"Formula 1 the most polluting? Nonsense!"

Formula 1 wants to become CO2 neutral in order to remain sustainable for the future. Nevertheless, the criticism that sport is a major polluter does not seem entirely true.

After the news that Honda is leaving Formula 1, all kinds of problems arose. Short-term problems, such as Red Bull and AlphaTauri having to find a new engine supplier quickly. But also problems in the longer term: is this a signal that the sport is not sustainable enough in the long run? And are the engines not too complex and expensive for manufacturers to enter the sport.

Criticism is unjustified

One of Honda's main reasons for leaving the sport is that it wants to focus more on sustainable solutions for the future. In addition, the Japanese company wants to be climate-neutral by 2050. Yet according to Autobild, the criticism of the sport is not entirely justified. "At the beginning of 2020, the United Nations Environment Department announced an ambitious plan. Formula 1 is to be climate-neutral by 2030 by using renewable fuels and using only electricity generated from renewable energies."

Also, sport is not the biggest polluter at all, the German medium says. "It is also a fact that there are other sports that do much more damage to the climate. The engines of cars only account for 0.7% of the total sport. By far the most is emitted by the logistics it brings. One example is the World Cup: an event that is organised more than once every four years, yet generates almost ten times as much CO2 emissions as one Formula 1 season. The royal league is, therefore, greener than its reputation."