What is more environmentally friendly? An A320 or a car?Do jet contrails impact weather?How much of an improvement would a 1% weight decrease on an airplane be to the industry?How much fuel do the new A320-Winglets burn vs. the B737-800?A320 procedures for one thrust reverser inoperative; why is the old procedure more efficient?What is the “No Step” flap thingy used for on an A320 engine?Why do outboard spoilers deploy more than the inboard spoiler on the A320?What dictates the A320's 'emergency ram air inlet' operation?What is “temporary flight plan” in A320 MCDU?What is the “off-side engine generator” on an A320?What is the unit for the oil quantity display in the Airbus A320 ECAM?What is this small black rubber strip protruding out of the flap track fairing of the A320?What are the BUGS and RST buttons on the A320's ISIS for?what would couse uneven fuel levels in a cessna 207?
Wand of the War Mage spellcasting focus and bonus interaction with multiclassing
How long until two planets become one?
What language is Raven using for her attack in the new 52?
How to store my pliers and wire cutters on my desk?
How many oliphaunts died in all of the Lord of the Rings battles?
What would the United Kingdom's "optimal" Brexit deal look like?
How did the SysRq key get onto modern keyboards if it's rarely used?
Are there any unpublished Iain M. Banks short stories?
Is it okay for me to decline a project on ethical grounds?
Why does Canada require mandatory bilingualism in a lot of federal government posts?
ECDSA: Why is SigningKey shorter than VerifyingKey
Exploiting the delay when a festival ticket is scanned
Do 3/8 (37.5%) of Quadratics Have No x-Intercepts?
Struggling with cyclical dependancies in unit tests
What is "aligned sequences" and "consensus sequence" in the context of sequence logo? How to compute these?
Introducing Tetronogram!
How likely is fragmentation on a table with 40000 products likely to affect performance
Why did I lose on time with 3 pawns vs Knight. Shouldn't it be a draw?
Why is it considered acid rain with pH <5.6?
Japanese reading of an integer
Irreducible factors of primitive permutation group representation
Does Wolfram Mathworld make a mistake describing a discrete probability distribution with a probability density function?
How can Paypal know my card is being used in another account?
Telling manager project isn't worth the effort?
What is more environmentally friendly? An A320 or a car?
Do jet contrails impact weather?How much of an improvement would a 1% weight decrease on an airplane be to the industry?How much fuel do the new A320-Winglets burn vs. the B737-800?A320 procedures for one thrust reverser inoperative; why is the old procedure more efficient?What is the “No Step” flap thingy used for on an A320 engine?Why do outboard spoilers deploy more than the inboard spoiler on the A320?What dictates the A320's 'emergency ram air inlet' operation?What is “temporary flight plan” in A320 MCDU?What is the “off-side engine generator” on an A320?What is the unit for the oil quantity display in the Airbus A320 ECAM?What is this small black rubber strip protruding out of the flap track fairing of the A320?What are the BUGS and RST buttons on the A320's ISIS for?what would couse uneven fuel levels in a cessna 207?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
Presuming the A320 is at least 80% full (of passengers) and comparing it to a typical road car with 2 people inside, which one is more environmentally friendly, per passenger mile?
I have attempted to do some rudimentary calculations, but then was reading that because aircraft release their emissions at altitude, this offsets (?) some of the environmental impact.
airbus-a320 fuel-consumption environment
asked 9 hours ago
CloudCloud
3,9463 gold badges28 silver badges70 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Presuming the A320 is at least 80% full (of passengers) and comparing it to a typical road car with 2 people inside, which one is more environmentally friendly, per passenger mile?
I have attempted to do some rudimentary calculations, but then was reading that because aircraft release their emissions at altitude, this offsets (?) some of the environmental impact.
airbus-a320 fuel-consumption environment
asked 9 hours ago
CloudCloud
3,9463 gold badges28 silver badges70 bronze badges
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
Define environmentally friendly. Are you referring to global warming or air quality (e.g. fine particulates)?
