Celebs Who Claim They're Green but Guzzle Gas

[GeneValgene]

link

 

[waggy]

yawn.

 

[Steve]

I wonder if TMZ takes into account that when these people are flying, it's probably work-related.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: sm8000
I wonder if TMZ takes into account that when these people are flying, it's probably work-related.

Even so they dont HAVE to fly private jets that have a whole 3 or 4 people in them.

No one needs to fly a private jet.

If you read the entire article, Leo flies commercial, why can't the rest of the so-called Hollywood green? It is very hypocritical of them to be preaching when they themselves needlessly fly private jets.

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: sm8000
I wonder if TMZ takes into account that when these people are flying, it's probably work-related.

Even so they dont HAVE to fly private jets that have a whole 3 or 4 people in them.

No one needs to fly a private jet.

If you read the entire article, Leo flies commercial, why can't the rest of the so-called Hollywood green?

As little as I care for him as an actor, I gotta give him credit where credit is due in terms of doing his little part.

 

[Kirby]

Originally posted by: waggy
yawn.

 

[BobDaMenkey]

Originally posted by: sm8000
I wonder if TMZ takes into account that when these people are flying, it's probably work-related.

Logic? What? Noooo.

 

[mundane]

Is there such a thing as a fuel-efficient private [luxury] jet?

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: BobDaMenkey

Originally posted by: sm8000
I wonder if TMZ takes into account that when these people are flying, it's probably work-related.

Logic? What? Noooo.

Even if it is work related, why do they have to fly a private jet?

 

[BobDaMenkey]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: sm8000
I wonder if TMZ takes into account that when these people are flying, it's probably work-related.

Even so they dont HAVE to fly private jets that have a whole 3 or 4 people in them.

No one needs to fly a private jet.

If you read the entire article, Leo flies commercial, why can't the rest of the so-called Hollywood green? It is very hypocritical of them to be preaching when they themselves needlessly fly private jets.

That has a high chance of just creating more headache and issues though with paperazzi and obsessive fans.

 

[Bootprint]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: BobDaMenkey

Originally posted by: sm8000
I wonder if TMZ takes into account that when these people are flying, it's probably work-related.

Logic? What? Noooo.

Even if it is work related, why do they have to fly a private jet?

So they can carry their hand cream with them onboard the flight.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: BobDaMenkey

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: sm8000
I wonder if TMZ takes into account that when these people are flying, it's probably work-related.

Even so they dont HAVE to fly private jets that have a whole 3 or 4 people in them.

No one needs to fly a private jet.

If you read the entire article, Leo flies commercial, why can't the rest of the so-called Hollywood green? It is very hypocritical of them to be preaching when they themselves needlessly fly private jets.

That has a high chance of just creating more headache and issues though with paperazzi and obsessive fans.

Well then they aren't really green and should STFU. They pollute atleast 100 times more than the avg american will in their lifetime.

I mean they have their 15,000+ sqf house, their private jets. Wow you drive a Prius, your carbon foot print is still 100 times bigger than someone with a gas guzzling SUV.

 

[suicidalpigeon]

Did Honda ever get their idea of partaking in the airline industry going?

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Who cares what a bunch of fake people, who need a script before being allowed to speak in public have to say about ANYTHING?

 

[BobDaMenkey]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Well then they aren't really green and should STFU. They pollute atleast 100 times more than the avg american will in their lifetime.

So it's their fault that there are legitimate security risks with flying comercially because of their celebrity status?

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: BobDaMenkey

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Well then they aren't really green and should STFU. They pollute atleast 100 times more than the avg american will in their lifetime.

So it's their fault that there are legitimate security risks with flying comercially because of their celebrity status?

Its not really a legitimate security risk. Hassel maybe, risk, not really. Plenty of celebs fly commerical. Leo isnt the only one, but he seems to be the only vocal hollywood green that flies commerical.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: sm8000
I wonder if TMZ takes into account that when these people are flying, it's probably work-related.

