AirClim: an efficient tool for climate evaluation of aircraft technology
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Abstract. Climate change is a challenge to society and to cope with requires assessment tools which are suitable to evaluate new technology options with respect to their impact on global climate. Here we present AirClim, a model which comprises a linearisation of atmospheric processes from the emission to radiative forcing, resulting in an estimate in near surface temperature change, which is presumed to be a reasonable indicator for climate change. The model is designed to be applicable to aircraft technology, i.e. the climate agents CO2, H2O, CH4 and O3 (latter two resulting from NOx-emissions) and contrails are taken into account. AirClim combines a number of precalculated atmospheric data with aircraft emission data to obtain the temporal evolution of atmospheric concentration changes, radiative forcing and temperature changes. These precalculated data are derived from 25 steady-state simulations for the year 2050 with the climate-chemistry model E39/C, prescribing normalised emissions of nitrogen oxides and water vapour at various atmospheric regions. The results show that strongest climate impacts (year 2100) from ozone changes occur for emissions in the tropical upper troposphere (60 mW/m2; 80 mK for 1 TgN/year emitted) and from methane changes from emissions in the middle tropical troposphere (−2.7% change in methane lifetime; –30 mK per TgN/year). For short-lived species (e.g. ozone, water vapour, methane) individual perturbation lifetimes are derived depending on the region of emission. A comparison of this linearisation approach with results from a comprehensive climate-chemistry model shows reasonable agreement with respect to concentration changes, radiative forcing, and temperature changes. For example, the total impact of a supersonic fleet on radiative forcing (mainly water vapour) is reproduced within 10%. A wide range of application is demonstrated.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The difference between transient and steady-state CH4 for the year 2000 found with TROPOS is smaller than that resulting from the Grewe and Stenke (2008) approach (27% and 35%, respectively).
“The difference between transient and steady-state CH4 for the year 2000 found with TROPOS is smaller than that resulting from the Grewe and Stenke (2008) approach (Myhre et al., 2011) (27% and 35%, respectively).”
From The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for 2000 to 2018 (2021) · cites this paper as Grewe and Stenke (2008)
The present approach is in general agreement with that presented by Grewe and Stenke (2008).
“The present approach is in general agreement with that presented by Grewe and Stenke (2008), which accounts for CH4 concentrations not being in steady-state with OH changes in the year of simulation.”
From The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for 2000 to 2018 (2021) · cites this paper as Grewe and Stenke (2008)
If TROPOS is run with constant background emissions representing the year 2000 in a similar manner using Grewe and Stenke (2008) methodology, the difference between transient and steady-state CH4 for the year 2000 increases from 27% to 31%.
“Indeed, if TROPOS is run with constant background emissions representing the year 2000 in a similar manner using Grewe and Stenke (2008) methodology, the difference between transient and steady-state CH4 for the year 2000 increases from 27% to 31%.”
From The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for 2000 to 2018 (2021) · cites this paper as Grewe and Stenke (2008)
The systematic differences are likely due to the Grewe and Stenke (2008) values being based on a simplified chemistry/climate model (AirClim) and the present TROPOS simulations having a different experimental setup and a full chemical reaction scheme.
“The systematic differences are likely due to the Grewe and Stenke (2008) values being based on a simplified chemistry/climate model (AirClim) and the present TROPOS simulations having a different experimental setup (all our emissions (surface + aircraft) are time-varying) and a full chemical reaction scheme with explicit calculations performed on time-varying emissions.”
From The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for 2000 to 2018 (2021) · cites this paper as Grewe and Stenke (2008)
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 35 · Cited by 161
- Authors
- Grewe, V., & Stenke, A.
- Affiliations
- Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e. V. (DLR) (DE)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2008-08-11
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 4621-4639
- ISSN
- 1680-7316 (ISSN-L)
- 1680-7324
- OpenAlex
- W2015298455
- Cited by
- 161
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 7.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Atmospheric chemistry and physics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- elib (German Aerospace Center) (acceptedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Research Repository (Delft University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- European Commission
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Advanced Aircraft Design and Technologies
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Atmospheric Ozone and Climate
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
- Keywords
- aviation emissions, climate impact assessment, radiative forcing, ozone, methane, water vapor, nitrogen oxides, contrails, short-lived climate pollutants, supersonic aircraft
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review