4 ms·
It would not. Those people would still travel - just by far less efficient means.
by Alupis 2y ago
It would not. Those people would still travel - just by far less efficient means.
- Dylan16807 2y agoYou think long distance travel demand is completely inelastic? It's not. Also what's "far less efficient means", please be specific. Most of these people are not going to take solo car trips super long distances.
- Alupis 2y agoUnless the UK is going to totally isolate themselves from the entire world - people and goods will still travel in and out. Only by vastly less efficient means. The UK is not isolated, and will never be. In this implausible scenario, people fly into France, drive to a ferry, cross the channel by boat, drive to the train station, etc. Increased traffic, idling, etc all adds up. People still have business that needs to be done and they will do it. Evidenced by this hypocritical academics.
- Dylan16807 2y agoBoats and trucks are not "vastly less efficient" than planes. And when travel is harder, people travel less.
- Alupis 2y agoYes they are. Look at these fuel economy numbers (broken down by number of butts in seats)[1]. 60-100+ mpg equivalent per seat. What car or truck is getting 80+mpg while hauling a 40,000lbs payload, for example? Not to mention how wildly efficient modern turbofan combustion is. This fiction that air travel is so awful is really counter productive. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft
- Dylan16807 2y agoBy trucks I meant trucks of goods. And that line didn't mention cars.
- quantified 2y agoLots of holiday travel would disappear, because the holiday would be swallowed by inconvenience.
- eesmith 2y agoIt wouldn't disappear. Lots of Brits went to Brighton long before cheap flights to Bali. If you have 12 hours to travel, then you have 12 hours to travel, no matter the method.