Sustainable Sleepers: Saying “No” to Flying

Travelling overseas has become an integral part of time off work and studies - at least in wealthy nations. Few of my classmates or work colleagues remain in Sweden throughout the year, with most heading to greener pastures (or, more accurately, warmer beaches) in Southern Europe, South East Asia, the Americas or Africa for their holiday fix. Whether financed through their own labour or parents’ money, as is more common with my university friends, holiday getaways are an annual occasion, at the very least. It is increasingly common for people to travel overseas three or four times a year, and given the international nature of my Bachelor’s programme, some classmates travel abroad to meet family or friends multiple times a month.

Travelling is a valuable experience which I am fortunate enough to have benefitted from. I grew up in Bahrain and had visited approximately 20 countries, many of them multiple times, by the time I left home shortly after completing my A Levels. I have fond memories of visiting temples, eating street food and making friends in parks and beaches in South East Asia, walking along trails and lakes in Cumbria, wandering around old towns, museums and churches across Europe, visiting Disneyland in Florida and Hong Kok, skiing with my classmates in the Swiss Alps and mountain biking with them in the Omani desert. Travelling helps to highlight the similarities and differences across cultures, whether in lifestyle, nature or values. It helps people develop their own practices and values and has tangible benefits to the individual in work, politics, awareness and the extension of empathy to others.

A photo of Hamburg train station. The first stop of a train and ferry journey from Stockholm to Berlin in spring 2023.

Despite these benefits, there’s a dark side of travelling, namely its greenhouse gas emissions. Whilst air travel results in ‘only’ 2.5% of global emissions, flight emissions are increasing at an alarming rate, and the vast majority of people do not fly on a regular basis. For those who fly, a large proportion of their emissions are likely to come from travel. As the per-passenger emissions of round trips in economy class can be hundred or thousands of kilos of carbon dioxide equivalent, individuals can far exceed their fair share of the global carbon budget by flying alone. Those who fly the most are often wealthy individuals with highly materialistic lifestyles based on unsustainable extractivism and are thus likely to exceed their fair share of emissions even without flying. For wealthy individuals, flying, like many luxurious forms of consumerism, has become so ingrained in their expectations that to go without it seems like an impossibly large burden. Whilst I empathise and understand this feeling, it does not change the fact that flying is just one of many examples of excesses from which the wealthy benefit at the expense of the most vulnerable.

Even though travelling has many benefits, it would be very difficult to argue that these benefits outweigh the harm caused by current fossil-fuel-intensive forms of transportation. There is an irony in the Business, Ethics and Sustainability programme’s international nature correlating with excessive flying. I am also not guilt-free. As mentioned, I spent much of my childhood and teenage years flying regularly. Despite now having a general prohibition on flying, I recently flew back to Sweden on a recent trip to the UK, where my girlfriend fell ill. Whether my actions are justified or not, it is clear that flying in its current form should be a luxury which we must be willing to give up, albeit with a heavy heart. It may be that technological advancements such as green-hydrogen power planes bring air travel back into the realm of the morally acceptable, but the industry is not yet at this point. So-called ‘sustainable’ aviation fuel (SAF) promises to reduce emissions until better technologies are developed but may slow down the adoption of more sustainable alternatives whilst serving as a way for individuals to internally justify their polluting actions (see this article for an example of this concept).

Fortunately, travelling doesn’t need to be put on hold until green aviation comes along. Train travel serves as an efficient, environmentally friendly method of travelling from city centre to city centre. By far, the most enjoyable way of train travelling over long distances is to take a night train. In the last two years, I have taken night trains from Stockholm, including Snälltåget (a private Swedish operator) to Berlin, SJ (the Swedish state operator) to Hamburg, and Vy (the Norwegian state operator) to Luleå. Trains are a particularly important part of sustainable travel as they have notably smaller emissions per passenger kilometre than planes. Night trains may be even more critical as they operate during times of low demand on the train tracks and in stations and thus can increase capacity without putting undue stress on day services. Night trains have beds, restaurants and toilets and may include private rooms, showers and viewing decks. As many routes will have constant connectivity to the internet, trains also allow for work to be done where this would not be possible on a plane or if driving.

Given the acute need to tackle the climate crisis, and the ability to increase rail capacity using existing technologies and adding to existing infrastructure, train travel requires greater investment and support. European night trains have a 28 times smaller climate impact than air travel per kilometre, and this number may improve as more tracks are electrified and renewable energy sources make up a larger proportion of the electricity supply. Even when SAF is used, European night trains have a 16 times smaller climate impact per kilometre.

As many flights connect cities where train travel is not possible, such as to islands or across oceans, travellers must rethink their destinations where train travel is not possible. But train travel needn’t replace flights like London to New York, Stockholm to Bangkok or Berlin to Malaga. Instead, they must simply be attractive enough to convince travellers that London to Naples or Berlin to Athens is a better alternative. Night trains can help make long-distance journeys possible, where “lost time” is minimised compared to day trains. Night trains should be utilised for long-distance travel as far as possible and allowed to use high-speed infrastructure during off peak-times as this can increase the distance that can be covered and passenger numbers without requiring large investments in infrastructure.

The corridor of a Vy night train to Luleå which I took in summer 2023.

There are still barriers to train travel in general, and night train services in particular. Unfortunately, there are barriers which are preventatively high for some individuals, including a lack of geographic coverage for long-distance routes, excessive prices compared to budget airlines, longer travel times, and difficulties with international trips, including booking tickets, seat reservations, different track gauges and electricity systems, getting connecting trains and refunds in the case of delays or cancellations. Although the EU is taking material steps towards making train travel cheaper, more reliable and more connected, this is only one small part of the world. Governments must be lobbied to help reduce these barriers through subsidies, investments and standardisation similar to those airlines benefit from. With individual and government support, the train industry and its offerings will grow and therefore accommodate the benefits of travel without harming the planet.

Until then, and even in geographies where there are no sustainable travel options, flying must remain a luxury we forgo if we are serious about doing our part to tackle the climate crisis.