Air travel accounts for 3 percent of CO2 emissions worldwide every year. On average, a plane produces 53 pounds of carbon dioxide for every mile it flies. So the recent record-setting, 10,500-mile, 19-hour-and-19-minute Quantas flight from Heathrow Airport in London, England, to Sydney Airport in Sydney, Australia, and other recent marathon flights, raise some significant questions.
Here’s the good news: The air travel industry has been investing in improved technology for years. Each new generation of aircraft is about 15 percent more efficient than the generation it replaces, and regional jets are up to 24 percent more fuel efficient than they were before. The upswing is mostly due to improvements in aircraft engines, and it’s expected new propulsion systems will make another leap in reducing fuel use in the years to come.
Fabrication is also an important piece of the puzzle. New, often sustainable, materials are being used to create lighter, but just as sturdy, aircraft. For instance, some airlines are looking to replace the heavy canvas fabric on seat covers with a whisper light synthetic fabric grown in a lab from proteins that mimic spider silk.
A lighter plane uses considerably less fuel than a heavy one.
Of course, airlines aren’t just doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) notes that fuel is the industry’s largest cost after labor.
So, it’s complicated. Short flights multiply the number of takeoffs a plane has, which is the part of the flight that burns the most fuel. On the other hand, jet fuel itself is heavy and dragging it along on an epic flight burns a lot of fuel, too.
So, are epic flights better than short ones? Watch the video and find out.
changing america copyright.
