I'm basing this on Emma Thompson's comments at the Climate Change protests this week. I don't get why a more expensive seat creates more carbon emissions?
It's it because if they're less people on one plane on first class then it means more voyages have to be made with the plane?
Why is flying first class more detrimental to your carbon footprint than economy?
2019-04-27 6:30 am
回答 (8)
2019-04-27 6:47 am
I'm going to Florida tomorrow with my wife. Since our seats were not together, my wife wasn't too happy about that and so I upgraded our seats today (still economy) paying another $161 for the privilege of sitting with my wife for 4 hours. That's 40 bucks an hour and she will probably be sleeping anyway. It is one of her superpowers. That should be my carbon offset since I'm not creating any more carbon than if I wasn't sitting with her. I guess that is the opposite point she was making if true.
參考: Feeling ripped off by the airlines.
2019-04-27 8:16 am
Take it to the logical extreme and imagine chartering a 747 just for you. The more people on the plane, the more efficient it is. Your footprint is the carbon the plane emits divided by the number of passengers. A full plane with an all-economy configuration can transport more people, and so the per person footprint is lower, than a mixed economy + business configuration.
2019-04-27 10:22 am
Liberals just parrot whatever they are told. Tats why they cannot learn from data. Libs must be told what it means, and more simply told what to protest.
Thats why there are so many contradictions.
Thats why there are so many contradictions.
2019-04-27 9:05 am
Carbon Footprints is a myth to scare you
2019-04-29 12:19 am
The cost of a carbon offset for air travel is quite inexpensive: about $2 per thousand miles in a business-class seat.
Many airlines already include that extra cost in the price of a ticket.
Many airlines already include that extra cost in the price of a ticket.
2019-04-28 1:48 am
You get more room to stretch out, room that could be filled with passengers.
2019-04-28 2:48 am
The only way they can be more detrimental is because they give you more space. It takes the same amount of fuel to haul someone in first class as in coach. Now if the plane is packed full and a few more people could have been put on if all the seats were coach an argument could be made that first class causes a higher carbon footprint. But the plane would have to be full to make this argument.
2019-04-28 3:36 am
More space per passenger. means fewer passengers for the same fuel outlay.
2019-04-27 8:18 am
That depends on how you count. If the plane was going anyhow, the only carbon footprint you have is the additional for you being on the plane. Mostly that is the same no matter where you sit, even more luggage would not increase the fuel use for one person. Now if you are counting average then it would be different, but that way of counting is not correct.
2019-04-27 12:48 pm
Why were so many idiots obsessed with actresses, thousands of ordinary decent people were out protesting about climate change in London and all the celebrity obsessed media could talk about was some fkin actress!
Who fkin cares! Get your head out your azz
Who fkin cares! Get your head out your azz
2019-04-27 8:37 am
Because more room means more weight for the aircraft.
2019-05-10 8:54 am
Seriously? I wouldnt be worried
2019-05-05 12:35 pm
It isn't! First Class and Economy all sit in the SAME PLANE.
2019-05-04 4:32 pm
She is retarded
2019-04-30 10:47 am
The stews make you pant more.
2019-04-27 6:38 am
I don’t think that’s what she said. She did try to defend flying from LA to London simply for a climate protest. She also said that SHE is able to reduce her own carbon footprint but others can’t. Sounds like typical, hypocritical liberal BS.
收錄日期: 2021-04-24 07:31:06
原文連結 [永久失效]:
https://hk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20190426223034AAe05Rh