This is another guest post by Drew Erskine. He predicts when we hit 1 billion air travels and makes the point that Briefed by Data has been making: there is not evidence we’ll reduce energy consumption, in particular, fossil fuels. Enjoy his post. Cheers, Tom
Every year, headlines such as “Record-Breaking Holiday Travel This Year” or “TSA Breaks Holiday Traveler Record” appear. Observing the aftermath of COVID-19, I couldn't resist the thought: shouldn't we be striving to reduce our carbon footprint? As I delved into TSA's Travel Numbers report, I realized we are approaching a significant milestone: 1 billion travelers in a single year (Figure 1). This report gives us all travelers that go through TSA at any given airport in the United States (though it’s not clear if these include the 15 checkpoints outside of the United States).

Naturally, the first question that came to mind was: How long will it take to reach the 1 billion milestone? Answering this wasn’t easy, as TSA only provides data going back to early 2019, significantly limiting the assumptions I can base a forecast on. I even filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Homeland Security to access older data. However, it's likely that searching through historical archives is not at the forefront of your priorities when you are occupied with “breaking records.”
To get a better idea of future trends in traveler checkpoint numbers, I used two different forecasting methods: linear regression and logarithmic regression. Each one gives a unique way of looking at how checkpoint numbers might grow in the coming years. With linear regression, I focused on weekly checkpoint numbers that reached at least 90% of 2019 levels, as I considered this threshold a reasonable indicator of returning to normal travel activity. Using those weekly numbers, I then create a best fit line to tell us more about future weeks. I calculated monthly totals, which then added up to an annual forecast seen in Figure 2.

The logarithmic regression is a bit more advanced but offers another perspective. After COVID, checkpoint growth didn’t happen at a constant rate—it started off strong but slowed down over time, forming a curve that looks a lot like a logarithmic shape. In mathematics, we can create a function that best fits this pattern just like we did with a linear regression, allowing us to generate a trendline that extends into the future. Figure 3 illustrates this calculation compared to our linear regression.

Looking at the results of these two approaches, as long as nothing major, like another pandemic disrupting travel, the linear regression suggests we will reach 1 billion in 2028, while the logarithmic regression predicts it will happen sooner, in 2027. For this year, I estimate checkpoint volumes will end up around 912 million travelers, falling about 90 million short of the big milestone.
Remember how we started with weekly data? Well, we can zoom in by day and make daily predictions using historical daily distribution, helping pinpoint the exact dates we might hit 1 billion travelers. The linear regression suggests a date of December 30, 2028, with a margin of error of approximately one week, whereas the logarithmic regression suggests an earlier date of December 29, 2026, with a similar margin of about seven days. Figure 4 shows both forecasts and how the daily trends play out.

Math aside, this is clearly not the direction we want to be going if we are serious about climate change. In a Nature article and also talked about in a Briefed by Data post called “CO2 emissions of traveling," in 2022, during a time where we were still recovering from COVID, the transport sector accounted for 30% of global energy use and 37% of global carbon dioxide emissions. Despite its large share in national emissions, transport has been one of the most difficult sectors to decarbonize. Well, at an average of 250 passengers on commercial flights at 1 billion checkpoints in a year, that is 4 million flights a year or 11,000 flights a day! How hard could it be to cut back the number of flights by at least 5%? All this to say, we are clearly more set on affordability and profitability than on our carbon footprint.
Please share and like
Sharing and liking posts attracts new readers and boosts algorithm performance. I appreciate everything you do to support Briefed by Data.
Comments
Please let me know if you believe I expressed something incorrectly or misinterpreted the data. I'd rather know the truth and understand the world than be correct. I welcome comments and disagreement. We should all be forced to express our opinions and change our minds, but we should also know how to respectfully disagree and move on. Send me article ideas, feedback, or other thoughts at briefedbydata@substack.com.
You're wrong on many levels.
The Carbon emissions of the aviation and shipping industry is around 2-3% respectively. Railways are like 0.7%. Most of the world's transportation emissions are from road transportation - cars and trucks.
In fact the amount of aviation oil demand in the US has declined for 50 years straight. So efficiency gains have outpaced demand growth. Although the demand for aviation oil has probably increased globally.
Half of the climate change impact of aviation comes from contrails and not the fuel consumption. That's the lowest hanging fruit in that sector and Google is already working on that.
I can see why you might be confused by the impact of aviation and the disproportionate attention the media gives the subject. This is because the media wants to blame carbon emissions on the 1% and not the lives of Middle class people. Most of the world's emissions comes from middle class stuff like electricity demand, steel, cement, road transportation, heating and livestock production.
Fortunately we might be on a good tragectory. Coal demand peaked 10 years ago. It will starting decline rapidly soon as India and China deploy a fuck tonne of solar and batteries. Oil demand will probably peak in 2027. ICE vehicle sales already peaked in 2017. We will probably hit peak emissions in 2025.