Just 1% of people are responsible for half of all toxic emissions from flying.

  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So it makes sense to divide planes mpg by passenger but not car mpg by passenger? Because the 67mpg you’re quoting is per passenger.

    A 4 passenger car that gets 20mpg, what’s the mpg per passenger? Two ways to get to the result: fuel used is divided between passengers so each passenger uses 25% of the fuel, so 20mpg/25% = 80mpg per passenger OR even simpler, 20 mpg x 4 passengers. The result is the same. For planes, using my example from another comment, 82mpg/passenger, 388 passengers, 82/388 = 0.21mpg/passenger with one passenger.

    Don’t tell me you truly believe that planes consume 67mpg by themselves because then you’ll have to explain why they need to cary thousands of gallons of fuel… (13k gallons for a 777)

    Again, you’re comparing the average number of passengers for all road trips vs the average number of passengers for all airline trips, but the purpose of both isn’t the same and just because someone took a plane to go somewhere doesn’t mean they won’t be taking their car to work. Compare both travels for the same purpose (in this discussion, vacations) and people don’t tend to go on vacation alone, that increases the number of passengers in the car, they don’t tend to go as far in their car so that also lowers the amount of fuel used for the vacation.

    • Zoolander@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      For all purposes of travel, planes are more efficient. The longer a plane trip is the more efficient it is because the plane loses weight as you travel, not the other way around.

      How can you ignore the multiple sources I’ve provided to still get the math wrong? Flying is more fuel efficient than cars. The only way you can make it less efficient is to limit the car rides to only rides that have 3+ passengers and only those that are multiple hundreds of miles in distance. That limits the trips we’re talking about to such a small percentage of auto travel that making progress in that specific area renders it meaningless. The majority of the carbon impact of driving comes from all the other usage. Airline travel has been more efficient than road travel since the start of the millennium.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        For all purposes of travel, planes are more efficient. The longer a plane trip is *the more efficient it is* because the plane loses weight as you travel, not the other way around.

        The 67mpg/passenger number from the source I provided is based on trillions of miles traveled, don’t you think that’s taken into consideration?

        I don’t get the math wrong, you interpret the data incorrectly and think that planes get 67mpg/vehicle instead of 67mpg/passenger and you compare car rides to work to long distance air travel instead of comparing leisure travel for both in which case cars are much more likely to be used for multi passenger travel.

        • Zoolander@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          you interpret the data incorrectly and think that planes get 67mpg/vehicle

          No I don’t. I have never said that anywhere.

          Stop lying and stop moving the goalposts.