Menu Menu
[gtranslate]

Cheaper flights trump greener railways in Europe

A new study has found that โ€“ on average โ€“ a flight is cheaper than a train journey in Europe. Hereโ€™s what that means for the climate crisis.ย 

If you live in Britain, youโ€™re well aware of the daylight robbery that is rail travel. Travelcards aside, youโ€™re likely to drop at least ยฃ100 for a 3 hour journey from London to Manchester. In Italy, however, a 2h, 55min journey from Rome to Milan weighs in at just โ‚ฌ29.90.

The relative affordability of European trains is what entices thousands of young Brits to take part in the interrailing experience, where they can train hop across the continent for just โ‚ฌ264.

But as it turns out, flying is still a cheaper option in Europe than rail.

Despite the fact that it produces more greenhouse gases than train journeys, and is decidedly less scenic, people still tend to head for the airport.

According to climate campaigners Greenpeace, train tickets are often double the price of flights along the same routes; in some cases, up to 30 times more expensive.

Due to tax breaks for airlines, uber-cheap flights are luring in tourists desperate for some summer escapism, and the planet is suffering as a result.

Flying is one of the most detrimental forms of travel when it comes to the climate. Itโ€™s also impossible to replicate in a greener way.

Unlike eating meat โ€“ย where plant-based alternatives exist โ€“ย or driving a car โ€“ when you can cycle or drive electric โ€“ flying is undeniably the most time-efficient and comfortable form of long-distance travel.

Stefan Gรถssling, a professor at Linneaus University in Sweden who has studied flight emissions, said the findings of the study โ€˜do not come as a surpriseโ€™, given how highly subsidised air travel is.

European airlines pay no taxes on kerosene and little-to-no tax on tickets or VAT.

A study published earlier this month by Transport and Environment, a green campaign group, found European governments lost out on โ‚ฌ34.2bn from poor taxation on aviation in 2022. The โ€œtax gapโ€ is set to rise to โ‚ฌ47.1bn in 2025, the report found.

The disparity between rail and air travel costs isnโ€™t consistent across the continent. In Poland, for example, train travel costs half as much as flying. But the UK remains the most expensive country for rail travel, with passengers paying four times more for train journeys than flights.

Thatโ€™s a staggering statistic given Britonsโ€™ most popular holiday destinations are within Europe, making them one of the biggest perpetrators of commercial air pollution on the continent.

The convenience of modern air travel has undeniably reshaped the way we explore the world. Affordable flights have ushered in an era where weekend getaways to exotic destinations are no longer distant dreams but within arm’s reach.

However, the euphoria of bagging a budget flight deal should be tempered with the understanding that these flights come at an unforgivable cost to our environment.

The Greenpeace report comes as a stark reminder of our collective failure to prioritize the well-being of our planet. While we have made strides in renewable energy and sustainable practices, the allure of quick and inexpensive air travel threatens to undo these efforts.

While electric trains and high-speed rail networks have been hailed as the eco-friendly alternatives to fossil-fuelled travel, their soaring costs have rendered them inaccessible to most. And in a continent known for its efficient rail infrastructure, the fact that a short flight can now be cheaper than a train ride is a glaring indictment of our misplaced priorities.

The phenomenon of flying being more affordable than train journeys hints at the deeply ingrained cultural narrative of speed and instant gratification. With that, the very systems designed to serve us have paradoxically become instruments of our own downfall.

Accessibility