[hytdstd]

> it's far more eco friendly and lower carbon Footprint to own an rv and travel and stay in it in various places than to own several properties and fly between them.

It's considered worse to drive (vs fly) unless you have more than 2 people-- and that's for a normal car. With a truck+trailer the break-even point would need more passengers.

https://terrapass.com/blog/carbon-footprint-of-driving-vs-fl...

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2015/09/evolving-climate-...

[iancmceachern]

The info you posted doesn't include the property and accommodations, it's only the travel, which of course is higher, the savings overall is in the stay, so you have to compare it to flying AND accommodations, not just flying.

https://www.trianglerv.com/blog/post/how-an-rving-vacation-a...

Tiny homes and RVs have about 7% of the energy Footprint of traditional dwellings: https://beginrv.com/tiny-house-vs-rv/

So if you add all that up, its more eco friendly, affordable, and what we've chosen to do.

For context the typical RV has a 20-50 amp service, most common is 30. Houses have 200amp service or more typically.

[asmosoinio]

That's per passager mile, right?

For the comparison parent post is making - leisure travel - I think there's a big difference in that flying enables much larger distances, thus much more emissions.

You can easily fly 1000 miles each way for a weekend trip. Not as easily with a car, the travel tends to be much shorter.

[iancmceachern]

And also doesn't take into account economy of scale, a family of 4 has 4x the emissions in the plane example, same as 1 person in the car example. So if you do the math as a family of 4 it really changes things.