Compare the carbon cost of two flights

Pick any two tracked flights. The figures come from published fuel-burn measurements for the aircraft that actually flies each route, not from a distance-based average.

What actually moves the number

Across the 238 flights we can measure, carbon per passenger-kilometre runs from 70 g to 100 g, with a median of 84 g. That is a spread of about 43 percent between the most and least efficient services we track, flying the same skies on the same day.

Three things account for nearly all of it. The first is the aircraft: a modern twin-engine widebody burns far less per seat than a four-engine design, which is why the 747 and A380 sit at the bottom of the efficiency table no matter who operates them. The second is cabin density: the same airframe fitted with more seats spreads the same fuel across more people, so a low-cost operator's A321 beats a long-haul carrier's on this measure while offering a great deal less room. The third is distance, and it cuts both ways - a longer sector carries the fuel that burns the fuel, but it also spends proportionally less of itself in the climb, which is the most fuel-hungry part of any flight.

What barely matters is the airline's name. Two carriers flying the same type on the same route land within a few grams of each other. The difference people imagine between a "green" airline and a conventional one is almost entirely a difference of fleet age and seat count.

The most carbon-efficient flights we track

Grams of CO2 per passenger-kilometre, which divides distance out so the comparison is about the aircraft rather than the length of the trip.

FlightRouteAircraftg per passenger-kmDistance
EY450 AUH to SYD Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner 70 g 12,061 km
NH106 LAX to HND Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner 70 g 8,813 km
BR67 TPE to LHR Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner 70 g 9,783 km
6E2001 DEL to BOM Airbus A321neo 70 g 1,137 km
6E1701 DEL to DXB Airbus A321neo 70 g 2,183 km
6E31 DEL to SIN Airbus A321neo 70 g 4,158 km
AK130 KUL to HKG Airbus A321neo 70 g 2,543 km
NZ103 AKL to SYD Airbus A321neo 70 g 2,159 km
W62201 BUD to LTN Airbus A321neo 70 g 1,491 km
W62371 BUD to TLV Airbus A321neo 70 g 2,166 km

And the least

Same measure, other end of the table. Every one of these is a large four-engine or high-premium-density aircraft.

FlightRouteAircraftg per passenger-kmDistance
QF7 SYD to DFW Airbus A380-800 100 g 13,808 km
QF11 SYD to LAX Airbus A380-800 100 g 12,061 km
QF1 SYD to LHR Airbus A380-800 100 g 17,020 km
SQ26 SIN to JFK Airbus A380-800 100 g 15,339 km
SQ308 SIN to LHR Airbus A380-800 100 g 10,881 km
QR906 DOH to SYD Airbus A380-800 100 g 12,375 km
LH453 MUC to LAX Airbus A380-800 100 g 9,616 km
KE11 ICN to LAX Airbus A380-800 100 g 9,627 km
EY100 AUH to JFK Airbus A380-800 100 g 11,031 km
EK202 DXB to JFK Airbus A380-800 100 g 11,001 km

Efficiency by aircraft type

Averaged across every tracked route each type flies. Types we see on only one route are left out, because one route's seating would be presented as the aircraft's character.

AircraftTypeAverage g per passenger-kmRoutes measuredAverage sector
Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner B78X 70 g 4 8,851 km
Airbus A321neo A21N 70 g 9 2,305 km
Boeing 737 MAX 8 B38M 72 g 4 3,930 km
Airbus A320neo A20N 72 g 4 852 km
Airbus A321 A321 74 g 8 4,040 km
Airbus A320 A320 74 g 15 1,128 km
Airbus A350-900 A359 80 g 34 8,432 km
Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner B789 80 g 34 8,407 km
Airbus A350-1000 A35K 81 g 6 9,896 km
Boeing 737-900ER B739 82 g 3 3,536 km
Boeing 737-800 B738 84 g 13 1,155 km
Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner B788 84 g 10 7,709 km
Airbus A330-300 A333 86 g 12 4,756 km
Airbus A330-900neo A339 88 g 4 6,165 km
Boeing 777-300ER B77W 91 g 46 8,819 km
Boeing 777-200ER B772 91 g 3 6,769 km
Boeing 747-8 B748 95 g 6 7,806 km
Boeing 737-700 B737 96 g 3 1,195 km
Airbus A380-800 A388 100 g 19 10,507 km

The heaviest single journeys

Total carbon dioxide per passenger for the whole trip. This table is mostly a ranking of distance, which is why it looks so different from the one above.

FlightRoutekg CO2 per passengerDistanceCompare
QF1 Sydney to London 1,700 kg 17,020 km pick a rival
SQ26 Singapore to New York 1,532 kg 15,339 km pick a rival
BA15 London to Sydney 1,523 kg 17,020 km pick a rival
EK448 Dubai to Auckland 1,419 kg 14,200 km pick a rival
QF7 Sydney to Dallas - Fort Worth 1,379 kg 13,808 km pick a rival
SQ22 Singapore to Newark 1,377 kg 15,335 km pick a rival
QF9 Perth to London 1,366 kg 14,508 km pick a rival
EK215 Dubai to Los Angeles 1,339 kg 13,400 km pick a rival
NZ2 Auckland to New York 1,338 kg 14,216 km pick a rival
UA1 San Francisco to Singapore 1,278 kg 13,580 km pick a rival

Frequently asked questions

Which is the fairer comparison, total or per kilometre?

Per passenger-kilometre, in almost every case. Total carbon tells you what one journey cost the atmosphere, which is the right number if you are deciding whether to take the trip at all. Grams per passenger-kilometre tells you how efficiently the aircraft did the job, which is the right number if the trip is happening and you are choosing between options.

Why does flying business class multiply my figure?

The aircraft burns the same fuel whoever is aboard, so the cabins divide one fixed total. A seat's share is the floor area it occupies, and a flat bed occupies roughly three economy seats' worth. Your presence does not burn three times the fuel; your share of it is three times larger.

Does a newer aircraft always emit less?

Per seat, usually yes, and the tables above show it: the newest twins sit at the top and the oldest four-engine designs at the bottom. But seating density can outweigh airframe age. A twenty-year-old narrowbody packed with seats can beat a modern widebody configured with a large premium cabin.

Are these figures the full climate impact?

No. They count carbon dioxide only. Contrails and nitrogen oxides emitted at altitude also warm the climate, and the widely cited estimate is that they roughly double the effect of the CO2 alone. We publish the part that is settled and say plainly what is missing.

Where do the fuel numbers come from?

Published measurements of fuel burn for each aircraft type at specific sector lengths, not a model. The full chain, the sources and every assumption are set out in how we calculate flight CO2.

How the comparison is worked out

Both sides use the same chain: measured fuel burn for the aircraft type at this sector length, multiplied by distance, multiplied by 3.16 to turn fuel into carbon dioxide, then divided across the passengers actually carried at an 83 percent load factor. Nothing here is modelled from first principles.

The per-passenger-kilometre figure is usually the more honest comparison. A long flight emits more in total simply by being long, so comparing a short hop with an intercontinental sector on totals alone tells you mostly about distance. Per passenger-km tells you about the aircraft and how densely it is configured.

Carbon dioxide only: contrails and nitrogen oxides at altitude roughly double aviation's warming effect, and the cabin split assumes a layout typical of each aircraft. The full method, sources and caveats are set out in how we calculate flight CO2.