The big change for F1 2026 that has been largely ignored

Many questions have been asked about the 2026 Formula 1 regulations and many comments made. These have tended to centre around the complexities of energy management and the merits or otherwise of active aerodynamics.

While these topics are debated, perhaps the longest lasting and most significant rule change has largely been ignored. I am referring to the introduction of fully sustainable fuel. Now, I declare an interest in this as I initiated this change and worked hard to ensure that a robust set of regulations was put in place that encouraged innovation while ensuring that the sport could not be accused of ‘greenwashing’.

I was also keen that, unlike governmental edicts to mandate electric vehicles, we defined the outcome that we wanted – a sustainable fuel – and then let the experts get on with producing it in the most efficient way rather than dictating a singular solution. 

The basic chemistry of road car fuels is that they are hydrocarbons – that is, they are formed by the bonding of hydrogen and carbon atoms in various ways. The number of carbon atoms in the molecule of fuel largely determines its properties, although the complexity of how the bonds between the carbon and hydrogen atoms are formed brings a myriad of subtleties to this oversimplified explanation.

The important thing is that the source of carbon must be sustainable. It should not compete with food stocks or even use land that should be available for the production of food

Perhaps we should start by explaining the many terms that are applied to non-fossil fuels, which can be confusing. The terms biofuel, e-fuel, sustainable fuel and synthetic fuel all describe substances that can replace conventional fossil-based fuels. Generally speaking, biofuels refer to fuels that are made by distillation of plant-based materials to produce ethanol or methanol. These are alcohol fuels and burn in a rather different way to gasoline. Of course, we are familiar with ethanol being blended at 10% in our current road car fuels, which are known as E10. 

E-fuels and synthetic fuels generally refer to fuels that are synthesised from ‘green’ hydrogen, that is hydrogen produced by passing an electric current through water to break the bond between the hydrogen and oxygen atoms. How the carbon is obtained is far more diverse. It can be produced from waste materials, direct capture and breakdown of the carbon dioxide in the air or even from algae, which could be farmed for the purpose.

The important thing is that the source of carbon must be sustainable. It should not compete with food stocks or even use land that should be available for the production of food. Sustainable fuel is a generic term that could be applied to both biofuels, synthetic fuels or, as is the case with F1 fuels, a blend of both.

When synthesising a fuel at a molecular level it is not necessary to mimic a fossil fuel and, in the early stages of developing the current F1 fuel regulations, I did consider the possibility of co-optimising the new fuel with the new engine. It certainly could have increased efficiency if you departed from the conventional formulation of fossil fuel blends.

The regulations have been written such that one fuel will not be in a position to dominate

Photo by: Getty Images

This approach was not adopted as it was felt that a much better purpose would be served by producing a sustainable fuel that met all the standards of a European road vehicle fuel. This standard, known as EN228, is pretty exacting but by following this route we were able to say that the fuel used in an F1 engine could be used in any road car. In this way we could demonstrate that it was feasible to provide an alternative, low-carbon energy source that in some circumstances may be a better alternative to pure electrical energy.

Some so-called sustainable fuels have been around for a while and some even used in motorsport over the last few years, but the difference between these and F1 fuels is that they often use shortcuts in production that can mask the sustainability of the product.

We are all familiar with green electricity tariffs but, if you subscribe to one, the electrons that come out of your wall socket are not necessarily from a renewable energy source. What you are buying is the promise that the energy company is producing enough renewable electricity to supply all subscribers to such a scheme. 

This is fine as long as enough renewable electrical energy is actually being produced. In the context of F1 fuel, it was important that every molecule of the fuel that actually went into the cars was sustainable, and not just based on the promise of a suitable amount of sustainably produced molecules being available somewhere in the production chain.

A performant fuel could still have an advantage, maybe by improving fuel economy and hence giving a lighter race start weight, but not one that gave a significant difference in power

This was quite a challenge because the preferred manufacturing method of the fuel producers was to co-process the sustainable fuel along with their regular fossil fuels. This would have avoided the cost of building special plants to isolate the sustainable fuel from its fossil cousin. It would also have opened the sport up to accusations of greenwashing and, because this was to be a demonstrator for the possibility of future road fuels being sustainable, this was not acceptable.

An independent company was therefore engaged to verify all the fuels made by the various companies. This involved certification of the source of the molecules and the production method itself to ensure renewable electricity was used in the processing. It involved a complex chain of evidence as the fuel’s components moved through their various stages of manufacture and a final certification of the product was delivered to the teams.

One final twist in the regulations was made to ensure that one fuel did not dominate, and this was to change the previous rule that dictated fuel mass flow to one of energy flow. This ensured that a performant fuel could still have an advantage, maybe by improving fuel economy and hence giving a lighter race start weight, but not one that gave a significant difference in power.

I truly believe that in years to come, when I hope we still have the opportunity to drive cars with internal combustion engines using blends that include sustainable fuel, we will be able to look back and say that F1 brought the use of these fuels to the forefront of both public and governmental minds.

This article is one of many in the monthly Autosport magazine. For more premium content, take a look at the May 2026 issue and subscribe today. 

The fact that the F1 grid now runs on fully sustainable fuels has got a little lost among all the debate about energy management

Photo by: Getty Images