F1 Winter Break
Analysis: Ferrari parent company FCA embroiled in US emissions challenge
News
Ferrari F1
Posted By: James Allen  |  13 Jan 2017   |  10:15 am GMT  |  105 comments

Today’s news that the US Environmental Protection Agency has decided to go after FIAT Chrysler Automobile for violating emissions laws will cause some concerns in the corridors at Ferrari.

Although Ferrari is not directly affected – the case revolves around the Jeep and RAM brands in the USA – nevertheless the size of the multi billion dollar fines paid out by VW recently to settle its case and the impact that has had on the VW and Audi motorsport programmes, will be front of mind.

The EPA has issued FCA with a ‘notice of violation’, relating to the sale of 104,000 recent diesel model Jeep and RAM vehicles that it said violated legal limits on toxic substances, the accusation being that there is software designed to trick the EPA’s emissions tests.

“Once again a major automaker made the business decision to skirt the rules and got caught,” said California Air Resource chair Mary Nichols.

XPB.cc Sergio Marchionne

FCA boss Sergio Marchionne, who is also chairman of Ferrari, has come out with a robust defence, saying “We have done nothing illegal” and calling the EPA’s move “grandstanding” shortly before the inauguration of the new US President Donald Trump.

Trump had earlier in the week Tweeted his thanks to Marchionne and FCA for announcing a new plant in the US, creating thousands of jobs. Whether the announcement was a pre-emptive move, knowing that the EPA was on the warpath, is not known at this time.

VW has had a torrid time since the EPA went after them, with executives being charged with criminal offences and an admission of guilt and $4.3 billion coming only yesterday.

The VW example shows that what happens in the automotive sector can have a devastating effect on the company’s ability to compete in the motorsport space. Having paid already close to $20 billion, VW has cancelled the Audi WEC programme and all its rally activities in WRC.

Sebastian Vettel

Ferrari is in a slightly different position in that it’s F1 team is very well funded from outside. It earns around $170 million a year from F1 Management, $100m of which is an annual bonus payment for being the ‘Longest Standing Team’. That deal is locked in until the end of 2020 under the bilateral agreement with F1 Management struck by former Chairman Luca di Montezemolo and Bernie Ecclestone.

On top of that it has big money sponsorship deals with Philip Morris, Shell, Santander and others which mean that the amount of money Ferrari itself contributes to the F1 programme is quite small. It also earns money from the sale of engines to Haas and Sauber and of technology and support services to Haas.

So if the US EPA does manage to prove that FCA utilised software on its diesel cars that cheated their emissions tests and FCA is liable to the fines of around $4 billion that are being talked about, the impact on Ferrari’s F1 operation will not necessarily be as painful as it was for Audi and VW Motorsport.

However, the new owners of F1 Liberty Media, will be renegotiating the deals with the F1 teams for the period after 2020 and it is hard to see the $100m bonus continuing at that level. Additionally it is not clear how much longer the Philip Morris deal with Ferrari will continue.

XPB.cc Sergio Marchionne

Another concern is the large debt on FCA, which partly motivated the flotation of Ferrari last year. FCA has net debt of $4.7 billion at the end of 2016 and Marchionne’s target is to clear that by the end of 2018 at which point he is due to step down and hand the FCA reins onto a new manager. Marchionne has told Italian media that FCA will survive even if it is hit with the kind of fines being talked about.

There has been talk in F1 circles recently of selling off electronics and automotive components business Magnetti Marelli to help reduce debt.

The EPA news from America would also appear to put paid to Marchionne’s oft stated dream of returning Alfa Romeo to Formula 1.

For Ferrari, F1 is vital as it is the company’s principal marketing effort, along with a limited GT programme in WEC and Le Mans as well as US sportscar racing. For Liberty Media, whose shareholders meet on the 17th to vote on the final part of the F1 takeover, the presence of Ferrari in the F1 field is fundamental.

It has been a year of shocks and there seems to be no sign of that ending.

What do you think of today’s news on FIAT Chrysler? Leave your comments below

Featured News
Editor's Picks
Share This:
Posted by:
Category:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry that something went wrong, repeat again!
1

Well nothing will stop EPA in the USA accept Trump,but if FCA fixed the software just as VW did then more things come into play that is resale value,pollution yes or no but if you paid 20K or 100,00K for a car then later on find out the software was fixed and now your car is worthless U might be pissed of.

