Which Airline Is Most Fuel Efficient?

The difference between carriers—and their routes—may surprise you.

Note: all routes shown include layovers. Source: International Council on Clean Transportation.

The airline industry uses about 4.5 million barrels of oil per day, or 10 percent of the oil that goes towards transportation. But there’s a sizeable difference between the carbon footprints of various airlines: According to recent research from the International Council on Clean Transportation, America’s most fuel-efficient major airline, Alaska Airlines, is 26 percent more fuel efficient than Allegiant, the least fuel-efficient.

It’s difficult to determine how much CO2 a plane burns on a given flight because many factors affect its overall efficiency. Old plane models tend to be less efficient than new ones, a plane that spends more time taxiing on the runway burns excess fuel, and empty seats on a flight result in the plane burning more fuel than necessary per passenger. Layovers make a big impact, too: Let’s say you’re flying from San Francisco to New York, for example, and have the option of choosing a layover in Chicago or Atlanta. Choosing Atlanta adds 300 miles to your trip overall, and the plane will consume 11 percent more fuel over the course of the flight than it would have on the more direct route, according to ICCT.

So, where to book? Depends on where you’re flying. While AirTran is generally one of the less efficient airlines, scoring 13th among the top 15 airlines, it actually makes the most efficient trips between Atlanta and New York. And Continental, one of the most efficient airlines around, is one of the least desirable airlines if you are flying from New York to Chicago. The graphic above provides information on which major airlines fly the most efficient flights on the 10 most popular routes in the US. (For a complete ranking of airline by city pair, see the report.)

Planes are generally less fuel efficient than cars, trains, or Greyhound buses. In a separate analysis run by the ICCT, planes came up short of trains and cars and leagues behind the Greyhound when it came to burning less fuel. The chart below ranks modes of transportation in “miles per gallon equivalent,” which takes into account the more carbon-dense fuels that planes, trains, and buses usually use, while cars use less dense fuels. Since the ICCT measures fuel-efficiency per passenger, the number of people traveling affects the fuel efficiency of a given mode of transportation. The ICCT assumed that 2.2 people were traveling in a car (the average for mid-distance trips). Buses, which transport many people at once and don’t consume nearly as much fuel as planes, came out ahead in the ICCT analysis:

After controlling for factors like the overall number of flights per airline, the report found a whopping 26 percent difference in the fuel consumed between Alaska Airlines, which ranked first, and Allegiant Air, which ranked last on its list.


More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend