Aviation is seeking for ways to reduce its climate impact caused by CO2 emissions and non-CO2 effects. Operational measures which change overall flight altitude have the potential to reduce climate impact of individual effects, comprising CO2 but in particular non-CO2 effects. We study the impact of changes of flight altitude, specifically aircraft flying 2000 feet higher and lower, with a set of global models comprising chemistry-transport, chemistry-climate and general circulation models integrating distinct aviation emission inventories representing such alternative flight altitudes, estimating changes in climate impact of aviation by quantifying radiative forcing and induced temperature change. We find in our sensitivity study that flying lower leads to a reduction of radiative forcing of non-CO2 effects together with slightly increased CO2 emissions and impacts, when cruise speed is not modified. Flying higher increases radiative forcing of non-CO2 effects by about 10%, together with a slight decrease of CO2 emissions and impacts. Overall, flying lower decreases aviation-induced temperature change by about 20%, as a decrease of non-CO2 impacts by about 30% dominates over slightly increasing CO2 impacts assuming a sustained emissions scenario. Those estimates are connected with a large but unquantified uncertainty. To improve the understanding of mechanisms controlling the aviation climate impact, we study the geographical distributions of aviation-induced modifications in the atmosphere, together with changes in global radiative forcing and suggest further efforts in order to reduce long standing uncertainties.@en

The characteristics of aviation-induced aerosol, its processing, and effects on cirrus clouds and climate are still associated with large uncertainties. Properties of aviation-induced aerosol, however, are crucially needed for the assessment of aviation’s climate impacts today and in the future. We identified more than 1100 aircraft plume encounters during passenger aircraft flights of the IAGOS-CARIBIC Flying Laboratory from July 2018 to March 2020. The aerosol properties inside aircraft plumes were similar, independent of the altitude (i.e., upper troposphere, tropopause region, and lowermost stratosphere). The exhaust aerosol was found to be mostly externally mixed compared to the internally mixed background aerosol, even at a plume age of 1 to 3 h. No enhancement of accumulation mode particles (diameter >250 nm) could be detected inside the aircraft plumes. Particle number emission indices (EIs) deduced from the observations in aged plumes are in the same range as values reported from engine certifications. This finding, together with the observed external mixing state inside the plumes, indicates that the aviation exhaust aerosol almost remains in its emission state during plume expansion. It also reveals that the particle number EIs used in global models are within the range of the EIs measured in aged plumes.@en

We report on an inconsistency in the latitudinal distribution of aviation emissions between the data products of phases 5 and 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). Emissions in the CMIP6 data occur at higher latitudes than in the CMIP5 data for all scenarios, years, and emitted species. A comparative simulation with the chemistry-climate model ECHAM/MESSy Atmospheric Chemistry (EMAC) reveals that the difference in nitrogen oxide emission distribution leads to reduced overall ozone changes due to aviation in the CMIP6 scenarios because in those scenarios the distribution of emissions is partly shifted towards the chemically less active higher latitudes. The radiative forcing associated with aviation ozone is 7.6% higher, and the decrease in methane lifetime is 5.7% larger for the year 2015 when using the CMIP5 latitudinal distribution of emissions compared to when using the CMIP6 distribution. We do not find a statistically significant difference in the radiative forcing associated with aviation aerosol emissions. In total, future studies investigating the effects of aviation emissions on ozone and climate should consider the inconsistency reported here. @en