← Back to Squawk list

We won't have electric airplanes until battery tech improves

2년 전 제출됨

Today’s commercial airliners are not exactly fuel efficient. The average 747, for example, burns through a gallon of kerosene-based fuel every second that it flies. And with 8.2 billion people expected to take to the skies annually by 2037, carbon-free alternatives to Jet A-1 will be necessary in order to offset the industry’s impact on global warming. We are nearing the age of electric airplanes. (www.engadget.com) 기타...

Torsten Hoff

8 멤버 코멘트

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

royalbfh 2년 전 2

The first statement is false on its own, Todays jet airliners are EXTREMLY fuel efficient. some of these aircraft have a take off weight of over 400,000 pounds and the 74 can go almost 1,000,000 gross weight. the absolute fact is electric "vehicles" may work at some point but will never be able to carry the large payloads that modern airplanes do now. Think about how heavy batteries are and then think about how many it would take to propel a large loaded airliner across the ocean. So PAX or cargo would have to be sacrificed to accommodate the weight of internal batteries. you can challenge me on this, and no, I'm not an aerodynamic engineer, just a lowly jet pilot that can think logically.,

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

ADXbear 2년 전 2

Duh.... its been the problem all along.. waiting..

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

jbermo 2년 전 1

I recall that my B-747 would burn an average of 10,000lbs of kerosene each hour - that's a lot of carbon!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

[This poster has been suspended.]

linbb 2년 전 1

Thanks for the post as am so over these dumb assed people as its doing the same thing its done since this thing was covered everywhere with ice. It is evolving nothing can stop it. It could at any time start going the other way. It has started a few times renewing the ice and it could go back to that again. There is no proof it could not.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

pjshield 2년 전 0

Well said!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

patrick baker 2년 전 0

scientific illiterates have spoken once again on global warming, who could not make a case except by denying the folks with the facts are correct. Why so proud of being misinformed, to the detriment of the planet and the people who will be the generations after us? THe people on our side of this question are not elitests, rather folks who stayed in school after junior high and paid attention in science classes. Behold two contributors with fingers to type with but without knowledge to speak about.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Greg S 2년 전 5

"... are NOT elitists..." Every word of yours is dripping with elitism and scorn for those you unjustifiably look down upon, and your assertion that you're better or smarter than others is really a projection of your own insecurities. I know for a fact that you don't understand *any* of the science details behind global warming, it's plainly obvious from your words. Climate science is like any other advanced scientific area, it takes specialized knowledge that is acquired from years of post-undergrad work. Just like me you must rely on the words and summaries of other, more knowledgable scientists.

You don't know any more than the deniers and skeptics, to pretend otherwise is dishonest. Rather than being superior in any way to those who you spit on, I lump all of you in the same boat.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

ToddBaldwin3 2년 전 1

There are a lot of people who stayed after school in Jr. High, High School, college (it wasn't a party experience, more like a third job), grad school, and to this day keep learning. We know what the evidence shows.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

We won't have electric airplanes until battery tech improves

8 멤버 코멘트

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

로그인