Carbon fiber technology has been around for a long time. US Airforce and NASA utilized it for aircrafts, whereas F1 brought it into the car realm. The technology is still too expensive to be used in high volume production vehicles. However, it won’t be like that forever and we’ll have Formula 1 to thank once it becomes ubiquitous.
Sure race cars use a lot of fuel but there aren’t a lot of them. Would you rather people race on designated race tracks or out on the public roads. Making car racing illegal wouldn’t stop people from racing cars.
The logic in the last para reminds me of a right wing talk show host who defended gas guzzling Hunvees because there aren’t a lot of them.
As.for those racing on public roads simply enforce speed.limits and fine the bejesus out of them. It is a false choice.
Also if there aren’t a lot of race cars around how will this technology be ubiquitous.
Finally saying that race cars serve a purpose is akin to saying wars service e a purpose.- for technologies developed for war equipment aircraft etc r used for civilian applications.
I will address point by point. The idiot right wing talk show host was simply providing reasons for why Hunvees are not that damaging to environment. By the way where did u get the information that left wingers only attack Humvees! You used Texas as an examlle. Not sure there r many left wingers tbere. The lefties have been shouting their voice boars to increase fuel efficiency standards. Bush gave tax breaks to those who use vehicles for work ourposes. More expensive the vehicle more expensive the tax breaks. Dentists for example went out and got suvs to get the tax break. Don’t lay thus one on lefties. Come on
Re .losing business to another country - another non starter argument. By that logic, no country should do anything to curb pollution because some other country will pollute! Each country should do best clean it’s backyard. Among industrialized nations USA is biggest carbon footprint per capita. Surely we don’t need to hide behind this argument! We wouod have half a.leg.to stand on if we were at the bottom of the carbon footprint list!!
Sure, cops cannot fine ALL speeders - or even those wearing speedos. Climate change is real. Forward thinking people look for solutions. Not roadblocks.
The point re ubiquitous - with or without race cars it will become ubiquitous. Rooftop Solar is becoming more common because of government incentives. Granted - race car industry exits. It pollutes. And a SIDE benefit is some of its vehcile characteristics can become ubiquitous. But to take the position it HAS to exist so it’s technology can become ubiquitous is an ash backward logic. There are other ways such as incentives to make such technologies ubiquitous- one does not have to WASTE to achieve other objevtives.
The war example was an analogy. Does not mean that I implied race cars have equal destruction as wars. But they do play their part in DESTROYING the environment. For waste is DESTRUCTION.
If banning car racing was put on the ballot, I would vote against it and so would most Americans. I’m all for riding bikes, taking the bus, carpooling or driving smaller cars but banning car racing sounds sacrilegious.
My initial post re banning races was in jest in response to post 36.
But si ce we are actually discussing car racing, I wouod have no issues with banning it. To me POLLUTING unnecessarily is sacrilegious.
I would also vote for banning golfing in a heartbeat. The wasting of water. There was an article that stated an astronomical amount of homes could be served water from that used for each golf course.
Also, it would be good to take into consideration the voices of those who live without air conditioning when it comes to car racing. They may have a thing or two to say abt whether they are for slowing down the temperature rise. Or at least not ACCELERATING it.
Those who have A.C. and support car racing have NOTHING TO lose. They don’t have a skin in the game.
One can make the same argument for those who.support unnecessary wars.
Or golfing enthusiasts who get access to plenty of water.
Here is link that shows how doe funding helped ford develop lightweight fuel efficient vehicle. The search term I had was fuel consumption of race cars. And this showed uo.
At peak power 2to5 mpg.
Annual fuel consumption for all.Nascar events - 2 million gallons. For someone who uses 100 gallons per year that is equivalent to 20000 drivers per year.
Now let us assume the total global emissions from race cars is 6 times US. So 12 million gallons. Or 120000 drivers per year. Since foreign drivers may not drive as much as US it could be 150000 drivers per year.
Now there are fuel emissions from events. Surely drivers practice for the events. If we use rule of thumb that for every hour on the track u practise 3 hours, total emissions is 48 million gallons. Or 650000 people.
For a city with 6 million population, if 30 pct r driving age and one in 3 drives, this supports driving habits of a 6 million string city.
Mods - just realized this thread is about Pakistani boys. When I got this reply to my past from Few days ago I forgot context. Feel free to move all racing cars post to a thread titled - Should racing cars be banned. The thread starter may be myself.
