Train tickets from London to Scotland are still more expensive than flights, analysis by The Telegraph reveals.
According to the fares, train travel from the capital to Scottish destinations is on average £161 more expensive than flying.
The news comes after years of public debate over the cost of flying between Scotland’s major cities and the capital versus taking the train – which is seen as the greener option.
Rory Boland, travel editor of Who?, warned that high train prices show that cost-conscious travelers may be forced to fly even if their personal preference is to travel by train.
“As travelers become increasingly concerned about the environmental impact of their travels, many face a difficult trade-off between the price of a ticket and the cost to the planet,” said Boland.
A month in advance
The Telegraph looked at a typical trip taken by a single adult, leaving on a Wednesday and returning after seven days, with the trip booked a month in advance.
For one adult passenger from London to Edinburgh, the train is £256.80 more expensive than flying.
Making the same journey to Glasgow resulted in a £53 price difference, with flying being the cheaper option.
It would cost £224.50 to book travel between the capital and Aberdeen at the end of June, while flying to Inverness would be £112.20 cheaper.
Who? in 2021 they found that a return journey from London to Edinburgh was £7 more expensive by train, while trains from Glasgow to London were £26 more expensive than flying, suggesting that the price gap had widened.
Railways have absorbed huge amounts of public subsidies since the Covid-19 pandemic decimated the industry’s business model.
Rail Green Credential
Last year alone the taxpayer pocketed £12bn to keep the railways solvent, with £4.4bn going to passenger train operators and a further £7.5bn to Network Rail.
Earlier this year, the Rail Delivery Group, the trade body for rail companies, launched a marketing campaign to boost rail’s green reputation.
The group said taking the train between London and Edinburgh instead of driving produces 19 times less carbon dioxide than flying, and published similar figures for the 100 most popular business journeys across the country.
Jacqueline Starr, its chief executive, said: “We all have a responsibility to reduce our carbon footprint and the figures we have published reveal that rail is a green option for travel between our towns and cities.”
Mr. Boland, which one? the travel editor added that travelers concerned about both cost and the environment could take steps “to reduce costs”.
“Check out what railcards you might be eligible for as there are a wide range of them available and they can save you up to a third of the price of your ticket.
“Further savings can be made with a split ticket if this is an option on your chosen route.”
Schematics available
Train companies also offer discounts for groups of three or more adults traveling together under the GroupSave banner.
If available, this mode can reduce the price of train tickets by a third, even if they can only be purchased at the box office.
Air travel, which has been associated with increased pollution in recent years, has taken steps to improve its environmental profile.
The new planes are fitted with modern, fuel-efficient engines, while the government has said that at least two per cent of jet fuel supplied in the UK must be made from recycled waste products by 2025, rising to 22 per cent by 2040.
This Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) mandate is part of Rishi Sunak’s net zero goals.