to sustainability faster, it's quite an exciting environment to see engineering making leaps forward which will be useful, something we haven't really been able to say for a while.
The chase to EV only is clearly a mistake, you are seeing alternatives finding a voice as that realisation takes hold. This will especially be the case for transportation of goods.
500TORQUES said:
I thought i read the transport was fully offset, but can't find the info now.
F1 have reduced the travel impact with some current measures such as running the broadcast from a fixed location for all races now, rather than transport the studio and staff to site. They have also implemented smaller travelling staff numbers for the teams.
The fuel used from 2026 will be carbon neutral, it's recently moved to a 10% biofuel prior to the big change in 2026, and there is a commitment for the whole circus to be carbon neutral by 2030.
F1 is one of the major innovative environments that is going to help the move to sustainability faster, it's quite an exciting environment to see engineering making leaps forward which will be useful, something we haven't really been able to say for a while.
The chase to EV only is clearly a mistake, you are seeing alternatives finding a voice as that realisation takes hold. This will especially be the case for transportation of goods.
Thanks F1 have reduced the travel impact with some current measures such as running the broadcast from a fixed location for all races now, rather than transport the studio and staff to site. They have also implemented smaller travelling staff numbers for the teams.
The fuel used from 2026 will be carbon neutral, it's recently moved to a 10% biofuel prior to the big change in 2026, and there is a commitment for the whole circus to be carbon neutral by 2030.
F1 is one of the major innovative environments that is going to help the move to sustainability faster, it's quite an exciting environment to see engineering making leaps forward which will be useful, something we haven't really been able to say for a while.
The chase to EV only is clearly a mistake, you are seeing alternatives finding a voice as that realisation takes hold. This will especially be the case for transportation of goods.
SpeckledJim said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
SpeckledJim said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Sorry, but trying to convince people, that the energy needed to move the 70 pound weight of the fuel tank (including the weight of the tank itself, and which reduces in weight as the fuel in the tank is consumed) in a medium sized ICE vehicle, is going to be anywhere near the energy required to move the weight of a 1200 pound EV battery (which stays the same weight, whether or not it is full or empty) is just clutching at straws.
EVs may have regen, but the energy used in accelerating the weight of a 1200 pound battery, up to the required speed, is always going to be greater than the energy consumed in accelerating an equivalent ICE vehicle with a 70 pound fuel tank, up to the same speed.
So when you read reports about EVs that say things like ‘it does the equivalent of 150mpg’ what do you think that means?EVs may have regen, but the energy used in accelerating the weight of a 1200 pound battery, up to the required speed, is always going to be greater than the energy consumed in accelerating an equivalent ICE vehicle with a 70 pound fuel tank, up to the same speed.
Because you’re saying the opposite.
It means nothing, when proponents of EVs desperately try to kid people, that it takes less energy to move a 1200 pound EV battery (which weighs the same when it is empty, as when it is full) than it takes to move a full 70 pound ICE fuel tank (which reduces in weight as the fuel in the tank is consumed)
Add to this that electricity has one of the worst Government fuel factors (Cradle to grave emissions) of any of the fuels available in the UK, where only 43% is produced by renewables, and the rest by fossil fuels and some nuclear.
You’re actually claiming an ICE is more efficient than an EV!?
Does it strike you as odd that at even the most strident of the anti-EV crowd aren’t here backing you up?
What percentage chance would you assign to the possibility that you’ve got this one wrong?
https://news.mgmotor.eu/what-is-the-equivalent-fue...
Clearly this is a shady and deceptive practice, as you have blown the whistle and told us all the truth. Are you going to report them to the ASA or shall I?
500TORQUES said:
I thought i read the transport was fully offset, but can't find the info now.
F1 have reduced the travel impact with some current measures such as running the broadcast from a fixed location for all races now, rather than transport the studio and staff to site. They have also implemented smaller travelling staff numbers for the teams.
The fuel used from 2026 will be carbon neutral, it's recently moved to a 10% biofuel prior to the big change in 2026, and there is a commitment for the whole circus to be carbon neutral by 2030.
F1 is one of the major innovative environments that is going to help the move to sustainability faster, it's quite an exciting environment to see engineering making leaps forward which will be useful, something we haven't really been able to say for a while.
The chase to EV only is clearly a mistake, you are seeing alternatives finding a voice as that realisation takes hold. This will especially be the case for transportation of goods.
The trouble is that there is no innovation involved in Liberty engaging Goldmans to calculate how many carbon credits to purchase on the open market to offset a fraction of the CO2 and general pollution a wholly unnecessary enterprise creates. F1 have reduced the travel impact with some current measures such as running the broadcast from a fixed location for all races now, rather than transport the studio and staff to site. They have also implemented smaller travelling staff numbers for the teams.
