Banning flights under 1000 km: Who bears the cost?

The 15-euro flight to London cannot be sustained by kerosene

The aviation sector has become the blind spot of the energy transition. Electric cars and trains dominate headlines, aid, and decarbonization plans. Meanwhile, planes continue to move millions of passengers with a cost structure that cannot withstand serious analysis. The proposal circulating is stark: electrify the network, multiply trains, and ban all flights below 1000 kilometers.

Why does a ticket to London cost 15 euros?

A 15-euro ticket to London is not the result of efficiency. Here, two incompatible explanations clash. One holds that this price is set by the subsidies carried by the sector, not by fuel. The other points to kerosene: when it rises, they say, the 15-euro fares vanish and must end. The clash of theses is unresolved because no one provides the specific accounting entry.

Can flying below 1000 kilometers be banned?

The veto on short flights has its defenders and its pitfalls. The underlying argument—thoroughly electrify, flood the market with trains, and reserve planes for long routes—clashes with the scale of the problem: some remind that the map of air traffic, viewed from outside Earth, is almost invisible, much like moving cars. Conversely, environmental criticism has become a sort of identity marker. Greta Thunberg is invoked as secular scripture, while others reply that those calling for the sky to close rarely fly.

The sticking point is always the same. No one disputes that the current model has an expiration date. No one quantifies who will pay for the difference until it arrives.