Formula 1 on Track to Meet 2030 Net Zero Target

F1 cuts carbon emissions by 35% against 2018 baseline

Formula 1 has reduced its carbon footprint by 35% compared to 2018 levels. The figure comes from the sport’s latest annual sustainability review and represents nearly 80,000 tonnes of CO₂ equivalent removed from operations since the programme started.

However, there’s an important distinction to understand. The 35% figure includes credits from Sustainable Aviation Fuel certificates. The absolute reduction in actual emissions stands at 26%, bringing total emissions down from 228,793 tonnes of CO₂ equivalent in 2018 to 168,720 tonnes in 2024.

This progress matters because F1 set a target in 2019 to achieve net zero by 2030. Specifically, the sport committed to a 50% absolute reduction in emissions by that date, with any remaining emissions offset through verified programmes. The current trajectory suggests this target remains achievable.

For UK businesses watching how large organizations tackle carbon reduction while maintaining growth, F1 offers a useful case study. The sport has expanded from 21 races in 2018 to 24 races in 2024, yet emissions have fallen substantially. This demonstrates that revenue growth and emissions reduction can happen simultaneously when operations are redesigned around carbon efficiency.

Where the emissions cuts have come from

The reductions break down across several operational areas. Emissions from factories and facilities have fallen by between 59% and 64% since 2018. Travel emissions are down 27%, while logistics emissions have decreased by 29%.

All ten F1 teams now power their facilities entirely with renewable energy. This single change accounts for the majority of the factory emissions reduction. Teams have invested in on-site solar installations, purchased renewable energy contracts, and in some cases switched to electric heating systems.

Travel represents a significant challenge for any global sport. F1 has tackled this through several measures. The sport now uses remote broadcasting technology to reduce the number of staff travelling to each race. Camera feeds and timing data are transmitted to a central production facility in the UK, where much of the broadcast content is assembled.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel is being adopted across team travel. Meanwhile, F1 itself is purchasing SAF certificates to cover emissions from its own air travel. These certificates represent fuel that has been produced from sustainable sources and used in the aviation system, even if not in the specific aircraft used by F1.

Logistics has seen perhaps the most creative changes. Currently, over 50% of broadcast freight travels by air. By 2030, this will shift to sea freight. The change adds time to the logistics schedule but cuts emissions dramatically.

Teams now store equipment in regional hubs rather than shipping everything back to the UK between races. For example, equipment used for the American races stays in North America between events. Similarly, kit for Asian races remains in that region. This approach eliminates thousands of unnecessary freight miles each season.

In Europe, the sport has switched its freight trucks to biofuel. This single change reduced related emissions by 83%. The trucks still run on existing diesel engines but use fuel derived from waste cooking oils and agricultural residues rather than fossil sources.

What the numbers mean for carbon accounting

The distinction between the 35% and 26% figures highlights an important point about carbon reporting. Organizations can report emissions reductions in different ways, and the methodology matters enormously.

The 26% figure represents actual, absolute emissions reduction. Fewer tonnes of CO₂ equivalent were released into the atmosphere in 2024 compared to 2018. This is the most straightforward measure and the one that ultimately matters for climate impact.

The 35% figure includes SAF certificates. These certificates represent sustainable fuel that has entered the aviation fuel supply somewhere in the world. By purchasing these certificates, F1 can claim credit for enabling that sustainable fuel to displace conventional jet fuel. However, the actual fuel used in planes carrying F1 personnel and equipment may still be conventional kerosene.

This approach is legitimate under current carbon accounting standards. Nevertheless, businesses should understand the difference when reviewing their own carbon strategies. Absolute reductions require operational changes that physically reduce emissions. Certificate-based reductions rely on the integrity of offset and credit schemes.

For UK SMEs facing carbon reporting requirements under frameworks like PPN 06/21, this distinction becomes practically important. Public sector suppliers need to demonstrate credible carbon reduction plans. Understanding what counts as an absolute reduction versus an offset or credit helps businesses structure compliant responses.

Independent analysis shows wider system emissions

F1’s official reporting covers its own operations and those of the teams. Independent analysis suggests the sport’s total climate impact is considerably larger when fan travel, media operations, and supply chains are included.

Research published by sustainability analysts estimates F1’s wider footprint at approximately 1.04 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent. That’s roughly six times the official operational figure. The difference lies in scope boundaries.

Fan travel to races represents the largest component of these wider emissions. Hundreds of thousands of spectators travel to each grand prix, many by car or plane. The sport doesn’t control these emissions and doesn’t include them in its official reporting. However, they exist as a consequence of F1’s activities.

Supplier emissions add another substantial layer. Everything from tyre manufacturing to hospitality services generates carbon. Some of this falls within F1’s Scope 3 reporting, but much sits outside the current boundaries.

This wider perspective matters for any business assessing its true climate impact. Official reporting frameworks like the Greenhouse Gas Protocol define clear boundaries for Scopes 1, 2, and 3. However, those boundaries don’t capture every emission associated with business activities. Companies pursuing credible sustainability strategies need to understand both their reported footprint and their wider system impact.

Racing calendar expansion creates tension with reduction targets

F1 has added three races to its calendar since 2018. Each additional race means more logistics, more travel, and more infrastructure. The fact that emissions have fallen despite this expansion demonstrates the effectiveness of the operational changes implemented.

However, there’s a tension here that many growing businesses will recognize. Revenue growth often requires expanded operations, which typically increases emissions. Breaking this link requires either radical efficiency improvements or fundamental business model changes.

