Is it more fuel effecient to fly or drive to a far-away location?

Question

I'm saying somwhere between 500-1000 miles, like:

Atlanta to San Antonio

Mobile to New Orleans

Like that...

Answer 1

If you have a small hatchback that consumes 6 liters/100 km and 4 persons inside 1000 km distance as an example here

60 liters x 1,3 euros/liter=78 euros

that is=19,5 euros per person

with aeroplane, it will be 150-200 euros per person

aeroplane prices reflect the overall costs of transportation, but it is quite clear that the small car will be more economical in any scales

(all these are european prices)

Answer 2

WHat do u think? if it costs more to fly than to drive?

plane fuel is more expensive

but a prias!

Answer 3

Flying get better people per gallon/miles than a car gets unless you can fit 200 people in your car.

Answer 4

Its probably pretty equitable... it will really boil down to personal preference.

-Edit-

If you fly, you have take off and landing pre-dump, if you get stuck in a taxi lane, you've lost your efficiency.

if you drive, you need to plan your departure time, I think driving would be the most efficient, if you plan it right. (avoid cities during rush hour and watch for construction, etc.)

Man-made GW is a myth... don't let that determine your life.

Answer 5

I just read an article that said a newer Boeing 747 filled with 75% of passenger capacity got better mileage than an avg car with only one person in it. Based on that article (Just google airplane fuel mileage), aslong as the plane is 3/4 filled or more, it may be more efficient.

Sounds like there isn't a lot of difference though.

Good question.

Answer 6

Generally, flying is a more efficient form of transportation. In the air, the engines have to work against air resistance and inertia of the airplane's mass. On the ground, your car has the same air resistance, inertia plus the addition of rolling friction of the wheels. Airliners travel at such high altitudes so they travel in air that is much thinner than it is on the ground. If the plane is almost empty, then the calculations would be different.

This general principle, that flight is the most efficient form of transport, is how a tiny bird can migrate across continents, without eating along the way. Migrating land animals have to consume food as they go.

Answer 7

Depends - what type of plane, and what type of ground transportation?

http://travel.howstuffworks.com/question...

A Boeing 747 gets uses about 5 gallons of fuel per mile.  However, it usually has about 500 people on board, so that's about 100 miles per gallon per person.

If you have a high-efficiency vehicle like a VW TDI diesel or a Honda Insight or a Toyota Prius, you would have to have at least 2 passengers and drive at 50 miles per gallon in order to get the same 100 miles per gallon per person figure.  If you have a more normal/average vehicle that gets about 25 miles per gallon, you would have to be transporting at least 4 passengers to get the same 100 miles per gallon per person figure...

I recall the one episode of "Living with Ed" that I caught once (a reality show following actor Ed Begley Jr.'s family), where Ed Begley Jr. claimed that whenever he has to go somewhere for a gig, he asks if he could just have the cash for the flights rather than the tickets.  He then takes his wife's Toyota Prius and drives to the events.  Even with the cost of gas and the occasional overnight hotel stays, he still makes a small profit over the cost of the airline tickets.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/06/06/...

However, if you are just going for cost, then you would have to compare the airline prices against the fuel prices.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/art...

seems to like Orbitz http://www.orbitz.com/ for roundtrip flight pricing, and http://www.fuelcostcalculator.com/ from AAA to calculate the cost of gasoline for your trip.  But it really depends on where you want to go...  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12537229/

Answer 8

Is there no train?

Answer 9

Fly in an ACM-check out CoolingEarth.org cruse ship in the sky. but then fly around the world when done.

I attended the Focus the Nation at Sierra College on 1-31-08. The event was the 2% Solution, a 2% reduction over 40 years to solve GW. Oil is a nonrenewable resource and we are running out-but not soon - $30 Gal for gas. The 2% Solution is ok for the USA for a 10 year plan to cut 20%. But over those 10 years, we have to be building renewable energy and about that time, we can cut an additional 20%. This should get us from importing any oil. We must have a pollution surcharge where we pay the real price (health effects, GW and cleanup) for oil, NG, coal, cigarettes, Cooling Towers, Cars, trains and airplanes. Humans have to put some of this nonrenewable into renewable energy like small hydro-electric dams, concentrating solar power plants, wind and wave machines, nuks, and geothermal. With the peak of oil in the 1970’s, peak NG in the 1990’s, having mined cheep coal, the peak of ocean fishing in the 1980’s, and the peak of uranium in the 1990’s, humans must stop procrastinating and make real changes to keep earth sustainable including in the energy debate, finance and regulation.

