F1's options to define its next powertrain step

Those who have anticipated significant change in the engine regulations for the 2021 Formula 1 season will have been left somewhat disappointed. While the aero rules have been granted a complete overhaul, the powertrain will remain largely untouched.

Furthermore, anyone hoping for fundamental change and the return of naturally-aspirated engines will also be left disappointed. Hybrid power units are in F1 to stay, and any deviation from them given their efficiency and the amount of resource put into them would be more damaging in the long run. After all, when faced with a choice between building a sustainable championship and pleasing a few people whose spectacle lenses are rose-tinted, the decision's not hard to make.

Apart from the addition of a few banned materials to control costs and the impending freeze of various components, the 2021 power units will be very, very similar to what we have now, and will be so until the end of 2025.

Just as 2014's hybrid powertrains were hugely anticipated, given the tepidity of the V8 era after the ear-splitting V10s were peeled away from F1, 2026 should be the next leap in deciding the next generation of powertrain designs.

And it will be hugely difficult for F1 and the FIA to define.

Naturally, the interests of those in charge of F1 will not always be complementary to the interests of the teams and manufacturers on the grid. The governing bodies will be, as they were ahead of 2014, tempted to stack the rules in their favour to lure more manufacturers to the grid.

Formula E has been able to dangle a tantalising powertrain concept at 10 different manufacturers, appealing to their need to develop electric vehicles in a high-stakes, pressure-cooker environment.

F1, meanwhile, has retained four and offered them the means to improve their hybridised consumer products, but the expense is still too great. The MGU-H component, in particular, is something of a white elephant. No doubt it's a fantastic idea, and the ability to use a motor to extract excess energy from the turbo and use it to control the turbine speed is certainly a good one - but it hasn't made quite the successful transition to road-going vehicles that an MGU-K, or regenerative braking, ever could.

For the manufacturers, 2026 powertrains have to be relevant to their product lines, and that means anticipating where the market is going to be in over five years' time. For the teams, a new concept has to be affordable and reliable, lest the fallout akin to the Red Bull-Renault relationship befall any other powertrain partnerships on the grid.

Of course, there's also the fans. A vocal portion of F1's fanbase has always nailed its colours to the mast, flooding social media with calls for louder, larger and thirstier engines. One imagines most of those fit in the Venn diagram overlap with voices belittling the achievements of Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg. Clarksonian acolytes are, after all, a lairy bunch.

There's a few directions that F1 can take for 2026: an incremental addition to its current hybrid formula, a radical step with greater electrification, or throwing away all the lessons from the previous decade and plonking in an ice-cap-melting, large-capacity, normally-aspirated engine.

Let's assess the merits of each and try to determine how the noisy part of an F1 car might end up looking in six years' time.

The safe option: bigger, better hybrids

Given the notorious difficulties in getting F1's manufacturers to agree on anything, this seems like the most likely course of action thus far. 2021's hybrids will be scarcely different to 2014's, and while it might be a little pessimistic to suggest that the 2026 formula will be nothing more than a continuation, that might not be such a bad thing.

What it does do is give the automotive industry more time for the MGU-H to trickle down into hybrid road cars. If it still proves too troublesome, then it could theoretically be scrapped in F1 too. The downside is that it leaves something of a void in energy recovery systems, and while the output of the MGU-K could be increased to cover that off, there's a ready-made replacement to cover off waste products from the engine.

Hybrid capabilities could be enhanced, but you don't get something for nothing in F1. An extra turbo and MGU-H, and a catalytic chamber, would all add weight - something F1 can scarcely afford to do

Fuel reforming is a recovery process that has flown under the radar somewhat in the automotive industry, but it has been touted for inclusion in the next set of engine regulations.

To break it down, a catalytic fuel reformer works in much the same way as a catalytic converter, which performs a 'redox' reaction. Harmful carbon monoxide products, produced by incomplete combustion, are oxidised to produce carbon dioxide, while nitric oxides are simultaneously reduced into nitrogen.

A reformer is less passive, taking exhaust gases from the engine - also using the waste heat and water vapour within - and reforming it into a hydrogen-rich gas. That gas can then be recycled into the engine, pushing efficiency beyond the current level to extend the range of the fuel onboard.

If F1 decided to retain the MGU-H, then the two could theoretically work in tandem - and if the legislators decided in favour of doubling their fun with a twin-turbo it could, depending on the arrangement, add an extra MGU-H and reap more regenerated energy.

The hybrid capabilities, with all those systems on board, would be enhanced - but you don't get something for nothing in F1. An extra turbo, an extra MGU-H and a catalytic chamber would all add weight, something F1 can scarcely afford to do.

In the past decade, cars have ballooned by over 100kg, including the addition of numerous safety measures. But the current crop of drivers are complaining that the cars are now large and ponderous in handling terms - and if anything, F1 needs to shift the balance the other way.

