<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title> &#187; aviation types</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.forcedgreen.com/tag/aviation-types/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.forcedgreen.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:48:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>How bad is Aircraft Emissions?</title>
		<link>http://www.forcedgreen.com/2008/10/how-bad-is-aircraft-emissions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.forcedgreen.com/2008/10/how-bad-is-aircraft-emissions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 04:51:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Linda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Going Green]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atmosphere]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atmospheric scientists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aviation types]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chemicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[co2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[complexities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conclusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[creating]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dependant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[detergent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[emissions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[equator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[greenhouse gas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lead]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[methane]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[molecule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nitrogen oxide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ozone depletion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ozone formation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[passenger planes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pollutants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pollution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reactive gas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reading university]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royal society of london]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stratosphere]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surprise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[troposphere]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[university]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[view]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.forcedgreen.com/2008/10/how-bad-is-aircraft-emissions/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<style type="text/css">
#leftcontainerBox {
	float:left;
	position: fixed;
	top: 60%;
	left: 70px;
}
#leftcontainerBox .buttons {
	float:left;
	clear:both;
	margin:4px 4px 4px 4px;
	padding-bottom:2px;
}
#bottomcontainerBox {
	width: 50%;
	padding-top: 1px;
}
#bottomcontainerBox .buttons {
	float: left;
	margin: 4px 4px 4px 4px;
}
</style>
It&#8217;s become almost a reflex to bash aviation&#8217;s role in climate change. Passenger planes are big, they emit stuff into the atmosphere, so they must be bad. It&#8217;s true, but it&#8217;s not quite that simple. Last week, climate and atmospheric scientists from the US and Europe presented research to a group of aviation types gathered [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<style type="text/css">
#leftcontainerBox {
	float:left;
	position: fixed;
	top: 60%;
	left: 70px;
}
#leftcontainerBox .buttons {
	float:left;
	clear:both;
	margin:4px 4px 4px 4px;
	padding-bottom:2px;
}
#bottomcontainerBox {
	width: 50%;
	padding-top: 1px;
}
#bottomcontainerBox .buttons {
	float: left;
	margin: 4px 4px 4px 4px;
}
</style>
<p><!--postonfire-->It&#8217;s become almost a reflex to bash aviation&#8217;s role in climate change. Passenger<br />
planes are big, they emit stuff into the atmosphere, so they must be bad. It&#8217;s<br />
true, but it&#8217;s not quite that simple.</p>
<p>Last week, climate and atmospheric scientists from the US and Europe presented<br />
research to a group of aviation types gathered at the Royal Society of London.<br />
Much of their focus was on nitrogen oxide (NOx), and what they found is that<br />
simply dismissing NOx as just another nasty greenhouse gas is not only bad<br />
science, but could also be unwise policy.<span id="more-410"></span></p>
<p>Keith Shine, a professor from Reading University, says that while there&#8217;s a<br />
great deal of research being conducted on the role of NOx in climate change,<br />
nothing is conclusive at this point, in part because the gas seems to both<br />
harm and help. &#8220;NOx has some particularly slippery issues we have to grapple<br />
with,&#8221; he says. &#8220;It is a very reactive gas in the atmosphere and has different<br />
impacts.&#8221;</p>
<p>One of those impacts is the formation of ozone, which facilitates growth in CO2<br />
by preventing its absorption by plants. But NOx only leads to ozone formation<br />
in the troposphere (the lower part of the atmosphere). Once you get above 20km,<br />
into the stratosphere, NOx actually causes ozone depletion. As an added bonus,<br />
NOx leads to creation of hydroxyl, which acts as a sort of detergent that cleans<br />
many pollutants out of the atmosphere and and helps destroy methane, another bad<br />
news greenhouse gas. “The discovery in recent years of the effect of the OH<br />
molecule as a detergent chemical has been a pleasant surprise to the scientific<br />
community,” Shine says.</p>
<p>He says that at this point it&#8217;s hard to know if there is a net impact one way<br />
or the other. &#8220;It turns out that by emitting on greenhouse gas into the atmosphere<br />
we are also partly destroying another. To add complexity to the subject, methane<br />
is one of the most important molecules that leads to ozone formation. So NOx is<br />
creating more ozone but also destroying methane, leading to less ozone.&#8221;</p>
<p>And it&#8217;s even trickier than that. The effects of NOx depend not just on the<br />
altitude at which they are released, but also on the geographical region. &#8220;With<br />
COx it doesn&#8217;t matter where the emissions take place,&#8221; Shine says. Whether it be<br />
the North Pole or the tropics, the impact is the same.&#8221; But this isn&#8217;t the case<br />
for NOx, which seems to have a bigger impact at the equator.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s pretty complicated stuff, and Shine is the first to admit that although<br />
the science is getting better there&#8217;s still a lot to figure out. When asked<br />
what advice he&#8217;d give policy makers with regards to aviation and the climate<br />
based on what we know so far, he urges them to stay focused on one just one<br />
thing. &#8220;If the worry is about climate change over a 50 or 100 year period&#8230;.<br />
in my view the only thing we should be concerned with is CO2 emissions.&#8221;</p>
<p>Source:  Dave Demerjian</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.forcedgreen.com/2008/10/how-bad-is-aircraft-emissions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