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
(also, the typical road car has one person inside, sadly)
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Presuming the A320 is at least 80% full (of passengers) and comparing it to a typical road car with 2 people inside, which one is more environmentally friendly, per passenger mile?
I have attempted to do some rudimentary calculations, but then was reading that because aircraft release their emissions at altitude, this offsets (?) some of the environmental impact.
airbus-a320 fuel-consumption environment
asked 9 hours ago
CloudCloud
3,9463 gold badges28 silver badges70 bronze badges
$endgroup$
Presuming the A320 is at least 80% full (of passengers) and comparing it to a typical road car with 2 people inside, which one is more environmentally friendly, per passenger mile?
I have attempted to do some rudimentary calculations, but then was reading that because aircraft release their emissions at altitude, this offsets (?) some of the environmental impact.
airbus-a320 fuel-consumption environment
airbus-a320 fuel-consumption environment
asked 9 hours ago
CloudCloud
3,9463 gold badges28 silver badges70 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
CloudCloud
3,9463 gold badges28 silver badges70 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
CloudCloud
3,9463 gold badges28 silver badges70 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
CloudCloud
3,9463 gold badges28 silver badges70 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
CloudCloud
3,9463 gold badges28 silver badges70 bronze badges
3,9463 gold badges28 silver badges70 bronze badges
7
$begingroup$
Define environmentally friendly. Are you referring to global warming or air quality (e.g. fine particulates)?
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
(also, the typical road car has one person inside, sadly)
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
add a comment |
7
$begingroup$
Define environmentally friendly. Are you referring to global warming or air quality (e.g. fine particulates)?
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
(also, the typical road car has one person inside, sadly)
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
7
7
$begingroup$
Define environmentally friendly. Are you referring to global warming or air quality (e.g. fine particulates)?
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Define environmentally friendly. Are you referring to global warming or air quality (e.g. fine particulates)?
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
(also, the typical road car has one person inside, sadly)
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
(also, the typical road car has one person inside, sadly)
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I'm going to simplify and assume that jets and cars burn the same fuel, and output the same exhaust, CO2, NOx and all. I'm going to compare only short-haul flights against cars.
According to Wikipedia, an A-320-NEO does 1.95L/100km per seat. Assuming flying at 80% capacity, that gives us 2.4L/100km per seat. According to
The Car Guide, a 2019 Honda Civic does 6.5L/100km. Assuming an average car carries 2 people, that gets 3.2L/100km. It would seem like flying is slightly better, using this simplistic measure.
Keep in mind that the longer you fly, the better the mileage, since the takeoff and climb are the fuel guzzling segments.
answered 7 hours ago
JimmyJimmy
8602 silver badges13 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This is just based on emissions from the fuel, but contrails are actually worse for the climate compared to the direct CO2 emissions.
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Something that's neglected in this calculation is that (commercial) airplanes take you to airports, while cars generally take you directly to your destination. So you have to add in the impact of transit to/from the airport.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Bianfable I'm not sure that is true, the link states thatThe only difference is that CO2 has a longer life than that of the contrails, and can still continue to cause warming even hundreds of years down the road.
$endgroup$
– zymhan
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@jamesqf This is a simplistic eval. If we want to be specific, yes, there's the last mile problem for aviation. But then you also have to factor in the city miles for cars too.
$endgroup$
– Jimmy
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The paper in question: Global radiative forcing from contrail cirrus. This appears to be an ongoing area of research.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
2 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It depends on what you mean by "environmentally friendly." Just for an example, let's consider a 1000 mile trip.
An A320 burns about 5 gallons of fuel per set per hour, and with 150 seats this comes to 750 gallons per hour. A 1000 mile flight will take about 2.5 hours, so this comes to 12.5 gallons per seat, or 1875 gallons total. This means that 2 seats worth of fuel would be about 25 gallons total.
For driving, if you assume a fairly efficient car will get 50 miles per gallon, and the drive is not as direct and is 1300 miles, this comes out to 26 gallons total.
So, on the face of it, they are approximately equivalent in fuel usage.
