% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Wilhelm:903168,
author = {Wilhelm, Lena and Gierens, Klaus and Rohs, Susanne},
title = {{W}eather {V}ariability {I}nduced {U}ncertainty of
{C}ontrail {R}adiative {F}orcing},
journal = {Aerospace},
volume = {8},
number = {11},
issn = {2226-4310},
address = {Basel},
publisher = {MDPI},
reportid = {FZJ-2021-04888},
pages = {332 -},
year = {2021},
abstract = {Persistent contrails and contrail cirrus are estimated to
have a larger impact on climate than all CO2 emissions from
global aviation since the introduction of jet engines.
However, the measure for this impact, the effective
radiative forcing (ERF) or radiative forcing (RF), suffers
from uncertainties that are much larger than those for CO2.
Despite ongoing research, the so called level of scientific
understanding has not improved since the 1999 IPCC Special
Report on Aviation and the Global Atmosphere. In this paper,
the role of weather variability as a major component of the
uncertainty range of contrail cirrus RF is examined. Using
10 years of MOZAIC flights and ERA-5 reanalysis data, we
show that natural weather variability causes large
variations in the instantaneous radiative forcing (iRF) of
persistent contrails, which is a major source for
uncertainty. Most contrails (about $80\%)$ have a small
positive iRF of up to 20 W m−2. IRF exceeds 20 W m−2 in
about $10\%$ of all cases but these have a disproportionally
large climate impact, the remaining $10\%$ have a negative
iRF. The distribution of iRF values is heavily skewed
towards large positive values that show an exponential
decay. Monte Carlo experiments reveal the difficulty of
determining a precise long-term mean from measurement or
campaign data alone. Depending on the chosen sample size,
calculated means scatter considerably, which is caused
exclusively by weather variability. Considering that many
additional natural sources of variation have been
deliberately neglected in the present examination, the
results suggest that there is a fundamental limit to the
precision with which the RF and ERF of contrail cirrus can
be determined. In our opinion, this does not imply a low
level of scientific understanding; rather the scientific
understanding of contrails and contrail cirrus has grown
considerably over recent decades. Only the determination of
global and annual mean RF and ERF values is still difficult
and will probably be so for the coming decades, if not
forever. The little precise knowledge of the RF and ERF
values is, therefore, no argument to postpone actions to
mitigate contrail’s warming impact},
cin = {IEK-8},
ddc = {530},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-8-20101013},
pnm = {2111 - Air Quality (POF4-211)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-2111},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000723773700001},
doi = {10.3390/aerospace8110332},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/903168},
}