It also adds extra expense at a time when F1 is holding teams to account with a cost cap, and that might begin to put manufacturers off. Power unit suppliers may charge no more than €15million for a year's supply, and the cost of having to develop new componentry will no doubt provoke lobbying to charge more.

But the point is that there's plenty of scope to adapt the current hybrid units to improve them. 2021's powertrain rules are probably guilty of not moving them on enough technologically, but that's perhaps understandable given the overwhelming change to the aero. But 2026's manufacturers should be afforded the opportunity to go deeper and push the overall efficiency further than it's ever gone before.

The futuristic option: greater electrification

This idea needs to be heavily caveated from the beginning, as F1 cannot go 'fully electric' until 2039 at the earliest - Formula E has a 25-year exclusivity arrangement with the FIA to be the only fully-electrified single-seater championship. If F1 wanted to go the whole hog and ditch internal combustion engines for good, it would have to take a different step - which could end up becoming a sustainable solution itself.

It's unclear whether FE's electro-exclusivity extends to anything beyond battery power, but if F1 was to embark upon using hydrogen fuel cells as an alternative fuel source to power a motor (or motors), then surely the FIA would waive any exclusivity.

Recently, DTM's promoter ITR unveiled a hydrogen-powered concept race series, and it seems certain that a series will eventually adopt fuel cells in the future. While the technology exists, it's nowhere near as widespread as the electric car is today - hydrogen power needs a 'Tesla moment', where the emergence of a single specialist company popularised a movement in the automotive industry.

Primarily, cost is a concern. Fuel cells are expensive to produce and the cost of energy in producing the hydrogen fuel is deceptively high.

While hydrogen is the most abundant element, it also readily forms compounds - meaning that various chemical processes are required to break the bonds that bind hydrogen atoms to others.

That can be achieved with the electrolysis of water, where hydrogen gas then begins to appear at the cathode. When the hydrogen is used by the fuel cell, it reacts with oxygen to reform water - although energy is lost from the cycle to power the car. It then requires more energy to break any recycled water down again through further electrolysis. It's not a perpetual cycle by any means, but does allow for potential regeneration if the water emitted can be harvested.

Aural stimulation isn't the sole contributor to sustainability. A fleet of heavy, thirsty V12s flooding the world's locales with fumes is at odds with F1's push to be a more environmentally aware category

But the issue there is that the initial energy to produce and store the hydrogen gas, along with the production of fuel cells, is problematically steep. The University of Queensland estimates that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles actually produce three times the emissions that battery-powered electric cars do when relying on power from the main grid.

While this would cease to be an issue if we relied purely on carbon-neutral forms of power, the reality is that current power demand means that the majority of countries are a long way off that target.

There's definitely merit in pursuing high-performance fuel cell technology, and due to hydrogen's prevalence in the atmosphere (it accounts for almost 75% of the planet's elemental composition) it's worth being able to harness something so abundant. But 2026 is too close to realistically introduce hydrogen-fuelled cars, and the world needs to largely decarbonise its entire power structure before bringing them into the mainstream.

The fan-friendly option: a return of V12s

As much as this author has grown to love the guttural growls of the current turbo-hybrid power units, it doesn't quite hold the same dominion over F1's fanbase as, say, a Ferrari V12 engine. The reverb-laden roars of a V12 is, subjectively, a much more thrilling experience than the shriek of a V10, or the nondescript noise of a V8. One imagines the idea of 20 cars powering along the Monza circuit, with engines howling through the trees, would be a very attractive proposition indeed.

Furthermore, they're cheap. F1 could potentially attract a swathe of smaller outfits to supply a no-frills V12 unit, harking back to the days when the likes of Ilmor, Judd and Hart would independently supply engines without manufacturer backing. There would be more choice, more differentiation - and did we mention the sound?

Unfortunately, aural stimulation isn't the sole contributor to creating a sustainable F1. If anything, it barely factors as a contributor at all - and a fleet of heavy, thirsty V12s flooding the world's locales with fumes is entirely at odds with F1's push to become a more environmentally aware category.

Sure, V12s with none of the trimmings of the current hybrid engines would be cheap to produce - but they're about as relevant today as a MiniDisc player. Manufacturers have no need to spend a few million dollars a year on designing and building V12 engines when their range of products are predominantly hybridised.

It might attract the independents, but it would not be consequence free - and the cost would almost certainly be the loss of F1's current automotive giants, if there's no apparent commercial gain.

To end with a hypothetical; let's say F1 does the unthinkable, caves to the demands of a single YouTube comment and brings back V12s. The immediate gratification of having noisy engines is brilliant, no doubt - but what good is that when there's nobody willing to be involved in developing such archaic technology?

Any powertrain solution that F1 chooses for 2026 and beyond must be carefully considered and must help it progress in a world where the development of technology is ever-accelerating.

F1 must remain relevant and it must remain sustainable in today's society - and the step it makes for the next generation of power units should ideally move on the formula we have now and bring it to new heights.

That step could make or break F1's longevity, depending on the direction it takes.