I freely admit I got this one by following links in F1 Fanatic’s post, F1 in the Blogs 17. But, when there’s not much happening elsewhere, hey, you have to see what others are digging up.

The first link is to Sandlander’s blog, an excellent example of the cool websites emanating from Arab countries these days. Sandlander is writing of local feelings in the UAE (United Arab Emirates) regarding Abu Dhabi’s GP, recently agreed to by our Bernie, and I don’t feel qualified to enter that arena. The article contains a link to the Abu Dhabi GP website, however, and this turns out to be a marketing exercise tour de force.

Go to the Circuit page and you will be treated to an ultra-cool virtual video of the track – never mind that it doesn’t exist yet. And the rest of the site contains all you ever wanted to know about Abu Dhabi, including some very nice photographs. The whole thing reeks of money (well, it has the F1 logo – that alone must have cost them quite a few bucks) and even includes a countdown to the GP in 2009.

It’s a picture of the future – this is where F1 is going and the old European circuits can only expect to be axed sooner or later. The sport must go where the money is, especially now that the manufacturer teams are going to have a bigger share of the profits; even an old dinosaur like me can accept that.

I just wish that there could be a guarantee about certain races, that they would never disappear, regardless of the financial aspect. F1 without Monaco and Spa would be a creature without a heart.

I love the double-mindedness of F1. On the one hand, we have Mighty Max pontificating about how F1 must become a part of the modern world and get its environment-friendly act together. When the world comes to an end through global warming, no-one will be able to point a finger at the sport and say it’s to blame. So we have ridiculous new regulations on the way, all to help the manufacturers in their quest to appear greener than the average bear.

But now along comes Bernie with the idea that F1 must have some night races – for the spectacle, of course. Well, let’s think about that for a minute. The cars have no lights so the circuit is going to have to be flood-lit – hey, they do it in football, you say. And that is true, they light up a whole stadium to turn night into day, no problem at all (until there’s a power failure).

Has it struck anyone yet that a Formula 1 circuit is a little larger than a football stadium? We are not talking a hundred yards of playable turf here; circuits are generally just short of two miles in length. That’s an awful lot of floodlights they’re going to have to assemble.

And I am not saying it’s impossible – many of the government-sponsored races have the financial clout to do such a thing. What concerns me is the power consumption. If we are so worried about the effect on the environment of a few F1 races a year, how come all that goes away when we need to light up a night race? Has Bernie not realized that the power comes from electricity generators that run on fossil fuels?

I need say little about what happens when there’s a power failure. On such occasions in a football game, you could get one or two players colliding but basically there’s no harm done. If it happens when you’re hurtling down a straight at two hundred miles an hour, things might be just a little different.

The fact is that the eco-friendly movement in F1 has nothing to do with a genuine concern for the environment (quite rightly so too as the whole issue is a political matter, not a scientific one). What matters to the car manufacturers is image – how they are viewed by the public. When pressure to be green becomes strong enough, the manufacturers begin an exercise to prove that they are, in fact, the greenest thing since Kermit the frog.

Formula 1 has become a part of that marketing exercise. If it can prove, through strange regulations to limit engine emissions, that it is in the forefront of the drive to eco-friendliness, that rubs off on the participants and they can go home well pleased. What matters is how F1 is perceived, not whether it actually has any impact on the environment at all.

Everyone knows that the internal combustion engine pumps out lots of hot gases through its exhaust. It is a convenient scapegoat, therefore, when imagining that the world is heating up through CO2 emissions. But, if F1 is doing its best to limit those emissions, it must be one of the good guys.

Electric light, however, is not so easily linked to global warming in the public mind. The power stations are out of sight and out of mind, therefore they do not count. Who cares that one night race would add greatly to CO2 emissions and negate all the ingenuity devoted to making the racing engines cleaner? It’s not about reality, it’s about image.

I have no doubt that Bernie will get his way and there will be night races for cars with strange turbo-driven engines and brakes that no longer glow red because all the heat is being re-used. There might even be an audience for such a circus. But please don’t tell me that F1 is genuinely concerned for the environment – it merely wants to appear so.

Pitpass dot com has an interesting article about the sale of Donington Park to a consortium calling itself Donington Ventures Leisure Limited (DVLL). This leads to speculation that Donington, with its improved facilities, might mount a serious challenge to be the venue for future British GPs.

