View Single Post
  #32   Report Post  
Old June 4th 13, 04:34 PM posted to uk.transport.london
[email protected] spud-u-dont-like@potato.field is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Feb 2013
Posts: 704
Default Bozza on Crossrail

On Tue, 4 Jun 2013 16:03:14 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:50:25 on Tue, 4 Jun
2013, d remarked:
What science do you base these comments on - mine is a university


Basic physics my friend. And googling will back me up.

research project that came to the conclusions above.


Care to post a link to it? I need a laugh.


You need a reality check.


Just for fun I did the calcs for your methane suggestion:

methane it atmosphere = roughly 1.8ppm

A commercial a jet engine takes in roughly 1 ton of air per second (going by
online figures) which for a high bypass turbofan means 100kg of air gets into
the compressor per second.

For a 10 hour flight that'll be 0.1 * 3600 * 10 = 3600 tons of air in
which there'll be 3660000 * .0000018 = 6.6 tons of methane.

Assuming all that methane gets burned (it won't but hey) thats equivalent
to about 165 tons of CO2.

A 747 uses 150,000 litres of kerosene on a 10 hour flight which will create
about 400 tons of CO2 which will be in the atmosphere on average for the next
10K years.

Therefor I think to sum up one can say nice idea, but no cigar.

--
Spud