4 ms·

A single flight (per passenger) from NYC to London is equivalent to 11% of the annual carbon footprint of an average UK citizen: https://www.bbc.com/news/scienc

by awb 7y ago

A single flight (per passenger) from NYC to London is equivalent to 11% of the annual carbon footprint of an average UK citizen: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49349566 https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49349566 Because of the altitude the emissions are worse than those emitted at sea level. We have a lot more cars on the road than airplanes in the sky, so reducing their carbon footprint would have a bigger impact. But on an individual basis, flying is one of the most carbon intensive travel options.

chii 7y ago
but if you didn't board that flight, the flight would still happen, and the efficiency just dropped since it carried one less passenger. Unless you can convince a large amount of passengers to not travel at all (and i meant not travel, rather than switch to a different mode of transport), there is no reducing carbon emissions.
- awb 7y ago
  > but if you didn't board that flight, the flight would still happen, and the efficiency just dropped since it carried one less passenger. At some point, less revenue = less flights. Even dropping demand by 200 people on a route would cause a reduction in flights. It's a long way off from making a huge impact, but individuals can decide how they want to vote with their dollar and every dollar and every reduction counts. Sure, a huge reduction in carbon emissions will probably come from a technology breakthrough, but we can help accelerate the demand for that tech by reducing demand for current carbon emitting activities.
Grue3 7y ago
>annual carbon footprint of an average UK citizen However annual carbon footprint of a regular citizen is completely meaningless in the greater scheme of things. Stop shifting the blame onto regular people, we're not going to give up on civilisation just because some monopolies are burning coal and gas.
- awb 7y ago
  > Stop shifting the blame onto regular people, I'm not, probably the opposite. I'm stating that if you choose to fly a ~5hr flight, you're contributing 11% more carbon than the average person does all year. In other words, by reducing the demand for flying you can have a greater impact on reducing emissions than the average person could.

by awb 7y ago

chii 7y ago

but if you didn't board that flight, the flight would still happen, and the efficiency just dropped since it carried one less passenger. Unless you can convince a large amount of passengers to not travel at all (and i meant not travel, rather than switch to a different mode of transport), there is no reducing carbon emissions.

awb 7y ago
> but if you didn't board that flight, the flight would still happen, and the efficiency just dropped since it carried one less passenger. At some point, less revenue = less flights. Even dropping demand by 200 people on a route would cause a reduction in flights. It's a long way off from making a huge impact, but individuals can decide how they want to vote with their dollar and every dollar and every reduction counts. Sure, a huge reduction in carbon emissions will probably come from a technology breakthrough, but we can help accelerate the demand for that tech by reducing demand for current carbon emitting activities.

Grue3 7y ago

>annual carbon footprint of an average UK citizen However annual carbon footprint of a regular citizen is completely meaningless in the greater scheme of things. Stop shifting the blame onto regular people, we're not going to give up on civilisation just because some monopolies are burning coal and gas.

awb 7y ago
> Stop shifting the blame onto regular people, I'm not, probably the opposite. I'm stating that if you choose to fly a ~5hr flight, you're contributing 11% more carbon than the average person does all year. In other words, by reducing the demand for flying you can have a greater impact on reducing emissions than the average person could.