excess_3
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-26-09 03:08 AM
Original message |
|
the easiest way to decrease CO2 emissions is to design aircraft to fly at a slower speed, for example, to cruise at Mach 0.75 instead of the more typical M 0.85 to 0.89.
there would be many benefits, fuel savings, weight savings, lower landing speeds, etc, etc.
another thing to look at, turboprops instead of jets. there would be many benefits, among them would be more noise and vibration in the cabin. .....................................................
of course, the jet-set greenies would complain about wasting a few minutes of there time
|
obliviously
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-28-09 12:48 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Cheer up! There will be other Ideas!
|
Nihil
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-28-09 06:34 AM
Response to Original message |
|
> the easiest way to decrease CO2 emissions > is to design aircraft to fly at a slower speed
Having had a lot of contact with the aircraft design cycle in the past, that is probably one of the hardest ways to do it. If you realised quite how long it takes to go from the initial design idea through to the sale of the first plane, you wouldn't even have suggested that.
On the other hand, the *really* easy way to decrease the aircraft contribution to global CO2 output is to stop flying so damn many of them every day. As seen just over 8 years ago, this decision can be implemented by a country to a draconian level in a single day so taking a more moderate approach (say cutting 15% or so per year) would still have achieved far more of a reduction before any modified design would even be submitted for certification (never mind be available for use).
:hi:
|
phantom power
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-28-09 10:35 AM
Response to Original message |
3. What fraction of total GHG emissions do airplanes represent? |
GliderGuider
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-28-09 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Aircraft use about 1.3% of all petroleum consumed. |
|
Edited on Mon Sep-28-09 10:52 AM by GliderGuider
According to my calculation derived from data here: http://www.airlines.org/economics/energy/MonthlyJetFuel.htmIt's not exactly low-hanging fruit.
|
excess_3
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-28-09 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. closer to 7 percent of US petroleum used |
|
keep in mind that the vast amount of air travel/freight is unnecessary
|
kristopher
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-28-09 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. They represent a class of energy users that require the energy density of liquid fuel |
|
Solve the problem for airplanes and you will quite possibly solve the problem for ships, heavy equipment (including farming), etc.
IIRC the entire class represents about 30-40% of fossil fuel consumption.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:07 AM
Response to Original message |