<DrumBeat: December 19, 2006The Oil DrumDrumBeat: December 20, 2006>
<Peak Oil at the Movies: Oil Crash & Crude ImpactThe Oil Drum: EuropeA Primer on Reserve Growth - part 1 of 3>

130 comments on Aviation and Oil Depletion

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

andytk on December 19, 2006 - 4:29am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top

"A lot of short haul point to point flying could be pushed onto alternative transport systems that are better able to switch to cleaner fuels"

Interesting comment.

Currently in the UK short haul airlines are Massacring  the railways.

The reason, amongst other things, is cost.

I can fly between Bristol and Glasgow (400 miles apart) for about £40 return.  Flight time 1 hour.  Door to door (including driving to airport, waiting in departure lounge, flying, landing, luggage collection, and driving to parents house) takes about 3 hours

The train will cost at least £90 return (if I book in advance) and takes 7 hours northbound and 15 hours southbound.

The airlines get almost no internal subsidy whilst the trains are awarded generous subsidy through Network Rail to upgrade large sections of the railway network.

And despite this aircraft are cheaper.

I have my suspicions that even with a doubling of fuel prices to cover the cost of pure CO2 neutral BTL fuels internal domesestic flights will still be cheaper and more pleasant than taking the train.  After all if fuel is 30% of operating cost then on my £40 ticket (approx only £30 goes to the airline) then doubling 1/3 of that gives you a airline price of £40 + £10 tax = £50 airline ticket price.

Still cheaper and better than the trains.

Andy

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Chris Vernon on December 19, 2006 - 4:42am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
The airlines get almost no internal subsidy whilst the trains are awarded generous subsidy through Network Rail to upgrade large sections of the railway network.
The domestic airline business gets a larger subsidy than the rail network through duty free fuel.  I forget the exact numbers but the missing ~50p per litre tax on fuel amounts of a subsidy of some £7bn a year or just a little more than the rail network's subsidy.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlanfromBigEasy on December 19, 2006 - 5:52am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Do the UK railroads pay duty on their fuel (on the non-electrified sections) and on their electricity on the electrified sections ?

I am not sure that the absence of a tax is a subsidy per se.

Alan

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
sunfixer on December 19, 2006 - 4:19pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
"Do the UK railroads pay duty on their fuel (on the non-electrified sections) and on their electricity on the electrified sections ?"

There is a small excise duty payable on railway gasoil, similar to that levied on home heating oil.  It is nowhere near the duty levied on road vehicle fuel in the UK, but the railways pay directly for their right of way, whereas road vehicles do not.

sf

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JustZisGuy on December 19, 2006 - 7:03pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
One also has to look at the cost of building, operating and maintaining airports (including the cost of 1000s of acres of land), navaids, ATC services, etc.  I don't know the situation in the U.K. and don't have the time to research it at the moment.

I know that in Canada the cost of ATC services alone was over $400 million per year about 15 years ago.  That's a pretty damn hefty direct government subsidy - $13 for every man, woman and child in Canada, just for ATC, whether they set foot on a plane or not.  The service is now run by NAV Canada, a "non-share capital, private corporation" which recovers costs from aircraft operators.  i.e. the government subsidy is now gone.  The cost of flying has, not surprisingly, increased substantially.  Canadian registered aircraft in the range 2 to 3 metric tonne maximum takeoff weight (4400-6600 pounds) pay $236/year.  The daily charge for a DHC-8-400 (as an example, as it cropped up above) is $2441.

http://navcanada.ca/ContentDefinitionFiles/Services/ChargesAndAdmin/guidetocharges/Customer_Guide_Ne w_en.pdf

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
andytk on December 20, 2006 - 4:15am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I believe in the UK the airlines pay a surcharge to the airport.   I believe UK airports are profit making, tax paying businesses.  As far as I know they are not part of any government organisation and do not recieve direct subsidy other than any local tax breaks they can negotiate with local authorities.  

Pretty much the same as any other large industry.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Luis de Sousa on December 19, 2006 - 5:22am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Since 2002 the world business of air travel taken as a hole has been loosing money. And that with 0.5 €/liter for jet fuel today.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
ashaddock on December 19, 2006 - 12:19pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
"Currently in the UK short haul airlines are Massacring  the railways."

I have read that the British railways are carrying more passengers than they have carried in decades, and that problems include lack of capacity and overcrowding.

I recently took the train from London to Exeter and found it fast, comfortable and very reasonable - with advance purchased tickets.  Twenty Five Pounds or $50 - first class - for a trip of about 200 miles, in less than three hours.  I don't see how airlines can "massacre" the railways on medium distance trips like that.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
andytk on December 19, 2006 - 5:54pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
In the UK East-West routes are typically served by rail.

Its the longer range North-South routes, especially the London-Edinburgh, London-Aberdeen, London-Manchester routes that the train companies are suffering.

Andy

Comments can no longer be added to this story.