That only is so if the jets are pretty much full. Since they fly on a schedule they will fly even if they only have 20-30 passengers on board. Then the efficiency is very low. The same with big trucks. Loaded they are quite efficient (ton-miles/gallon) empty they are a terrible waste of resources. However a passenger car with only a driver in it is fully 1/4 as efficient (passenger-miles/gallon) as it is with a family of 4 in it.

The point I am trying to make is, of course, the relative efficiency of large vehicles varies much more with load than it does in smaller vehicles.

--

Steve Desjardins wrote:

I dispute your disputation.  ;-)   I saw a Scientific American article
about transportation a few years ago, and Jet transports are much more
efficient than any gas powered ground vehicles because they can move
such enormous amounts of  cargo.  Of course, ships are not counted here,
which are even better.


Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]


[EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/26/2004 9:46:10 PM >>>

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 11:38:48 -0400, Steve Desjardins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

There are many activities (music) that have no real benefit except

that

someone exnjoys it.

I was a bit puzzled by your comment about jumbo jets.  They are
actually pretty efficient even though they use a lot of fuel because
they move so much stuff.  They are certainly more efficient than

trucks.

The problem is they have to land at airports, whereas trucks can go
anywhere.



I think that the problem with airliners, other than the fact that
they're not very fuel efficient (I dispute your comment wrt jets being
more efficient than trucks), is that jets add significantly to the
cloud and haze cover, and hence are accelerating greenhouse effect.

That is, if you believe in the greenhouse effect, which I know that
some here don't.

cheers,
frank


-- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html




Reply via email to