Would banning all motorsports make a significant difference to global warming?

Question

Would banning all motorsports make a significant difference to global warming?

Answer 1

No.  Transportation is only 30% of the problem and motorsports is a tiny, tiny fraction of that.  CO2 has a residence time of hundreds of years in the atmosphere, so we won't see results from CO2 reductions for a long time, if ever.

Reducing air pollution however would have an impact, within days of any reductions.

Reducing Black Carbon, or Soot, May Be Fastest Strategy

for Slowing Climate Change

http://www.igsd.org/docs/BC%20Briefing%2...

Emissions from black carbon (BC), or soot, are the second largest contributor to global warming after carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, and reducing these emissions is the fastest strategy for slowing climate change. The most recent estimate of BC forcing, 0.9 watts per square meter (W/m2) (range of 0.4 to 1.2 W/m2), is “as much as 55% of the CO2 forcing and is larger than the forcing due to the other GHGs such as CH4, CFCs, N2O, or tropospheric ozone.”1 In some regions, such as the Himalayas, the impact of BC on melting snowpacks and glaciers may be equal to that of CO2.2 BC emissions also significantly contribute to Arctic ice-melt, and reducing such emissions may be “the most efficient way to mitigate Arctic warming that we know of.”3 Since 1950, developed countries have successfully reduced BC emissions by a factor of five, primarily to improve public health, and “technology exists for a drastic reduction of fossil fuel related BC” in the rest of the world.

Chasing CO2 emission reductions while developing countries are exempt and grow like weeds is a fool's errand, and an extremely expensive one at that.  

Case in point: China grows 8-10% a year, they'll outgrow U.S. CO2 reductions of 83% in 8-10 years, while we hope to gradually achieve similar reductions by 2050, over the course of 42 years.  Then consider India, Russia, etc. and we're still screwed on CO2.

Answer 2

Yes, it would definitely add to the amount of CO2 in the air. Once you ban the sports, the fans would start burning random business and homes (probably yours). This would increase the CO2 in the air.

Answer 3

The country needs to begin having an "honest" conversation about the "costs and consequences" of ethanol regulations.

    While most people are focusing on rising gas prices, world food prices are also soaring -- and those soaring prices are having a "devastating" effect on people.

    Many people are now going hungry; and while there are a lot of reasons for the rising cost of food, ethanol mandates are a part of that and it is something that the Greenies need to think seriously about changing.

    Reports suggests that bio-fuel production contributes to about one-third of the rising cost of food. As farmers switch crops in order to grow more corn for bio-fuel, that has a negative impact on the price of wheat and other grains. And the excess corn production does not enter the food market.

Answer 4

This would be a good idea but there  is another the possibility of putting  out a bounty  on fuelhogs. Unemployed people might then gain cash they require by removing  large recreatonal vehicles in cities from the road for destruction.

Old Folks without a security net could gain money this way with the help of other Un Employed people.    Special Government Demolition Units might also scour parking lots of Car Dealers to remove such for destruction . The Units may also replace oil based cars whichon highways like Los Angeles  with electric based ones. Destroy all but those required for work and those for parades then introduce electric cars.  Perhaps a special resolution from The UN Security Cuncil to place an Embargo on Hummers and to ban oil based cars as a source of warfare. Perhaps a demand that oil based cars be replaced with electric  ones. A demand backed up and enforced by citizens. The view in movies always shows Highways or Free Ways clogged with Oil Based Cars. To either shut down roads or replace them with electric cars may be good.  The Radicalization Act being considered by The U.S. Government may preclude such though.

Answer 5

Emissions due to motorsports is insignificant compared to the worldwide emissions of all fossil-fueled vehicles even condidering the contribution from fans travelling to and from events. A much larger impact comes from eating beef because of the large amounts of methane emitted by the millions of beef cattle. But I would hate to give up eating a good steak now and then or enjoying a great hamburger at the local race track. The best answer is to convince people to drive the most energy efficient vehicle they can get and convert to nuclear based power wherever fossil-fuel plants are now being used or planned for use. Wind, solar and hydro power just won't be enough.

Answer 6

NO= IT WOULD'NT AFFECT GLOBAL WARMING AT ALL, BUT THIS WILL START TO DELETE IT. http://www.socyberty.com/Activism/First-...