Even so they dont HAVE to fly private jets that have a whole 3 or 4 people in them.

No one needs to fly a private jet.

If you read the entire article, Leo flies commercial, why can't the rest of the so-called Hollywood green? It is very hypocritical of them to be preaching when they themselves needlessly fly private jets.

Small planes get better gas mileage than you would think. I don't know about jets, but a twin engine 4 seater gets about something like like 15mpg. If two people are in it, that's 30mpg per person. I'd assume that a small jet with a comparable number of people delivers similar mpg per person.

Edit: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/06/hondajet_to_att.html

The hondajet gets 39.36 seat miles per gallon (6 seats). An sj30 returns 22.5 seat miles per gallon (7 seats). A learjet 31a returns 24.9 seat miles per gallon (8 seats). That is a pretty phenomenal improvement in efficiency.

Yeah, seat mpg makes them seem better than they are, but do celebrities usually fly around alone in their jets? In any case, that jet or piston plane isn't going 20,000 miles a year like your 9mpg Hummer H2.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: sm8000
I wonder if TMZ takes into account that when these people are flying, it's probably work-related.

Do you fly in a private jet for work? No. You probably take public transportation or maybe even carpool, right? There are not 2 sets of rules in this life, one for the haves and one for the have-nots.

 

[eits]

lame...

and by that, i mean this thread is lame. celebs have jets... jets need fuel... they don't fly around in them all the time. this is a pointless point.

 

[BobDaMenkey]

You also need to consider the fact that jets fly on incredibly low grade fuel. Basically karosene IIRC. Gasoline for cars is a much more highly refined and much more costly comodity because of it.

I don't disagree that it's somewhat hypocritcal, however there are legitimate reasons for it I think.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: BobDaMenkey
I don't disagree that it's somewhat hypocritcal, however there are legitimate reasons for it I think.

There's also legitimate reasons for people to own SUVs and pick-up trucks.

 

[BillGates]

404: Care about celebrities and their lives not found.

 

[PAB]

Originally posted by: diegoalcatraz
Is there such a thing as a fuel-efficient private [luxury] jet?

In terms of MPG/Passenger - no way in hell.

I'm just going to throw this figure out here.....

Flight time on a private jet is in the THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS PER HOUR. If you have a 3 hour flight at $2000/hr, you just spent $6000 flying from Miami to Boston.

In the same token, fight costs for a commerical airliner would be more - but the number of passengers involved is far greater. Recently there was an American Airlines flight crew that was interviewed for a week and I think they flew across half of the country at $18,000 in flight costs.

On en economic basis, private jets will never be cheaper than commercial.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: BobDaMenkey
I don't disagree that it's somewhat hypocritcal, however there are legitimate reasons for it I think.

There's also legitimate reasons for people to own SUVs and pick-up trucks.

There is no legitimate reason to own some SUVs like the Hummer H2... small interior, mediocre off road ability, and it's enormous-- 8000lbs right? I'd say most people who drive full size trucks in Texas do not need them and don't use them for what they were built. I technically don't need my Jeep-- I'd get by with a BIG wagon and a roof rack, but I use it to its full capabilities regularly.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: BobDaMenkey
You also need to consider the fact that jets fly on incredibly low grade fuel. Basically karosene IIRC. Gasoline for cars is a much more highly refined and much more costly comodity because of it.

I don't disagree that it's somewhat hypocritcal, however there are legitimate reasons for it I think.

Jet fuel is not "basically kerosene," it IS kerosene. And it's not low grade, it's the most energy dense fossil fuel there is, by both volume and weight (which is a big reason why it's used in jets).
Gasoline is "much more highly refined" only because there is more demand for gasoline than there is actual heptane/octane available in the natural crude oil extracted from the earth. Therefore, gasoline cannot just be fractionally distilled, as kerosene is, but must be cracked, whereby larger hydrocarbon atoms (like those that comprise kerosene for example) must be split apart to form the heptane/octane mix that is pump gasoline.

Jeez... if you're gonna be an apologist, at least get your facts straight.