• gewindestift@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    Thank you for the reply. “Your” numbers are not in fuel/mile/person but in energy/mile/person. So an electric train is much better carbon emission wise than it suggests. I was aware that flights and ICE cars are equal-ish per distance, but the takeaway from this should be to not fly or ICE-drive long distances and not that flying is ok.

    Flying is really bad and billionaires as well as common people alike should not be allowed to do it. I do not understand why we still have to discuss this.

    • Soggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      The first one is measuring BTUs and converting but the UMich information is straight carbon emissions per passenger mile and planes are only ~30% worse than commuter rail in the US by that metric. It’s really not the apocalypse you’re making it out to be.

      • gewindestift@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Sorry i didn’t read carefully enough. Thanks for pointing that out. So there’s a huge difference between the UK “national rail” and the US “commuter rail” in carbon emission (35g vs 214g per km, which is not so great again*). I guess this is because the US rail is much less electrified and runs mostly on diesel. Also a national rail train will stop less (and have to accelerate again) than a commuter train.

        As i mentioned in another post in this thread a round trip transatlantic flight is almost a full year of what one person can emit (if we share it equally) to limit the warning to 1.5°C.

        What breaking this limit means is easy accessible information. (No its not the apocalypse but is is shit)

        *sorry couldn’t resist