this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
140 points (100.0% liked)

World News

1036 readers
31 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] itchy_lizard@feddit.it 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hoenslty it's a better way to cross the ocean than planes, climate wise

[–] hairyfeet@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2006/dec/20/cruises.green

Not at all. This article is 17 years old and planes have only gotten more efficient whilst the same old cruise ships continue to so the seas.

Plus a more recent article

https://www.treehugger.com/what-is-greener-boat-vs-plane-emissions-5185547

[–] itchy_lizard@feddit.it 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is green washing. Making planes burn less fuel is nice, but it doesn't change the physics of burning them St high altitude.

The only way to fix that is to burn lower to the ground. Ships will always be more environmental friendly way to cross oceans.

[–] igorkraw@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Source please? This is not how my understanding of physics works

[–] itchy_lizard@feddit.it 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Literally read the link above. They mention the issues of nitrogen oxides exponentionally fucking up the atmosphere when burned at high altitude, but they they totally leave that out when calculating only co2 in the conclusion