A new study published today (September 29) on the air-rail debate challenges the “clear political bias” towards trains.
The study, entitled Air and Rail: Setting the Record Straight – environment, investment, mobility and political bias, says its findings raise doubts as to whether that stance is justified.
The report by the European Regions Airline Association (ERA) reveals “massive rail subsidies 125 times higher than State aid granted to air transport.”
It claims there is “no evidence that rail is always “greener” or economically beneficial as a mode of transport for Europe.”
It also says the findings shed “serious doubt on the evidence used to justify policies which attempt to shift passengers from air to rail.”
ERA said it report was based on “extensive and independent research.”
Among other findings of the report are:
- the average investment cost of a new runway builds just 30km of HSR track
- the turnover of the air transport market in the EU is almost twice that of railways
- EU airports and airlines offer 150,000 city pairs versus 100 from HSR
- expanding the HSR network to link all major city pairs currently connected by at least 10 flights/day would require a 600% increase in the HSR network and result in less than 5% drop in flights demand by 2030
- independent data show that, when taking the full life-cycle into account, rail has consistently higher emissions than air for CO, NOx, VOC and PM10
- Investment would be better made in improving intermodality between the two modes.
Mike Ambrose, ERA’s director general, said: "For too long, politicians have favoured rail over air as a solution to many of the problems facing intra-European transport including congestion, environmental impact and investment programmes.
“That high speed rail is seen by key European decision-makers as a preferred alternative to air transport is more a result of doctrine than rational and transparent analyses.”
Ambrose said that both modes offered to transport within Europe “but the case for rail as the ‘preferred’ mode by policy-makers and transport planners can no longer be justified.”
He added: "I hope that this study will lead to a more constructive and balanced debate on the future of air and rail in Europe, and provide policy-makers with the evidence they need to promote air transport as an equal (and in some cases better) means of delivering enhanced future mobility for European citizens."