New analysis from Greenpeace shows that rail tickets are much more expensive than airline tickets. Photo / Michal Parzuchowski, Unsplash
New analysis from Greenpeace shows that rail tickets are much more expensive than airline tickets. Photo / Michal Parzuchowski, Unsplash
New analysis from Greenpeace has highlighted the cost difference in ticket prices for plane and rail travel throughout Europe.
The findings have led the environmental organisation to argue for urgent change, in order to make the eco-friendly option of rail a viable and accessiblealternative for travellers.
The comparative analysis finds that flights are less expensive than their corresponding rail journeys on the majority of the European routes analysed. According to the report, 79 of the 112 routes (a little over 70 per cent) are more affordable to travel by plane than train. Of the 112 routes, only 23 are almost always cheaper by train - but only half of those make for convenient train trips (some are plagued by inconvenient or slow connections).
Some of the most effective and convenient train routes, such as Amsterdam-London or London-Edinburgh (which are only 4-4.5 hours each), are “still among the top four most popular short-haul flights in Europe”, as the price of air travel is much cheaper.
In the report, the organisation argues that the higher price of train tickets disincentivises travellers from choosing that route of transport.
“One of the reasons people choose to fly rather than travel by train is price: why would anyone take the train from London to Barcelona and pay up to €384 ($795) when air tickets are available for the ridiculously low price of €12.99 ($27)?”
Austria offers 'Klimatickets' to travellers utilising public transport - Greenpeace would like to see the concept expanded. Photo / Michelangelo Azzariti, Unsplash
Greenpeace says that, in order to encourage people to choose rail travel, there should be more competitive prices for train tickets, improvements to the rail infrastructure and further investigation of the pricing strategies of airlines.
The organisation also highlights “climate tickets” as a potential option for making rail travel more accessible and attractive.
“Greenpeace is calling on national governments to introduce climate tickets, affordable and simple long-term tickets valid on all public transport in a country or defined region, including all trains and cross-border transport,” the report says.
It points to some of the public transport infrastructure in Austria (which actually uses Klimatickets, or “climate tickets”), free and discounted transport in Spain and “free public transport for all” in Luxembourg as some of the most effective policies.
The organisation suggests that these public transport tickets could be funded through taxpayer subsidies, with the taxes from windfall profits of fossil fuel companies. Greenpeace proposes that more long-term funding could come from a tax on CO2 emissions and the eventual reduction in costs from car-related spending.
The report prioritised short-haul flights, with the train/plane routes being between European cities with more than a million inhabitants. The destinations had to have both a rail station and an international airport. The report also made specific considerations for popular tourism destinations and the potential of utilising night trains.
The potential of rail travel is currently being supported by some infrastructure developments throughout Europe.
One high-speed train travelling from Rome to Pompeii took its maiden voyage in mid-July, with the direct service making the trip to the popular tourist destination in under two hours. Trials and early runs of trains utilising experimental fuels have also taken place in Canada and Italy.
