: Why Flying Carbon Class To COP26 Is More Expensive Than Taking the Train #WorldNEWS A version of this story first appeared in the Climate is Everything newsletter. If you’d like sign up to receive

Why Flying Carbon Class To COP26 Is More Expensive Than Taking the Train #WorldNEWS
A version of this story first appeared in the Climate is Everything newsletter. If you’d like sign up to receive this free once-a-week email, click here.

In less than two weeks, leaders from 196 countries and around 25,000 delegates, activists and protestors will descend on the Scottish city of Glasgow for the United Nation’s 26th global climate summit, or COP26. It is no small irony that most of them will travel by air, the most carbon intensive form of travel, emitting six times more CO2 per passenger mile than taking the train. The U. K. , of course, is an island, so alternatives are limited. But even for those traveling from elsewhere in Great Britain, where trains are ubiquitous, it’s not an easy choice. A round-trip train ride from London to Glasgow costs nearly three times the price of an EasyJet flight, according to a quick search on the travel cost comparison site Omio. com.
[time-brightcove not-tgx=true]
In key U. S. transit corridors, such as New York to Washington, D. C. , taking Amtrak is only slightly higher than flying. Within Europe, where low-cost airlines dominate the market, the price difference makes it almost unaffordable to take the train from one capital to another. Aviation is responsible for 2. 5% of global CO2 emissions, and even more global warming when other greenhouse gas emissions such as nitrogen oxide are taken into account. Both the E. U. and the U. K. have committed to some of the strongest greenhouse-gas-emission reduction targets in the world, and trains are far better for the climate than flying. “If you’re very concerned with your climate impact, you will go for the more expensive train option, but a lot of people don’t have the means to do this,” says Andrew Murphy, aviation director at sustainable transport organization European Federation for Transport and Environment. “It should not have to be more expensive to make the more sustainable choice, and right now it is. ”
There are a couple of reasons why, says Murphy. First and foremost, aviation is under-priced and undertaxed, in part because the cost of a ticket doesn’t reflect the broader climate and environmental impacts. It also doesn’t include the full cost of operating a flight because of numerous subsidies built into the aviation sector. “There is a reason why Ryanair can sell tickets for 19 Euros. On every step of the way, from designing the plane to running the airport to paying for the fuel, there are subsidies involved. ”
Read more: If the U. S. Spends Big on Climate, the Rest of the World Might Follow
Policy makers could do a lot to help close the price gap: charging a tax on jet fuel, for example, something the European Union doesn’t currently do.

Latest stock market news Twitter alternate of India

10% popularity Flash it Bury this