3 ms·
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 bet
by 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 agoOne 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.