Cited by 63Advanced Aircraft Design and TechnologiesAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsAtmospheric Ozone and Climate

Emission metrics for quantifying regional climate impacts of aviation

Open access
Lund, Marianne T., Aamaas, Borgar, Berntsen, Terje, Bock, Lisa, Burkhardt, Ulrike, Fuglestvedt, Jan S., Shine, Keith P.·2017·Earth System Dynamics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Abstract. This study examines the impacts of emissions from aviation in six source regions on global and regional temperature. We consider the NOx-induced impacts on ozone and methane, aerosols and contrail-cirrus formation, and calculate the global and regional climate metrics Global Warming Potential (GWP), Global Temperature change Potential (GTP) and Absolute Regional Temperature change Potential (ARTP). GWPs and GTPs vary by a factor 2–4 between source regions. We find the highest aviation aerosol metric values for South Asian emissions, while contrail-cirrus metrics are higher for Europe and North America, where contrail formation is prevalent, and South America plus Africa, where the optical depth is large once contrails form. The ARTP illustrate important differences in the latitudinal patterns of radiative forcing (RF) and temperature response: The temperature response in a given latitude band can be considerably stronger than suggested by the RF in that band, also emphasizing the importance of large-scale circulation impacts. To place our metrics in context, we quantify the temperature response in the four broad latitude bands following a one-year pulse emission from present-day aviation, including CO2. Aviation over North America and Europe cause the largest net warming impact in all latitude bands, reflecting the higher air traffic activity here. For all regions, the largest single warming contribution is from contrail-cirrus 20 years after the emissions, while CO2 becomes dominant at 100 years, although contrail-cirrus remain important in several regions also on this time scale. Our emission metrics can be further used to estimate regional temperature impact under alternative aviation emission scenarios. A first evaluation of the ARTP in the context of aviation suggests that further work to account for vertical sensitivities in the relationship between RF and temperature response would be valuable for further use of the concept.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5194/esd-8-547-2017

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 GWPs and GTPs for soot and sulfate reported here are larger in magnitude (positive and negative) than previous estimates.

    “while soot and sulfate numbers are larger in magnitude (positive and negative) than previous estimates (Fuglestvedt et al., 2010; Lund et al., 2017).”
  • The GWPs and GTPs for contrail cirrus and water vapor reported here are similar to, albeit slightly smaller than, corresponding results previously reported.

    “GWPs and GTPs for contrail cirrus and for water vapor reported here are similar to, albeit slightly smaller than, corresponding results previ­ ously reported”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 84 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lund, M. T., Aamaas, B., Berntsen, T., Bock, L., Burkhardt, U., Fuglestvedt, J. S., & Shine, K. P.
Affiliations
  • CICERO Center for International Climate Research (NO)
  • University of Oslo (NO)
  • Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e. V. (DLR) (DE)
  • University of Reading (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Lund, Marianne T.
  • Aamaas, Borgar
  • Berntsen, Terje
  • Bock, Lisa
  • Burkhardt, Ulrike
  • Fuglestvedt, Jan S.
  • Shine, Keith P.
Venue
Earth System Dynamics
Published
2017-07-10
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
547-563
ISSN
  • 2190-4979 (ISSN-L)
  • 2190-4987
OpenAlex
W2586065957
Cited by
63
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 2
FWCI
3.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Earth System Dynamics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (acceptedVersion)
  • elib (German Aerospace Center) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Federal Aviation Administration
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Advanced Aircraft Design and Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Atmospheric Ozone and Climate
Keywords
aviation emissions, global warming potential, global temperature change potential, NOx emissions, ozone, methane, contrail cirrus, radiative forcing, regional temperature change, CO2 emissions, source regions, large-scale circulation

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