The prominence of eFuels has been thrust into the spotlight with Formula 1’s ambitious plan to adopt 100% sustainable drop-in fuels for its next generation of engines in 2026. This move follows the World Rally Championship’s introduction of a blend of synthetic and biofuel in 2022, claiming full renewability. IndyCar also joined the trend by incorporating a blend of second-generation ethanol derived from Brazilian sugarcane for this season.
Significant investment is being channeled into eFuels to prolong the lifespan of internal combustion engines. The European Union is set to ban the sale of new internal combustion engine cars by 2035, unless they operate on synthetic fuels, aiming to reduce carbon emissions from existing vehicles. While efforts to minimize fossil fuel consumption are commendable, it is essential to critically examine whether eFuels are the optimal solution in the realm of motorsport.
Let’s begin by understanding the process of manufacturing eFuels. It is an energy-intensive undertaking that involves capturing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and combining it with hydrogen extracted from water. This process requires an upfront energy input to enable subsequent energy extraction during the combustion cycle. Therefore, a fuel with high energy content necessitates substantial initial production energy.
Furthermore, the transportation of this fuel from its source to filling stations, its dispensing into vehicles, and ultimately its combustion are additional considerations. Even if the argument is made that the carbon emitted by 2026 F1 engines burning eFuels is offset by the carbon utilized in fuel production, there remains the question of establishing an entire renewable and cost-effective supply chain.
The generation of carbon emissions to produce eFuel is evidently counterproductive. Therefore, for complete carbon neutrality, the electricity used must originate from renewable sources. This implies reliance on wind and solar power, as the average electricity grid in the US and Europe is heavily carbon-dependent. However, these energy sources are expensive and not abundantly available. Consequently, for the general public, eFuels are not a commercially viable option.
Merely assuming that the market will follow suit because F1 embraces eFuels is flawed due to the exorbitant cost of energy production. Unless one desires a niche classic car for occasional weekend drives, accompanied by the sound of an engine while maintaining carbon neutrality, eFuels do not make economic sense.
Carbon capture technology is still in its nascent stages, and costs are expected to decrease as the technology evolves. Nevertheless, this progression is still a considerable distance away. In 2020, Bosch predicted that renewable synthetic fuels would not cost €1.20 per liter until at least 2030, with the International Council on Clean Transportation deeming this estimate optimistic.
The global energy supply is insufficient to produce eFuels in quantities capable of entirely replacing oil. Transport & Environment, a campaign group, projects that by 2035, only five million out of the 287 million cars on the road will be able to operate solely on eFuels, accounting for a mere 2% of the cars in use within the European Union.
Even in a hypothetical scenario where abundant and affordable renewable energy exists, it would be inefficiently allocated to the production of synthetic fuels. The energy loss incurred in manufacturing, transporting, and burning eFuels far exceeds that of battery electric vehicles. According to T&E, eFuels exhibit an average efficiency of only 16%, while battery electric vehicles achieve 77% efficiency.
The situation differs with aviation since the electrification of the aviation industry is still a distant prospect. However, in the domain of road cars and racing, where electric vehicle alternatives are available, it is simply impractical to generate the same level of propulsion from eFuels as can be achieved with electric motors. While improvements can be made to the process, there are inherent physical limitations. From my perspective, it is more sensible to bypass these intricate procedures and utilize electricity to charge batteries.
Can eFuels save motorsport? If their primary purpose is marketing and image enhancement, one could argue that there is some logic to it. It could effectively satisfy Formula 1 sponsors. However, it makes no sense to claim that average consumers will adopt eFuels for their everyday vehicles, nor should it serve as a driving force for Formula 1’s pursuit of this technology.
eFuels may not be the most efficient solution for motorsport.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about eFuels viability
What is the purpose of eFuels in motorsport?
eFuels are being considered as a potential solution to reduce carbon emissions in motorsport. They aim to prolong the use of internal combustion engines by providing a renewable alternative to traditional fossil fuels.
How are eFuels produced?
The production of eFuels involves capturing carbon dioxide from the air and combining it with hydrogen extracted from water. However, this process is energy-intensive and requires substantial upfront energy input.
Are eFuels carbon-neutral?
While eFuels can be considered carbon-neutral during combustion, as they only release the carbon used in their production, achieving full carbon neutrality requires the electricity used in their production to come from renewable sources.
Are eFuels a commercially viable option for the general public?
Currently, eFuels are not a commercially viable option for the general public due to their high production costs. The expensive nature of renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, makes eFuels economically impractical for widespread use.
Can eFuels replace traditional fossil fuels entirely?
The global energy supply is insufficient to produce eFuels in quantities that can replace traditional fossil fuels entirely. It is projected that only a small fraction of vehicles on the road will be able to run solely on eFuels by 2035.
Are eFuels more efficient than battery electric vehicles (BEVs)?
No, eFuels are less efficient compared to BEVs. Studies show that eFuels have an average efficiency of only 16%, while BEVs achieve 77% efficiency. The energy loss in producing, transporting, and burning eFuels is significantly greater than with BEVs.
Why are eFuels being considered despite their drawbacks?
In motorsport, eFuels may serve as a marketing and image enhancement tool. They can keep sponsors satisfied and create a perception of environmental consciousness. However, their practicality and cost-effectiveness for average consumers and everyday road cars are questionable.
More about eFuels viability
- Formula 1 to adopt sustainable eFuels
- World Rally Championship’s use of synthetic and biofuels
- IndyCar’s blend of second-generation ethanol from sugarcane
- EU’s plan to ban new ICE cars by 2035
- Bosch’s prediction on synthetic fuel costs
- Transport & Environment’s projection on eFuel adoption
- Comparison of eFuels and battery electric vehicles
- Benefits and challenges of eFuels in motorsport