<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article"><?xmltex \bartext{Research article}?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ACP</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ACP</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Chem. Phys.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1680-7324</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-22-11987-2022</article-id><title-group><article-title>Impact of present and future aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and aerosol emissions on
atmospheric composition and <?xmltex \hack{\break}?> associated direct radiative forcing of climate</article-title><alt-title>Impact of present and future aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and aerosol emissions</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Impact of present and future aircraft NO${}_{x}$ and aerosol emissions}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{E. Terrenoire et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff5">
          <name><surname>Terrenoire</surname><given-names>Etienne</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Hauglustaine</surname><given-names>Didier A.</given-names></name>
          <email>didier.hauglustaine@lsce.ipsl.fr</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Cohen</surname><given-names>Yann</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Cozic</surname><given-names>Anne</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Valorso</surname><given-names>Richard</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Lefèvre</surname><given-names>Franck</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5294-5426</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Matthes</surname><given-names>Sigrun</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5114-2418</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement (LSCE), UMR
8212, Gif-sur-Yvette, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Univ. Paris-Est-Créteil and Université Paris Cité, CNRS, LISA,
94010 Créteil, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Laboratoire Atmosphères, Milieux, Observations Spatiales (LATMOS),
UMR 8190, Paris, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Deutsches Zentrum für Luft-und Raumfahrt e.V., DLR
Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>Oberpfaffenhofen,
82334 Wessling, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>a</label><institution>now at: Office National d'Etudes et de Recherches Aérospatiales
(ONERA), <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>DMPE, Université Paris-Saclay, Palaiseau, France</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Didier A. Hauglustaine (didier.hauglustaine@lsce.ipsl.fr)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>16</day><month>September</month><year>2022</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>22</volume>
      <issue>18</issue>
      <fpage>11987</fpage><lpage>12023</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>21</day><month>March</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>19</day><month>April</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>22</day><month>July</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>1</day><month>August</month><year>2022</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2022 Etienne Terrenoire et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2022</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e188">Aviation NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions not only have an impact on global climate by
changing ozone and methane levels but also contribute to the deterioration of local air quality. A new version of the LMDZ-INCA global model, including chemistry of both the troposphere and the stratosphere and the sulfate-nitrate-ammonium cycle, is applied to re-evaluate the impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and aerosol emissions on climate. The results confirm that the efficiency of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to produce ozone is very much dependent on the injection height; it increases with the background methane and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations and with decreasing aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. The methane lifetime variation is less sensitive to the location of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions than the ozone change. The net NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> radiative forcing (RF) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is largely affected by the revised CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> RF formula. The ozone positive forcing and the methane negative forcing largely offset each other, resulting in a slightly positive forcing for the present day. However, in the future, the net forcing turns to negative, essentially due to higher methane background concentrations. Additional RFs involving particle formation arise from aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions since the increased hydroxyl radical (OH) concentrations are responsible for an enhanced conversion of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to sulfate particles. Aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions also increase the formation of nitrate particles in the lower troposphere. However, in the upper troposphere, increased sulfate concentrations favour the titration of ammonia leading to lower ammonium nitrate concentrations. The climate forcing of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions is likely to be small or even switch to negative (cooling), depending on atmospheric NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> or CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> future background concentrations, or when the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> impact on sulfate and nitrate particles is considered. However, large uncertainties remain for the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net impact on climate and in particular on the indirect forcings associated with aerosols, which are even more uncertain than the other forcings from gaseous species. Hence, additional studies with a range of models are needed to provide a more consolidated view. Nevertheless, our results suggest that reducing aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions is primarily beneficial for improving air quality.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e376">Air traffic emissions represent a sizeable contribution to global
anthropogenic climate change (Lee et al., 2021) and also to regional surface
air pollution, particularly around airports (Yim et al., 2015). Aircraft
release into the atmosphere not only gaseous compounds such as carbon dioxide
(CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), nitrogen oxides (NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), hydrocarbons (HC), sulfur dioxide
(SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) and water vapour (H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O), but also particulate material
composed of ice crystals, soot particles (black carbon, BC) and sulfates
(SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) (e.g. Kärcher, 2018; Lee et al., 2021). There is a wide
range of spatial and temporal scales associated with atmospheric
perturbations due to aircraft emissions. It ranges from the local and plume
scales for chemical species, aerosols, and contrail-cirrus formation to the
global scale for methane and carbon dioxide perturbations; and from a few
minutes after emission up to several decades (Brasseur et al., 2016).
