Monday, July 09, 2007

Boeing Launches New Green Jet

Boeing has unveiled its new greener jet that promises to use 20% less fuel than other similarly sized aircraft by taking advantage of a new lightweight carbon fibre design. Dubbed the 787 "Dreamliner" the craft promises to carry up to 330 passengers in greater comfort than its predecessors by offering larger windows and less noise.

The launch took place yesterday outside the boeing factory in Everett, Washington.

Close to 700 orders for the new Boeing have already been fulfilled, with Virgin Atlantic leading the way. They have already purchased 15 and will likely exercise options on another eight by the end of this year. They also have the right to buy a further 20, in a deal that could be worth up to $8 billion.

How significant is a 20% increase in efficiency? The Grist has the scoop from one the project's lead designers,

According to Jeff Hawk, who oversees environmental efforts for the model, the 787 consumes about one gallon of fuel per seat per 100 miles of travel -- "less than a typical sedan, and a half to a third the fuel consumption of an SUV."

There's something seriously wrong with our transportation system when, mathematically, you can fly to work more efficiently than you can drive. Perhaps Boeing should start designing our automobiles as well.


rabbit said...

Of course, more efficient jets reduces fuel costs for the airlines, generating lower ticket prices, generating more passengers, generating more flights, requiring more jet fuel, producing more GHG's.

The law of unintended consequences raises its head once more.

Or am I being cynical?

Ash said...

Boeing's Dreamliner Airbus's Nightmare

Red Tory said...

Rabbit has an extremely valid point. That's not to discount the improvements Boeing is making, but the inherent paradox and unintended consequences should also be made note of.

JimBobby said...

Whooee! I reckon maybe them lower ticket prices and increased traffic would mean fewer people loadin' up the SUV to go to Disneyworld an' more flyin' instead. Just cause more are flyin' don't necessarily mean more are travelin'. If that gallon per 100 miles per passenger thing is accurate, ol' Mother Earth wins everytime somebuddy flies instead o' drivin'.

I ain't sure that MPG thing is right, though. I figger they maybe used a full-to-capacity airliner and an SUV with only a driver.