8 ms·

Isn't there some jet or jet like propulsion engine that was developed in the UK a couple years ago that may offer far more efficient and even harder thrust that

by wahsd 11y ago

Isn't there some jet or jet like propulsion engine that was developed in the UK a couple years ago that may offer far more efficient and even harder thrust that could revive high speed air travel? Is that what that boom.aero post was about? Sorry, I wasn't able to read into it. Either way, when these things come up, I am always curious what happened to the realization that air travel is a multitude worse than any other type of air pollution because it essentially directly delivers harmful particles right into the highest strata of our atmosphere. Is that no longer a concern with the jet-setting, globe trotting liberals? Or is it too inconvenient to their lifestyle and therefore will simply be ignored? Or maybe scientists were totally wrong about fundamental research?

TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(spacecraft) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(spacecraft)
ceejayoz 11y ago
> I am always curious what happened to the realization that air travel is a multitude worse than any other type of air pollution because it essentially directly delivers harmful particles right into the highest strata of our atmosphere. Is that no longer a concern with the jet-setting, globe trotting liberals? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviation#Total_climate_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviati... "The IPCC has estimated that aviation is responsible for around 3.5% of anthropogenic climate change, a figure which includes both CO2 and non-CO2 induced effects. The IPCC has produced scenarios estimating what this figure could be in 2050. The central case estimate is that aviation’s contribution could grow to 5% of the total contribution by 2050 if action is not taken to tackle these emissions, though the highest scenario is 15%." So, it's a concern, but far from the largest. There have been pretty significant advances in fuel efficiency, lighter aircraft, stuffing more people into a single plane, etc.
- wahsd 11y ago
  I think the question is the proportionality, i.e., is that 3.5 or 5% impact a disproportionate one. The absolute percentages of even just 3.5% means nothing without seeing it in relative terms. If that 3.5% is caused by 0.0001% of activity then that seems rather significant. I don't see air travel being anything even remotely close to 3.5% of all human climate affecting activity so it strikes me that it really is actually a rather significant matter.

by wahsd 11y ago

TheOtherHobbes 11y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(spacecraft) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(spacecraft)

ceejayoz 11y ago

> I am always curious what happened to the realization that air travel is a multitude worse than any other type of air pollution because it essentially directly delivers harmful particles right into the highest strata of our atmosphere. Is that no longer a concern with the jet-setting, globe trotting liberals? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviation#Total_climate_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviati... "The IPCC has estimated that aviation is responsible for around 3.5% of anthropogenic climate change, a figure which includes both CO2 and non-CO2 induced effects. The IPCC has produced scenarios estimating what this figure could be in 2050. The central case estimate is that aviation’s contribution could grow to 5% of the total contribution by 2050 if action is not taken to tackle these emissions, though the highest scenario is 15%." So, it's a concern, but far from the largest. There have been pretty significant advances in fuel efficiency, lighter aircraft, stuffing more people into a single plane, etc.

wahsd 11y ago
I think the question is the proportionality, i.e., is that 3.5 or 5% impact a disproportionate one. The absolute percentages of even just 3.5% means nothing without seeing it in relative terms. If that 3.5% is caused by 0.0001% of activity then that seems rather significant. I don't see air travel being anything even remotely close to 3.5% of all human climate affecting activity so it strikes me that it really is actually a rather significant matter.