I searched first and did not come up with a specific thread about this so sorry if this is a duplication. I'm sitting at home eagerly awaiting delivery updates on my new TB MPB 15" and I'm doing what we MR members do trying to get as much information as possible to kill the time. So I'm looking on Flightaware for UPS flights out of China and I was watching UPS 81 today from Shanghai to Anchorage. Then I notice some data that flight aware provides. This single 747 flight used over 117,000 pounds of fuel. Don't know why I never considered this before. Plus this is not the only cargo flight between these two points today. There are probably a dozen! Even then that is only half the trip this computer will eventually fly. That was 7 hours and change. Then Anchorage to Louisville is another 5+ hours and then a few more from Louisville up to Canada. Tim Cook likes to tout how much Apple does to reduce their carbon footprint and for certain they are doing a lot of things that are positive. But what about flying all their products in fuel-sucking airplanes when they could build ahead and put them in shipping containers and send them across the Ocean. Maybe Apple has done the math and maybe it really is better but I find it astounding that this is a "green" method of transporting goods around the globe. Does anyone know if Apple figures that in when they calculate their carbon footprint? They may well, but could they do more to reduce it further by using more fuel-efficient shipping methods? Anyway the sheer numbers on the fuel astounded me. It's not like I never bought Apple products and waited for them to get here as fast as they could get them here. It's not like I won't continue to do so but it was a bit of an eye opener for me.