The true costs of flying
Flying is too cheap, reckons Renate Schubert. If fuel tax, CO2 tax and VAT were charged, air tickets would be more expensive and there would be fewer false incentives.
What about nipping to London at the weekend? Or a quick trip to New York for some Christmas shopping? We’re all too familiar with the temptation of cheap flights, but the truth is that flying endangers the global climate. Nonetheless, in most countries it’s so cheap to fly nowadays that people do so more than ever before. Just why is that?
At the climate’s expense
Let’s take Switzerland as an example. Here international flights are exempt from fuel tax, whereas in the automotive sector there’s a tax on petrol. In addition, air travel is exempt from CO2 tax and has no limits on emissions. Finally, air passengers don’t have to pay the value-added tax (VAT) that is applied to all other commercial transactions.
All this ensures that air fares are very low compared with other means of transport. You can, for example, fly from Basel to Berlin for only 31.20 francs, while a regular (undiscounted) second-class train ticket costs 178 francs.
Would surcharges on flying make train travel economically competitive? It would certainly be more ecological, for while the Basel to Berlin flight kicks out some 180 kg of CO2, a train journey over the same stretch only emits around 20 kg.
Calculation for Basel to Berlin
Let's stick to the example of a single, economy class flight from Basel to Berlin (Sch?nefeld) for 31.20 francs. The flight covers a distance of 690 km. Assuming an average fuel consumption of 5.52 litres per person per 100 km, as estimated by the German aviation authority, that gives us a fuel consumption of approx. 38 litres per person. Based on the fuel tax on domestic flights of 0.74 Fr/l, a surcharge of 27.90 francs would then be added to the airfare.
For the CO2 tax, we’ll use the values of the Federal Office for the Environment and the CO2 Act as guidelines and apply 96 Fr/ton CO2. The CO2 emission of the flight in question can be estimated at 0.18 tons (see above), for all types of aircraft and load factors. The CO2 surcharge is therefore 17.20 francs, which gives us a total airfare of 76.30 francs.
Then VAT at 7.7% would have to be applied to this amount – an additional 5.90 francs, bringing the total price to 82.20 francs. And so the “new” airfare would be 2.6 times higher than the original one.1 If, say, a ticket charge were taken into account too, as is the case at some European airports, the factor would be even greater. So depending on the initial price, we could expect to pay a total of 2 to 7 times the current ticket price – and that’s a drastic increase!
?If we want to reduce flying, surcharges on air fares are certainly a step in the right direction.?Renate Schubert
Even then, this new fare is still only half as much as the price of a regular (undiscounted) train ticket. The price discrepancy has something to do with the differences in infrastructure costs between the two systems: the construction and maintenance of rail networks have a major impact on the price of train travel. However, market factors also appear to be important. While air travel is a highly competitive market, which is reflected in low prices for consumers, train travel is often more monopolistic, and ticket prices are correspondingly high.
Setting price signals
If we want to reduce flying, or at least prevent it from increasing, surcharges on air fares are certainly a step in the right direction. However, only recently the Environment Commission of the National Council spoke out against a CO2 levy on airline tickets.
We can’t rely on the effectiveness of price signals alone; I’m convinced we also have to adopt a new approach to air travel. Do we really need to go to New York for Christmas shopping just because it’s so cheap? Anything that’s conducive to making consumers think long-term will help here.
Further information
1 See also this external page broadcast from SRF Kassensturz (in German).