Evaluating the global chemical and climate perturbations associated with
aircraft emissions therefore appears to be a complex issue.</p>
      <p id="d1e424">Due to this range of scales as well as the different nature of the
perturbations of the climate system involved, a distinction is usually made
between the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and the non-CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> climate impacts of aviation. These
climate forcings were recently reassessed by Lee et al. (2021). For 2018,
the net aviation effective radiative forcing (ERF) of historic aviation
emissions until 2018 was estimated to 101 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in this recent study with major contributions from contrail cirrus (57.4 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> or 57 % of
the total forcing), CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (34.3 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 34 %), and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (17.5 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 17 %). Non-CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> terms represent a net positive forcing that accounts for more than half (66 %) of the aviation total RF of climate. In contrast to the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing which is relatively
well determined, except for some methodological issues (Terrenoire et al.,
2019; Ivanovich et al., 2019; Boucher et al., 2021), non-CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing
terms contribute about 8 times more than CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to the uncertainty in the
aviation total forcing (Lee et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e549">From these non-CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> climate forcings associated with aircraft emissions,
nitrogen oxides (NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) play a particular role. Indeed, they not only affect climate by changing the atmospheric concentration of two important greenhouse gases, i.e. ozone (O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) and methane (CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) (e.g. Hauglustaine et al., 1994; Brasseur et al., 1998; Holmes et al., 2011; Myhre et al., 2011), but also have an impact on local air quality and human health,
both through emissions in and around airports and from emissions at higher
altitude affecting near-ground background concentrations (e.g. Barrett et
al., 2010; Hauglustaine and Koffi, 2012; Cameron et al., 2017). For this
reason, it has been assumed that emission standards for NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions
set by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) since the 1980s not only protected local air quality but also had co-benefits for
climate change mitigation (Skowron et al., 2021). A technological difficulty
faced by aircraft industry today is that reducing NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions tends
to increase fuel burn, hence resulting in increased CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and a
climate penalty (Freeman et al., 2018). There is however a possibility that
technological development could simultaneously lead to the reduction of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (Prashanth et al., 2021). Hence, a better quantification of the aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> effect on climate is needed to determinate whether the climate effect of the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> increase linked to new technology could be compensated by the associated NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> reduction.</p>
      <p id="d1e662">Emissions of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> into the troposphere result in a short-term increased
photochemical ozone production (resulting in a positive climate forcing or
warming), and a long-term increased oxidation of atmospheric methane through
reaction with the hydroxyl radical (OH; resulting in a negative climate
forcing or cooling), as shown by Fuglestvedt et al. (1999) and Szopa et al. (2021). In addition, the aforementioned methane reduction leads to a
long-term reduction in tropospheric O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (cooling) and a long-term
reduction in stratospheric H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O (cooling). In the lower
troposphere, the net effect of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions is dominated by the
increased methane destruction and a negative forcing is predicted. In the
upper troposphere, at aircraft cruise altitudes, the ozone production is
about 5 times more efficient per molecule of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emitted (e.g.
Hauglustaine et al., 1994; Derwent et al., 2001; Hoor et al., 2009; Dahlmann
et al., 2011) and a positive net RF of climate is generally
associated with aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (e.g. Holmes et al., 2011;
Myhre et al., 2011; Hoor et al., 2009; Søvde et al., 2014; Brasseur et
al., 2016; Lee et al., 2021). Based on an in-depth literature assessment,
Lee et al. (2021) provided the most recent estimate of these forcings and
derived a net NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> RF from all emissions released by
aviation of 17.5 (0.6, 28.5) mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2018, decomposed into a positive short-term tropospheric ozone forcing of 49.3 (32, 76) mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and a negative methane forcing of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">34.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net RF of climate is positive, but this net effect is the sum of two forcings of opposite sign, distinct geographic distributions, and each of them associated with large uncertainties.</p>
      <p id="d1e806">Recently, Skowron et al. (2021) reinvestigated the aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> climate
forcing based on various future scenarios for both surface and aircraft
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions using the MOZART-3 global chemistry–climate model
(Kinnison et al., 2007). They found that in all their future (2050)
simulations and even for “present-day” (2006) simulations under certain
conditions, the net RF from aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions could turn
negative. This finding is essentially associated with the revised expression
for methane direct RF from Etminan et al. (2016) which
increases, for instance, the methane forcing by 24.5 % for a halving of
its atmospheric concentration compared to previous formulations. However,
another major uncertainty associated with the impact of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions
on atmospheric composition arises from the non-linear character of the
tropospheric chemistry. This feature makes the impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions dependent on the background atmospheric concentrations and hence sensitive
