Carbon Footprint of attending the Model S Factory tour

[Kevin Harney]

Well you do have to divide that 1.53 metric tons by the 200 or so passengers and crew right ?!?!?! LOL

[Lloyd]

Well you do have to divide that 1.53 metric tons by the 200 or so passengers and crew right ?!?!?! LOL

No this figure would be correct for each passenger. Typical flight 200 seats will burn about 15,000 gallons San Francisco to London. Weight of Fuel ~90,000 lbs. C02 produced is about 600,000 lbs divided by 200 passengers is 3,000 lbs per passenger each way.

[dpeilow]

Yep. The calculator I used says 1.86 tonnes for economy, 5.3 for business class and over 7.4 for first.

I used 1.86 in the calculation.

[NigelM]

Anyone want to buy some carbon offset credits from my solar system?

[Jaff]

Buy carbon credits from Florida Nig?

That one acre kinda looked like swampland to me...

[NigelM]

That one acre kinds looked like swampland to me...

Everglades!

[zack]

Not sure how much one less ticket sold will reduce the amount of kerosene burned on any given flight, but it sure would be nice if jets burned hydrogen in the future and it was derived from alternative, non-carbon renewable energy. We're not going to change everything at once, but our electric cars make a significant impact in many ways. One thing to keep in mind, even if we can't reduce our carbon footprints as fast as we'd like, is that we've never had to fight a war over electricity. Coal, uranium, hydro, natural gas, solar, wind, geothermal... it's all right here in North America and requires no guns, tanks, rockets, drones, or fallen soldiers. To me it's more about moving the focus of our precious financial resources away from killing and toward developing a sustainable course. It's not so much about the momentary guilt of buying an airplane ticket... it's about the overall direction we're headed. It's impossible to live in the modern world at the moment without having significant carbon footprints, but I'd like to believe that the directions my footprints are headed are beginning to aim away from fossil fuels. Oil is a great resource, and the oil left in the ground needs to stay there for use in making plastics and other materials we need in the future. Even natural gas is used to make plastics.

[DisneylandIsHome]

Everyone stay home and give us more time with the Model S. We're charging our Roadster using our solar panels and driving the 37 miles round trip no matter what anyone says! 8-)

[dpeilow]

Not sure how much one less ticket sold will reduce the amount of kerosene burned on any given flight

It's more about reducing demand so that maybe 9 instead of 10 flights operate a route on a given day

but it sure would be nice if jets burned hydrogen in the future and it was derived from alternative, non-carbon renewable energy.

Or they could be switched to run on methanol pretty much tomorrow. Hydrogen for planes en masse is as much of an unobtainable dream as for road cars.

From http://www.efcf.com/reports/E21.pdf

The full dimensions of the challenge become apparent when these numbers are translated to a specific case. The following case study may serve to illustrate the point. About 50 jumbo jets leave Frankfurt Airport every day, each loaded with 130 tons of kerosene. If replaced on a 1 : 1 energy base by 50 tons of liquid hydrogen, the daily needs would be 2500 tons or 36 000 m3
of the cryogenic liquid, enough to fill 18 Olympic-size swimming pools. Every day 22 500 tons of water would have to be electrolyzed. The continuous output of eight 1-GW powerplants would be required for electrolysis, liquefaction, and transport of hydrogen. If all 550 planes leaving the airport were converted to hydrogen, the entire water consumption of Frankfurt (650 000 inhabitants) and the output of 25 full-size power plants would be needed to meet the hydrogen demand of air planes leaving just one airport in Germany.

For hydrogen derived from fossil hydrocarbons, the availability of water and the safe sequestration of CO2 may pose serious problems, not because of inadequate technology, but with respect to logistics, infrastructure, costs, safety, and energy consumption. To fuel the 50 jumbo jets with hydrogen, about 7500 tons of coal and 11 250 tons of water are needed daily and 27 500 tons of carbon dioxide must be liquefied for transport, shipped to a suitable disposal site (perhaps in the deep waters of the mid-Atlantic) and safely deposited. The significant energy needs for hydrogen liquefaction and transport are the same for any source of hydrogen. Fueling the 50 jumbo jets at Frankfurt airport is only an insignificant part of a hydrogen economy. Has the magnitude of the task been recognized?

It's not so much about the momentary guilt of buying an airplane ticket... it's about the overall direction we're headed. It's impossible to live in the modern world at the moment without having significant carbon footprints, but I'd like to believe that the directions my footprints are headed are beginning to aim away from fossil fuels.

But is that going to really be affected by your seeing the car a few months before it's in the local store?

[TEG]

I wonder how much CO2 is produced to fly a corporate jet between LA and SF twice a week all year long...