2

None of the cars are or will be worthless. Ferrari don’t do diesel so it won’t affect them.
Fiat won’t depreciate any more. They will fix the issue.
The Italians are great car makers, like GM and Ford.
VW rely on a advertising, giving the impression of a soft, loving warm and cuddly family image and that’s their problem, people will jump on the bandwagon stating that they expected more from VW group.

3
Beentheredonethat

In 2008 the Japanese government started supporting Okinawans’ push to close down the Futenma Marine base there, for several good reasons. The US hit Japan where it hurts, forcing  a recall of Toyota cars with a scandal, that sticky accelerator pedals and ill fitted floor mats were causing road deaths. Toyota paid $1.1 Billion to Settle Runaway Car Claims.
The Japanese government quickly fell into line, even though Toyota was blameless.

In 2015 after the Ukrainian war, Germany supported the Minsk accords, which the US opposed, allowing German firms to construct pipelines for the future of Russian -European energy, which the US violently opposes. VW opend a new engine plant in Russia in 2015, the US hit germany where it hurts, and the rest, as they say, is history. the VW ‘defeat’ software has been known since 2013.

Fast forward to present, Trump has welcomed Fiat opening a plant in the US providing for new jobs, but Fiat also uses a ‘defeat’ software, and has been known to since 2013. Only this time, the US elites want to hit Trump where it hurts.

On a serious tip, the $100m, Ferrari earns for just being there is diabolical!!t

4

F1 would be better without Ferrari. I hope they quit racing cars

5

Must say I’m not sure why the consensus is that Ferrari’s ‘special’ payments will reduce post 2020. Surely if anything they’ll be in an even better bargaining position, with a new owner keen to make sure the biggest draw in the sport doesn’t go somewhere else and wipe millions off the value of the show.

6

I wonder if anyone checks American cars for emissions?

7

Euro GM cars with Diesel engines all use FIAT made engines.
All companies must be involved including the Koreans and the Japanese

8

Okay…
Background: probably ALL of the automobile producers, save the electric-only company, have been using ‘work-arounds’ for EPA emissions testing, for quite a few years.
The outgoing American administration, eying a ‘gimme’, in terms of raising some quick, one-time revenue, enough to show up on the balance sheet, (extremely well-needed), has been scrolling through the automobile manufacturers, and hitting them up for $$$. There was an escalating pattern, wich suggests that companies that came to the authorities and made it easy for them to find the most obvious ‘cheats’ got better deals earlier on, manufacturers from one particular northeastern Asian country with very obvious ‘inconsistencies’ with its fuel consumption figures, who seems to have not been in the news, comes to mind.
The one German conglomerate, who got so lambasted in the media, they had very specific single purpose code in their emission systems to specifically change the engine operation characteristics to pass emission tests.
The cited Fiat ‘issues’ are quite a bit more into a grey area; that is not to say that there wasn’t intent, who knows, to distort the engine operations to beat the tests, but the method, based at least partly on driver input, puts the issue well into the grey zone. Without knowing all of the facts, I’d bet there are a few choice, extremely well-crafted lines in the owners manuals of those cars, which describe ‘appropriate’ operating guidelines for those vehicles.
We see Marchionne taking the opposite approach to the German company, by directly challenging the findings, and effectly letting it be known that he is going to fight.
He’s pretty smart guy.
And I think he’s a guy who can talk the language of the incoming president; I think it
likely that there will be a low (PR) profile decision to open a new Jeep/Chrysler manufacturing facility in a choice jurisdiction in the U.S.A., some time in 2017, and this issue will be allowed to ‘go away’.
The root of the emissions challenges, is of course, ego; people become insane when they are driving in their cars, and are irrational in their decisions about getting automobiles. Especially in the US/Canada, the ridiculous obsession with (unuseable) power output from engines, for what?! In North America, we have these (now) HUGE ‘pickup’ trucks, with insane amounts of power, which millions of office workers use to drive 50-100 km, each way, to work in the cities, from their homes in the suburbs. Why?! For some reason which is associated to a manipulation of their egos. You’ll never see those trucks hauling manure.
I’d still like to see Alfa Romeo on the grid.

9

Thanks for explaining, it’s right to say VW made a “device” with the purpose of recognizing EPA emmisions testing and then run a special setting.
I’m not sure how far FCA went to fulfill the EPA tests but Marchionne seems to be confident at the moment.
Let’s see what happens.

