[email protected] wrote:
> To explain why, let's first look at plasma TV's. Per square
> inch of screen, they consume about as much energy as an
> old-fashioned vacuum-tube TV. Nevertheless they are
> considered a big step back in energy efficiency -- because
> the flat screen makes screen areas possible which were out
> of reach for the old TV's.
Plasma TV's are energy hogs, use LCD TVs and computer monitors
with LED backlighting. Some LED lights are twice as efficient
as fluorescent lights.
> The same argument applies to flying. The speed of airplanes
> makes trips feasible which would have been out of reach, or
> perhaps a once-in-a-life-time affair, without airplanes.
> This is one of the reasons why air travel is so harmful: not
> only because of the emissions per mile, but also because air
> travel leads to many more miles per trip.
Priceoftravel.com had the following statement for 2011:
Paris to Barcelona
• Air: US$61 – 1.75 hours on EasyJet (inc. 1 checked bag)
• Train: US$98 – 12 hours
• Bus: US$62 – 15.25 hours
Winner: Air
Here the clear winner is the flight since it’s actually the cheapest as well
(not including airport transport). In this case the bus is only good for
cheapskates who are afraid to fly, or at least afraid to fly EasyJet.
**********
The cost of air travel is going down because modern aircraft are lighter.
Trains are so heavy they aren't energy efficient (regenerative braking doesn't
work). On the other hand motor vehicles
are getting more energy efficient through the use of plug hybrid technology.
--
Ron
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