However, if the flight is only 80% full, then if you choose not to take the flight, it's still going to happen. This means the difference in fuel usage will be from the reduction in weight of two people and their luggage. The fuel usage will decrease by about the same amount as the weight reduction compared to the total aircraft weight. If you approximate 2 passengers plus luggage at 400 lb, and aircraft weight at 140,000 lb, based on the 1875 gallon fuel consumption from before, the additional fuel burned by the two people choosing to fly is about 3 gallons total. This makes it much better than driving.
But not all emissions are equal. The aircraft emits most of the exhaust higher in the atmosphere, where it will create contrails that help trap solar energy.
answered 7 hours ago
foootfooot
56.6k18 gold badges181 silver badges342 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In regards to lbs of fuel consumed per passenger nautical mile the A320 unquestionably is.
answered 6 hours ago
Carlo FelicioneCarlo Felicione
46k5 gold badges85 silver badges165 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Please provide sources for your claim.
$endgroup$
– AEhere
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "528"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f67080%2fwhat-is-more-environmentally-friendly-an-a320-or-a-car%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I'm going to simplify and assume that jets and cars burn the same fuel, and output the same exhaust, CO2, NOx and all. I'm going to compare only short-haul flights against cars.
According to Wikipedia, an A-320-NEO does 1.95L/100km per seat. Assuming flying at 80% capacity, that gives us 2.4L/100km per seat. According to
The Car Guide, a 2019 Honda Civic does 6.5L/100km. Assuming an average car carries 2 people, that gets 3.2L/100km. It would seem like flying is slightly better, using this simplistic measure.
Keep in mind that the longer you fly, the better the mileage, since the takeoff and climb are the fuel guzzling segments.
answered 7 hours ago
JimmyJimmy
8602 silver badges13 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This is just based on emissions from the fuel, but contrails are actually worse for the climate compared to the direct CO2 emissions.
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Something that's neglected in this calculation is that (commercial) airplanes take you to airports, while cars generally take you directly to your destination. So you have to add in the impact of transit to/from the airport.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Bianfable I'm not sure that is true, the link states thatThe only difference is that CO2 has a longer life than that of the contrails, and can still continue to cause warming even hundreds of years down the road.
$endgroup$
– zymhan
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@jamesqf This is a simplistic eval. If we want to be specific, yes, there's the last mile problem for aviation. But then you also have to factor in the city miles for cars too.
$endgroup$
– Jimmy
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The paper in question: Global radiative forcing from contrail cirrus. This appears to be an ongoing area of research.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
2 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm going to simplify and assume that jets and cars burn the same fuel, and output the same exhaust, CO2, NOx and all. I'm going to compare only short-haul flights against cars.
According to Wikipedia, an A-320-NEO does 1.95L/100km per seat. Assuming flying at 80% capacity, that gives us 2.4L/100km per seat. According to
The Car Guide, a 2019 Honda Civic does 6.5L/100km. Assuming an average car carries 2 people, that gets 3.2L/100km. It would seem like flying is slightly better, using this simplistic measure.
Keep in mind that the longer you fly, the better the mileage, since the takeoff and climb are the fuel guzzling segments.
answered 7 hours ago
JimmyJimmy
8602 silver badges13 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This is just based on emissions from the fuel, but contrails are actually worse for the climate compared to the direct CO2 emissions.
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Something that's neglected in this calculation is that (commercial) airplanes take you to airports, while cars generally take you directly to your destination. So you have to add in the impact of transit to/from the airport.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Bianfable I'm not sure that is true, the link states thatThe only difference is that CO2 has a longer life than that of the contrails, and can still continue to cause warming even hundreds of years down the road.
$endgroup$
– zymhan
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@jamesqf This is a simplistic eval. If we want to be specific, yes, there's the last mile problem for aviation. But then you also have to factor in the city miles for cars too.
$endgroup$
– Jimmy
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The paper in question: Global radiative forcing from contrail cirrus. This appears to be an ongoing area of research.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
2 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm going to simplify and assume that jets and cars burn the same fuel, and output the same exhaust, CO2, NOx and all. I'm going to compare only short-haul flights against cars.