The fuel used from 2026 will be carbon neutral, it's recently moved to a 10% biofuel prior to the big change in 2026, and there is a commitment for the whole circus to be carbon neutral by 2030.
F1 is one of the major innovative environments that is going to help the move to sustainability faster, it's quite an exciting environment to see engineering making leaps forward which will be useful, something we haven't really been able to say for a while.
The chase to EV only is clearly a mistake, you are seeing alternatives finding a voice as that realisation takes hold. This will especially be the case for transportation of goods.
I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
DonkeyApple said:
The trouble is that there is no innovation involved in Liberty engaging Goldmans to calculate how many carbon credits to purchase on the open market to offset a fraction of the CO2 and general pollution a wholly unnecessary enterprise creates.
I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
To survive long term, Formula 1 needs to go fully electric. Fundamentally an upgraded Formula E.I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
ICE motorsport will become the domain of historic vehicles.
DonkeyApple said:
The trouble is that there is no innovation involved in Liberty engaging Goldmans to calculate how many carbon credits to purchase on the open market to offset a fraction of the CO2 and general pollution a wholly unnecessary enterprise creates.
I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
You are such a miserable sod.I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
F1 engineering on the powertrain side has never been so interesting or relevant to the way the future is heading.
Pepperpots said:
I hope it doesn't go full electric, worst thing it could do.
It's going to 40% electric 60% ICE in 2026.F1 will always have a large % ICE component.
FE is garbage, it's a dead man walking series.
F1 and WEC is the most likely to be sustainable, the new hypercar WEC had it's first race just this week, with some manufacturers coming back to that area of racing for the first time in decsdes.
500TORQUES said:
DonkeyApple said:
The trouble is that there is no innovation involved in Liberty engaging Goldmans to calculate how many carbon credits to purchase on the open market to offset a fraction of the CO2 and general pollution a wholly unnecessary enterprise creates.
I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
You are such a miserable sod.I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
F1 engineering on the powertrain side has never been so interesting or relevant to the way the future is heading.
It would be better for it to go full ICE in VR to maintain the experience while being socially acceptable. Max Verstappen is pretty handy in sim racing remember, it’s not that much of a stretch
Most people watch F1 on TV so what’s the difference?
Pan Pan Pan said:
It means nothing, when proponents of EVs desperately try to kid people, that it takes less energy to move a 1200 pound EV battery (which weighs the same when it is empty, as when it is full) than it takes to move a full 70 pound ICE fuel tank (which reduces in weight as the fuel in the tank is consumed)
Add to this that electricity has one of the worst Government fuel factors (Cradle to grave emissions) of any of the fuels available in the UK, where only 43% is produced by renewables, and the rest by fossil fuels and some nuclear.
So please make rational comparisons...such as...
energy to move a EV, including the battery vs. energy to move ICE car, including the tank( with reducing fuel)
Unless you can dream up a 3 x mass factor (mass EV/Mass ICE car), then your argument is just plain wrong.
These highly selective arguments, where key elements are deliberately left out don't sell your case in the slightest.
In fact you probably don't even believe it yourself.
Edited by 911hope on Sunday 19th March 15:41
500TORQUES said:
Pepperpots said:
I hope it doesn't go full electric, worst thing it could do.
It's going to 40% electric 60% ICE in 2026.F1 will always have a large % ICE component.
FE is garbage, it's a dead man walking series.
F1 and WEC is the most likely to be sustainable, the new hypercar WEC had it's first race just this week, with some manufacturers coming back to that area of racing for the first time in decades.
bigothunter said:
DonkeyApple said:
The trouble is that there is no innovation involved in Liberty engaging Goldmans to calculate how many carbon credits to purchase on the open market to offset a fraction of the CO2 and general pollution a wholly unnecessary enterprise creates.
I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
To survive long term, Formula 1 needs to go fully electric. Fundamentally an upgraded Formula E.I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
ICE motorsport will become the domain of historic vehicles.
Changing it is simply greenwashing.
None of this argument about engine efficiency and stuff makes any difference to me. Nor does any arguments about how the electricity is generated or supplied to the chargers, even if they can be made reasonably ubiquitous.
The elephant in the room and the main reason that I have zero interest in an electric car, even if it were the same price as the ICE equivalent, is charge time. If it means that I have to wait inordinate amounts of time to buy another 100 miles or so of range then it's a non-starter. It is not even a consideration.
You can only get the electrons from the grid into the battery so fast and, as it stands, that is not good enough.
The elephant in the room and the main reason that I have zero interest in an electric car, even if it were the same price as the ICE equivalent, is charge time. If it means that I have to wait inordinate amounts of time to buy another 100 miles or so of range then it's a non-starter. It is not even a consideration.
You can only get the electrons from the grid into the battery so fast and, as it stands, that is not good enough.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff