If each passenger viewed themselves as not responsible for the half a tonne of aircraft and fuel that it took to support and propel their seat, we would seriously undercount the emissions. Consequently, if we view our carbon footprint from flying as arising purely from the additional weight we add to the aircraft, we will significantly underestimate our emissions. Put differently, a typical 260 seat plane weighs 100 tonnes without passengers or fuel – almost 400 kg per seat.
When a typical plane takes off, passengers and their baggage account for 20-25% of the total weight of the plane – which includes the aircraft and the fuel.
Professor Hood’s argument is indisputable, but it is also inadequate. Having you – rather than an empty seat – on a plane will cause more emissions. He noted that the plane’s weight directly relates to how much lift is required, and hence to the rate of fuel consumption. The easiest way to show that an individual boarding a plane does make a difference was put forward last night by Professor David Hood. However, as I’ll attempt to demonstrate in this article, our choice – to fly or not to fly – does make a difference. This is indeed a tempting line of thought, as it allows us to minimise responsibility for our actions. Many of us will have wondered similarly ourselves. So what difference does it make whether or not I fly?” Whether or not I book a ticket and get on that plane, it will go. At our book launch last night, I was asked a curly question: “ A flight goes everyday from Sydney to Johannesburg.
0 kommentar(er)
