The most comprehensive analysis so far of how much warming is caused by aeroplanes has found that flying鈥檚 contribution to global warming nearly doubled between 2000 and 2018. Rapid growth is far outpacing efforts to reduce its contribution.
鈥淚t is growing so rapidly,鈥� says David Lee at Manchester Metropolitan University in the UK. 鈥淚t鈥檚 just astonishing.鈥�
The study only goes up to 2018, before the big decrease in flying due to the coronavirus pandemic, but this is just a blip, says Lee. 鈥淚t鈥檚 not going to make much difference in the long term.鈥�
Advertisement
Flying has extremely complex effects on the climate. For instance, the soot from jet engines triggers the formation of contrails that, like clouds, can have both a warming effect by reflecting outgoing heat back down to Earth鈥檚 surface and a cooling effect by reflecting sunlight back into space.
Similarly, nitrogen oxides from the engines can increase the formation of ozone, an important greenhouse gas, but also destroy methane, another potent greenhouse gas.
So the team behind the new analysis, which included Ulrike Burkhardt at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics in Germany, used computer models to improve on previous estimates of the overall effect. These suggest that contrails cause less than half as much warming as previously thought.
Even so, short-lived contrails still lead to more warming than the long-lasting carbon dioxide emissions from aircraft.
Overall, the team calculated that flying is responsible for 3.5 per cent of the global warming effect resulting from human activities. That is less than previous estimates of around 5 per cent.聽Figures suggesting that flying is responsible for around 2 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions don鈥檛 take into account the other ways in which flying causes warming.
This contribution of 3.5 per cent has remained relatively constant since 2000, but only because other sources of warming have also increased rapidly. Over this period, the warming effect from flying has nearly doubled.
鈥淚t鈥檚 the growth that is the real feature,鈥� says Lee. 鈥淚t is rising quite dramatically.鈥�
Switching to biofuels 鈥� such as palm oil聽鈥� isn鈥檛 the answer, he says, because when the full effects of growing crops for biofuels are taken into account, it isn鈥檛 clear that they reduce emissions much, if at all.
However, using renewable energy to turn carbon dioxide from the atmosphere into synthetic kerosene could greatly reduce emissions. Switching to synthetic kerosene would make individual flights carbon neutral. It would also halve the warming effect from contrails, says Lee, because synthetic kerosene doesn鈥檛 contain the aromatic chemicals that produce most soot.
鈥淚t鈥檚 feasible, but we don鈥檛 know how to do it at scale,鈥� he says. 鈥淎nd as long as it鈥檚 cheaper to dig it out of the ground, it鈥檚 never going to happen.鈥�
A major policy initiative is required, he says, such as setting a date beyond which the use of fossil kerosene will be banned.
Atmospheric Environment
