FridgeFreezer Posted November 7, 2005 Share Posted November 7, 2005 Collectively, US airlines are expected to burn 19 billion gallons of jet fuel this year. :o http://www.boston.com/business/articles/20...ord_fuel_costs/ I guess it's just too difficult for Greenpeace to get near a 747 to stick the sticker on it without being shot as a terrorist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john cranfield Posted November 7, 2005 Share Posted November 7, 2005 Collectively, US airlines are expected to burn 19 billion gallons of jet fuel this year. :ohttp://www.boston.com/business/articles/20...ord_fuel_costs/ I guess it's just too difficult for Greenpeace to get near a 747 to stick the sticker on it without being shot as a terrorist Nah its that they have to get around too and prefer to fly. But while we are on the question how much fuel do the Greenpeace ships burn while they are off saveing whales and seals and unicorns and stuff? John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbocharger Posted November 7, 2005 Share Posted November 7, 2005 To be fair, buses burn lots of fuel too but they certainly make a positive contribution to the air quality of places like York and London. How much CO2 is produced to run the London underground? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffbeaumont Posted November 7, 2005 Share Posted November 7, 2005 To be fair, buses burn lots of fuel too but they certainly make a positive contribution to the air quality of places like York and London. How much CO2 is produced to run the London underground? Ah, but not in London. And we all know where the politicians are... I recall an independent survey a few years back that worked out that something like 80% of the air pollution from UK traffic came from buses and lorries (which were at the time about 20% of traffic). I can't remember exactly what they were measuring or how it was done, and I might not have the figures quite right, but I think one of the things they discovered during their measuring was that a modern car stuck behind a lorry or bus could actually be cleaning the air it was taking in... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbocharger Posted November 7, 2005 Share Posted November 7, 2005 I recall an independent survey a few years back that worked out that something like 80% of the air pollution from UK traffic came from buses and lorries (which were at the time about 20% of traffic). Which may well be true, unless the 38tonnes behind the artic was distributed amongst a hundred Ford Mondeos, when that same freight occupies 50% of the traffic and produces 250% of the original CO2. Buses were grubby things, but they carry more people, and since Euro2 emissions regs effectively made DPFs compulsory the tables have turned somewhat. The new buses in Bath are 8 months old and the exhaust pipes are still shiny inside Cleaning the air? I suspect your source may have undermined their own credibility there anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minivin Posted November 7, 2005 Share Posted November 7, 2005 One thing I know at RAF Boscombe Down, we only tend to fly bombers and other small stuff, but when a VC10 (passenger/transport/re-fueling aircraft) comes in, every single fuel bowser on site has to be fueled to re-fuel the things had one in for flight refueling trials so it did a few trips out, kept the tanker pool busy all week! think what the likes of Gatwick must get through....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FridgeFreezer Posted November 7, 2005 Author Share Posted November 7, 2005 Ah, but not in London. And we all know where the politicians are...I recall an independent survey a few years back that worked out that something like 80% of the air pollution from UK traffic came from buses and lorries (which were at the time about 20% of traffic). I can't remember exactly what they were measuring or how it was done, and I might not have the figures quite right, but I think one of the things they discovered during their measuring was that a modern car stuck behind a lorry or bus could actually be cleaning the air it was taking in... This is not so far fetched: - Diesels give off a lot more particulates than petrols, and big old diesels running badly can give off a hell of a lot more. - Cleaning the air is also not that daft, IIRC there was a Ford or Saab that had a catalyst coating on the radiator that did exactly that as air passed through it. Might seem pointless, but I'll bet it helped their environmental friendliness brownie points. If a modern clean running car breathes in nasty polluted air from the knackered old bus in front it's perfectly possible that what comes out of the exhaust is friendlier, with less particulates etc. having passed through it's air filter, been burnt up in the cylinders and passed through a nice new catalytic converter and particulate filter as modern cars have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missingsid Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 My mate gives me grief due to my vehicles and claims he is a eco tourist. only trouble is he fly's around the world. who's doing the most damage! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muckshifta Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Nah its that they have to get around too and prefer to fly. But while we are on the question how much fuel do the Greenpeace ships burn while they are off saveing whales and seals and unicorns and stuff?John Saw one the Greenpeace boats last summer sailing out of Greenock harbour the amount of black smoke out the exhausts was unreal , the stuff was hanging around in the air for at least 5 mins after the boat had left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.