8 ms·

I used to regularly travel from Edmonton to Calgary for work. When you add up the extra time required for flying, it's about a three hour trip (45 minutes in t

I used to regularly travel from Edmonton to Calgary for work. When you add up the extra time required for flying, it's about a three hour trip (45 minutes in the air, the rest is getting to the airport, checking in, etc). Coincidentally, it's also about a three hour drive. My reasons for driving vs flying were usually to do with how long I'd be there. If I was going for one day then flying was preferable since falling asleep on the way home isn't a big deal. If I was going for multiple days then driving was preferable so that I'd have a car and be able to go places after finishing at the office. Flying was preferable in winter in case the roads were in bad shape. Driving was preferable on Fridays so that I could visit friends afterwards and come back the next day. Flying was preferable during the Calgary Stampede to avoid having to deal with the excess traffic in Calgary (plus WestJet did a cowboy-themed safety lecture during Stampede which was kind of neat).

publicola1990 6y ago
In general though flying is much safer than highway driving. If one wanted to minimize risk, one would always fly.
- lovasoa 6y ago
  Flying is actually much more dangerous than driving. The risk is to destroy the environment that sustains life on earth. This does not even compare with the risk of a car or plane accident.
  - varajelle 6y ago
    I believe it might be better for the environnement to share a full plane than be alone in your car, for equal distances.
    - jeromegv 6y ago
      Quotation needed. All studies show the impact of flying as being much higher than driving, even when shared.
      - varajelle 6y ago
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_avia... > in 2018, CO2 emissions averaged 88 grams of CO2 per revenue passenger per km. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_transport https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_tran... > In Europe, the European Commission enforced that from 2015 all new cars registered shall not emit more than an average of 0.130 kg of CO2 per kilometre (kg CO2/km). The target is that by 2021 the average emissions for all new cars is 0.095 kg of CO2 per kilometre. 0.088 < 0.095 That said, the 88 grams figure might not be accurate for short flights. But we'd still be in the same order of magnitude as a car
        lovasoa 6y ago
        I think you are comparing unrelated things. The average car ride is thousands of times shorter than the average flight, and transports more than one person. You cannot just compare the average emissions of cars and planes and make the conclusion that it makes sense to choose a plane over a car to reduce your carbon footprint. And even when you make this comparison with sensible data, the car still wins: https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint
        lumost 6y ago
        when comparing driving to flying between destinations, it's highly likely that the flight will have a shorter duration. The big wrinkle in this comparison is that planes burn most of their energy in the ascent to cruising speed/altitude. Energy consumption per mile is likely to be much higher on a short hop flight where cruising altitude is never reached than a 12 hour transoceanic flight.
        asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
        On the other hand short-haul flights don't climb to as high of altitudes. They only climb about 2/3rds as high. But then again the air is thicker so cruising is less efficient. Oh gosh, for want of data.
  - GuB-42 6y ago
    If you are alone in your car, flying and driving are in the same ballpark when it comes to emissions. Trains are much, much lower. Especially considering that in France, most lines are electrified and 70% of production is nuclear.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- js2 6y ago
  The difference in relative risk is high, but the absolute risk of dying in a car is still pretty low if you're sober, wearing a seatbelt, and not speeding. Oh, and apparently if you're not driving in the U.S. Geez, didn't realize we're such crappy drivers here. https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/motor-vehicle-safety/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/motor-vehicle-safety/index.ht...
  - martin8412 6y ago
    Several things will need to change for that number to be lower. Licenses needs to be much more difficult to obtain, and a lot easier to lose. There are things allowed on American roads that could cost you your license in countries with lower numbers. Cars should have higher safety standards. Basically a lot of people wouldn't be able to drive anymore.
  - ziml77 6y ago
    It's really easy to get a license in the US and cops focus on looking for speeders over other forms of dangerous driving.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    It's mostly not that people in the US drive worse, it's that people in the US drive more. Similar risk multiplied by more miles leads to more fatalities.
    - bildung 6y ago
      Sadly that isn't the case: The actual fatalities and accidents per billion km driven is higher in the US than many other industrialized countries, so it's not about more km/miles being driven in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...
      - Guthur 6y ago
        Are they also reluctant to wear seat belts?
option 6y ago
there are no good reasons why we spend so much time on the airports on funny useless procedures.
bluefirebrand 6y ago
Incidentally I think Calgary and Edmonton would be an ideal pair of cities to have some kind of high speed rail between. Would be a great alternative to air travel.
- fredophile 6y ago
  I'd agree in terms of distance and traffic between the two cities. However, the long, relatively severe winters would probably add some complications to high speed rail.
  - wirrbel 6y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Siberian_Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Siberian_Railway Snow isn't an obstacle to trains (unless you don't want trains to be a reality).
    - fredophile 6y ago
      The trans siberian railway isn't high speed. There are plans to make some of it high speed but the only article I could find was from 2018 and at that time it was still only in the early planning stages and expected to cost billions of USD [0]. [0] https://www.railway-technology.com/features/moscow-kazan-high-speed-rail/#:~:text=The%20trains%20will%20have%20an,maximum%20speed%20of%20440km%2Fh https://www.railway-technology.com/features/moscow-kazan-hig.... (Edited to fix an autocorrect correction from my phone)
      - go_blue_13 6y ago
        >trans siberian railway >edmonton to calgary I think think there's a slight difference between the things we're comparing
    - refurb 6y ago
      It certainly makes things more difficult. You need to clear tracks, build shelters where there is avalanche risk.
Teever 6y ago
The Red Arrow bus line from Edmonton to Calgary is the best of both worlds. Pick-up/Drop-offs from city core to city core as well as other stops along the way, Free wifi and beverages on the bus, decent seats for working during the stress free commute.
- Mister_Snuggles 6y ago
  I only travelled on Red Arrow once, but not for work, and it was really nice. I can't recall why I never used it for work though.
pomian 6y ago
I remember traveling by train, from Calgary to Edmonton, on return trips for the weekend. It was great fun, relaxing, with good food. Hard to beat that by driving in crazy weekend traffic. Or driving to the airport at each end, security theatre, cramped sitting, long walks, tired and hungry, at each end. (Train stations were down town, and at the ends of the city. Very convenient.)

