Autumnpuma

This Environmental Thing

43 posts in this topic

An editorial from grandprix.com:

****

We are all for Formula 1 portraying itself as being environmentally-friendly. That is a very good idea and getting rid of the crazy "fuel burn" segment of the qualifying was an intelligent thing to do. However, one does have to ask whether all this pressure on Asia-Pacific races to hold races at night is really a good idea as the floodlighting in Singapore is expected to use 3.2m Watts of power. This is a vast amount of electricity. Thus we have a rather contradictory approach to saving the world with Max Mosley and the FIA going great guns towards the KERS system and the Formula One group pushing people to use millions of Watts of power.

We appreciate that running the races at night will generate more income because the TV viewing figures will rise in the major F1 markets but, when all is said and done, using up all that electricity sends out the wrong message about the sport.

If there is more demand for the racing in Europe, then perhaps there should be more races in Europe and fewer in far-flung parts of the world where a racing car means very little to most of the population.

****

Indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantasticly honest comment, and very much true to what most of us have been saying.

I wonder what Max Mosley would say in arguement to that point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems that Malaysia and Bahrain are also pitting plans into place in the event that they become night races in the future.

Yeah. Malaysia presented plans for 2009 already... I dunno but I think that'd be like 12pm here ... But I'm so used to wake up early for F1, so it's gonna be weird :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An editorial from grandprix.com:

****

We are all for Formula 1 portraying itself as being environmentally-friendly. That is a very good idea and getting rid of the crazy "fuel burn" segment of the qualifying was an intelligent thing to do. However, one does have to ask whether all this pressure on Asia-Pacific races to hold races at night is really a good idea as the floodlighting in Singapore is expected to use 3.2m Watts of power. This is a vast amount of electricity. Thus we have a rather contradictory approach to saving the world with Max Mosley and the FIA going great guns towards the KERS system and the Formula One group pushing people to use millions of Watts of power.

We appreciate that running the races at night will generate more income because the TV viewing figures will rise in the major F1 markets but, when all is said and done, using up all that electricity sends out the wrong message about the sport.

If there is more demand for the racing in Europe, then perhaps there should be more races in Europe and fewer in far-flung parts of the world where a racing car means very little to most of the population.

****

Indeed.

The thing you dont know dear puma is that they are thinking to use MICE to produce that huge amount of electricity...

tt0119595.jpg

the hard work is to put them to work at the same time...

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: Nice, ecap! Actually, the article is only using the wattage example as a way of driving home the point that night races in far-flung lands for the sake of better viewer times in Europe is ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The concept of F1 is probably as far as you can get from "enviromentally friendly". Lets make a quick count. F1 cars emissions and noise pollution, brake dust, energy cost to create a circuit occupying land that could have been forrest, pollution from the spectators travelling to and from the circuit, testing outside gps, energy spent on development..etc etc, all for the sake of spectacle.

I guess since F1 is reaching so many homes it's still a positive thing to remind people of climate change but actually saying that we care about the enviroment is verging on ludicrous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with the article. Does that make me a hypocrite for looking forward to the Singapore night race?..Damn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article was ok until it reached the following sentence:

"If there is more demand for the racing in Europe, then perhaps there should be more races in Europe and fewer in far-flung parts of the world where a racing car means very little to most of the population."

"far-flung parts where a racing car means very little"???? Since when other countries outside Europe are considered like that?

First, it is perfectly logical to take F1 to other parts to reach more people. Maybe there is no interest in Bangladesh at the moment in F1, but if you took F1 there their interest would certainly rise. According to that logic, tennis, rugby and other sports should never have been played outside UK. After all, they were not known outside Britain in the beggining. Simply idiotic.

Second, "far-flung"? "FAR-FLUNG?????" :furious: Europe itself is far-flung from here, and we gave Fangio, Reutemann and Jose Froilan Gonzalez among others. Froilan Gonzalez gave Ferrari its first win, yet at the time Argentina was a "far-flung country where a racing (f1) car meant very little", at least relatively speaking. Again, totally idiotic. I am curious as if the writer thought that USA should be considered "a far-flung country where a racing car meant very little".

They are far away from Europe, and interest in F1 is low.

I know they are not referring to Argentina, or USA, but to Dubai, Singapore and Thailand (at least that is what I guess), still that phrase sounded too chauvinistic for my taste <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quiet One, you do make some valid arguments there....

You so rightly gave Argentina's historical input into F1.

Of course, I too must reside in one of these "far flung" countries - infact, we must be the furthest flung of all countries in the world, going by that logic.

However - what has New Zealand given Formula 1 in years past?

A 44+ year old team, the second oldest on the grid - McLaren

A world champion - Denny Hulme

A driver Enzo Ferrari called "the best tester I ever had" - Chris Amon

A country where drivers in the '60's came to relax and compete in in The Tasman Cup

It would be hard to find a team today without at least one New Zealander either in the pit crew, or firmly established in the engineering side of things

A world respected motorsport journalist - Eoin Young

A businessman that worked with the teams of McLaren, Brabham, and a few others - Phil Kerr

Several other lesser known drivers - Mike Thackwell, Howden Ganley, Graham McRae (met him the other week), and others

And for a country that has only just passed 4-million inhabitants, a poll in circa 2004 placed Amon, Hulme, and McLaren all inside the top 50 F1 drivers ever. http://www.listener.co.nz/issue/3343/colum...d_the_dead.html

Not too shabby of the furthest flung country in the world, that makes do with number 8 fencing wire to hold our race cars together. :P

Last one out turn out the lights will you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
USA should be considered "a far-flung country where a racing car meant very little".

