From: Silk on 22 Apr 2010 12:09 On 22/04/2010 09:23, ChelseaTractorMan wrote: > On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 08:57:20 +0100, Silk<me(a)privacy.net> wrote: >> Seems I was wrong. ;-) > > you have been too? :-) Of course.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 23 Apr 2010 04:48 On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:09:21 +0100, Silk <me(a)privacy.net> wrote: >> you have been too? :-) > >Of course. its not really an "of course" sort of destination, is it? Many people who have flown huge long haul distances to sit on beaches the same as mallorca (creating a bigger carbon footprint than the average driver in the process*) haven't even thought of it. * Thailand for two - 6 tonnes of carbon. my total annual carbon Land Rover footprint, including trips to Spain 2.5 tonnes per head -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: boltar2003 on 23 Apr 2010 05:31 On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:48:50 +0100 ChelseaTractorMan <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:09:21 +0100, Silk <me(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >>> you have been too? :-) >> >>Of course. > >its not really an "of course" sort of destination, is it? Many people >who have flown huge long haul distances to sit on beaches the same as >mallorca (creating a bigger carbon footprint than the average driver >in the process*) haven't even thought of it. > > >* Thailand for two - 6 tonnes of carbon. >my total annual carbon Land Rover footprint, including trips to Spain >2.5 tonnes per head Its not really how you travel , its how far you travel. A gallon of diesel weighs about 3.6 kilos (4.5 litres * 0.8Kg). I don't know how far Thailand is but say 10,000 miles, probably more by road but anyway... For your landie which probably does 30mpg that'll be 10000/30 * 3.6 = 1200 kgs of fuel for the trip. Which is probably about 2 tons of CO2 , so its more or less the same as flying. I'm not defending flying per se , but as a method of transport its not much more polluting per person than a car or bus (so long as the plane is full of course). What it does do however is encourage people to travel huge distances that without aircraft they wouldn't or even couldn't do. B2003
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 23 Apr 2010 05:58 On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:31:10 +0000 (UTC), boltar2003(a)boltar.world wrote: >What it does do however is encourage people to travel >huge distances that without aircraft they wouldn't or even couldn't do. yes, exactly. People bang on about cars, cars made a big carbon increase because they allowed freedom to travel at 70 mph, so you go as far as Spain, say. Many of those who bang on the most about cars, do not drive but fly a lot.... Of course distance for distance, flying is only a smallish amount worse than a car with passengers:- London Aberdeen 3 people Mondeo: 0.16 - Fly: 0.5 tonnes -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: boltar2003 on 23 Apr 2010 06:10 On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 10:58:47 +0100 ChelseaTractorMan <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:31:10 +0000 (UTC), boltar2003(a)boltar.world >wrote: > >>What it does do however is encourage people to travel >>huge distances that without aircraft they wouldn't or even couldn't do. > >yes, exactly. People bang on about cars, cars made a big carbon >increase because they allowed freedom to travel at 70 mph, so you go >as far as Spain, say. Many of those who bang on the most about cars, >do not drive but fly a lot.... They probably just tell themselves its public transport so it must be ok :) B2003
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Prev: No crash rise after Swindon speed camera turn-off Next: Trucker cooks his dinner |