publicola1990 6y ago

In general though flying is much safer than highway driving. If one wanted to minimize risk, one would always fly.

lovasoa 6y ago
Flying is actually much more dangerous than driving. The risk is to destroy the environment that sustains life on earth. This does not even compare with the risk of a car or plane accident.
- varajelle 6y ago
  I believe it might be better for the environnement to share a full plane than be alone in your car, for equal distances.
  - jeromegv 6y ago
    Quotation needed. All studies show the impact of flying as being much higher than driving, even when shared.
    - varajelle 6y ago
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_avia... > in 2018, CO2 emissions averaged 88 grams of CO2 per revenue passenger per km. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_transport https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_tran... > In Europe, the European Commission enforced that from 2015 all new cars registered shall not emit more than an average of 0.130 kg of CO2 per kilometre (kg CO2/km). The target is that by 2021 the average emissions for all new cars is 0.095 kg of CO2 per kilometre. 0.088 < 0.095 That said, the 88 grams figure might not be accurate for short flights. But we'd still be in the same order of magnitude as a car
      - lovasoa 6y ago
        I think you are comparing unrelated things. The average car ride is thousands of times shorter than the average flight, and transports more than one person. You cannot just compare the average emissions of cars and planes and make the conclusion that it makes sense to choose a plane over a car to reduce your carbon footprint. And even when you make this comparison with sensible data, the car still wins: https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint
        lumost 6y ago
        when comparing driving to flying between destinations, it's highly likely that the flight will have a shorter duration. The big wrinkle in this comparison is that planes burn most of their energy in the ascent to cruising speed/altitude. Energy consumption per mile is likely to be much higher on a short hop flight where cruising altitude is never reached than a 12 hour transoceanic flight.
        asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
        On the other hand short-haul flights don't climb to as high of altitudes. They only climb about 2/3rds as high. But then again the air is thicker so cruising is less efficient. Oh gosh, for want of data.
- GuB-42 6y ago
  If you are alone in your car, flying and driving are in the same ballpark when it comes to emissions. Trains are much, much lower. Especially considering that in France, most lines are electrified and 70% of production is nuclear.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
js2 6y ago
The difference in relative risk is high, but the absolute risk of dying in a car is still pretty low if you're sober, wearing a seatbelt, and not speeding. Oh, and apparently if you're not driving in the U.S. Geez, didn't realize we're such crappy drivers here. https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/motor-vehicle-safety/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/motor-vehicle-safety/index.ht...
- martin8412 6y ago
  Several things will need to change for that number to be lower. Licenses needs to be much more difficult to obtain, and a lot easier to lose. There are things allowed on American roads that could cost you your license in countries with lower numbers. Cars should have higher safety standards. Basically a lot of people wouldn't be able to drive anymore.
- ziml77 6y ago
  It's really easy to get a license in the US and cops focus on looking for speeders over other forms of dangerous driving.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  It's mostly not that people in the US drive worse, it's that people in the US drive more. Similar risk multiplied by more miles leads to more fatalities.
  - bildung 6y ago
    Sadly that isn't the case: The actual fatalities and accidents per billion km driven is higher in the US than many other industrialized countries, so it's not about more km/miles being driven in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...
    - Guthur 6y ago
      Are they also reluctant to wear seat belts?

option 6y ago

there are no good reasons why we spend so much time on the airports on funny useless procedures.

bluefirebrand 6y ago

Incidentally I think Calgary and Edmonton would be an ideal pair of cities to have some kind of high speed rail between. Would be a great alternative to air travel.

fredophile 6y ago
I'd agree in terms of distance and traffic between the two cities. However, the long, relatively severe winters would probably add some complications to high speed rail.
- wirrbel 6y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Siberian_Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Siberian_Railway Snow isn't an obstacle to trains (unless you don't want trains to be a reality).
  - fredophile 6y ago
    The trans siberian railway isn't high speed. There are plans to make some of it high speed but the only article I could find was from 2018 and at that time it was still only in the early planning stages and expected to cost billions of USD [0]. [0] https://www.railway-technology.com/features/moscow-kazan-high-speed-rail/#:~:text=The%20trains%20will%20have%20an,maximum%20speed%20of%20440km%2Fh https://www.railway-technology.com/features/moscow-kazan-hig.... (Edited to fix an autocorrect correction from my phone)
    - go_blue_13 6y ago
      >trans siberian railway >edmonton to calgary I think think there's a slight difference between the things we're comparing
  - refurb 6y ago
    It certainly makes things more difficult. You need to clear tracks, build shelters where there is avalanche risk.

Teever 6y ago

The Red Arrow bus line from Edmonton to Calgary is the best of both worlds. Pick-up/Drop-offs from city core to city core as well as other stops along the way, Free wifi and beverages on the bus, decent seats for working during the stress free commute.

Mister_Snuggles 6y ago
I only travelled on Red Arrow once, but not for work, and it was really nice. I can't recall why I never used it for work though.

pomian 6y ago

I remember traveling by train, from Calgary to Edmonton, on return trips for the weekend. It was great fun, relaxing, with good food. Hard to beat that by driving in crazy weekend traffic. Or driving to the airport at each end, security theatre, cramped sitting, long walks, tired and hungry, at each end. (Train stations were down town, and at the ends of the city. Very convenient.)