:) lol

Well I objected to the "better viewing times in Europe" comment. I think that is a misnomer too. Whenever there is a flyaway race in the UK, the coverage is always shown at whatever time that may be with repeat showings at the "normal" time. And as for qualifying? Well that gets relegated to some strange hour - quite often not live. Most Brits (and I'm sure most Europeans) put up with this and this has been the case *for years*. Why should Bernie suddenly get a soft spot for us Europeans when he has been spending most of his time in recent years trying to cut down the number of races here and talking of booting out circuits like Spa, Silverstone, Magny Cours, one of the Italian circuits, Hungaroring, etc.... ?

So find it hard to believe that all of a sudden they are running a night race just to benefit us Europeans??? OK Bernie may say various things, but as everyone knows he occasionally <cough, cough> speaks with "forked tongue" and actually the real reasons for night races are: a ) to create a "spectacle" and encourage tourism into the heart of a big city (easy to sell to tourism chiefs and tourists alike) -stands to reason more especially given the mumblings in the undergrowth about circuits like Magny Cours - which is in the middle of nowhere, b ) to extend F1 to new audiences c ) to get a lot of publicity, d ) finding a new way of selling street races that minimise disruption to day to day commuters/traffic/city life.

To me F1 is 90% about marketing these days and I think Bernie is simply repackaging the sport/creating case studies for use to support some of his ongoing discussions with current/new/other locations.

Edited by Meanioni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"far flung"

Actually, you know this comment got me thinking.....

- How far does one have to fling a country for it to be "far flung"?

and....

- How does one fling a country anyway?? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The article was ok until it reached the following sentence:

"If there is more demand for the racing in Europe, then perhaps there should be more races in Europe and fewer in far-flung parts of the world where a racing car means very little to most of the population."

"far-flung parts where a racing car means very little"???? Since when other countries outside Europe are considered like that?

First, it is perfectly logical to take F1 to other parts to reach more people. Maybe there is no interest in Bangladesh at the moment in F1, but if you took F1 there their interest would certainly rise. According to that logic, tennis, rugby and other sports should never have been played outside UK. After all, they were not known outside Britain in the beggining. Simply idiotic.

Second, "far-flung"? "FAR-FLUNG?????" :furious: Europe itself is far-flung from here, and we gave Fangio, Reutemann and Jose Froilan Gonzalez among others. Froilan Gonzalez gave Ferrari its first win, yet at the time Argentina was a "far-flung country where a racing (f1) car meant very little", at least relatively speaking. Again, totally idiotic. I am curious as if the writer thought that USA should be considered "a far-flung country where a racing car meant very little".

They are far away from Europe, and interest in F1 is low.

I know they are not referring to Argentina, or USA, but to Dubai, Singapore and Thailand (at least that is what I guess), still that phrase sounded too chauvinistic for my taste <_<

quite true the Quiet One...quite true...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The article was ok until it reached the following sentence:

"If there is more demand for the racing in Europe, then perhaps there should be more races in Europe and fewer in far-flung parts of the world where a racing car means very little to most of the population."

"far-flung parts where a racing car means very little"???? Since when other countries outside Europe are considered like that?

First, it is perfectly logical to take F1 to other parts to reach more people. Maybe there is no interest in Bangladesh at the moment in F1, but if you took F1 there their interest would certainly rise. According to that logic, tennis, rugby and other sports should never have been played outside UK. After all, they were not known outside Britain in the beggining. Simply idiotic.

Second, "far-flung"? "FAR-FLUNG?????" :furious: Europe itself is far-flung from here, and we gave Fangio, Reutemann and Jose Froilan Gonzalez among others. Froilan Gonzalez gave Ferrari its first win, yet at the time Argentina was a "far-flung country where a racing (f1) car meant very little", at least relatively speaking. Again, totally idiotic. I am curious as if the writer thought that USA should be considered "a far-flung country where a racing car meant very little".

They are far away from Europe, and interest in F1 is low.

I know they are not referring to Argentina, or USA, but to Dubai, Singapore and Thailand (at least that is what I guess), still that phrase sounded too chauvinistic for my taste <_<

I complete agree, Andres - Tennis, Rugby, Football and other sports should NEVER have been played outside the UK. I am sick to the back teeth of all you other foreign countries robbing our games and becoming better at them than us. It's just not cricket, as one says here. :whistling:

PS - by 'other sports', I presume you are talking about tiddlywinks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I complete agree, Andres - Tennis, Rugby, Football and other sports should NEVER have been played outside the UK. I am sick to the back teeth of all you other foreign countries robbing our games and becoming better at them than us. It's just not cricket, as one says here. :whistling:

PS - by 'other sports', I presume you are talking about tiddlywinks?

