Racing's future tied to energy issues

By DAVID GREEN

Ever since man started digging coal out of the ground in large quantities, there have been dire predictions that we were going to run out of fossil fuels. So far, that has proven to be about as accurate as the Y2K computer scare.

But, obviously, it's a resource that is non-renewable. Just as obviously, our dependence upon it has some negative consequences ranging from economic to environmental to political.

It's a subject that ought to be important to any auto racing fan, because the great majority of motorsport utilizes internal combustion engines that burn fossil fuels. We, as members of the racing community, most definitely have a dog in this fight, folks.

Therefore, we all ought to welcome and applaud such things as the Indy Racing League's conversion in 2007 to ethanol fuel and the announcement yesterday by FIA President Max Mosley that Formula One will emphasize the development of more-efficient engines and energy storage systems in its racing equipment -- and we ought to do what we can to pressure NASCAR to, at the very least, get beyond the leaded-gasoline stage.

As most race fans probably know, the IRL is using a blend of ethanol in the gasoline that powers cars in the IndyCar Series. Next year, IRL racing will be gasoline-free.

So, too, is the South American nation of Brazil. As a consequence of an initiative two decades ago, Brazil is energy independent. Most of the vehicles on the roads in that country are fueled by ethanol that is made from sugar cane. Brazil does not care about the cost per barrel of oil, nor does it need to worry about the impacts on that price by various events in the Middle East.

Without argument, converting from gasoline to ethanol was one thing for Brazil and an exponentially more complex problem for the United States. The degree of difficulty of that conversion, however, is unfortunately matched by the strategic importance to each of the two nations.

What better way to nudge the mammoth infrastructure and convoluted political arena of America toward energy independence than by exploiting the nation's most popular form of racing?

What's that? You say the Indy Racing League is not the nation's most popular form of racing?

Bingo.

It should have been NASCAR, not the IRL, leading this charge.

During the gasoline crises in the mid 1970s, NASCAR President Bill France and other racing leaders were able to make the point to Congress and to the public that racing cars burn only a tiny fraction of fuel consumed by the nation. Had they not done so, racing might have been shut down, much in the manner it was during World War II because of rationing of fuel and other resources.

The argument is still true. From an economic and environmental standpoint, the leaded gasoline burned in NASCAR stock cars has virtually no impact on the country's energy big picture. The reduction in length of its races during those gas crisis years was a symbolic gesture that had less impact on the fuel shortage than a bug has on the forward progress of a 757.

But, symbolism and imagery are important. From a political standpoint, there's nothing that could "fuel" an energy renaissance like NASCAR setting the example.