The published figures for the 787 (2.4lt /100 passenger km) equate to 117 mpg – as good as a hybrid carrying two passengers. It might seem better than the intercity train but those figures are for long-haul. Consider the fuel used on the ground at LHR; consider the 3X multiplier for emissions at altitude; the comparison quickly fails. If carbon emissions are the issue the bus will have everything beaten.
Safety and security might be an issue – compare the fatality risks – car:3 ; bus:0.2 ; train:0.1 ; air:0.01 but how long before some terrorist takes a look at the Virgin Cumbria rail crash and realises that five minutes with a Stihl saw could be much more effective than gas cylinders at an airport?
The passenger will decide on convenience as well as cost – the biggest issue with UK short haul is much more likely to be the airport hassle than any carbon tax.
When will the airlines realise how easy it would be to counter the carbon crusaders? The cost to offset 260 tonnes of CO2 is just £70 using very “
PR friendly” deforestation. Become carbon neutral and then see how quickly the political tune changes.
The real problem is the disinformation and downright lies that go unchallenged:
http://www.carboncalculator.co.uk/averages.php showing a pie chart with the average person using 34% of their carbon in air travel and only 16% for electricity – and this is supposed to be a University! Shipping - thats so insignificant it's not even shown
