The plan to replace short flights with train journeys under two and a half hours is gaining attention as a strategy to cut carbon emissions and curb climate change. A study by the Open University of Catalonia examines how such a policy might unfold in practice and what it could mean for transport planning and travel time.
Substitution of flights for train journeys
Researchers from the Open University of Catalonia highlight that shifting passengers from short haul flights to high speed rail could influence investment in fast rail infrastructure and affect total travel time. The study underscores that the measure is not just about emissions; it has broader implications for regional transport networks and the tempo of travel choices.
The plane in flight marks a turning point as policy makers consider alternatives that could redefine how people travel over short distances.
The starting point of the analysis is a government decision to curb short duration flights. The goal is to reduce CO2 emissions and address climate concerns by prioritizing rail options when travel time remains reasonable.
The researchers assess the potential impact in Germany and note that the policy would likely produce a moderate reduction in emissions while also warning about changes to high speed rail investment needs and the effect on travel time for passengers.
International connection considerations
Policy makers must maintain a realistic view of what these measures can achieve because aviation accounts for a relatively small share of total global emissions. The approach should be selective and evaluated case by case, with attention to regional connectivity and the specific needs of peripheral areas.
Understanding potential emission reductions
The study estimates a possible CO2 reduction ranging from 2.7 percent to 22 percent, depending on how strictly short haul flights are substituted with rail travel. The authors caution against blanket thresholds that ignore international links and the varied travel patterns across airports.
They argue that universal short haul flight bans could push travelers into longer routes if rail options are not sufficiently efficient or convenient, which would undermine the climate benefits and passenger convenience.
The researchers examined 87 routes in Germany to model feasible rail substitutes for typical short haul flights and to quantify the related emissions impact and travel time changes.
A passenger train on a modern corridor illustrates how rail services could replace flights on many routes.
Long distance travel and network effects
The analysis also considers how shifting short haul flights might affect long distance travel patterns. Many travelers use short routes as an intermediate step to international connections. Replacing these with rail could alter overall travel behavior and choice sets for international itineraries.
Data suggest that a share of bookings for these types of flights may come from Asia-Pacific markets and are also significant in Latin American and United States markets. The study notes that changing short haul flights would raise rail network use by a modest margin compared to 2019 levels, driven by improvements in speed, capacity, and the integration of modal options along high speed corridors.
Investment in rail infrastructure is a key part of the equation. The projected emissions benefits must be weighed against the environmental footprint of expanding high speed rail, as construction and operation carry their own CO2 costs that need to be accounted for in policy assessments.