According to Wikipedia, an A-320-NEO does 1.95L/100km per seat. Assuming flying at 80% capacity, that gives us 2.4L/100km per seat. According to
The Car Guide, a 2019 Honda Civic does 6.5L/100km. Assuming an average car carries 2 people, that gets 3.2L/100km. It would seem like flying is slightly better, using this simplistic measure.
Keep in mind that the longer you fly, the better the mileage, since the takeoff and climb are the fuel guzzling segments.
answered 7 hours ago
JimmyJimmy
8602 silver badges13 bronze badges
$endgroup$
I'm going to simplify and assume that jets and cars burn the same fuel, and output the same exhaust, CO2, NOx and all. I'm going to compare only short-haul flights against cars.
According to Wikipedia, an A-320-NEO does 1.95L/100km per seat. Assuming flying at 80% capacity, that gives us 2.4L/100km per seat. According to
The Car Guide, a 2019 Honda Civic does 6.5L/100km. Assuming an average car carries 2 people, that gets 3.2L/100km. It would seem like flying is slightly better, using this simplistic measure.
Keep in mind that the longer you fly, the better the mileage, since the takeoff and climb are the fuel guzzling segments.
answered 7 hours ago
JimmyJimmy
8602 silver badges13 bronze badges
edited 6 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
JimmyJimmy
8602 silver badges13 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
JimmyJimmy
8602 silver badges13 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
JimmyJimmy
8602 silver badges13 bronze badges
8602 silver badges13 bronze badges
$begingroup$
This is just based on emissions from the fuel, but contrails are actually worse for the climate compared to the direct CO2 emissions.
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Something that's neglected in this calculation is that (commercial) airplanes take you to airports, while cars generally take you directly to your destination. So you have to add in the impact of transit to/from the airport.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Bianfable I'm not sure that is true, the link states thatThe only difference is that CO2 has a longer life than that of the contrails, and can still continue to cause warming even hundreds of years down the road.
$endgroup$
– zymhan
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@jamesqf This is a simplistic eval. If we want to be specific, yes, there's the last mile problem for aviation. But then you also have to factor in the city miles for cars too.
$endgroup$
– Jimmy
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The paper in question: Global radiative forcing from contrail cirrus. This appears to be an ongoing area of research.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
2 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is just based on emissions from the fuel, but contrails are actually worse for the climate compared to the direct CO2 emissions.
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Something that's neglected in this calculation is that (commercial) airplanes take you to airports, while cars generally take you directly to your destination. So you have to add in the impact of transit to/from the airport.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Bianfable I'm not sure that is true, the link states thatThe only difference is that CO2 has a longer life than that of the contrails, and can still continue to cause warming even hundreds of years down the road.
$endgroup$
– zymhan
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@jamesqf This is a simplistic eval. If we want to be specific, yes, there's the last mile problem for aviation. But then you also have to factor in the city miles for cars too.
$endgroup$
– Jimmy
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The paper in question: Global radiative forcing from contrail cirrus. This appears to be an ongoing area of research.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
2 mins ago
$begingroup$
This is just based on emissions from the fuel, but contrails are actually worse for the climate compared to the direct CO2 emissions.
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is just based on emissions from the fuel, but contrails are actually worse for the climate compared to the direct CO2 emissions.
$endgroup$
– Bianfable
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Something that's neglected in this calculation is that (commercial) airplanes take you to airports, while cars generally take you directly to your destination. So you have to add in the impact of transit to/from the airport.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Something that's neglected in this calculation is that (commercial) airplanes take you to airports, while cars generally take you directly to your destination. So you have to add in the impact of transit to/from the airport.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Bianfable I'm not sure that is true, the link states that
The only difference is that CO2 has a longer life than that of the contrails, and can still continue to cause warming even hundreds of years down the road.$endgroup$
– zymhan
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Bianfable I'm not sure that is true, the link states that
The only difference is that CO2 has a longer life than that of the contrails, and can still continue to cause warming even hundreds of years down the road.$endgroup$
– zymhan
7 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@jamesqf This is a simplistic eval. If we want to be specific, yes, there's the last mile problem for aviation. But then you also have to factor in the city miles for cars too.
