F1 claims to have reduced its carbon footprint by 13% in 2022 and is on track to achieve its ambitious target of net zero emissions in 2030. But significant indirect emissions are not included in its balance sheet and the means used to achieve its targets have attracted criticism.
Representatives of the Formula One Group company presented on Tuesday the “2023 impact report” which highlights the organization’s improvements in its environmental record.
With this report, “we can really show what sustainability and action looks like,” said Ellen Jones, head of environment, social and governance at Formula 1, during a virtual conference.
In 2018, F1 claimed to emit 256,551 tonnes of CO equivalent2 (t of CO eq.2). For example, a Quebecer emits 8.4 tonnes per year.
In 2022, the carbon footprint shows a drop of 13%, with 223,000 t of eq. CO2.
Which means that there remain “37% reductions to be made by 2030 to achieve our net zero objective”, we can read in the report.
If F1 succeeds in reducing its CO emissions by 37%2 by 2030, it will have halved its carbon footprint since 2018.
Still 128,000 t of eq. CO2
But this scenario means that its annual activities would still emit around 128,000 t eq. CO2. So why are its leaders talking about carbon neutrality (net zero)?
At a press conference, Ellen Jones explained that “our net zero emissions commitment has always been a minimum reduction of 50%” and not an “absolute zero emissions” goal, because “having zero emissions means you would not exist” .
F1 intends to “monitor the market for carbon credit projects” to offset the remaining 128,000 tonnes of emissions, without however giving details on how it intends to go about it.
According to energy specialist Pierre-Olivier Pineau, for F1’s carbon neutrality plan to be credible and consistent with the objectives of the Paris Agreement, “it would have to reduce by much more”.
According to the holder of the Chair of Energy Sector Management at HEC Montréal, “an organization can do this [acheter des crédits pour 128 000 t d’éq. CO2], but overall it is not possible, because there is not enough compensation potential on Earth for all organizations to do it. Or, we would have to go for direct CO capture2 in the air… at costs between $500 and $1000 per ton. But at that price, it’s better to find ways to reduce emissions.”
Professor Pineau adds that having the objective of “reducing its emissions by 50% is not nothing” and “that there is a completely laudable aspect to that”, but reducing its emissions by 13% CO emissions2as would be the case currently, “it’s not very difficult”, because “we are in a system which is so inefficient so, by actively managing energy consumption a little, we can find opportunities for significant reduction “.
Real measures or a smokescreen?
The Formula One Group says it has made several significant changes in recent years in order to reduce its carbon footprint.
The number of employees who travel by plane during the Grand Prix races has reportedly been reduced, with 150 people now working remotely. The company also says it carries less equipment, and lighter equipment, on planes to go from one race to the next.
The report also explains that F1 uses “biofuel for the trucks” that transport equipment and that F1 has reduced the carbon footprint of its racing cars.
It also plans that the drivers’ cars will be powered by “100% renewable fuel” within two years. The company also invests in “sustainable fuel” for aviation.
But for Patrick Bonin, of Greenpeace Canada, these measures are only a “smokescreen”.
The head of the environmental group’s Climate-Energy campaign says that “the vast majority of the plan is based on compensation and not reduction.”
Formula 1 “resorts to solutions which are in no way sustainable and which are false solutions, for example it uses biofuel, so it uses agriculture to feed vehicles when it should be used primarily for humans”.
He adds that “sustainable fuel technologies for aviation are extremely energy-intensive and their potential is very limited”, and that these types of solutions “should be used for essential uses and not to green an industry of millionaires”.
Patrick Bonin also denounces “that emissions compensation is a false solution” when it is used to compensate for new CO emissions.2.
“Offsetting should be used to compensate for past emissions” and “not to allow an industry to continue to pollute”.
Half of emissions come from logistics
In the 2023 impact report presented on Tuesday by F1 executives, it is indicated that only 1% of CO2 issued by the organization comes from racing cars. A tenth of the carbon footprint comes from company infrastructure, 12% is the result of “event operations” and 29% comes from employee travel.
Logistics, the transport of equipment by truck and plane, is the most energy-intensive aspect of F1 with 49% of emissions in 2022.
The report notes that emissions attributable to logistics increased in the last annual report, notably due to the addition of races to the F1 circuit.
F1 has not taken into account certain so-called “scope 3” emissions
In its report, F1 did not count emissions from spectator travel during events, waste management and food.
In a carbon footprint, these indirect emissions are generally counted in the level 3 category (or “scope 3”).
“If we wanted to be rigorous and if we really wanted to claim to have made full disclosure of the emissions, we would have to include these “scope 3” emissions. But they don’t do it,” comments Pierre-Olivier Pineau.
Luc Baillargeon Nadeau, project manager and head of sustainable development at LCL, a consulting firm in environmental solutions, has produced an estimate of the ecological footprint of the Montreal Grand Prix.
It estimates more than 1500 tonnes of CO2 broadcasts linked to the local travel of spectators. For comparison, he estimates that between 15 and 20 tonnes of CO2 will be emitted by the racing cars during the weekend.
Regarding the air transport of spectators, he explains that it is difficult to make an estimate without having a detailed study of the origin of the participants.
“But if a significant proportion of visitors come from outside, GHG emissions can rise quickly. We could quickly talk about 5000 to 10,000 t of CO2 for an event of the magnitude of F1 in Montreal,” he says.