It's hard to follow how these points being put across are either consistent, or related to F1.
At one point, the amount of transportation required to deliver the F1 calendar was under question, and around this time the following was posted:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tel 911S
When the Covid lockdown was on , with very little aircraft flights , and a reduction in traffic around the world of about 80% , it made absolutely no difference to the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere , proving that the total human emissions are insignificant .
|
Which means if we follow this through, then F1 need not worry about the amount of travel involved, or the fuel used to do so (because it makes no difference).
So, with that view put across, if the claim is made that
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tel 911S
Despite all of the lies about Biofuels , that actually produce more CO2 as a whole than regular fuel.
|
then F1 switching to Biofuel for both transportation and the cars racing has no impact (so neither positive or negative) - but is using a sustainable (renewable) source of energy rather than the finite fossil fuels currently used.
Which surely means that F1 using Biofuel, whether you think global warming is a conspiracy or not, is still a good thing?
You can't claim Biofuels are a bad thing because they produce more CO2, and simultaneously say the CO2 production from transportation is insignificant.