$endgroup$
– Jimmy
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@jamesqf This is a simplistic eval. If we want to be specific, yes, there's the last mile problem for aviation. But then you also have to factor in the city miles for cars too.
$endgroup$
– Jimmy
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The paper in question: Global radiative forcing from contrail cirrus. This appears to be an ongoing area of research.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
2 mins ago
$begingroup$
The paper in question: Global radiative forcing from contrail cirrus. This appears to be an ongoing area of research.
$endgroup$
– Schwern
2 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It depends on what you mean by "environmentally friendly." Just for an example, let's consider a 1000 mile trip.
An A320 burns about 5 gallons of fuel per set per hour, and with 150 seats this comes to 750 gallons per hour. A 1000 mile flight will take about 2.5 hours, so this comes to 12.5 gallons per seat, or 1875 gallons total. This means that 2 seats worth of fuel would be about 25 gallons total.
For driving, if you assume a fairly efficient car will get 50 miles per gallon, and the drive is not as direct and is 1300 miles, this comes out to 26 gallons total.
So, on the face of it, they are approximately equivalent in fuel usage.
However, if the flight is only 80% full, then if you choose not to take the flight, it's still going to happen. This means the difference in fuel usage will be from the reduction in weight of two people and their luggage. The fuel usage will decrease by about the same amount as the weight reduction compared to the total aircraft weight. If you approximate 2 passengers plus luggage at 400 lb, and aircraft weight at 140,000 lb, based on the 1875 gallon fuel consumption from before, the additional fuel burned by the two people choosing to fly is about 3 gallons total. This makes it much better than driving.
But not all emissions are equal. The aircraft emits most of the exhaust higher in the atmosphere, where it will create contrails that help trap solar energy.
answered 7 hours ago
foootfooot
56.6k18 gold badges181 silver badges342 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It depends on what you mean by "environmentally friendly." Just for an example, let's consider a 1000 mile trip.
An A320 burns about 5 gallons of fuel per set per hour, and with 150 seats this comes to 750 gallons per hour. A 1000 mile flight will take about 2.5 hours, so this comes to 12.5 gallons per seat, or 1875 gallons total. This means that 2 seats worth of fuel would be about 25 gallons total.
For driving, if you assume a fairly efficient car will get 50 miles per gallon, and the drive is not as direct and is 1300 miles, this comes out to 26 gallons total.
So, on the face of it, they are approximately equivalent in fuel usage.
However, if the flight is only 80% full, then if you choose not to take the flight, it's still going to happen. This means the difference in fuel usage will be from the reduction in weight of two people and their luggage. The fuel usage will decrease by about the same amount as the weight reduction compared to the total aircraft weight. If you approximate 2 passengers plus luggage at 400 lb, and aircraft weight at 140,000 lb, based on the 1875 gallon fuel consumption from before, the additional fuel burned by the two people choosing to fly is about 3 gallons total. This makes it much better than driving.
But not all emissions are equal. The aircraft emits most of the exhaust higher in the atmosphere, where it will create contrails that help trap solar energy.
answered 7 hours ago
foootfooot
56.6k18 gold badges181 silver badges342 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It depends on what you mean by "environmentally friendly." Just for an example, let's consider a 1000 mile trip.
An A320 burns about 5 gallons of fuel per set per hour, and with 150 seats this comes to 750 gallons per hour. A 1000 mile flight will take about 2.5 hours, so this comes to 12.5 gallons per seat, or 1875 gallons total. This means that 2 seats worth of fuel would be about 25 gallons total.
For driving, if you assume a fairly efficient car will get 50 miles per gallon, and the drive is not as direct and is 1300 miles, this comes out to 26 gallons total.
So, on the face of it, they are approximately equivalent in fuel usage.
However, if the flight is only 80% full, then if you choose not to take the flight, it's still going to happen. This means the difference in fuel usage will be from the reduction in weight of two people and their luggage. The fuel usage will decrease by about the same amount as the weight reduction compared to the total aircraft weight. If you approximate 2 passengers plus luggage at 400 lb, and aircraft weight at 140,000 lb, based on the 1875 gallon fuel consumption from before, the additional fuel burned by the two people choosing to fly is about 3 gallons total. This makes it much better than driving.
