I was thinking about doing the math awhile ago, because a full A320 Neon only uses 1,5l per passenger for 100 km. They just don’t burn the same fuel and at different altitudes.
A full plane is still greener than a car with 1-2 passengers.
That may be true if you’re going the same distance, but planes go a lot farther. A lot of plane trips are unnecessary, and wouldn’t be made at all if the plane wasn’t an option. Many car trips are also unnecessary, but given modern infrastructure, they tend to be more necessary than plane trips.
It just isn’t. A car would need at least 2 passengers to beat a plane, maybe 3-4 depending on the car. Jet engines are incredibly efficient and planes carry a lot of people. If they all hopped in cars, the planet would turn into a smog hellscape.
If you care about personal emissions so much, take a train.
They do it anyway though.
A full plane is still greener than a car with 1-2 passengers.
I was thinking about doing the math awhile ago, because a full A320 Neon only uses 1,5l per passenger for 100 km. They just don’t burn the same fuel and at different altitudes.
That may be true if you’re going the same distance, but planes go a lot farther. A lot of plane trips are unnecessary, and wouldn’t be made at all if the plane wasn’t an option. Many car trips are also unnecessary, but given modern infrastructure, they tend to be more necessary than plane trips.
Per kg-km flying is higher carbon impact than driving, no matter how full the plane is.
It just isn’t. A car would need at least 2 passengers to beat a plane, maybe 3-4 depending on the car. Jet engines are incredibly efficient and planes carry a lot of people. If they all hopped in cars, the planet would turn into a smog hellscape.
If you care about personal emissions so much, take a train.