5 ms·
Which makes sense. It's not like pollution stays confined within the track area.
by TulliusCicero 3y ago
Which makes sense. It's not like pollution stays confined within the track area.
- oceanplexian 3y ago[flagged]
- pixl97 3y agoEh, you'll look for anything to complain about. If you were one of those rich people you'd be complaining about the certification of airplane parts causing them to be so expensive. And if you're in the US, it's likely you could take dozens of flights per year if you wanted to, if you fit in the techy HN pay grades.
- TulliusCicero 3y agoI think you're probably rather exaggerating the difference here, but nonetheless, sure, let's regulate or the tax the shit out of private jets too, I'm okay with that.
- saltymug76 3y ago[flagged]
- ceejayoz 3y ago> pollute as much as 10,000 modified diesel trucks This is insanely hyperbolic. A Cessna Citation I carries 564 gallons of fuel, with which it can travel ~1,500 miles - 2.7mpg. A Ford F-250 carries 48 gallons of fuel, with which it can travel ~700 miles - 14mpg. It's not even 10x.
- datavirtue 3y agoLeer jets, they so thirsty.
- paulddraper 3y agoPer mile What if the little person and the wealthy person travel a different # of miles?
- tmtvl 3y agoThen the person who travels more miles is better off doing it with a private jet rather than a truck?
- kortilla 3y agoGood thing Cessna citations are only used to travel as far as an F-250 travels /s
- protonbob 3y agoIt’s not just about mpg. It’s about pollutants emitted.
- ceejayoz 3y agoWhich pollutant does a private jet emit 10,000 times as much as a diesel truck?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- rgmerk 3y agoAnd furthermore, it matters where non-CO2 pollution is released. Particulates released from a jet at cruising altitude, particularly over an ocean, are less harmful to human health than a truck belching pollution next to a kindergarten.\ I'd also add that two wrongs don't make a right, and while not strict enough there are emissions regulations for aviation.
- profile53 3y agoYes but an F250 does not use leaded gas like many planes do, has much more complete and efficient combustion, and likely produces far less particulate emissions.
- ceejayoz 3y agoPrivate jets don't use leaded gas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel No amount of cherry picking is gonna get you to the 10,000x number upthread.
- paulddraper 3y ago> No amount of cherry picking is gonna get you to the 10,000x number I cherry-pick "5 miles in a F-150" vs "5000 miles in a Citation." Cherry-pick complete.
- fallingknife 3y agoAnd I nit pick your cherry pick on the grounds that 1000x miles * 5.2x efficiency ratio only gets you to 5200x, far short of 10K
- paulddraper 3y agoAn F-150 has better gas mileage than a F-250.
- jojobas 3y agoPlanes emit their crap at a higher altitude which somehow makes a greater impact or so I hear.
- Blackcatmaxy 3y agoPrivate planes absolutely still use leaded gas https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/leaded-gas-was-phased-out-25-years-ago-why-are-n1264970 https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/leaded-gas-wa... https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/leaded-aviation-fuel-and-environment https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/leaded-aviation-fuel-and-enviro...
- chrisBob 3y agoMaybe in terms of CO2, but turbines also don't burn as completely as most piston engine cars. 10k is probably an exaggeration , but the pollution is much worse than the fuel economy indicates. Similarly, my chain saw probably pollutes nearly as much as my new Honda truck even though it only gets a few gallons of gas per year.
- SAI_Peregrinus 3y agoA Gulfstream G700 carries 22,407kg of fuel (about 6,100 gallons at 800kg/m^3 ) and a max range of 14,353km (8,918.5mi), for 1.45mpg. Closer to 10x, by a bit. Using the 12,316km high-speed cruise range manages to bring it down to 1.24mpg, just under 10x worse.
- ceejayoz 3y agoSaid Gulfstream carries 18 people, though. Whether 5x or 10x, it isn’t 10,000x.
- SAI_Peregrinus 3y agoYep! My point was to take one of the biggest private jets, and show it's still vastly less than 1000x. Private jets are bad, but they're not that bad.
- babypuncher 3y agoBut nobody drives their Ford F-250 10,000 miles a week. It's not about the energy efficiency of someone's mode of transport, it's about the total emissions from their transit habits. You know, the actually important metric when measuring an individual's impact on the climate.
- westmeal 3y agoThey're not in a fuckin Cessna.
- vwcx 3y agoOf course they are.
- paulddraper 3y agoA Cessna Citation, not a Cessna 172.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ceejayoz 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_Citation_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_Citation_family > In the fifty years following the 1969 first flight, more than 7,500 [Cessna] Citations were delivered, forming the largest business jet fleet. The math is similar for a Gulfstream, if you prefer.
- queuebert 3y agoDedicated race cars don't have emissions controls, though. For some reason, only race cars that drive on both roads and tracks are regulated.
- TulliusCicero 3y agoMaybe that might be worth regulating, but there aren't many actual race cars around.
- sidewndr46 3y agoThis too is incorrect. If a vehicle is made with for street purposes, it can never have its emission devices removed. Even if it used as a dedicated race car
- queuebert 3y agoAs you probably know, I was referring to custom built race cars, such as Indy or Nascar. But yes there is a very tiny set of cars that were once street cars that have been modified and now only race and never, ever, even for a minute, drive on the roads.
- SoftTalker 3y agoDedicated race cars are too few in number to really make a difference, so they don't worry about them.