ETHICAL RATINGS

We grade World Tour teams to sort the laudable from the lamentable

Cyclists are often referred to, dismissively, as moving billboards. Drilled down to the nub of the issue, that is what they often are, human automatons carrying around the names of sponsors they have no say over.

The fallout over Shell's limited sponsorship of British Cycling last year showed that passions run high when controversial partners are involved, while the sport's recent 'Middle East swing' has put the politics of the sport in the spotlight. And yet, there remains limited scrutiny of professional cycling's commercial backers. The sport of cycling may have a relatively niche appeal, but it is still important to take a look at the sponsors on the front of jerseys.

In an effort to situate the current field of sponsors within an ethical framework, we have rated the teams below on their ethics, putting them into high, medium, and low categories, with 'high' being the teams you should be most concerned about.

INEOS GRENADIERS

HIGH

Four years ago, when Sir Jim Ratcliffe, Britain's richest man, bought the team that was then Team Sky, he insisted from the beginning that the project was not "greenwashing", and defended fracking.

Ineos is a global manufacturer of petrochemicals, speciality chemicals and oil products, among other things. Carbon emissions are produced throughout the manufacturing process, from the extraction and transport of fossil fuels, from the use of fossil fuel as both raw material and power to produce plastics and other chemical products, and from the incineration and degradation of plastics waste.

It aims to hit net zero by 2050, which is the latest date set in order to keep global warming below 1.5°C, as called for by the Paris Agreement.

The Ineos team is specifically advertising the Grenadier, a giant 4x4 off-road vehicle which burns fuel, hardly the environmentally friendly future we are all in need of.