Highlights Short-haul flights are the least efficient but the easiest replaceable by rail. Replacing short-haul flights with existing non-high-speed rail (NHSR) was studied. Carbon dioxide emissions and door-to-door travel time were taken into account. Substituting short-haul flights with NHSR could reduce emissions by 95% NHSR can compete with air travel times on routes up to 400 km.
Abstract Replacing short-haul flights with high-speed rail (HSR) has been widely discussed as one solution to mitigate the climate change impacts of aviation. However, although HSR can provide travel times similar to those provided by short-haul flights, and at lower emission levels, it also requires considerable investments in time and infrastructure to build. Instead, this study considers the feasibility of replacing short-haul flights with existing non-high-speed rail (NHSR). Our study is based in Finland, a country that has an extensive route network of short-haul flights but does not possess any HSR. We compared all 16 city pairs for which short-haul flights are offered with existing NHSR based on the total carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (CO2-eq) and real travel times from door-to-door. Two scenarios were developed based on the results, which suggest replacing all short-haul flights with NHSR in Finland. This would result in a 95% emissions reduction. In terms of travel times, NHSR could remain competitive against air travel on distances up to 400 km.
The emissions reduction potential of substituting short-haul flights with non-high-speed rail (NHSR): The case of Finland
2020-07-03
11 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
Overcrowded skies and airports: what are the prospects for rail compared with short-haul flights?
British Library Conference Proceedings | 2001
|VERY SHORT HAUL FLIGHTS, AN ENVIRONMENTAL COMPARISON WITH SURFACE TRANSPORT
British Library Conference Proceedings | 2007
|