Many of mankind’s advancements cause earth surface to warm, destroy the ozone layer, kill off endanger species, heat cities, and in some way cause more dramatic destruction.  Blacktop and buildings (roads, roofs and parking lots-heat cities), deforestation (air pollution, soil erosion), duststorms (increase hurricanes and cyclones, cause lung diseases), fires (cause pollution, mud slides, and deforestation), refrigerants (like CFC's) and solvents (including benzene destroy the ozone layer raising skin cancer rates) and plastics; cars, airplanes, ships and most electricity production (causes pollution including raised CO2 levels and increased lung and other diseases); these human problems we must fix to keep life on earth sustainable! Humans have destroyed half of the wetlands, cut down nearly half of the rain forest, and advance on the earths grasslands while advancing desertification which increases duststorms.

The result is:  change is on the way, we just do not know what changes (where and when). Look beyond the hype, beyond the weather, beyond a quarterly report and beyond today. President Bush has made a choice of energy (ethanol) over food and feeding the starving people around the world; this is a choice China has rejected. The fact is Bush wants to buy your food to send to starving people since our grain is not available. Now what USA Presidential candidate is give you the facts so you can make an educated decision?

Over the next 90 years carbon dioxide is projected to skyrocket as human’s burn more fossil fuels. The problem is, the oil will be gone in less than 30 years at present rates of consumption without projected increases and shortages. We have to come up with what will take its place. Again we have to cleanup our mess. One of the big problems we have is at some time Yellowstone will blow its top again, as the magma move closer to the surface, creating a nuk winter. After that we will not have to worry about the destruction of the ozone layer, global warming or pollution.

But with that we must understand we have never seen what is now happening before. CO2 has never lead to temperature change, but temperature change has led to increases in CO2. The models have to be made as we go along with current evidence! But again adding a small amount of CO2 to the atmosphere enlarges the earths sun collection causing warming; increase water in the atmosphere and it forms clouds cooling earth but sometimes causing flooding. Even natural events are warming earth and causing destruction. The sun has an increased magnetic field causing increases in earthquakes (more destruction), volcanoes (wow, great destruction), and sun spots. Lighting produces ozone near the surface (raising air pollution levels). The USA Mayor's have taken a stand and I believe are on the right track, we can have control and can have economic growth. The sun is available to produce energy, bring light to buildings and makes most of human’s fresh water. Composting is the answer to desertification. New dams are the answer to fresh water storage, energy and cooling earth by evaporation, we need many small ones all over (California needs 100 by 2012 and has not even started).

Remember knowledge is power and this information is very powerful. Humans have 50 trillion dollars worth of stuff that runs on cheep oil, natural gas, or coal. We need 20 Trillion Dollars worth of renewable energy over the next 10 years if we are to avoid a world wide depression (and right now ethanol does not count)!

That is why I founded CoolingEarth.org, a geoengineering web sight where you can learn more about earth, the atmosphere, and how to sustain life on earth’s surface.

Answer 10

Probably to drive, especially if 2 or more are in the car.

About 25% or more of the fuel consumed by an airplane on a 500 mile trip is used to take off and climb to cruising altitude. And, the plane weighs much more than the passengers it's hauling, so much of the fuel burn is used just to lift the airplane and push it through the resistant air.

No fuel burned to lift a car and wind resistance factor is much less, tho there is a matter of rolling resistance to overcome.

Whoops. Modern jet transports apparently get at least 50 miles/passenger/gallon, even more when 100% booked.(discovered thru a little research.)

Very interesting question.

Answer 11

If you are using a commercial flight, better to fly.  If you are Al Gore or someone else of his libeal elite ilk and plan on using a private jet, better to drive, even if you use one of your gas guzzling SUVs.

Answer 12

Go by bicycle, but try and get fit first.

I did 250 miles in 2 days and I was seriously unfit!! But IT DID HURT!!

Hmmm - can anyone do the calorific equivalents between walking, cycling, driving and flying 1000 miles?

Answer 13

A personal plane will be very poor efficiency

Per passenger mile a full airliner is better fuel efficiency, but then you need to add on getting to the airport & all the ground and air crew and equipment training & overheads too. ie air traffic control, emergency services; national security & interrceptor jets on standby...

or are you measuring efficiency in time, money, comfort, stress levels, ability to work when you get to the other end or in transit, luggage arriving with you ...

a 3 pipe problem watson