Is Supporting Electric Racing Wishing for the Death of Racing?
Another series has announced that it plans to go all-electric in the near future. Another blow to the “traditionalists” of motorsport and another step closer to government run racing. It pains me to my core to have to write this, but I think it’s time to question: Is supporting e-race cars, indirectly, rooting for the death of the high-performance automobile?
Recently a topic of discussion among people on Twitter is if the government is too involved in racing? In Europe I think it’s a fairly simple answer: yes. Europe has made it very well known that it intends to phase out the combustion engine by 2040. So thinking that this doesn’t influence the European based FIA, would be delusional to say the least. I think we have to look at some facts and figures to consider, are we even right about electric cars as a whole? Let alone electric race cars. But do the government bureaucrats and environmentalists have our best interests in mind? Or is it just another form of people control? Let’s look at a few things about the “green car” initiative.
I can really only speak from the perspective of America. So for my European readers, I apologize. Fuel mileage concerns really started in 1970 with the Arab Oil Embargo, which eventually led to the National Fuel Economy Standards being put in place. This is what set a standard for the auto industry to increase fuel efficiency in vehicles. This really kicked into high gear in 2009 when the Obama Administration wanted a dramatic increase in fuel efficiency. This put an emphasis on smaller lighter cars along with finding alternative fueling methods. The most prevalent is obviously electricity. The problem is that it doesn’t allow for the free market to determine what it wants. It forces consumers to buy what someone else is telling them to buy. What we’ve learned since the enforcement of these policies are topics of much debate. One thing is that electric vehicles have a higher operating cost over the vehicles lifetime. According to consulting firm Arthur D. Little, it can cost up to $20,000 more to maintain, operate and dispose of an electric vehicle. Environmentally speaking, when you factor in the mining of rare earth minerals, which are required for the batteries that e-cars use, electric cars produce three times as much toxic pollution. That figure does not include the resources needed to dispose of the batteries. Vinod Khola, Co-Founder of Sun Microsystems famously said “Electric cars are coal-powered cars”
An easy argument would be that “Coal power plants are far from suburban areas, so their pollution isn’t as concentrated as a large metropolis area.” But you might be mistaken there too. Gasoline cars are condemned for their CO2 production. Little is made of the fact that ⅓ of the lifetime CO2 from an electric car comes from the energy used to make the car itself. Lithium mining is not a “green activity. When an electric car rolls off the production line it is already responsible for 25,000 lbs Of CO2. While a fossil fueled car is responsible for 16,000 lbs. When you look at a lifetime emission for a car at 90,000 miles a Nissan Leaf will have contributed 31 metric tons of CO2. While a comparable Mercedes cdi A160 will have produced just 34 metric tons. What about the fabled Tesla you ask? A Tesla will make 44 metric tons while the similar in class Audi A7 will make just 49 metric tons of CO2. According to the European Trading Systems it costs $7 to clean one ton of CO2 from the air. Which results in a savings of $35 between the two vehicle types. Lastly the National Academy of Sciences report that: if gas car sales increased by 10% by 2020 it would result in an annual increase in 870 air-quality related deaths. At the same time, if electric vehicles sales increased by 10% by 2020, it would result in 1,617 air-quality related deaths, annually. Nearly double the fatality rate.
I fully understand the controversy behind these numbers. Not everyone will agree that electric is the way of the future. While some don’t see how we can continue to make gas and diesel powered cars forever. More than anything else I want you to look at how this impacts your favorite motorsport. Manufactures have to justify sporting costs, by saying that the series has to produce “road relevance”. And with governments and environmentalists pushing certain regulations and sanctions, how can a OEM justify going racing if the expense does not fall in line with what governments require? The answer is: they can’t. As long as people in suits, determine what you and I should drive, how we should drive, where we should drive, how we should park it, how we should fuel it, and how long we can own it, it will spill into racing. It’s inevitable. Formula E is a prime example. Now with the FIA World Rally Cross announcing that they plan to go electric by 2020, Europe’s regulation driven government has gotten to another series. Formula 1 is torn between this same issue. Fans don’t like the hybrid power units. Hell, drivers don’t like them either. But F1 has to remain “road relevant” and with a series driven by European manufactures, relevant means hybrid-electric. Meanwhile, IndyCar has already released its next engine regulations and has decided to go 2.4 liters twin-turbo V6’s. Because America
I’m not here to spark (pardon the pun) a political debate. And with the NFL so heavily influenced by politics the last thing we want is to have our racing decided by politicians. What do you think? Is electric the future? Are you ok with this trend? Do you really believe that electric cars are the way to go? Do you support Formula E? Will you watch the new World Rally X? Let us know on Twitter or in the comments below!