10

I agree with most of what you say.
But it’s people choice and in the USA they should get that choice, look at the automotive world. America rocks to the rest of us!
Why would you see Alfa on the grid?
Touring cars yes 🚗 F1 costs too much
And the worlds best brand is there!

11

Ooh 😲 That’s pretty clever…. or sumptin 🤷🏻‍♂️

12

FCA is not a parent company to Ferrari.

13

Yes it is, in Italy FIAT owns all of them, except Zonda and Lamborghini of course.
In the USA Ferrari is floated as separate stock I think. So isn’t that Ferrari North America as opposed to Ferrari Spa?

14

As of 3 Jan 2016, FCA owns no interest in Ferrari.
http://corporate.ferrari.com/en/investors/ferrari-spin

15

James if the fines for FCA were truly enormous surely Ferrari might itself have to consider pulling out of F1 to maintain its own stability as Ferrari’s shares might plummet.? F1 needs Ferrari less than Ferrari needs F1 anyway -nothing can last forever. Maybe it wouldn’t be detrimental to F1 if Ferrari left . Ferrari’s history in F1 isn’t that great considering they’ve been in it 66 years . Their history is good in f1 but not great . Ferrari’s history as works team in sportscar racing is greater.

16

Awn… what a pitty… Dodge was about to return to NASCAR.

Since there were no legal charges against BOSCH in the VW Dieselgate, I guess Marelli is clear for selling w/o collateral responsability and future legal actions against the new buyer.

18

Yeah, I’ll have an electric FIAT 500, for £25,000. It’s a subsidised price….

19

If you don’t want to pay more and get less for your money, don’t buy into this GW nonsense. It’s that simple.

20

Luke, I think we have had enough of that.

21

Luke, you seem very determined to make everyone think that:
– Global Warming is a nonsense, a fallacy, a fuss over nothing,
– that the Earth is doing O.K.,
– that human race, using (read mostly burning) each year billions of metric tons of fossil fuel, has no detrimental effect on our health, on climate,
– that we shouldn’t change anything to try to improve the amount of pollutants we release into the atmosphere.
(Passenger cars amount to above 20% of CO2 emissions from the
total end-uses, right behind the biggest source, space heating).

I doubt not only your basic judgement but also start to think you have a deeper motivation for defending these entrenched, obsolete opinions.
You being a teacher makes it even worse.

22

Ionut E; you’ve misunderstood me completely. All I’m trying to do is to educate people ( I’m a teacher so I can’t help it) so that they will not be taken for a ride by a few bull**** artists who want to get rich at the expense of your freedoms and general quality of life.

Because guess what? if you and everybody else allows this to happen, my freedoms and quality of life will most likely go along with everybody else’s.

So that’s my motivation.

23

Luke, did anyone ask you to educate them on this issue? What makes you think people come to an F1 fan site to be force fed your opinions on global warming?

24

Luke. I click on the comments section on this F1 site to talk about F1, I didn’t ask you to educate me, and I don’t need you to educate me.

25

TimW, i didn’t ask anyone to educate me about the global warming nonsense either, and yet I’m being force fed this nonsense on a daily basis.

The topic of post is political in nature and involves discussing the global warming swindle, which is not only a political issue, but also a moral one.

If you don’t wish to be educated on this topic and are happy to continue to delude yourself that these people care about you, the planet and polar bears, more than they care about money, power, influence and their mistresses, then go ahead. You don’t have to click on the comment section of this post.

26

Shares in Renault fell more than 4 per cent to their lowest level in around a month after a source at the Paris prosecutor’s office said it had launched a judicial investigation into possible cheating on exhaust emissions at the French car maker.

27

Every one does it!
Isn’t it obvious?

28

But the VW shares already are back to normal and the company recovered it sales without a dent.

29

They keep sending me emails but I’m not buying another VW!

30

Just another case of American witch hunts of non American businesses. I’m not saying either business was innocent, they were quite the opposite, but can you really imagine the US imposing the same fines they did on BP and VW to e.g. Exxon and Ford? No I didn’t think so.

31

Well since GM came within a couple of votes of not existing any longer and I doubt most Americans even know that Dodge is owned by Fiat so leave the pity party for our President Elect.

