Eco Balance: Tour de France or F1 season, which is worse?

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79496
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11113

Eco Balance: Tour de France or F1 season, which is worse?




by Christophe » 07/07/08, 13:41

Everything is in the title, in your opinion between the Tour de France and a season of F1, what is the event that has the worst EcoBilan?

Obviously, a priori, we focus largely on the F1 but closer look is not necessarily so obvious.

After that, it depends what we count or what we do not count especially in the preparation of the test.

Examples: R&D in F1, training of cyclists, movement of spectators ... etc ...

One thing is nevertheless certain: it is better to develop the image of the bicycle than that of the car ...

Subsidiary question: are F1s flying?

Edit: here is an 1ere answer CO2 report for the F1
Last edited by Christophe the 19 / 07 / 08, 11: 56, 2 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
gegyx
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 7025
Registration: 21/01/05, 11:59
x 2954




by gegyx » 07/07/08, 14:05

Must also see the messages carried.

: Arrowd: The F1 is spectacular, but sectarian, to advocate a better automotive technique, and to sell more basic cars ...

: Arrowu: The Tour de France cyclist is interesting and moves a lot of people.
Cities have an economic, tourist interest when they receive the Tour.
This tour creates a community feeling that is well accepted.
They occupy a lot of people in the afternoon watching TV, watching beautiful landscapes, they may never see, because of disability or financial means.
This can lead to knowing a region that would benefit from being more appreciated.

And finally, it encourages people to use their bikes, children want to do exploits.

---------
Since you are talking about it, just to see, do the ecobrand, the soap opera Ingrid Betancourt, since 6 years, for a single person concerned, ... : Mrgreen:
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79496
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11113




by Christophe » 07/07/08, 14:12

Oula exact Gegyx but if we start talking about the consequences and economic consequences (because there is THAT which counts for 99% of the people) to make the ecobilan one is bad ...

Already I think there are more bikes that are sold after the tour de France than F1 cars after a season : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen:
0 x
Matt113
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 344
Registration: 22/05/08, 09:15




by Matt113 » 07/07/08, 14:45

I would say it must be kif-kif, there are still a lot of people who move to see both events.
And then during the races, whether for the f1 or the bike is a lot of grilled fuel when you see all the cars, motorcycles, etc ... that follow the cyclists.
0 x
User avatar
geotrouvetout
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 108
Registration: 18/09/05, 21:10
Location: 76




by geotrouvetout » 07/07/08, 15:56

From another point of view, the F1 promoted cigarettes, while the tour promotes pharmaceuticals : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen:

But in 2 cases they are financial products at the expense of sport, what values ​​can we inculcate in our kids ???, and it does not matter the ecology of the moment that it reports even if from the appearances one of the 2 is closer to nature.

A question to the F1 pros, what is the level of pollution of their engine which is very sharp with a much higher efficiency than the conventional engines of everyone's vehicles as well as special fuels, and as mentioned above this includes a large part of R&D.

Geo;).
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79496
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11113




by Christophe » 07/07/08, 16:11

Ben yeah the trick is doping but anything but water : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen:
0 x
Leo Maximus
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2183
Registration: 07/11/06, 13:18
x 124




by Leo Maximus » 07/07/08, 19:35

I can say one thing, the Tour de France leaves traces of its passage, even a year after they are visible in the stages of mountain! In some places it is catastrophic, fortunately there is the wind which sends away the detritus produced by the caravan (in particular those big green hands with the con) and by the spectators. There is a garbage collection but it only concerns a small part of what is thrown on the edge of the roads.
Road pollution must be added to acres of aerosol paint, the fact that spectators are parked anywhere and the motorhomes that take the opportunity to drain sewage.

Formula 1 and CO2: what a balance sheet for the F1

It's a lot less than the Concorde ... : Lol:
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14142
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 841




by Flytox » 07/07/08, 19:43

Hello geotrouvetout
geotrouvetout wrote:From another point of view, the F1 promoted cigarettes, while the tour promotes pharmaceuticals : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen:

Cyclists race for the Pharmaceutical World Championship.: Mrgreen: : Mrgreen:

geotrouvetout wrote:But in 2 cases they are financial products at the expense of sport, what values ​​can we inculcate in our kids ???, and it does not matter the ecology of the moment that it reports even if from the appearances one of the 2 is closer to nature.

What we instill in kids is that with "a little" dope, cheating what, we can always do better than the other and then it's normal "they" all do it etc ... Come on , going a bit fast: We should have a generation of cheaters, oblivious and irresponsible. :frown: : Mrgreen: ... always this cult of performance ..... :frown:

geotrouvetout wrote:A question to the pro F1, what is the level of pollution of their engine that are very sharp with a yield much higher than the conventional engines of the vehicles of all the world as well as special fuels

Chui not a F1 pro, but I believe they have no limitation for pollutant releases. So if no NOx limitation, they are looking for a great combustion temperature that improves efficiency. The high engine is able to cash much higher temperatures and the specific consumption is excellent (seems' it, I did not find conso standardized 90 km / h : Mrgreen: ).

For special fuels, remember the scuba and gas mask they used a few years ago during refueling, it should contain only bios friendly products ....: Mrgreen:

A+
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79496
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11113




by Christophe » 07/07/08, 21:15

Excellent .pdf Léo even if it does not take into account the indirect costs of R&D nevertheless the orders of magnitude are without appeal:

Finally, even if we admit that this study has certain shortcomings (for example, the additional electricity consumption generated by the event), the breakdown of CO2 emissions is as follows:

The 1 Formula and the moving of the stables: 555,0 tons of CO2, ie 6,6%
The displacement of journalists: 629,4 tons of CO2, ie 7,5%
The movement of the spectators: 6975,7 tons of CO2, ie 83,0%
Other items (safety and waste): 239,9 tons of CO2, ie 2,9%


For Sunday's F1 GP alone, the 65000 spectators will have traveled the cumulative distance of 12,9 million kilometers in a vehicle. For comparison, the distance traveled by vehicle (12,9 millions of kilometers) to attend the F1 GP is as follows:
· 323 towers of the planet;
· 34 times the Earth-Moon distance;
· 6300 round trips between Brussels and the Côte d'Azur;
· 35000 trips between Namur and the Belgian coast (enough to empty
the municipality of Namur in full at the rate of 3 persons per
vehicle);
· Average annual distance traveled by 835 vehicles in Belgium.
The number of passenger-kilometers transported by air is estimated at 10 million.


For the tour, assuming that there is 1000 vehicle in the caravan + staffs and that the tour is 2000 km long ... we have the worst 2 Million km vehicle over a season ... against 12 Millions for a great price.

We can therefore deduce that the F1 is much worse than the Tour de France at the CO2 level for the rest, waste style on the roads it is sure that the Tour de France is more "dispersive" ...
Last edited by Christophe the 07 / 07 / 08, 21: 40, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
delnoram
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 1322
Registration: 27/08/05, 22:14
Location: Mâcon-Tournus
x 2




by delnoram » 07/07/08, 21:36

Christophe wrote: for the rest, waste style on the roads it is sure that the Tour de France is more "dispersive" ...


The tour last year was spent on a small part of my cyclo trip and being on this road the next day I did not find anything at the waste level, contrary to what we see along the roads usually (package cigarette, most often, sometimes some bottles or can).

But my region is not among the most "loaded" in viewers, which therefore does not make it the typical example. :|
0 x
"Thinking should not it be taught in school rather than to make learning by heart the facts that are not all proven?"
"It's not because they are likely to be wrong they are right!" (Coluche)

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Google Adsense [Bot] and 177 guests