Someone calls talk show and says this new light weight plane which is made using carbon composite material will not reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that it is touted for.
Because even more people will fly.
Lower fuel costs can make air travel less expensive so there will be more air travel, thus wiping out any savings in greenhouse gas.
I guess that's population growth. More people, so more flying.
Step forward, slide back.
It also depends on what the people would be doing if they weren't flying.
The 787 saves energy if people are flying, instead of driving across country. It doesn't save energy if the people fly instead of taking the train, or biking across country.
The main reason why I biked across USA was to see more of America than the in flight movie, but I am not against flying.
I have flown before. Several times, but not since the 1980s.
One flight was on a small plane with "every seat a window seat." Seattle to Pullman, WA. Clear day and Cascade snow cones were visible from Canada to Oregon.
Fantastic, but that joyous trip only lasted a bit over 1 hour.
Since then, I haven't had occasion to fly. Living in the slow lane.
By bicycle, the scenery can last 6 days, but it's not quite so intense. Takes patience.
I ask someone what it was like to fly over a blanket of thick clouds. To be in sunshine, but look down on nothing but clouds. He said, "it's very interesting, for about 5 minutes."
Still, I do like most technology. It's kind of exciting to have the first, basically non metal plane. Actually, I guess there was the wooden Spruce Goose.