It takes me back to 1993, when Donington hosted the European GP. At the time, there were thoughts that the circuit was too small to put on a decent F1 race but events proved everyone wrong. Thanks to the weather and the genius of Ayrton Senna, the race turned out to be one of the all time greats.

As a result, we all have fond memories of Donington as a GP venue and this must surely aid DVLL in any move to steal the British GP from Silverstone. But the most telling aspect will inevitably be facilities. Pitpass seems to think that Silverstone will never be able to compete in this area and they may have a point. The BRDC, owners of Silverstone, just don’t have the money to build luxury facilities like those on offer in the tiger economies of Asia.

Things have come a long way from the days of rickety toilets and greasy food served from a caravan. The average race goer expects to be cosseted with the latest advances in hygienic amenities; or so we are led to believe. And the standards for acceptance as one of Bernie’s elite circuits just keep going up and up, while the tracks become ever more standardized in the quest for safety. It’s a brave (and boring) new world.

It is not that I think Donington should not have a GP; more that I would be sad to see Silverstone go. Apart from being a good circuit, it has history on its side and that means atmosphere. Which wasn’t enough to save Brands Hatch, of course, and many other famous circuits on the continent. Surely it is about time that more factors than facilities were taken into account in this business of selecting GP venues. If the FIA is so concerned about entertainment value, it might be an idea for atmosphere and setting to be considered as well as fancy grandstands and ablution blocks.

The greatness of the Nordschleife was not just the length and variation of the circuit – it was also the brooding forest that surrounded the circuit and gave it atmosphere. Monaco survives only because its setting is so steeped in history that its demise is unthinkable. And we all react with horror to the thought that Spa might be taken from us yet again. Circuits become part of our memories, reminders of great races we have witnessed, places that speak of famous names and events, deeds of courage and superhuman skill.

Silverstone is not one of the most atmospheric circuits yet it has its share of memories. It remains one of the GPs that we look forward to, not just for the renewal of competition but also because it has that aura of tradition.

Bernie Ecclestone has been hinting at the possibility of a second GP for the States and is talking to people in Las Vegas and Chicago apparently. This is all very interesting but then he asks a rhetorical question that just begs for an answer:

Bernie said: “Why should we race in America for certainly half the fee we get in other parts of the world?”

Funnily enough, I can tell you why, Bernie – because the US remains the largest market in the world, that’s why. If F1 has to accept lower profits to get into that market, it will be more than worth it in the long run. Ever since it began, F1 has tried to interest Americans, adding the Indy 500 as a fake GP at first, then accepting races at some pretty strange places; anything to gain a toehold.

For fifty years nothing has worked – the Statesiders have remained doggedly fascinated by cars roaring around banked ovals at top speed but F1′s moment has come at last. American open wheel racing is in disarray, split into two camps, Champ Cars and IRL, and competing with NASCAR for viewers. If there were ever a time when those viewers might be persuaded to look at an alternative to their domestic series, this has to be it.

It is not due to F1′s success that its TV ratings are the equal of Champ Cars’ now – that is entirely thanks to the split. But this illustrates the chance that is going begging. Those Americans that have made the switch to F1 are already incredibly knowledgeable about the sport and hunger for more. Give them another GP and the word will spread; heck, give them three more and you’ll murder CC and IRL.

And, if you have to accept a bargain basement price for such races, grin and bear it – there’ll be plenty of opportunities to add to the FIA’s fortune in the future. Think of how the Japanese destroyed the British car industry: they sold their cars for ridiculously low prices and added a radio as standard. Naturally, the Brits bought them by the thousand. Once the competition was on its knees, they increased the prices and it was too late to save the local industry. That is how to invade a new market.

Money is all very nice and easy to get while Asian countries are prepared to pay ridiculous prices for a GP. But how long can the bonanza continue? Sooner or later those governments that are all for F1 now will realize that there are better places to spend their cash. Taxpayers have a way of demanding some return for their contributions. When that happens, F1 will have to fall back on its traditional source of funding, the fans. Will they still be there after an endless diet of featureless races in deserts and fading funfairs?

So yes, we need at least one more race in the States. And if it has to be done by special offer, a never-to-be-repeated price, then it must be so. When a chance like this comes along (and it’s been fifty years of waiting, remember), we should be prepared to give the GPs away if it means conquering America.

Stupid question, Bernie.