The train pulls up to the platform a few minutes ahead of schedule, ready for passengers to board. Once theyve settled into their spacious seats, the train pulls away, exactly on time. As they speed smoothly through the countryside, hungry passengers visit the dining car for healthy, regionally inspired food. Theres even a play area, complete with a slide, to keep kids entertained during the journey.

This might sound like a utopian vision for railroad travel, but its an everyday reality in Switzerland, whose trains were named best in the world in 2018 .

It is, however, a far cry from train travel in the United States. Even Amtraks Northeast corridor service which runs from Richmond, Virginia, to Boston and is considered the crown jewel of American passenger rail cant compete with the quality of service found in countries like Switzerland, China, Spain and Japan.

While rail advocates have long called on the U.S. to invest in train infrastructure and commit to building a world-class, coast-to-coast, environmentally friendly passenger rail system, the funding has yet to come. Flying remains the default way to travel between distant cities.

Some see a sliver of hope that this may change, however, as the U.S. grapples with both the coronavirus pandemic and the climate crisis.

For one thing, air travel suddenly looks a lot less enticing in the COVID-19 era. With social distancing nearly impossible at 30,000 feet, anxieties are high and passengers eye each other skeptically, worried that every cough or sneeze will spread the coronavirus. And the pandemic has dealt the aviation industry a catastrophic financial blow, grounding thousands of planes and leading to pay cuts for many of the roughly 715,000 people it employs in the U.S.

The Trump administration agreed to a $25 billion bailout package in April but its likely the industry will need help for months or even years to come. Meanwhile, transportation experts, environmentalists and some lawmakers question the logic of continuing to prop up an industry responsible for 3% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions .

Does it make sense to do that? asked Anthony Perl, a professor of urban studies and political science at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, British Columbia. Or should we spend some money on an alternative that might be more resilient and post-carbon friendly? Were still a long way from electric-powered planes.

Global greenhouse gas emissions from flying could triple between 2018 and 2050, according to the United Nations International Civil Aviation Organization . In Europe, some governments are adding green strings to pandemic bailout packages for airlines. France and the Netherlands, for example, will require the Air France KLM group to cut emissions per passenger in half and to halve emissions from domestic flights, which, on a per-mile basis, burn far more fuel than long-haul routes.

Overall, these green strings, if they dont get cut by industry lobbying, would effectively limit the number of short-haul flights that airlines can run a technically easy change to make on a continent where theres already a more environmentally friendly option: frequent, efficient high-speed rail.

That approach wouldnt immediately work on this side of the Atlantic because the U.S. lacks the necessary railway infrastructure to make up for losing short-haul flights. But advocates argue that federal pandemic-related stimulus money could get rail improvement or expansion projects started. That would create millions of jobs and chip away at U.S. transportation emissions, which currently represent more than a quarter of the national carbon footprint. While its hard to nail down precise numbers because of high variance within both modes of travel, its clear that rail powered by electricity or diesel depending on location uses far less energy per passenger-mile than air travel

In short, this could be the perfect time to radically rethink how America travels and finally bring the countrys passenger rail network into the 21st century.

How The Railways Were Built