[GTO]

Source & Full Article

Some notable quotes:

Like Klarna, companies across Europe are reconsidering travel policies, and individuals are asking whether jetting off to sunny spots for holidays is worth the environmental cost. The Swedes even have a name for it: flygskam, or flight shame, and it’s a growing threat to airlines in Europe and beyond. SAS AB says its traffic fell 2% in the nine months ended July 30 from the year-earlier period, and Sweden’s airport operator has handled 9% fewer passengers for domestic flights this year than last.

Austria’s state railway—Europe’s leading provider of international sleeping car service—has ordered 13 new sleeper trains, saying the move was spurred by increased demand for overnight travel because of environmental concerns.

Airlines this year will pump almost 1 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. And the United Nations says aviation is on track to overtake power generation as the single biggest emitter of CO₂ within three decades.

The danger for airlines is growing as companies cut back on business travel.

European carriers are at the greatest risk because they often fly short distances, and high-speed rail is a viable alternative. While it takes more than 19 hours to travel the 800 miles from Chicago to New York on Amtrak, a European can cover a similar distance from London to Marseille in a bit more than six hours.

It’s hard for airlines to push back, as there’s little they can do to reduce their carbon footprint. While manufacturers have introduced more efficient jets in recent years, CO₂ output per passenger mile remains at least quadruple that for trains.

[speedmiester]

Not surprised, my current organisation hold team meetings every year at their HQ in London. This year, this has been shelved and teams are encouraged to use virtual meetings.
Tough times for all fossil fueled vehicles.

[Jeroen]

It is an interesting development. Although it is very early days. Mainly started and making some impact in Sweden. The rest, is more or less incidental as far as I can tell. Apart from Sweden, it does not appear to impact non-business travel (e.g. holiday travel)

The statement that high speed rail is a viable alternative is only partly true.
Whereas it is very easy and convenient to travel by plane within Europe it is not that easy by train. Apart from a few international lines such as Euro star, travelling internationally by train in Europe on business can be a real pain. It can be quite expensive and quite inconvenient.

There is no doubt in my mind that over time this will change, but railroads have been notoriously slow into working effectively cross country borders. (There are numerous different technologies in how the trains run and operate too).

My daughter and son in law travel a lot. They try to avoid planes on short European distances. But it is always costing them money and time.

If I need to be in the center of London, it is still quicker and cheaper for me to fly than to take the Eurostar.

Jeroen

[locusjag]

Interestingly, Jeremy Clarkson said this in a video (was it Top Gear or on another side-gig of his? I am unable to find where exactly!) that after 9/11 when every single aircraft around the world was grounded, the earth's temperature instantly became cooler by 1 degree Celsius.

[srini1785]

Is there a better, equally fast, reliable way to get from point A to B anywhere in the globe other than being on a jet powered plane?.

Somethings cannot be replaced, at least in the near future, so get over it. I am all for climate change protection but i draw the line at trying to replace the jet flight without alternatives. Who's in for using the Hindenburg for international travel again?.

[V.Narayan]

As trains get faster and the city pairs connected get more prolific it will take away some of the traffic currently going by air. For example if Bombay-Hyderabad were a 4-hour run many won't take the flight. But for distances beyond 700 to 1000 kms air travel will still rule simply because of the convenience. However once the major sources of pollution like coal based power plants and ICE cars get sorted out even by 50% it is very likely that the green thrust will come tumbling down on air travel as jet emissions will stick out like a sore thumb. No battery currently even under research has the energy density of jet fuel. But one never knows what the future may hold. In 1934 no one could have predicted that man will walk on the moon in 35 years hence. Similarly in in 1964 no one could have predicted that the internet will swamp the world by 1999.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by srini1785

Is there a better, equally fast, reliable way to get from point A to B anywhere in the globe other than being on a jet powered plane?.

Somethings cannot be replaced, at least in the near future, so get over it. I am all for climate change protection but i draw the line at trying to replace the jet flight without alternatives. Who's in for using the Hindenburg for international travel again?.

This is not about travelling across the globe. This is about travelling within Europe. Relative short distance, typically well under 1000-1500kms. These short flights produce an unbelievable amount of emissions. And yes, there are often alternatives, just not always as convenient and cheap as air travel. But more and more people and some companies too, are taking the less convenient and maybe even more expensive, just to travel a little more climate friendly.

There is also an argument that aviation is unfairly treated compared to all other modes of transportation. Aviation fuel is exempt from tax in Europe. It is part of the reason aviation can be so cheap.

This regime comes from a very old global type of arrangement established after WW2.

But there is nothing stopping the EU to introduce a tax on aviation fuel for inter-EU flights. It is being debated in most national parliaments and in the EU one way or the other.

Jeroen

[Sutripta]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

If I need to be in the center of London, it is still quicker and cheaper for me to fly than to take the Eurostar.

London City Airport or Heathrow?

Regards
Sutripta

[alpha1]

How will they (Europeans) compete with the Chinese and Indians, who, in the quest for economic growth, will embark upon the "more polluting" means since it easier and faster.