F1 has achieved this decoupling through the measures outlined earlier. Renewable energy, regional logistics hubs, and freight modal shifts have collectively reduced emissions per race. Therefore, even with more races, total emissions have fallen.

UK manufacturers and distributors face similar challenges. A growing order book means more production and more deliveries, which usually means more emissions. The F1 example shows that growth and decarbonization can coexist, but only through systematic operational redesign.

Five key facts about F1’s carbon reduction programme

• Formula 1 has reduced its operational carbon footprint by 26% in absolute terms since 2018, from 228,793 to 168,720 tonnes of CO₂ equivalent, despite adding three races to the calendar.
• All ten F1 teams now power their facilities entirely with renewable energy, contributing to a 59-64% reduction in factory and facility emissions.
• Over 50% of broadcast freight currently transported by air will shift to sea freight by 2030, substantially reducing logistics emissions.
• The sport achieved an 83% emissions reduction for European freight by switching trucks from diesel to biofuel derived from waste oils and agricultural residues.
• Regional equipment hubs now store race kit between events, eliminating thousands of unnecessary transcontinental freight movements each season.

Calendar optimization reduces unnecessary travel

One less visible change involves how races are scheduled. The calendar is now organized to minimize intercontinental travel. Races in the same region are grouped together where possible, reducing the back-and-forth movement of equipment and personnel.

For example, the American races now run in sequence rather than being scattered across the season. Similarly, European races are clustered into a concentrated portion of the calendar. This geographical grouping cuts the number of long-haul freight movements required.

This approach mirrors supply chain optimization in other sectors. Businesses can often reduce transport emissions significantly by rethinking delivery routes and scheduling. Batching shipments to the same region, using consolidation centers, and planning routes to minimize empty running all deliver measurable carbon reductions.

The principle applies equally to service businesses. Professional services firms with multiple client sites can reduce travel emissions through careful diary management, clustering client visits by geography rather than scheduling them opportunistically.

Biofuel switch delivers immediate emissions cuts

The 83% emissions reduction from switching European freight trucks to biofuel represents one of the programme’s most significant single interventions. Importantly, this change required no modifications to vehicles or infrastructure.

The trucks use hydrotreated vegetable oil, a drop-in replacement for conventional diesel. It’s produced from waste cooking oils, agricultural residues, and other feedstocks. The fuel meets the same performance specifications as fossil diesel but with substantially lower lifecycle carbon emissions.

This approach offers a template for UK haulage and logistics businesses. Many fleet operators face pressure to decarbonize but struggle with the capital costs of switching to electric or hydrogen vehicles. Biofuel provides an interim solution that delivers immediate emissions reductions using existing assets.

However, biofuel availability and pricing vary significantly by region. UK businesses considering this approach need to assess local supply and establish reliable procurement contracts. Additionally, not all biofuels deliver the same carbon savings. Lifecycle analysis matters enormously, as some feedstocks and production methods offer far better emissions performance than others.

Renewable energy procurement eliminates facility emissions

The shift to 100% renewable electricity across all team facilities represents a straightforward but effective intervention. Most UK businesses can make similar changes relatively easily.

Teams have used three main approaches. Some have installed on-site solar panels to generate their own renewable electricity. Others have purchased renewable energy supply contracts from their electricity providers. A third group has bought Renewable Energy Guarantees of Origin certificates to cover their consumption.

For UK SMEs, renewable electricity contracts are now widely available at competitive prices. The previous premium for renewable supply has largely disappeared as wind and solar have become cost-competitive with fossil generation. Many businesses can switch to renewable electricity without increasing costs.

This change particularly benefits manufacturers with significant electricity consumption. Switching to renewable supply can eliminate 50-70% of a typical manufacturer’s Scope 2 emissions immediately. For businesses pursuing carbon reporting compliance through frameworks like our net-zero program for PPN 06/21, renewable electricity represents one of the most accessible early wins.

Remote broadcasting technology cuts travel requirements

F1’s adoption of remote broadcasting demonstrates how technology can substitute for travel. Previously, large broadcast teams travelled to each race to produce coverage. Now, much of this work happens in a central facility in the UK, with only a skeleton crew at each circuit.

Camera feeds, timing data, and telemetry are transmitted in real time to the remote production center. Editors, directors, and graphics operators work from there, assembling the broadcast without travelling to the race. This change has removed hundreds of return flights from the sport’s annual carbon footprint.

The principle applies to many professional services. The shift to remote and hybrid working during the pandemic proved that many meetings and interactions don’t require physical presence. Businesses that embed remote working practices permanently can sustain significant travel emissions reductions.

However, some activities genuinely benefit from in-person interaction. The challenge lies in distinguishing between travel that adds real value and travel that happens out of habit. A systematic review of travel patterns, linked to carbon data, helps businesses identify where remote alternatives work effectively and where they don’t.

Official sources for further information

The Formula 1 sustainability pages provide detailed reporting on the sport’s environmental programme, including annual reviews and progress updates against the 2030 net-zero target.

The UK government’s greenhouse gas reporting guidance offers comprehensive advice on carbon accounting methodologies, helping businesses understand the difference between Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions.

For businesses in logistics and transport sectors, the government’s net zero strategy outlines sector-specific pathways and policy support for decarbonization.

Organizations seeking guidance on sustainable procurement and supply chain emissions can access resources through our sustainable procurement support, which helps businesses address Scope 3 emissions and supplier engagement.