I'm left with a lot of questions though, as the scope of the article is quite limited.

Short-haul flight are banned, so the gains seem obvious. But the article doesn't seem to detail if they're actually substituted by rail. Travellers could also be going by car, search for destinations further away, maybe not go at all.

I guess it's quite hard to find an actual effect from a broader perspective, but if their expectations are true, travellers using rail should have a noticable increase. It's a shame this is missing in the article.

Basically the article is saying that if you scrap a bunch of flights, emissions by aviations go down. Maybe I'm missing the point, but that seems pretty obvious. I'd like to know what the actual broader effect is of these measures taken.