Passengers snub ‘expensive’ Eurostar train for plane
– Many travellers are opting to take a plane, rather than train between London and Paris, despite climate concerns and the Eurostar rail service connecting the two capitals in only two hours.
“It’s ridiculous to take the plane for such a distance,” said Sabia Mokeddem, a French national who has lived in London for more than five years.
Mokeddem says she is forced to fly, however, because of Eurostar’s “prohibitive” ticket prices for the 492km high-speed link through the Channel Tunnel.
“I think of all the carbon that I’m emitting for such a short flight... But I can’t afford the train,” the 27-year-old bank worker said.
She would happily pay a little more to let the train take the strain “because it’s better for the planet” and because she prefers going by rail.
But the difference in price is too great when she can find flights that go over rather than under the Channel for as little as €40 (about R820).
Lucy Kelly, a 30-year-old from Ireland who lives in Paris and works in brand management, takes the train to London only when she can reserve a seat well in advance.
“If I’m organised enough I’ll book the Eurostar,” she said. “Then you can find a return for €110, which is fine, even if it’s still more expensive than the plane.
“If I go last-minute, prices can be crazy.” A return ticket often exceeds €350.
Kelly said she took the plane to London in November.
“It was definitely cheaper – a quarter of the price of getting on the train,” she said.
Getting to the airport was a headache, but said she would still probably do it again.
“The train should be subsidised. People should be encouraged to take the train, not the plane,” she said.
When asked, Eurostar declined to provide the price of an average ticket or indicate whether it had increased in recent years, as many travellers suspect.
The subsidiary of French rail operator SNCF says it cannot compare train and air fares, as flying incurs costs, such as getting to the airport and for luggage.
Despite evidence of passengers choosing to fly for cost reasons, Eurostar said about seven million people still used its service between London and Paris last year.
In comparison, nearly two million flew in the 12 months to October last year, according to aviation sector analysts Cirium. Both figures are similar to pre-pandemic levels.
Eurostar commercial director Francois le Doze said people “buy Eurostar first” and trains fill up quicker than planes, which may account for the faster increase in prices.
He also said Parisians and Londoners had greater purchasing power, compared with people in other capitals across the continent, which means “these journeys are priced at the amount people are willing to pay”.
“Take-up rates are higher than ever,” he insisted.
The company had said it wants to increase passenger numbers, which could help cut prices, but it has become more difficult since Britain’s departure from the European Union, with Brexit causing a “bottleneck” at the border.
Operating costs for running stations, infrastructure, rail lines, energy, personnel and financing are also “very high”, Le Doze added.
Environmental campaign group Greenpeace is active on the issue of high rail prices compared with aviation. “Government have created an uneven regulatory playing field that benefits the most polluting modes of transport,” it said.
“We should tax air travel at a level that reflects the damage it does to the climate.”
Greenpeace notes airlines do not pay tax on aviation fuel.
According to the group, planes emit five times more greenhouse gases than trains. Eurostar estimates there are 90% less CO2 emissions on the train. –