• poVoq@slrpnk.netM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    From a fuel efficiency point of view, trains are still way more efficient, and a dense coverage of airports is also extremely expensive to maintain.

    But it is also a bit unfair to compare prices of low cost airlines that use subsidized airports and tax exempted fuel to mostly state owned rail companies. A fairer comparison would be Lufthansa prices or vise versa Flixtrain.

    • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Trains are more fuel efficient, but there is a lot more which goes into the cost of these transport modes than fuel.

      I’m comparing these modes of transport because they both receive subsidies, including tax exemptions for avgas. The EU subsidises air travel (in many ways) to the tune of around €30–40 billion annually depending on what you include and what you consider to be a “subsidy.” Using similar criteria, rail is subsidised to the tune of €40–75 billion per year. So rail gets a lot more investment despite it serving 16% fewer travel kilometers per year in the EU than air travel.