3 ms·
Ah, fair enough. Elsewhere there was the talk around private jets and politicians and I mixed up my usecases. I would also class flying in a completely differe
by happymellon 3y ago
Ah, fair enough. Elsewhere there was the talk around private jets and politicians and I mixed up my usecases.
I would also class flying in a completely different category to boats and cars, as emissions at altitude are significantly worse.
- vel0city 3y agoA Cessna 172 will use ~10GPH cruising. A large motorboat might use 15-30GPH. Neither one usually has a lot of emission control devices on board. Chances are that boat pulling some water skiers all day is dumping more emissions in an afternoon than a Cessna flying for a few hours.
- sidewndr46 3y agoBoats do not use leaded fuel that gets spread into the countryside. Cessnas usually do, unless converted to run on pump gas or to a turbine engine.
- vel0city 3y agoI do agree it's stupid leaded gas is still in use, it should have been phased out a long time ago. I'm just pointing out, a Cessna's GHG emissions aren't that far off (or might even be less) than a typical small recreational boat.
- sidewndr46 3y agoso you're just unashamedly carbonwashing general aviation. "It's got less GHG so it's GOOD". How about I show up at your house and sprinke lead all over it non stop every day?
- vel0city 3y agoI've written a letter to the FAA in support of getting rid of leaded gas. I've written my Congress critters about the issue several times. I'd love to see it end. I don't personally do any GA, I've never flown in any of those planes, I've never bought avgas. I'm not in support of the use of leaded gas in the slightest. What have you personally done to remedy the situation? All I'm trying to do is share knowledge. I imagine many people on this forum would have thought a Cessna would have used more gas than a speed boat. Chill out.