Bah, you're just bitter because we beat you at the Davis Cup :P

About twiddlywinks, I just had to google it. Geez, stop inventing non-sensical games! :lol: Why do you British have to make even the simplest of things so complicated? Tennis scoring, football "off-side" rules and cricket incomprehensible concept.

Here is my idea of Tic-Tac-Toe, if it were invented by a British guy:

- You play it on a 3.141592652*3.141592652 grid.

- You use three tokens, called whigglemusstingtons.

- Each player places one token each turn, except on turns 13, 17, 22, 49 and 198 where you can place either none or 4.

- Oh yes, that is because there is a fourth one: the "Poppler". It serves no real purpose, but you can place it on the board. Or on your head.

- If you place a poppler on your head its called a "Pauler". Everybody in the room has to yoddel in Hebrew for the next two hours.

- The objective is to place the three whigglemusstingtons in line. If you manage to place two on the same line, your opponent might call a "Brambly". This means you both must engage into a Sumo match. Whoever wins gets to choose between removing one whigglemustington from the board or pursuit a better career in Japan.

- Horrible British beer must be chugged at all times or you will be disqualified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bah, you're just bitter because we beat you at the Davis Cup :P

About twiddlywinks, I just had to google it. Geez, stop inventing non-sensical games! :lol: Why do you British have to make even the simplest of things so complicated? Tennis scoring, football "off-side" rules and cricket incomprehensible concept.

Here is my idea of Tic-Tac-Toe, if it were invented by a British guy:

- You play it on a 3.141592652*3.141592652 grid.

- You use three tokens, called whigglemusstingtons.

- Each player places one token each turn, except on turns 13, 17, 22, 49 and 198 where you can place either none or 4.

- Oh yes, that is because there is a fourth one: the "Poppler". It serves no real purpose, but you can place it on the board. Or on your head.

- If you place a poppler on your head its called a "Pauler". Everybody in the room has to yoddel in Hebrew for the next two hours.

- The objective is to place the three whigglemusstingtons in line. If you manage to place two on the same line, your opponent might call a "Brambly". This means you both must engage into a Sumo match. Whoever wins gets to choose between removing one whigglemustington from the board or pursuit a better career in Japan.

- Horrible British beer must be chugged at all times or you will be disqualified.

We have a saying here - one swallow, does not a summer make :mf_tongue:

Already played it. We did use a pork pie for our 'grid' though. Perhaps the translation got lost somewhere :eusa_think:

Anyway, our rules are not complex. Well, not to us intelligent people :whistling:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The concept of F1 is probably as far as you can get from "enviromentally friendly". Lets make a quick count. F1 cars emissions and noise pollution, brake dust, energy cost to create a circuit occupying land that could have been forrest, pollution from the spectators travelling to and from the circuit, testing outside gps, energy spent on development..etc etc, all for the sake of spectacle.

I guess since F1 is reaching so many homes it's still a positive thing to remind people of climate change but actually saying that we care about the enviroment is verging on ludicrous.

Couldn't agree more. :thbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: Very good! But I object to you calling all our beer "horrible". :P

It's the truth.....................................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like this idea of more night races on street circuits.

Monaco is bad enough for a street circuit, why add more ?!

Night race, here's an idea bring back those pre 58 Grand Prix formats where races lasted from 4 to 5h to as much 12h in the early days of GP racing.

That way you'd include the night as well.

But at Malaysia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We have a saying here - one swallow, does not a summer make :mf_tongue:

Already played it. We did use a pork pie for our 'grid' though. Perhaps the translation got lost somewhere :eusa_think:

Anyway, our rules are not complex. Well, not to us intelligent people :whistling:

Bah, we are intelligent, too. We invented our own sport here. It's called "Pato" and it's our national sport.

Rules:

- Two teams playing horseback.

- Ball is made out of a duck (alive) inside a basket.

- Players must grab the basket with their hands while riding their horse and carry it towards the opposite rim.

- Two rims at opposite ends of the field.

- Whichever team throws the duck through the other team's rim the most, wins the match.

100% true. This is our national sport. And there aren't many more rules. Well, nowadays the duck was replaced by a ball with handles. If they still used the duck I bet it would be more popular.

See? We are not that stupid! :whistling:

@Muzza: I don't drink beer, but everybody agrees that English beer is horrible. Besides, those are the rules! Beer MUST be horrible! :P

Edited by Quiet One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: Crazy sport (Pato, not the "British" version of Tic-Tac-Toe, which made perfect sense). British beer's decent, well our ale is anyway, not that I drink beer nowadays either. The day I trust an American about beer is the day Bruce admits he has a playboy pin up poster of Hilary Clinton from her college days in his garage...

1721464738_e3afdeee00_o.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is my idea of Tic-Tac-Toe, if it were invented by a British guy:....

That's the version for kids, you should see the adult version :)

Well at least we don't take sports, change them everso slightly, stick fifteen hundredweight of padding on the participants and declare them a world series (when there is only one country playing)... :D

Baseball=cricket/rounders

American football=rugby

Basketball=netball

Racquetball=squash

Champcar/IRL=F1

etc, etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now