Why is train travel so expensive? A European perspective. 

by | Jun 13, 2024 | Blog

The high cost of train travel gives gas guzzling flights an unfair advantage. 

Rail is the most electrified mode of transport in Europe and accounts for less than 1% of EU transport emissions. It’s nearly five times less emissions-intensive than air travel (on average), which has contributed to an estimated 4% of global warming worldwide. For the more than 60% of Europeans who support a ban on short-distance flights, rail transport is the obvious transport choice.

But while three in four Europeans are willing to pay a premium for ‘sustainable products’, choosing the train costs travellers on average double the price of flying internationally in Europe. For some routes, it’s 30 times more.

So why are trains so expensive? Or, rather, how are flights so cheap?

Budget airlines infamously use an array of loopholes to squash costs, such as flying into cheaper airports, headquartering in countries with low corporate tax, and minimising the number of staff per flight.[1] And the entire EU aviation industry — budget and luxury airlines included — benefits from billions in government support each year, enabling artificially low prices industry-wide.

In 2022, EU governments lost out on an estimated €34 billion in tax exemptions to the industry. Airlines pay reduced or no flight ticket tax or VAT, and zero tax on kerosene (a fossil fuel used to power planes), despite contributing to nearly 4% of EU CO2 emissions. Governments are also financing other schemes that benefit airlines — for example, the Dutch government pays farmers near Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport €853 per hectare each year to plough their land right after harvest, to avoid birds searching for food from colliding with planes. Meanwhile, EU railways and train operators pay energy taxes, VAT and high rail tolls in most countries.

Reducing the aviation tax gap will help train ticket prices compete. But the railway industry faces other challenges too.

Europe’s cross-border train system is disjointed. A lack of technical standardisation means countries use different trains, tracks and signalling systems, making crossing borders by train a logistical nightmare. Train scheduling and ticketing systems also vary across countries, making it complicated for passengers to book international train trips the way they would flights.

Railways are operated by national companies which make the vast majority of their profits via domestic travel, so there is little incentive to invest in fixing the cross-border conundrum. National operators understandably buy trains best suited to their country’s railroads, but this forces those travelling internationally to pay more and often switch trains at the border. The result of all this is an ‘ineffective patchwork of national lines,’ according to the executive director of the European Railway Agency.

Despite Europe continuing to fund carbon-intensive aviation, rail is starting to get more attention.

In 2023 the EU announced €6.2 billion in grants for more sustainable and efficient transport infrastructure initiatives, including cross-border rail projects. It has also set targets to double highspeed rail traffic by 2030 and triple it by 2050 (compared to 2015), as part of the EU Green Deal’s aim to cut transport-related emissions by 90% by 2050.

At a national level, France is leading the charge with concrete action. In 2023, it banned flights shorter than 2.5 hoursand announced its plan to finance €100 million of railway investment by increasing flight ticket tax.

Europe’s trains are on the right track. But we need to see more aggressive action from governments — taking inspiration from France — to make train travel the obvious choice from both an environmental and cost perspective.

[1] This Greenpeace report shares a fuller list of budget airlines’ shortcuts.

The dirty environmental paw print of pets

by | Aug 31, 2023 | Blog

People want the best for their pets, but the environmental impact of feeding them is massive and demand for more pets is growing. The world’s more than half a billion domesticated animals (mostly cats and dogs) consume up to a fifth of the world’s meat and fish produced — meat production being a major perpetrator of rising greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

The result? Global pet food production emits the equivalent of more than 106 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year — more than Mozambique, a country of 32 million people. Packaging waste is another major issue. In the US, 99% of the 300 million lbs of plastic pet food packaging ends up in landfill every year. 

The problem will worsen over the next five years, with the pet food industry projected to grow by 70% and reach USD 220 billion in market value by 2028. Millennials are driving this furry baby boom — having children later in life, more disposable income and the flexibility to work from home. Pet culture has also expanded in high-population, emerging markets like China, Brazil and Mexico, where increased disposable income means more pets. Feeding more cats and dogs translates into more GHGs, less fresh water and more plastic waste.

But pets are good for us in many ways. They provide immense social (and some environmental) benefits to society. Pets reduce loneliness, boost mental health and provide a sense of purpose — particularly for children and the elderly. Dog owners are four times more likely than non pet owners to reach the recommended level of daily physical activity and spend more time in nature, which has been linked to pro-environmental behaviours like better recycling habits and reduced energy use.

Keeping our pets (and ourselves) healthy doesn’t have to be such a burden to the planet. Some companies are tackling the packaging waste issue. Mars Petcare trialled refillable pet food dispensers with supermarket chain Carrefour in 2022 and has committed to making its packaging 100% recyclable, reusable or compostable by 2025. Several dog food companies use plant protein instead of meat to cut emissions — Omni’s plant protein reduces emissions by 85%, while maintaining 30% protein by weight (the high end of what’s recommended for dogs). Others, like pet food tech company Petgood replace animal protein with insect protein to cut 94% of GHG emissions and save 80% of water per gram of protein produced. Pets may not notice the difference. The challenge will be convincing owners to make the switch, particularly if they have to pay a premium.