The UK’s Guardian is all over a plan to develop a high-speed rail network in Britain specifically to replace short-haul air service both within Britain and to European destinations. The plan, announced by Transport Secretary Lord Adonis, could potentially add new aviation taxes to pay for it.

It has long been known that European policies favor rail over air, what with the heavy subsidization of the rail industry while forcing airlines and passengers to pay their own way. For their part, airlines are calling the plan “insane,” suggesting Adonis has little understanding of how these things work.

“For reasons of carbon reduction and wider environmental benefits, it is manifestly in the public interest that we systematically replace short-haul aviation with high-speed rail,” said the transport secretary in announcing his plan that would ostensibly take 46 million domestic airline passengers and put them on trains. "I would like to see short-haul aviation – not just domestic aviation, but short-haul aviation – progressively replaced by rail, including high-speed rail. If we want to see [this] progressive replacement … then we have got to have a high-speed rail system that links our major conurbations and makes them far more accessible to Europe, too."

But flights are facing stiff opposition from environment groups which are calling for heavier taxation on already-overburdened passengers which now pay £2 billion per year in aviation taxes with an additional £1 to be added to the current £10 charge on short-haul flight in November. The UK pledged to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050 with transport the second largest contributor at 21%. Despite the fact that air travel is only a tiny fraction of that contribution at 1.6%, lawmakers are considering higher taxes to pay for he rail network.

Adonis formed High Speed Two, a new company designed to map out the first stage and expects to submit plans by December. Routes would include London to Glasgow and London-Edinburgh as well as lines to London-South Wales, London-Cornwall. London-Birmingham and London-Sheffield have also been mentioned.

The announcement drew immediate criticism which pointed out that rail is not more sustainable than air, according to studies.

Critics also suggested the rail network would derail efforts for a third runway at Heathrow, but Adonis said that project would continue because of the expected growth in passengers there. "If you look at projections for long-haul air demand the third runway just on long- haul demand alone is justified," he said. According to government estimates, air passenger numbers will nearly double to 465 million a year by 2030, according to the Guardian.

The British Air Transport Association pointed out the obvious concerning the proposed 250-mile-per-hour network – while such a network would be welcome, it would never replace air transport, especially for those connecting at hubs for long-haul trips. BATA told the Guardian, "There are high-speed networks in France, Germany and Japan but they still have domestic air routes between their major cities. It does not have to be a question of one or the other."

“It is insane,” said Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary. “The only link you have is one highly priced tunnel. People are not going to travel to the UK regions including the Lake District and Cornwall on a [Eurostar] train that only stops at Kent and London St Pancras. On [return] domestic flights from Glasgow to London passengers are paying £20 in taxes while they continue to subsidize the s--- out of the railways. Substituting one form of transport that is heavily taxed for a form of transport that is heavily subsidized is not the answer.”

The International Air Transport Association went even further noting that Britain has taken decades to plan the Heathrow runway project would probably take longer for such a huge project. Even so, the high-speed rail plan enjoys cross party support while a third runway at Heathrow does not. In addition unions favor the proposal with one issuing a report noting a fifth of all spokes going into Heathrow are already served by train. IATA cited a University of California at Berkeley study calculating that emissions from train travel could more than double from building and maintaining vehicles and infrastructure making GHGs far higher than anticipated.

“When building 3km of runway takes decades, the challenges of criss-crossing the country with corridors of high-speed rail infrastructure will be enormous,” an IATA spokesperson said. “And, for what gain? Putting aside the astronomical costs and timescales of such a project, has the secretary thought about the total carbon lifecycle impact of building so much rail infrastructure? Exactly how many channel tunnels will be built?”

Not even mentioned, however, is the fact that modernization and harmonization of air traffic control networks – also a multi-billion effort – so far remains unrealized despite decades of efforts and despite the reduction in aviation GHGs such projects promise. Still the rail program faces opposition from environmental groups such as the Campaign to Protect Rural England.

British Airways, which supports high-speed rail to serve Heathrow from throughout Britian, cited the impracticability of replacing flights to Rome, Madrid and Prague. “High-speed rail cannot be a complete substitute for flying,” the airline told the Guardian. “There are relatively few destinations in continental Europe to which it would be practical to travel and return by rail in a day. Therefore flying will always remain the preferred form of transport for millions of travelers.”

The transport leader noted the explosion of high-speed rail networks around the world indicating that such projects grow cheaper with every mile of rail put down. Aviation Today’s Daily Brief outlined the impact of high-speed rail on domestic air links earlier this year. Related Story

There is no question that high-speed rail is a threat to short-haul air services, especially for regional carriers and for low-cost carriers such as easyJet, Ryanair and Flybe as well as British Airways own BA Connect services. Low-cost carriers do not have the balance of long-haul networks and must compete against the convenience of city center rail stations. Still their fares are often far less than rail. Indeed, such carriers have burgeoned everywhere in Europe with the singular exception of France, according to Airscoop which noted the mature railway infrastructure in that country which has pioneered the heavily subsidized, high-speed, 300-kilometer-per-hour rail concept in Europe.

The Guardian, this morning, ran a story quoting SNCF CEO Guillaume Pepy saying high-speed rail will divert millions of passengers if an ultra-fast network is build. Unlike its aviation counterparts, France’s TGV posed a 2008 profit of €798m with an 18.5% margin, compared to a margin of 3% for UK rail operators. Pepy pointed to the London-Paris and London-Brussels markets, which now carry 80% of the traffic. Speaking at a London conference this week, Pepy said: "Three hours' travel time by train means a share between 66% and 70% of the air and rail market."

Cutting the travel time to three hours is the key in Europe, according to analysts who spoke to the DT. They indicated Virgin Train’s 4.5 hour service London-Glasgow service would be a prime candidate for successful high-speed rail service. Airlines hold 80% of that market today because of their faster service.

He noted taxpayers would pay a huge bill citing the fact state and regional governments in France currently pay nearly three quarters of the cost of the new line running from Paris to Alsace which is estimated at €5.1bn. "They want it, they pay for it," said Pepy.

Adonis is tapping the expertise of both French and Japanese experts for his plan but is going beyond that to other regions which have developed high-speed rail. Europe is the most advanced, according to UIC, a 199-member organization representing the railway sector. Europe has 5598 kilomters built, 3474 under construction and another 8501 planned while Asia has 3959 kilometers built, 4821 under construction and 7857 planned. A list of countries with high-speed rail is available here.

COMMENT: Can trains really replace planes?