32

And the EU doesn’t persecute US companies like Facebook, Microsoft and Google?

33

The C in FCA stands for Chrysler, which is American. FCA on the whole may be a true multinational now, but the two problem vehicles are both Chrysler models, designed and built in the US.

34

The problem vehicles may be built in the US but the diesel engines in them are from Fiat and presumably designed and built in Italy. I don’t subscribe to the idea that the EPA is targeting non-US companies, they are going after companies that are trying to flout the US laws and in the case of diesels that does happen to mean some European companies because there are no US-made mass production car diesel engines.

35

Technically, yes, you are correct, the diesel engines are European in origin. My only point was that no matter where the engine came from, the cars are American and were assembled in what would have in the past been a Chrysler plant, not a FIAT one. So the EPA is hurting American parties through this as much as it is hurting a European, even not more.

Mind you, the conspiracy theorist in me wonders if this is not a political statement. The timing is very curious. First FCA announce a new plant in the US, then Trump acknowledges them in a tweet. Shortly after that the EPA comes out swinging against FCA with less than fully baked allegations (the allegations were a lot more solid in VW’s case at the same stage)… is it the Obama administration taking one last swing at a company that received public thumbs up from Trump? Seeing as the incoming EPA guy is a former oil executive and given FCA’s pledge to build that new plant, I wouldn’t be surprised if these allegations went away very quickly after January 20. We may never know if there was even anything there. But I’m speculating…

36

Have to agree 100% with this!!!

37

I think Exxon was fined over 5 billion for the Valdez spill, so yes, and I don’t have to “imagine” it.

38

What a great ad!

39

Tesla 7 seater family 4 door is smoking Ferrari F12s at the quarter mile runs while Viper ACR is destroying the entire Ferrari product portfolio along with Porsche 918 and McLaren P1 with the lovely V10 and 6 speed posting amazing lap times. How in the world did Sergio allow a car to be made by one of his “lower” brands that puts the entire Ferrari product portfolio to shame?

40

And a top fuel dragster would smoke them all, so what?

42

You do know that Ferrari products are not competing with Tesla, let alone Dodge, right? You do understand that quarter mile times are not the primary decision criteria for the average Ferrari buyer right?

43

Welcome back bud!

While I take your point, drag times or lap times say very little about the level of enjoyment for any car. I drive a relatively entry-level sports car (not mid-engined, but pretty damn fast) and I chose the manual transmission version of (which in my case also meant it has to be RWD only as a result, as opposed to the AWD standard). Guess what, I lose a couple of tenths in the 0-60 time of the automatic. I also I don’t have launch control, rev matching, or the 8 gears that are standard on the auto. So slower and less gas efficient.

But my oh my is it way more fun to drive in anger than the auto (I did drive both before deciding). And the satisfaction of nailing the heel-toe down shift is exhilarating.

So I do get what you’re saying, and it is ironic, but numbers aren’t necessarily the full story when it comes to the overall experience of driving a car.

BTW, keep your eyes peeled for my username around town – it’s my licence plate.

44

What entry level pretty damn fast sports car do you drive?

45

BMW M235

46

You neglected to mention the marque?

47

At least an admission that the VW witch hunt was partly politically motivated. Question remains will the EU go after non european carmakers, there is potentially lots of money to be made if you find the fly in the ointment. Good thing for VW, they will now have a headstart in electric cars and the recently unveiled (with BMW, Daimler and Ford) european wide super fast charging network will become the global standard, making Teslas efforts to standardise with what is now outdated tech basically obsolete.

48

Even if this doesn’t impact Ferrari directly FCA will still need to recoup that money from somewhere and what ever little amount Ferrari receive from them will be ever diminished by necessity.

You lose Ferrari and you lose the core of Formula One at a time when the sport can clearly not afford too. Whether you like the Scuderia or not you still have to accept that Formula One without them isn’t Formula One at all.

49

This will not affect Ferrari in any way.
Maserati yes and the other, less prestigious companies like Lancia and Alfa and of course FIAT. But not Ferrari.
It will of course affect General Motors to a great extent.

50

What rubbish.

I enjoy seeing Ferrari on the grid, appreciate their being there all these years, and would not want that to change. However, if there were not to continue for whatever reason, the sport would not cease to exist.