But not all emissions are equal. The aircraft emits most of the exhaust higher in the atmosphere, where it will create contrails that help trap solar energy.
answered 7 hours ago
foootfooot
56.6k18 gold badges181 silver badges342 bronze badges
$endgroup$
It depends on what you mean by "environmentally friendly." Just for an example, let's consider a 1000 mile trip.
An A320 burns about 5 gallons of fuel per set per hour, and with 150 seats this comes to 750 gallons per hour. A 1000 mile flight will take about 2.5 hours, so this comes to 12.5 gallons per seat, or 1875 gallons total. This means that 2 seats worth of fuel would be about 25 gallons total.
For driving, if you assume a fairly efficient car will get 50 miles per gallon, and the drive is not as direct and is 1300 miles, this comes out to 26 gallons total.
So, on the face of it, they are approximately equivalent in fuel usage.
However, if the flight is only 80% full, then if you choose not to take the flight, it's still going to happen. This means the difference in fuel usage will be from the reduction in weight of two people and their luggage. The fuel usage will decrease by about the same amount as the weight reduction compared to the total aircraft weight. If you approximate 2 passengers plus luggage at 400 lb, and aircraft weight at 140,000 lb, based on the 1875 gallon fuel consumption from before, the additional fuel burned by the two people choosing to fly is about 3 gallons total. This makes it much better than driving.
But not all emissions are equal. The aircraft emits most of the exhaust higher in the atmosphere, where it will create contrails that help trap solar energy.
answered 7 hours ago
foootfooot
56.6k18 gold badges181 silver badges342 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
foootfooot
56.6k18 gold badges181 silver badges342 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
foootfooot
56.6k18 gold badges181 silver badges342 bronze badges
answered 7 hours ago
foootfooot
56.6k18 gold badges181 silver badges342 bronze badges
56.6k18 gold badges181 silver badges342 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In regards to lbs of fuel consumed per passenger nautical mile the A320 unquestionably is.
answered 6 hours ago
Carlo FelicioneCarlo Felicione
46k5 gold badges85 silver badges165 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Please provide sources for your claim.
$endgroup$
– AEhere
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In regards to lbs of fuel consumed per passenger nautical mile the A320 unquestionably is.
answered 6 hours ago
Carlo FelicioneCarlo Felicione
46k5 gold badges85 silver badges165 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Please provide sources for your claim.
$endgroup$
– AEhere
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In regards to lbs of fuel consumed per passenger nautical mile the A320 unquestionably is.
answered 6 hours ago
Carlo FelicioneCarlo Felicione
46k5 gold badges85 silver badges165 bronze badges
$endgroup$
In regards to lbs of fuel consumed per passenger nautical mile the A320 unquestionably is.
answered 6 hours ago
Carlo FelicioneCarlo Felicione
46k5 gold badges85 silver badges165 bronze badges
answered 6 hours ago
Carlo FelicioneCarlo Felicione
46k5 gold badges85 silver badges165 bronze badges
answered 6 hours ago
Carlo FelicioneCarlo Felicione
46k5 gold badges85 silver badges165 bronze badges
answered 6 hours ago
Carlo FelicioneCarlo Felicione
46k5 gold badges85 silver badges165 bronze badges
46k5 gold badges85 silver badges165 bronze badges
2
$begingroup$
Please provide sources for your claim.
$endgroup$
– AEhere
6 hours ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Please provide sources for your claim.
$endgroup$
– AEhere
6 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Please provide sources for your claim.
$endgroup$
– AEhere
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Please provide sources for your claim.
$endgroup$
– AEhere
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Aviation Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f67080%2fwhat-is-more-environmentally-friendly-an-a320-or-a-car%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
7
$begingroup$
Define environmentally friendly. Are you referring to global warming or air quality (e.g. fine particulates)?
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
(also, the typical road car has one person inside, sadly)
$endgroup$
– Sanchises
8 hours ago