this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
75 points (100.0% liked)

Solarpunk Travel

16 readers
1 users here now

Community for those focused on sustainable travel. Our society's current levels of energy intensive and frequent travel are not compatible with life on a finite planet. We advocate for long-term slow travel to see the world, and low energy local travel to deeply experience your community. Green washing free zone.

related to sustainable travel:

related to travel generally:

The communities listed above are decentralized. Centralized instances are omitted as they go against the fedi purpose and it’s better to cultivate digital rights in the free world. That means instances that have a disproportionately large population or are centralized on Cloudflare are not listed.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
bonkerfield@slrpnk.net
activistPnk@slrpnk.net
75
Why are flights cheaper than trains in Europe? (www.euronews.com)
submitted 1 year ago by MrMakabar@slrpnk.net to c/solarpunktravel@slrpnk.net
24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 11 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

France will increase taxes on flights to invest more in its railways, the country’s Transport Minister Clément Beaune announced this week.

Last month Greenpeace released an analysis showing that taking a train is on average double the cost of flying.

The report compared the costs of flight and train tickets on 112 routes in Europe, including 94 cross-border connections.

Dardenne counters that the climate crisis is a much bigger threat to tourism and points to the example of wildfires and heatwaves in Europe this summer that have been disrupting holidays on the continent.

The European Commission has been working on an upcoming ‘Regulation on Multimodal Digital Mobility Services’ to improve the process of booking tickets across rail, bus and air.

It says this could be funded by windfall profit taxes, the phase-out of airline subsidies, and a fair taxation system based on CO2 emissions.

I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] beeng@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Tax subsidies on avation gas? Where as none on trains (subsidies)

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

no taxes on aviation fuel and no VAT on flights. Both apply for trains.

[–] starlinguk@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

So it's the fault of the governments? What a surprise. /S

[–] Jajcus@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why guessing, when the answer is in the article?

[–] Alcor@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 year ago

Suggesting that someone read the article in a comment section under said article…blasphemy!

[–] Driftking@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Because trains require far more infrastructure

[–] yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Air traffic uses far more infrastructure: airports are gigantic compared to the throughput they have. LAX has 30 M passengers per year. Berlin main station has 50 M long distance and 85 M public transport passengers per year.

„But you need rails and shit for trains!“. Yeah, and you know what, trains use way less fuel because of that… Now guess what is exempted from tax? Kerosene.

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/800/cpsprodpb/16D76/production/_108485539_optimised-travel_carbon-nc.png

And airports still need train infrastructure or roads to be able to access them, while a train drops you right in the city.

Edit: had a look at „driftking‘s“ posting history, of course it’s just a right wing troll who’s looking forward to „getting to that sweet oil under Antarctica once the ice is gone“, lol.

[–] zoe@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

so many unwrinkled brains around. i gave up on advocating for this: most of the time i am just met with deaf ears. 13€ from Netherlands to Italy: thats how facking subsidized that shit is

[–] Driftking@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You cant just go and compare europe and america to the whole world. Have you ever seen South East Asian train networks? I know the article is related to the former but I think having a global perspective on this is way more important. Many places need to be accessible by plane. Global travel is not practical by train

[–] yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Your point was that air travel uses less infrastructure.

And of course I can point to a high throughput airport and to a high throughput train station and conclude that the airport is using way more infrastructure in comparison.

Also nobody asked for „global travel“ by train.

And what about the SE Asian train network? Do you mean China, lol? Why must „many places“ be accessible by ~~train~~ edit: plane? This is not an argument.

[–] Driftking@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And your point still does not support that trains are more expensive on long disances without being subsidised by tax money. Short distance train travel is not the problem. We need long distance air travel. Who do you think occupies the economy seats. Its not the fat cats

China, japan etc

[–] yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The question was: „Why are planes cheaper than trains in Europe?“

Your answer was: „because infra“.

I showed you this is wrong because you underestimate the infra needs of air traffic and also neglect the long term savings.

Because that’s why you install infra: it saves money in the long run.

Nobody – except you – is talking about „global air traffic“. Nobody.

So, if you want to burn straw men apply for a job as a fire fighter, and if you want to be a professional goal post mover, IDK, call FIFA maybe?

But stop pulling out „arguments“ out of your ass. Thank you.

[–] Driftking@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't get so worked up

[–] yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

fuck off, troll.

[–] starlinguk@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

He sea lioned you.

[–] zoe@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

true point: planes should be used only for intercontinental travel: for exemple dedicate 2-3 airport hubs in all europe, and the rest of it should only be accessed by train. look up european sky on flightradar: it is always rush hour up there, and probably not so many intercontinental flights. Air travel should also be limited cross country only in Asia's case: and the number of flight hubs should be reduced to a minimum and leave the rest of the country to be accessed through train

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 year ago

They would be cheaper, if flights had to pay VAT and taxes on fuel. The price difference is not that crazy.

[–] Neon@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

maybe don't use a Picture of the SBB, probably the best Train Operator on the entire Continent, for this Article?

anyways, i just compared SBB Zürich -> Généve: 48.- / 44.20 CHF. not even comparing the zone subscriptions you can use to save money if you frequent a route.
Airplane Zürich -> Généve: min. 94.- CHF

for any other country it probably holds up though

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you go international that stops pretty quickly thou. Berlin - Zürich is something 226€. A flight costs 209€. The issue is no kerosine tax and no VAT. German VAT on that alone would raise costs to 249€.

[–] XTornado@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why was the vat removed for flights?

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago

For international flights, but in Europe that is nearly all of them. The idea in general with vat is that is paid for every consumption within the country. However it being international, it is no longer domestic so it does not apply. For trains it ends up being domestic travel in one country and then the other, so vat applies.

[–] thisfro@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago

You can't use zone subscriptions on most IC connections and 48.- is also only with a half-fare subscription. So basically equal price.

[–] Nortempeh@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Without proper info and data we are swimming in opinions and anecdotes and not able to vote for something rational.

Tax exemptions for aviation is a problem. A bigger problem yet is that the environmental costs are not charged to the user (in both aviation or trains).

But even considering that, I suspect the train tickets would still be to expensive, relative to aviation. And that is, in my opinion, due to the inherent lack of competition in trains and relatively easy to implement competition in aviation. Train and train infrastructure companies need more accountability

big vehicles in dedicated tracks should result in very inexpensive tickets, why aren't they?