51

Considering F1 has lost 40% of its viewers since its peak in 2008, there’s no doubt losing a marquee constructor like Ferrari ( however unlikely some say that is ) will have a extremely detrimental effect on the future of the sport.
By all means feel free to pretend that its sunny outside when there are in fact storm clouds brewing. Don’t be surprised when you get wet though.

52

Sarsippious, Ferrari aren’t going anywhere, the road cars make a serious amount of money for the parent company, and the F1 team is it’s sole marketing spend, the fact that it comes at or near break even depending on championship position makes it a no brainer to keep it going.
It’s worth noting that FCA deny all wrongdoing regarding the software in question, so maybe there wont be a fine to pay at all.

53

Maybe not at this moment in time Tim however there is a flow-on effect that will be felt across on entire network if FCA are in fact guilty and if fines are forthcoming because of it.

Whilst the issues may stem from the heart ( FCA ) its little naive to think the effect won’t be felt in the veins at some point as well.
Add into the mix the possibility of Ferrari having to live with a new agreement with Liberty in 2021 far less comforting to their bottom line and all of a sudden they could find themselves as a liability leaking and costing money at a time when they can least afford it.

54

Sarsippious, if FCA are guilty, and if they do get a massive fine, then they will need to milk their cash cows for all their worth. This won’t involve damaging the fattest cow by removing it’s only form of advertising, that is currently free, and would still be a bargain even if the historic payment is removed in 2020.

55

As it says in the article, the F1 programme pays for itself anyway, so they won’t have to cut it to pay the fine! VW didn’t need to cut the WEC programme to raise the cash for the fine either, the problem was there sportscars were diesels and they wanted to distance themselves from anything to do with that particular fuel source. Ferrari of course use petrol engines and petrol hybrids in their road car range, and so are unaffected, the rest of the FCA group will now be following the rest of the industry and towards petrol hybrids as the ever increasing emissions rules make diesel engines uneconomic to produce, and more cities ban them from their roads. This might be a good time for the long rumoured Alfa Romeo F1 team to come to fruition.

56

I have a very, VERY, hard stance ragarding Environmental violations. If you violate and caught – you have to pay for this, even if it costs you all your businesses.
So in that regards I don’t care what happens to Ferrari – they have only FCA to Thank for anything that can happen to them.

BTW, I find VW fines absurdly small considering the impact and that their million of cars are still on the road. And will remain their for another 10 years.

57

What is this massive impact that VW cars have had on the roads, that will remain for another 10 years?

58

Chrysler have fallen into the VW emissions scandal. How many other manufacturers will be caught up in this scandal. Diesel engines are worse than petrol engines period. Chrysler decided not to open a plant in Mexico so that got a thumbs up from ‘Comb over Trump’. Well the Market has already lopped a great deal off their share prices. Maybe they’ll go the way of Manor if they end up having to pay a huge refund.
No wonder Marchionne is deciding to make a sharp exit from Ferrari in 2019. Things are definitely looking abit tricky for him if 2017 is a bad one then expect a mass cull at Ferrari.

59

Please, not another emissions scandal.

The idea that CO2 is a pollutant and that it causes warming is the most insanely idiotic idea ever conceived by the human mind, and it’s about that it was thrown in the rubbish bin, along with the idea that the influences of the moon cause influenza.

60

Let’s talk about something easy: the aerodynamics of a F1 car. If scientists would be able to calculate it precisely all cars would look the same.
Aerodynamics of an F1 car are really easy compared to long time weather models.
No one can predict weather for the next 100 years. There is something like fractal mathematics involved.
A small change in the numbers put into the model can make a big difference.
And what is the result: Paid experts will never say they just don’t know. They will make small changes into the computer model to get the results they are paid for.
These changes can be really small and can look right. But what they often don’t say is: with a digit more in calculations the results may be totally different.
And there are unknown factors: how many glasshouse gas is stored in the deep sea, in permafrost grounds, …
The warmer it gets the less oceans and permafrost ground can store this gas. it may be a quickly accelerating process.
A fact is: at the carbon time there was way more glasshouse gas in the atmosphere. It never vanished, it is in coal, petroleum, stored in oceans and permafrost, …

61

Seifenkistkistler, some models do produce better predictions than others.

For example, the model of earth temps being dependent on the sun’s cycles had been shown to produce predictions that have been corroborated by observation and measurement. Things like ocean level rises and measurable irradiance from the sun. This is the real science that was taught at universities before the global warming propaganda infiltrated the education system.

