3 ms·

For the entire plane, the MPG is much lower. For each passenger, that's certainly not true [0] It's the same for busses, boats, etc. [0] https://www.wired.com

For the entire plane, the MPG is much lower. For each passenger, that's certainly not true [0] It's the same for busses, boats, etc. [0] https://www.wired.com/2015/04/debate-settled-flying-way-efficient-driving/ https://www.wired.com/2015/04/debate-settled-flying-way-effi...

jMyles 10y ago
Yep, I'm aware of the Michigan study, and I don't find its conclusions compelling. I don't think it's fair to say that it's "certainly" not true, as this study has not been reviewed and plenty of reasonable people believe that the evidence suggests a different conclusion. Here's a fairly straightforward critique of its methodology: https://thinkprogress.org/no-flying-is-not-greener-than-driving-7de8d53959ab#.b88klnj7a https://thinkprogress.org/no-flying-is-not-greener-than-driv... In fact, can you name any other study which comes to the same conclusion as this one?
- duaneb 10y ago
  The article you linked makes the claim "not all trips are equal" and points out that some trips (e.g. local commutes) give driving a distinct edge. The trip between LA and SF falls on the opposite end of the spectrum, pulling the average trip toward being more flying friendly, especially if you can avoid driving to and from the airport, than your driving solo. I agree the original article isn't great, but the one you offered is equally insubstantial. It shouldn't be shocking to find the trip type impacts the energy use.
  - jMyles 10y ago
    One of us is misreading the critique (and it may be me?). I think that what it's saying is this: * The most wasteful car trips are solo local commutes. Carbon-per-inch, flying is more efficient than driving when the driving is a solo local commutes. * For longer trips, in a light duty vehicle like a sedan or SUV, driving usually smashes flying. If you have 4 people in the car, even in an inefficient car, you are using less than half the fuel of those same people flying. The Michigan study simply averaged these together, which is obviously senseless because there is no flight equivalent of a 3-mile commute. It only makes sense to compare flights against highway mileage, and it's not unfair to assume >= 2.2 people in the car. That's the way I read the critique.

jMyles 10y ago

Yep, I'm aware of the Michigan study, and I don't find its conclusions compelling. I don't think it's fair to say that it's "certainly" not true, as this study has not been reviewed and plenty of reasonable people believe that the evidence suggests a different conclusion. Here's a fairly straightforward critique of its methodology: https://thinkprogress.org/no-flying-is-not-greener-than-driving-7de8d53959ab#.b88klnj7a https://thinkprogress.org/no-flying-is-not-greener-than-driv... In fact, can you name any other study which comes to the same conclusion as this one?

duaneb 10y ago
The article you linked makes the claim "not all trips are equal" and points out that some trips (e.g. local commutes) give driving a distinct edge. The trip between LA and SF falls on the opposite end of the spectrum, pulling the average trip toward being more flying friendly, especially if you can avoid driving to and from the airport, than your driving solo. I agree the original article isn't great, but the one you offered is equally insubstantial. It shouldn't be shocking to find the trip type impacts the energy use.
- jMyles 10y ago
  One of us is misreading the critique (and it may be me?). I think that what it's saying is this: * The most wasteful car trips are solo local commutes. Carbon-per-inch, flying is more efficient than driving when the driving is a solo local commutes. * For longer trips, in a light duty vehicle like a sedan or SUV, driving usually smashes flying. If you have 4 people in the car, even in an inefficient car, you are using less than half the fuel of those same people flying. The Michigan study simply averaged these together, which is obviously senseless because there is no flight equivalent of a 3-mile commute. It only makes sense to compare flights against highway mileage, and it's not unfair to assume >= 2.2 people in the car. That's the way I read the critique.