“Rarely has Formula One found itself on the threshold of the sort of technological leap forward that we’re contemplating right now. And – here’s the added kick that should give the idea legs – rarely have we been gifted with so obvious an opportunity to nudge the sport in an ecologically and commercially appealing direction. The idea would benefit the public and the car companies as well as F1, because, at a stroke, it will infuse the sport with more power and excitement while eventually helping all car users to conserve energy and improve fuel consumption.

The initial thought concerns a high-tech device that would inject significant extra power into F1 cars over short periods. About 10 years ago, three F1 teams were looking at just such devices. The idea was to recover and store some of the energy lost in braking, then use it to supplement engine power when on full throttle. However, these systems were banned in the mid-90s owing to concerns over the safety of stored energy and costs.

Since then, the safety problems have been resolved and the potential costs look modest compared with the car manufacturers’ annual $100 million-plus budgets for developing conventional F1 engines. At the same time, hybrid cars using stored braking energy have become commonplace on our roads, but they presently suffer from two major problems. First, they run on batteries that must be charged at a very slow rate and, if the brakes are applied firmly, lose most of that braking energy in heat. Second, the batteries, electric motors and associated gubbins, are very heavy, which is bad for fuel consumption and take up lots of space.

But suppose we had systems that could soak up large quantities of energy quickly and were also small and light. In their ultimate development, they could collect all the energy generated by a road car and re-use it, instead of fuel, when accelerating. And, being light, they would have a negligible effect on general fuel consumption.

Which brings us back to our power-boost devices. If we allow them in F1, some of the world’s best engineers will set out to maximise energy storage while reducing weight and size – precisely what is needed. And instead of these devices being developed painfully slowly in back-room labs by major car makers, they’ll quickly be thrust into the full glare of F1, because new, upgraded versions will be needed immediately, not a few years down the line.

If we limit these devices by weight – a maximum of, say, 20kg (including all ancillaries) – but allow technology a free hand, we might see as many as three rival systems: electrical, hydraulic and flywheel-based. Existing technology should allow a 20kg system to store as much as 400kJ of energy and release it at about 45kW (60bhp) for nine seconds. That output is likely to increase, perhaps even double, by 2009, when these systems come on stream. In F1, braking times are very short, but as much as 2500 braking bhp can be generated for a second or so. Thus, depending on the circuit, it could well take little more than a lap to charge the system fully. The driver behind would then have to try to trick his rival into wasting stored energy to prevent counter-moves during overtaking. Imagine the Schumacher/Alonso battles at Imola with this extra element in play.

Making things light and efficient is one of F1’s greatest talents. It wouldn’t be long before relatively inexpensive versions of these devices could be offered on high-performance road cars. The result would be blinding acceleration (engine plus device), but low fuel consumption. Every time a driver braked or lifted off, the energy would be recovered and stored. When unit costs came down, such devices would be fitted to everyday cars, with huge benefits for fuel economy.

All of which would be much more useful than attempts to extract another few hundred revs from engines already running on the high side of 19,000rpm. And that is why we’re inviting the major car companies to propose a new engine formula for 2011, when we’ll suggest limiting power not by engine capacity (as we’ve done for the past 100 years), but by fuel. This may mean, for example, capping the maximum fuel-flow rate as a function of rpm, leaving the engine designers to maximise power from a given quantity of fuel. In short, we’re inviting the car companies to help us make F1 part of their general fuel economy research.

Yes, you may say, all very interesting, but what about cost? Who will pay? The obvious answer is that by stopping conventional engine development, we save $100 million-plus per major manufacturer each year, while they’re already all working on regenerative braking. And it wouldn’t be surprising if organisations outside the automobile industry also become involved – plenty of work is going on and there’s a lot of expertise out there, much of it surviving on very modest budgets. F1 may be just the catalyst that is needed.”