The CO2 model, on the other hand has failed to produce a single substantial prediction. And the few predictions that it did make, one could get simply by chance. In fact just by making predictions at random,unencumbered by the GW nonsense, one would get more hits.

So the question to everyone here is this: are you going to trust the scientists whose models have been demostrated to produce correct predictions?

Or are you going to trust Al Gore, whose every single substantial prediction has failed to come to pass, and whose movie the “inconvenient truth” has been ruled by the British High Court to be nothing but misinformation that just happens to be convenient for him and his investments in renewables.

62

USA: hadn’t the magazine ‘The American Mathematician Monthly’ in 1897 accepted a proof that pi=3.2?
It needed articles in main newspapers started by the german language newspaper’ Der tägliche Telegraph’ to stop this ‘Indiana pi bill’.

The sad thing however was that this episode made that american politicians agreed that never again a mathematically proof should be used in law making.

So even if there would be a hard proof, american politicians will not accept it.

63

Please note to all who read further than this first reply….
Not all that follow F1 have their heads in the sand. Luke may yell the loudest but most sensible readers have just ignored his grandstanding, after all, this is not facebook.

64

r, unfortunately this is always the response from the global warming alarmists when their nonsense gets debunked. It’s impossible to have a discourse with you guys anymore because you just put your fingers in your ears and mumble “la la la la la la la, I’m not listening. “

If you have something of substance to contribute to the debate please put it forward. But please make sure it is something better than the nonsense out of Al Gores “inconvinient truth ” which has been proven to be a bunch of misinformation and even outright lies as ruled by the British High Court.

Let’s have something a bit more rational than a bunch of insane predictions about the world melting by 2013, which have never come to pass.

And finally lets have something, anything, that is actually corroborated by real observation and measurements, rather than a bunch of insane computer models where rubbish has been put in as the initial conditions and threfore rubbish is being spewed out in bucketloads.

65

Ever been to Venus? Hottest planet in the solar system despite being further away than Mercury. What causes this anomoly? Runaway greenhouse effect.

66

Paul, no one is saying that there is no such thing as a greenhouse effect, of course there is, there would be no life on this planet without it.

It’s just that the earth does not have enough co2 to cause global warming. In fact, recent estimates are that for the average global temperature to increase by 2 -2.5 degrees Celsius we would need to more than double the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, which is impossible to do.

And what would be the result of the average temperature going up by 2.5 degrees? Not particularly disastrous is the answer.

So don’t worry, the planet won’t melt, and you won’t have to pay 6 times more for your power from renewables. Now, isn’t that good news?

67

It isn’t CO² it is about NOx. CO² would be funny as long US define heavy pickups to be cars.
It shouldn’t matter if it is software or hardware. If the buildin gears are chosen with the test in mind, pollution may be way higher at real driving. I don’t want to know how away from the tests the consumption and emission of a big pickup at full throttle on an autobahn is.
Another pollution is dust from tyre and brakes, another thing pickups fail to shine.
We need new tests for pollution based on real driving and not a car placed on rolls for a simulated test without aerodynamics and other factors in the calculations.
As far i heard Renault is claimed for suspicious software too? Renault could be hit harder than Fiat Chrysler.
Let’s face it, a diesel injection engine has to change its running mode if it is too much away from its parameters. And it is written nowhere at which distance to the test parameters it would be allowed and in which way if it is at all.
Currently trucks and buses have cleaner engines than cars because they have tanks for ammonea or urea for a better catalyst.

68

Yeah man the earth is hollow, aliens landed in the 60s but the government tell you about it 😳…and the sun revolves around the earth. All of this true! At this point there’s no use in talking with you

69

Tarun, right back at you.

70

Doesn’t matter, they are accused of cheating on government tests and the rules are the rules.

71

Wolfy, accused of cheating by a government that never, cheats, never lies, never misrepresents and never fudges any numbers?

73

Tarun, I’ve read this, just like back in the late nineties I’ve read Al Gore’s predictions that two thirds of polar ice would disappear by 2013.

I’m done with this nonsense.

