Election Propaganda
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A collection of Photos taken by Environmental Engineering students to appreciate the earth's wonders and promote its safety.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(30)
-
▼
January
(26)
- Anacel Maybituin
- Kathlyn Madrid
- Serj David
- Chrislene Calivo
- Camille Cuadra
- Nicolo Guiao
- Patrick Nepomuceno
- John Lapidez
- Clement Dula
- Niki Tolentino
- Wesley Hontiveros
- Jose Diaz
- Kazmikhail Maurillo
- Laura Carlos
- Walter Crisologo
- Jermaine Seco
- Marc Menor
- Melissa Dela Merced
- Demi Obediencia
- Jonas Quero
- Aimah Busok
- Ygee Larion
- Lean de la Cruz
- Anacel Maybituin
- Nikki Biag
- Angel Gacutan
-
▼
January
(26)
Followers
Flying vs Driving: Which is Better for the Environment?
How can I determine if it is more eco-friendly to fly or drive somewhere? – Christine Matthews, Washington, DC
The simple answer is that driving in a relatively fuel-efficient car (25-30 miles per gallon) usually generates fewer greenhouse-gas emissions than flying. In assessing the global warming impact of a trip from Philadelphia to Boston (about 300 miles), the environmental news website Grist.org calculates that driving would generate about 104 kilograms of carbon dioxide (CO2)—a leading greenhouse gas—per typical medium-sized car, regardless of the number of passengers, while flying on a commercial jet would produce some 184 kilograms of CO2 per passenger.
Flying vs Driving: Carpooling Generates Fewest Greenhouse Gases Per Passenger
What this also means, of course, is that while even driving alone would be slightly better from the standpoint of greenhouse-gas emissions, carpooling really makes environmental sense. Four people sharing a car would collectively be responsible for emitting only 104 kilograms of CO2, while the same four people taking up four seats on a plane would generate some 736 kilograms of carbon dioxide.
Source: http://environment.about.com/od/greenlivingdesign/a/fly_vs_drive.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment