Delta Air Lines is working with MIT to eliminate what it says is “one of aviation’s largest environmental impacts.” The airline says it wants to help MIT eliminate “persistent contrails,” which it says trap heat and warm the earth. Pam Fletcher, the airline’s chief sustainability officer, says the work could offer almost immediate improvements on the airline industry’s environmental impact without any significant costs. “(It) has the potential to make a major impact on our environmental footprint within just a few years,” she said.
Contrails form on about 65 percent of high-altitude flights but most of them dissipate in a few minutes. About 10 percent linger for hours and spread slowly to form a thin barrier of ice crystals in the atmosphere. By simply avoiding airspace with the conditions conducive to persistent contrail formation, the impact of aviation on climate could be reduced by 80 percent, Fletcher said. To test that theory, researchers need ready access to aircraft that produce contrails. “Working with airline partners gives us the needed access to flights and operational expertise to conduct successful flight trials,” said Steven Barrett, director of MIT’s Laboratory for Aviation and the Environment.
I live under a jetways — the record number of persistent contrails I counted one evening, from horizon to horizon (East to West) was 52. There were more contrails than blue sky.
During the covid lockdowns, it actually took two days before contrails disappeared and we had normal clouds.
For the airline industry to pretend it does not matter (and that people do not notice) is the height of irresponsibility.
I’m not a climate science denier, but I had thought there was a study done post-9/11 that found the contrails actually tended to reflect IR light out into space and had a cooling effect on the environment. I might just be misremembering it, though the main point is that 9/11 gave us an unusual control point to study the effect air traffic has on the enviroment, because for several days, there was zero air traffic over the US.
I believe it’s both. High clouds (or contrails) tend to reflect light and heat during the day and tend to blanket heat in during the night. So, during the part of the calendar with long days, they make it cooler. Months with long nights, warmer.
Hi Gary,
Your memory serves you well – contrails do reflect IR out.
We can see the logic in that – can’t we?
“Pam Fletcher, the airline’s chief sustainability officer, says the work could offer almost immediate improvements on the airline industry’s environmental impact without any significant costs.”
Never ask a car salesman if you need a new car, a beaucrat if you need a permit or a a sustainability officer if they want to make their mark. So when a quote like the Delta emoloyee surface we must objectively reply with “perhaps”, as long as the intantaeous ATC re-routing with the associated new system algorithms and regulatory approval process can be *immediate*, flight cancellations, congestion caused by the concentration of traffic in dryer airspace, longer flight times and higher fuel usage can be done immediately, and are all not considered significant impacts.
A chief sustainability officer’s only tool is a hammer, so every opportunity is a nail.
Apparently we’ve run out of real problems to solve.
Good point John; my thoughts exactly.
When we are free or murderers rapists and thieves I’ll worry about contrails.
So, I’ll never worry about contrails.
Wait, you must remember now that we have identified and are addressing cow farts, contrails are the next “low hanging fruit” in human-based climate management.
Personally, I think the folks at MIT tend to know an awful lot about things that the rest of us don’t. Could they simply be doing this to get grant money? Of course that’s possible, but MIT has a pretty good record of coming up with some excellent science and technology. I’m looking forward to what they find out. If they can reduce contrails and global warming at the same time, for no real added cost, why not? The added benefit of clearer blue skies on those clear blue sky days is a bonus.
With truckloads of money for anyone doing AGW research; 97% of scientists will agree that money is good.
But there is a cost.
Flight at less than optimum altitudes for efficiency and winds burns more Jet A and costs more money. Same applies to less optimal routing.
The YouTube channel 74 Gear did a good evaluation of this concept and categorizing the negatives.
Word. When I want to get a second opinion on MIT research and Delta flight ops, I also turn to a 747 FO.
“By simply avoiding airspace with the conditions conducive to persistent contrail formation, the impact of aviation on climate could be reduced by 80 percent, Fletcher said.”
Might this be by flying at lower altitudes (which increases fuel consumption per hour AND has the added problem of tankering additional fuel on nearly every flight just in case contrails are reported)? Doe it also mean vectoring around contrail-producing areas to avoid the “problem”?
Both increase the carbon emissions of the flight. Seems like there is the possibility of making the problem WORSE–but that doesn’t seem to bother the “professional (woke) worriers.”
Commercial jet traffic leave very few, if any persistent contrails. So-called chemtrails are way higher in altitude (flight level 450+). So high that you can barely discern an aircraft at the point. Also chemtrail aircraft make X patterns in the sky. Typically they also run several aircraft in an area. Also making X patterns. According to several sources, this program is run by the U.N. There is a big difference between airlines and cargo and the chemtrail aircraft. This MIT program is smoke and mirrors IMHO.
This hits my BS meter pretty hard. Show me the data. “MIT says” means nothing. If there is no name, then it sounds made-up. Who at MIT? Global warming research is a cash cow for any university, and this looks like a grant application. How many degrees will the entire atmosphere warm if a few square kilometers of contrails temporarily hang around the upper atmosphere? Give me a number.