74

Where do you get all these information from? Here’s a link for you!
http://www.nationalgeographic.com.au/nature/what-you-really-need-to-know-about-the-huge-iceberg-breaking-off-antarctica.aspx
The planet warming up may not be bad for you at all! All of us scientists are idiots who have no idea what’s dramatically changing the giant ice sheets. So here are some facts for you…you can go and check it out yourself. West Antarctic Ice sheet alone has 5 m worth of sea level rise! Most of it lies below sea level. Not only the ice loss is increasing over the years the oceanic temperature and salinity near the antarctic sea is increasing. Add those two together, it can lead to a potential collapse situation!
And if that’s no concern to you…check here what that will do to current land mass across the earth
http://www.floodmap.net/
….why would that be any concern to you anyway you’re one of the millions of ignorant people talking all bs and have no idea how climate change will affect humanity. I hope that fills your brain cells a bit..I doubt though it will achieve anything

75

Tundra is luckily still permafrost. So the gases in the earth there are yet captured.
Oceans can store less gas at higher temperatures.

Mathematics are not able to solve problems precise with more than 5 bodies. All they can do is to come hopefully as close to reality as possible.
So both sides tell their mathematicians which results they want to hear and BOTH(!!!) sides may be close to reality even if there are worlds between the results.
In a world of fractales and a butterfly in europe affecting the weather in china, both sides can be really close with their calculations. But at the same time they can be terrible wrong because they were on the wrong side of the fractale world, not by much, not by a few digits, maybe only at 1000 digits after the .
But this little error may explode in a long time simulation.

76

“West Antarctic Ice sheet alone has 5 m worth of sea level rise! Most of it lies below sea level”
Anybody with a rudimentary understanding of physics will tell you that ice that is under water will not contribute in an way to a rise in sea level. In fact floating ice has zero influence in sea level change.

77

The Antarctic ice sheet is not floating ice; it’s several kilometres thick and much of the Antarctic plateau is 3,000 metres (9,800 ft) high.
The floating sea ice that you’re referring to is a tiny % of the whole ice mass. Facts: https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/quickfacts/icesheets.html

I do wish people would research their comment before making such forceful and incorrect statements.

78

Quercus
I assume this is a response to my comment .
If not, appoligies in advance.
Read the comment again, now tell me where I have stated anything about the amount of ice floating or otherwise. I was simply pointing out that the statement made by Tarun that the majority of the ice is under water is irrelevant to the outcome of sea level change. That’s a fact I did not have to research.

79

@ Jake, The surface that the ice sheet rests on which is land beneath the ice of the West Antarctic continent sits below sea level. In other words the ice sheet bed has a retrograde slope, meaning it slopes downwards because the weight of icesheet has suppressed the land below it.
Now the biggest concern is if the warmer saline oceanic water enters the iceshelf on the margins of this ice sheet can cause a dramatic collapse. West Antarctice Ice sheet by itself has 5 m equivalent of sea level that is my point. The land area where it is located makes it super vulnerable to climate change. This is why it is important. I hope this answers your concern. I posted the link from science journal. You can check that up to better inform yourself.

80

Absolutely correct, and if the ice below sea level should melt it would have the opposite effect for that piece of ice. Water expands when it freezes to ice!

But I suspect we will be hearing the same threats of water rising fifty years from now too. And then as now you’ll hear nothing of the 3000-4000 years old harbor cities we find in the inland these days.

Water levels have always fluctuaded through history, it’s just modern mans arrogance that leads to the conclusion that we have to be the cause.. After all, everything revolves around us human beings, right!!!!

84

Tarun, I’m familiar with all the GW lies, and I’m far from being the only one. For me it’s a case of, been there, done that.

I’m just curious as to what you are doing on an F1 website given that this particular enterprise pumps out a fair amount of CO2 each year and which will contribute to kiling you and the planet?

If you have some emotional need to continue to buy into to this nonsense, while watching the likes of Al Gore get obscenely rich whilst eroding your quality of life, go ahead, but count me out and don’t post me links to a bunch on nonsense that has already been debunked.

85

Try inhaling co2 and it’s other subsidiaries and you will get an idea of it being a pollutant in less than 30 seconds. Scientists unlike the ones shown in Hollywood are not idiots. Climate change is real! Try reading scientific American or nature for example and you will realize what community says about climate change. Even then if you don’t believe try going to Antarctica! I have been there and studied those glaciers. This is really not a joke!

86

“Try inhaling co2 and it’s other subsidiaries”
I have been inhaling it ever since I took my first breath.
It is in the air and always has been, 300 to 400 ppm in most built up areas on average.

