As cities commit to bold climate targets and corporations sharpen their ESG mandates, one thing is becoming clear: sustainability demands better, smarter data. Aerial imagery has long helped us understand the environment, but traditional methods—like satellites and fixed-wing aircrafts—come with a heavy carbon cost.
Drones offer a cleaner, faster alternative that aligns with climate-conscious goals and the pace of modern planning. As we race towards a net-zero future, how we collect environmental data matters more than ever.
Across North America, both cities and corporations face mounting pressure to deliver on sustainability promises.
Municipalities like Vancouver, Toronto, New York, and Calgary have pledged to hit net-zero emissions by 2040 or 2050. That means retrofitting buildings, expanding renewable energy, and preserving green space. Programs like Burlington’s 100% renewable energy push and Toronto’s Home Energy Loan Program show real investment in clean infrastructure.
But hitting these goals requires more than funding. Cities need reliable, timely data to track progress—and, it is here that aerial imagery plays a vital role.
Fortune 500 companies are being asked to report- and reduce- scope 3 emissions. ESG reporting has moved from a nice-to-have to a business imperative. At the same time, companies are grappling with rising operational costs, unstable geopolitical conditions, and shifting investor expectations. Balancing sustainability with financial resilience has become a matter of grave importance.
While cities and corporations are striving to meet these sustainability goals, the path forward is still obstructed by deeper, structural challenges.
The reasons aren't surprising—but they are persistent:
Without accessible, frequent, and trustworthy data, even the best climate strategies can stall before they gain momentum. That’s when the gaps become obvious: cities need more aerial data—data that’s not just accurate, but rich in detail, easy to access, and fast to deploy.
High-resolution aerial imagery is critical for:
and countless other things.
With better aerial data, cities can identify vulnerable urban heat zones faster, track green infrastructure rollouts in real time, and prioritize climate resilience investments with more precision.
Corporations, on the other hand, can use aerial insights to audit facilities for energy inefficiencies (Scope 1), verify renewable energy installations, and optimize real estate portfolios to reduce purchased electricity emissions (Scope 2).
But if the method of collecting that data is emissions-heavy, it undermines the very climate goals it's meant to advance. Traditional aerial methods—like satellites and fixed-wing aircrafts—provide coverage, but they also carry a significant environmental cost.
As cities and companies work to reduce emissions, it’s worth asking: are the tools we're using aligned with the outcomes we’re aiming for? Satellites and fixed-wing aircrafts are widely used, but both come with substantial—and often under-discussed—carbon footprints. And while comparisons aren’t always straightforward, looking at the emissions across their full life cycles reveals a more complex picture.
Aircraft-based imagery missions burn a considerable amount of aviation fuel—and that directly drives emissions. Depending on the aircraft type and mission duration, the impact can vary significantly:
For perspective, a single Cessna 172 mission is roughly equivalent to burning 16–32 gallons of gasoline. A longer mission in a Piper Navajo, can generate emissions equivalent to driving a car over 9,000 miles.
Newer aircraft models and optimized flight plans can reduce fuel use, and in large-scale surveys, higher-efficiency jet aircrafts may offset emissions per square kilometer. But fuel consumption—especially for photogrammetry, where multiple overlapping passes are required—remains a core challenge.
It’s easy to assume satellites are a low-carbon alternative. In some cases—especially over massive regions or for continuous monitoring—they are. But their full life cycle tells a more complicated story:
While satellites excel at global-scale, long-term monitoring, their environmental impact is front-loaded and harder to mitigate. Advances in reusable launch vehicles and cleaner propellants are underway, but the challenge is far from solved.
Beyond emissions, traditional aerial methods face several operational limitations:
Each method—satellite or aircraft—has its strengths, limitations, and ideal use cases. But when sustainability, responsiveness, and local resolution matter most, traditional platforms often fall short.
Electric drones eliminate combustion, jet fuel, and launch emissions. As organizations look to reduce emissions, noise, and environmental disruption, drones provide a more compatible way forward.
Unlike fuel-burning satellites or aircrafts, most drones are electric and run on rechargeable batteries. This dramatically reduces operational emissions. For example, Spexi’s model cuts carbon output by up to 97% compared to a typical aerial flyover. Independent studies back this up—replacing traditional methods with drones for power line inspections, for instance, can eliminate hundreds of tons of CO₂ per year.
The core difference is simple: a helicopter can emit 230–250 kg of CO₂ per hour. A drone, by contrast, has near-zero emissions in flight—especially if powered by renewable energy. Even accounting for recharging and support logistics, the environmental impact is a fraction of traditional methods.
Drones require no runways or air traffic scheduling. They can launch in minutes, from rooftops, parks, or the back of a truck. This agility makes them ideal for:
Because they’re lightweight and maneuverable, drones can operate frequently without disrupting traffic or requiring complex logistics—making it easier to get timely, relevant data when it matters most.
Drones aren’t just low-carbon—they’re low-impact across the board. They produce far less noise than aircrafts (which can exceed 100–120 decibels) and don’t disturb wildlife or communities. In fact, many sustainable filming experts highlight drones as a preferred tool precisely because they’re quieter and more respectful of sensitive environments.
They also require less infrastructure—no hangars, no fuel trucks, and minimal personnel. That means less land disruption, fewer vehicle miles traveled, and a lighter overall footprint. A drone team can often operate with just a backpack, leaving the landscape largely untouched. This is especially valuable in natural areas, parks, or urban green spaces where preserving the ecosystem is key.
Taken together, the emissions savings, minimal noise, and lightweight footprint make drones a practical, future-ready option for aerial data collection.
Spexi makes it simple to collect aerial data at scale:
Our nationwide drone network and cloud-based platform deliver consistent, standardized outputs—ready to support green building audits, infrastructure tracking, and more.
We can’t afford slow, carbon-heavy data collection in a climate emergency. Drone imagery offers a smarter, cleaner way to monitor the environment—and hit our sustainability targets.
Whether you're a city planner, GIS manager, or insurer, fast and affordable aerial imagery helps you act sooner and plan better.
👉 Book a demo to see how Spexi can power your climate-smart data strategy.
