2 ms·
If you really want to reduce CO2 emissions, you need to ban cars, buses, and SUVs before you address planes. https://truecostblog.com/2010/05/27/fuel-efficienc
by 543g43g43 4y ago
If you really want to reduce CO2 emissions, you need to ban cars, buses, and SUVs before you address planes.
https://truecostblog.com/2010/05/27/fuel-efficiency-modes-of-transportation-ranked-by-mpg/ https://truecostblog.com/2010/05/27/fuel-efficiency-modes-of...
Flippancy aside, in most cases the transportation mode has a relatively similar rate of emission. The problem is the number of miles travelled.
- foxhill 4y agononsense. cars, buses, and SUVs (odd distinction, but ok. also why buses?!) account for ~10-15% of global emissions (depending on how you cut it). see https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector.
- sokoloff 4y agoI don’t see where your data refutes GP’s primary point; your data shows road transport as being much higher share of emissions than aviation.
- foxhill 4y agoit doesn’t refute it, and it wasn’t my intention to do so. i was trying to point out that such an “extreme” position might not be sensible for such a fractionally small amount of CO2 emissions.
- sokoloff 4y agoThe extreme position being banning a small sliver of air travel (itself a small sliver of the overall pie)?
- 543g43g43 4y agoWhat is sensible, about banning a particular journey type for a transport sector that produces even smaller CO2 emissions, and has better fuel economy per passenger seat than (for example) buses and SUVs?