[itwasntme]

My go-to portal for any intra-EU or UK travel is seat61.com. Only if the trains don't suit us, do we look at flights. Anything upto 6 hours on a high-speed train (ICE, Eurostar, Thalys, TGV, Frecce, RailJet, AVE, Alfa Pendular, Pendolino, Super Voyager) is cool with us whether we are travelling alone or with our 2 teens. Iwe have done them all with impeccable experiences.

I like the sensation of being able to carry my baggage as I want to, sit like a human being (and not in a fetal position), to walk around, eat something of my choice from the pantry car, enjoy the varied views, step from one EU capital directly into another, and of course save the irritating journey to heavily guarded airports & the scrutiny focused on South Asian folks coupled with an IN passport.

I dislike the time taken if over 6 hours as it leads to unnecessary wastage of valuable time when on a tight schedule. Add fractious teen children and suddenly a squashed Ryanair or Easyjet appeals.

I am overjoyed to hear that the 'sleepers' are coming back. Some years back I did the Paris - Venice Thello sleeper - it was a superb experience except it was 2 hours late to Venice. They are super for saving the overnight cost and only drawback is the inevitable potty situation in the morning :-)

[shortbread]

The UK's public transport infrastructure is archaic which means more people prefer using the likes of Flybe, EasyJet etc. I reside in Scotland and using the train to travel down south makes absolutely no sense.

The diesel powered locomotives are slow, narrow bodied and horribly over-priced compared to the likes of French Thalys or TGV trains. The french locomotives seem generations ahead of the british counterparts. The UK trains run late and more often than not even small weather anomalies can cause disruptions. To top it all the flights are cheaper than the trains in most circumstances.

Even the Indian railways are showing a lot more urge to progress vis a vis UK rail, what an irony!

[landcruiser123]

I'm not for airline shaming. Although I'm all in favour of a high carbon tax for short flights if the cities have good connectivity options. There is not yet any viable solar/electric powered alternative for passenger airlines flights as far as I know. The tested ones are just PoCs with very small seating capacity.

Airlines will remain one of the biggest source of pollution- all we can do is try to get more efficient engines and also reduce emissions from other sources.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Sutripta

London City Airport or Heathrow?

Here is how it works out for me:

The nearest Eurostation for me is Rotterdam. Irrespective if i drive to the nearest railway station near to my home and take the train to Rotterdam, or drive to Rotterdam, find a parking and walk to the station, it will take me approx 90 minutes to get to Rotterdam station to take the Eurostar.

The Eurostar take 4 or 5 hours, depending on the time of travel (still need to change trains at Brussels). So it will take me 5,5 or 6,5 hours to get from home to St Pancras, London.

It takes fifty minutes to drive from home to Amsterdam. Including parking, walking through the terminal, security/immigration I always allow for 30 minutes.

The average gate to gate time flying to any of the London airports is usually between 75-90 minutes tops! Depending where I need to be in London I choose the airport. So at best/worse, it will take my about three hours from home to one of the London airports. So irrespective where you need to be in London, that is likely to be quicker overal.

These days Heathrow has got good connections with the centre of London, and so does city airport of course. Most of my business travel tends to be in the centre (in which case I will fly into City Airport) or Reading (in which case I will fly to Heathrow and take the bus or train to Reading).

In theory the Eurostar gives you the advantages of more available departure times. In practice that is of no concern to me. Because I always plan to arrive late the night before and leave as late as possible the day at which my meetings end. Gives my maximum time at our offices / customer office.

Jeroen

[dragracer567]

The thing about Europe is, while they’ve really mastered high speed rail for relatively shorter distances, for longer distances, planes still rule. I used to study in Ghent, Belgium which is just 35 mins by train from Brussels. Brussels is well connected to Paris, Amsterdam, Cologne and London by a plethora of high rails (TGV, Thalys, ICE and Eurostar) but say I want to travel to Barcelona, Milan or Prague, even for holidays, the only option would be to fly a low cost airline like Ryanair or change in Paris for a train (which can be much more expensive). It should also be noted that for trains (atleast in Europe and the US), it is actually gets more expensive to run than planes over a longer distance since they require more staff and need to maintain an infrastructure on the way, this was discussed in a Wendover video.

The only country that seems to have succeeded in long distance high speed trains seems to be China and that’s with heavy government subsidies! Perhaps we’ll have to deal with the fact that airplanes are a necessary evil and we’ll have to find other ways to reduce emissions (eg. ban cruise ships, more electric cars). If you don’t wanna feel bad about taking a plane, maybe you could pay for ‘carbon offset’ that airlines like KLM offer. Not sure if it works but atleast your conscience is clear!

[sreejith1830]

Originally Posted by srini1785

Is there a better, equally fast, reliable way to get from point A to B anywhere in the globe other than being on a jet powered plane?.

Somethings cannot be replaced, at least in the near future, so get over it. I am all for climate change protection but i draw the line at trying to replace the jet flight without alternatives. Who's in for using the Hindenburg for international travel again?.[/QUOTE

To be honest, the Hindenburg makes more sense than the cramped seats in economy. True it might take thrice the time , but why not have a party on board before we hit the destination ?