87

Jakethesnake, plus we also exhahale it.

88

Tarun, co2 is not meant to be inhaled by humans. Since you’ve decided to respond I would assume tht you know that co2 is food for plants and they effectively convert it to oxygen, which you can breathe.

Co2 causes flora to thrive, which is why glasshouse keepers pump loads of the stuff into their glasshouses.

I can tolerate many things, but I will not tolerate someone telling me blatant lies to my face such as that co2 is a harmful, or that it is unnatural.

Even if co2 did cause warming, why would that be bad ? Tell me, does life thrive at the tropics, or at the poles. Where is the greatest biodiversity, tropics or polls? Where would you rather live, tropics or at one of the poles?

It really boggles my mind why so many people buy into this and why they work so hard to help the likes of Al gore to realise their dreams of becoming “carbon billionaires” by contributing absolutely nothing? in face, worse than nothing, since this stuff has the capacity to damage economies, and your quality of life along with it.

89

I’m with Luke C here. We are going through a climate change though!! Yesterday it was 36C and today it is 37C and tomorrow will be 37C but with rain and storms. WOW there you have it, factual evidence…

90

Yeah, the earth is only 6000 years old and humans and dinosaurs existed together.

91

Are you suggesting that anyone not buying into the GW nonsense is a creationist? I’m definitely not. I’m a high school teacher with 2 university degrees and a masters in tech and science.

Even if I were a creationist, that wouldn’t automatically mean that I’m wrong about global warming.

What you are doing here here is committing a logical fallacy called ” ad hominem”, which is very ironic, given your response here.

92

It is not about CO2. USA does not care about CO2 emissions. They have not ratified yet the Kyoto Protocol. It is about NOx.

93

John, it’s about a bunch of aspiring “carbon billionaires” with a gift for bull**** artistry wanting a large slice of the tax funded money pie.

94

NASA doesn’t agree with you, Luke: http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

95

Quercus, is this the same NASA that is funded by the US government to assist it in spreading its GW agenda, and which in September 2014 published a photograph showing Antarctic ice extending 20 million square kilometres more than in 1979, and 1.7 million square kilometres more than two years previously?

It’s all a tad “inconvenient” for Al Gore, who predicted summer polar ice to disappear completely by 2013, don’t you think?

Honestly, if you guys are just going to repeat to me these politically motivated and government funded lies, we have nothing to discuss. There was a time when I bought into this nonsense, but not any more.

96

I’m still with you luke.

97

I think conspiracy theories should be off-topic, Luke.

98

Quercus, What are you talking about? What conspiracy theories?

99

Completely off-topic but i trust these sources more 😉
https://www.princeton.edu/geosciences/people/bender/CO2Sampling/climate.xml
Not sure about the moon, but it seems it has had it’s influence on you opions.

100

Eric, this is an article written by a geoscience freshman who volunteered to contribute to the university website.

101

He obviously still needs a lot of years to reach a trustworthy knowledge level. For now it complete nonsense.

102

That’s not the point [Mod]. The point is deceiving people and companies who buy these cars en masse by lulling them into thinking they’ve got better emissions than they actually do. CO2 effects outcomes change at the drop of a hat…. But it’s long been known the sensible people that NO2 which is what diesel cars emit are harmful to human health.

103

Speedster, if these companies were not required to conform to insanely idiotic requirements in the first place, they wouldn’t have to decieve.

Why not let car companies build the kinds of cars people want (or have always wanted before the GW brainwashing took place) and let the consumer not feel guilty about wanting a proper car with some chest hair?

104

NOX emissions is not an idiotic requirement. Your comment just makes you sound ignorant. CO2 is arguable I agree….but I would recommend you read the effect of NOX emissions on humans. There is no argument on that.
Renault’s under investigation for it too but they’ve already said that they won’t produce any diesel cars

105

Speedster, in this universe everything has a price tag; nothing is free. NOX emissions are the price we pay for cheap, practical and convenient transportation.

How exactly is it acceptable for a government to forcibly extract millions of dollars in fines from car manufacturers for “NoX” emissions, while at the same time using tax payer money to subsidise equally harmful technologies such as the electric car and solar — the latter being responsible for putting out copious amounts of hydrofluromethanes which are estimated to be about 14000 times more toxic than anything that has ever come out of an ICE?

Top Tags
SEARCH News