wvwxvvafxn1hphu7wsvrfuv0b1t1l9wjcbgnzucspeq-5539201-1384289-jpg

https://reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/motfwy/france_to_ban_short_flights_to_reduce_emissions/
EaglesPDX
https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/motfwy/france_to_ban_short_flights_to_reduce_emissions/


Domestic flights of under 2.5 hours are to be banned requiring people to use France’s high speed electric rail.

“French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights | Reuters

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-france-flights/french-lawmakers-approve-a-ban-on-short-domestic-flights-idUSKBN2BY0AO?il=0

“PARIS (Reuters) – French lawmakers voted late on Saturday to abolish domestic flights on routes than can be covered by train in under two-and-a-half hours, as the government seeks to lower carbon emissions even as the air travel industry reels from the global pandemic. The measure is part of a broader climate bill that aims to cut French carbon emissions by 40% in 2030 from 1990 levels, though activists accuse President Emmanuel Macron of watering down earlier promises in the draft legislation.”



View Reddit by EaglesPDXView Source

Read it Too  Buying Guide - Average Car Guy

By admin

27 thoughts on “France to ban short flights to reduce emissions.”
  1. Correction: It’s not the flights that have to be under 2.5 hours, but the equivalent railroad trips.

  2. It helps that France has TGV stations at major airports. Connecting to, say, Lyon or Marseille from CDG is a breeze.

  3. I would have added a provision that shorter flights are fine if their emissions don’t exceed those of the alternatives. That would leave the door open for zero emission flights.

  4. They should really upgrade their rail network and add more connections that aren’t via Paris. If you want to go from Lyon to Bordeaux (two of the major cities in France) you have to go all the way up to Paris and back down to Bordeaux. That can take almost 8 hours. No wonder people prefer to fly

  5. I don’t think this is the best way to minimize the negative externality. I would think a more logical way would be a carbon tax of sorts. Just heavily tax these fights to fund the carbon offset. Then let the market do what it does best.

  6. This is the dumbest legislation I’ve read in a while. It’s both cheaper and arguably more efficient to take a plane on many of these flights. Unless you think multiple transfers that double your trip time are a good idea to force everyone to do while also costing them more money.

  7. I feel the emissions concerns, especially for shorter flights like those the French government is trying to ban, can be addressed with FCEV planes running on green hydrogen.

    I [recently posted](https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/mmygep/the_hydrogen_revolution_in_the_skies/) about a company making headway on that front, but (most?) folks on this sub don’t seem to care about this topic, despite that fact that [aviation accounts for 3.5% of global warming](https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation).

    r/eplanes only has 6 members. (*Edit: u/requiem_mn points out that [r/electricaircraft](https://www.reddit.com/r/electricaircraft/) has about 500 members.)

    Frankly I’m baffled as to why there doesn’t seem to be any interest at all in FCEV planes in the Reddit community.

  8. I like it in principle. In Europe this should not be too much of an inconvenience since they have both a compact geography and what is reported to be a good train system.

    I don’t know why Macron would bother. France is about 600 miles north to south, and east to west. 400 MPH is about average for commuter flights so 2.5 hours of flight time puts all domestic flights off limits.

    I live in Toronto, our train service is typical for N. America, it sucks. What we do is have is a local commuter airline that flies where I like to go: Ottawa and Montreal. Convenient, inexpensive, and none of this show up 3 days before your flight crap. Unfortunately it is bad for the environment.

    Logically it should be possible to electrify aviation by range. Shoot for 250 miles* for commuter flights as an initial target then increase the range by 100 mile increments over time.

    I was looking at Porter’s service area with the idea of taking a bunch of off peak 3 day mini holidays. Being retired, my long weekends don’t need to have any relationship with the regular version, this idea sounds way better if I can book electric flights.

    The bottom line is that government should heavily subsidize the industry as it gets to the first 250 mile range, subsidize less heavily for each 100 mile increment.

    *That covers the all important NYC to DC corridor.

  9. Vive la France! Another American wishing we had a high-speed rail network in our country. I have been fortunate to travel in high-speed rail in Europe and find it very time efficient. And those train stations are usually located in the the city centers and not, like airports, another hour of travel outside the city.

  10. Shouldn’t they start by banning government and politicians from flying, see how that works first? Maybe ban pleasure boating, and military flights first? It’s easy to ban OTHERS, when you exempt your self

  11. A carbon/particulate matter tax would allow the market to figure out the best solution. Bans aren’t necessary and likely hurt innovation.

  12. I have a lot of hope for the 1000 miles aptera. It could replace a lot of flights for some people.

  13. This should’ve been a carbon tax. Sometimes travel time is critical and banning flights kills that. Short flights should be allowed but taxed according to the damage they cause.

  14. I bet the airlines will suddenly have 2.6 hour flights that include some sight seeing.

  15. If the train connection is both more convenient and fast people will move to trains, even if the price matches/is a little higher. Ryanair, in Italy, stopped flying from Bergamo (what they call Milan Airport) to Rome Fiumicino few years ago because we have TWO major competing high speed rail companies that offered the same service for less time, more convenience and often same money. Nobody likes to go through airport security multiple times a week if that can be avoided with trains.

  16. Bold move. But France can do it, they have a good high speed rail network to begin with.

    [According](https://i.imgur.com/RXoACV5.png) to Google Maps, in Germany you need ~8h 30min for a cross country trip by car from Hamburg to Munich, by train ~6h, by airplane 1h 15min. Not taking into account getting to and away from the airport/train station of course.

  17. Be interesting to see the number of people who took those short domestic flights compared to current capacity of the rail network.

  18. Yea no shit this was coming, thanks eco commies / eco-terrorits scum. Useful idiots is the correct term though . Look up what happened to them…

  19. Horse shit.. You might not like this in this EV group, but governments are incrementally taking away your freedoms. Wake the fuck up people.

Comments are closed.