this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
333 points (96.6% liked)

Mildly Interesting

21475 readers
456 users here now

This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.

This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?

Just post some stuff and don't spam.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bluGill@kbin.social -5 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Plane pollution is not that much worse than a car. Depending on what metric you measure it can be better (planes are more fuel efficient and thus less CO2. Small planes like the picture generally use lead fuel and old engine designs that pollute more) on long trips.

[–] awwwyissss@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago

I do love having heavy metals rain down on me from the sky so rich cunts can entertain themselves.

[–] meat_popsicle@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago

Nearly all land near small runways and airports that fly planes using AvGas will have lead contamination. That’s because lead is still used in most aviation fuels a consumer plane would use. Runways are also required to have and use PFAS in firefighting foam for emergencies. Training and system tests will dump that stuff in the surrounding area.

Unless these fine folks have A380s they’re paying a hefty premium for lead exposure and PFAS in their water and soil.

[–] vreraan@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

No, planes are not more fuel efficient, even driving alone a car. The reason why it costs more to go by car is due to many reasons, especially the higher cost of fuel at petrol stations.