to anthropogenic surface emissions of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO, and HCs or even
to natural emissions such as lightning NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Holmes et al., 2011;
Skowron et al., 2021). It also makes the impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions very dependent on the location of the emission and on the season (Stevenson et al., 2004; Stevenson and Derwent, 2009; Gilmore et al., 2013; Skowron et al., 2013; Søvde et al., 2014). Since the ozone production sensitivity differs from the methane destruction sensitivity, the positive short-term ozone forcing associated with aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions can be overwhelmed by the methane negative forcing, providing a negative net radiative forcing of climate (Stevenson and Derwent, 2009; Skowron et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e891">Other effects of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, less accounted for in earlier
studies, include the role played by tropospheric aerosols and in particular,
the impact on secondary inorganic aerosols such as nitrates and sulfates
(Unger, 2011; Pitari et al., 2015; Brasseur et al., 2016; Lund et al., 2017;
Prashanth et al., 2022). Increased NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from aircraft
indeed have the potential to form ammonium nitrate particles. However, the
changes in oxidants and the direct emissions of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> by aircraft also
increase the formation of sulfate particles with possible implications on
nitrate concentrations (Unger et al., 2013; Righi et al., 2013, 2016). These
indirect forcings associated with aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are however
complex and need further investigation since they can provide additional
negative direct forcings of climate. In order to account for the role played
by secondary inorganic aerosols and other interactions involving gas-phase
and aerosol chemistry, the global models used to assess the impact of
aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions need to include both gas-phase chemistry,
tropospheric aerosols, and in particular, the role played by the
sulfate-nitrate-ammonium cycle.</p>
      <p id="d1e939">The aim of the present study is to provide a comprehensive and updated
model-based analysis of the impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions on
atmospheric composition and associated RF of climate. The LMDZ-INCA global model, including both tropospheric and stratospheric
chemistry as well as tropospheric aerosols, is applied. An earlier and less
mature version of this model was previously used by Koffi et al. (2010)
and Hauglustaine and Koffi (2012), or in several model intercomparisons
(Hoor et al., 2009; Hodnebrog et al., 2011, 2012; Myhre et al., 2011) in
order to investigate the impact of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> transport emissions on
atmospheric composition and climate. This earlier version of the model only
included tropospheric gas-phase chemistry and used a coarser vertical
resolution. The new version of LMDZ-INCA used in this study allows us to
revisit the impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions on ozone production, changes in oxidants, and methane destruction, but also its impact on the secondary inorganic aerosol distributions. These earlier studies will provide a point of comparison for this new assessment. This study not only focuses on the effect of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions but also includes aircraft SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and aerosols emissions in order to account for the effect of the sulfate-nitrate-ammonium cycle and considers the potential effect linked to heterogeneous chemistry. Similarly, the direct water vapour aircraft emission is also included in order to account for the role of stratospheric water vapour on atmospheric oxidants and is linked with the methane indirect effect on H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O.</p>
      <p id="d1e997">Moreover, another aim of this paper is to investigate the sensitivity of the
aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net RF of climate to various mitigation options. Motivated by earlier work (e.g. Unger, 2011; Hodnebrog et al., 2012; Matthes et al., 2021; Skowron et al., 2021) we particularly assess the sensitivity of the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing to a variation of the aircraft emission injection height and to background (present versus future) atmospheric concentrations. Several scenarios are considered for the future in order to investigate low and high assumptions in air traffic growth and fuel-burn efficiencies. Other scenarios will also illustrate more
specifically the impact of desulfurized jet fuel as a mitigation option or
engines with ultra-low NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> combustor technology. For all these
present-day and future (2050) scenarios, the changes in atmospheric
composition are illustrated and the RFs of climate associated
with NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> direct and indirect
forcings) and aerosol direct effects are calculated.</p>
      <p id="d1e1055">The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: in Sect. 2, we
present the aircraft emission inventories prepared and introduced in the
global chemistry–climate model for both the present-day baseline
simulation and for the future (2050) baseline and mitigation scenarios. In
Sect. 3, we provide a description of the LMDZ-INCA chemistry–climate model
used in this study along with a description of the RF calculations and modelling setup. Additionally, in Sect. 3, we summarize the model performance comparing the model results with ozone soundings and the In-service Aircraft for a Global Observing System's (IAGOS) measurements of ozone and carbon monoxide concentrations in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere. In Sect. 4, we present the atmospheric composition perturbations associated with the present-day aircraft emissions, and in Sect. 5 the perturbations associated with future aircraft emissions under different scenarios. We then present the RF of climate associated with the changes in atmospheric composition in Sect. 6. Finally, in Sect. 7, we discuss conclusions drawn from this study.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Aircraft emissions</title>
      <p id="d1e1066">The global three-dimensional and time-varying aircraft emission inventories
used in this study are essentially based on the previous European Union (EU) projects: Reducing Emissions from Aviation by Changing Trajectories for the benefit of Climate (REACT4C; Matthes et al., 2012) and Quantifying the Climate Impact of Global and European Transport Systems (QUANTIFY; Lee et al., 2010). These inventories are based on the fuel-flow model PIANO (Project Interactive Analysis and Optimization) and the global emission model FAST (Future Aviation Scenario Tool) with air traffic movements coming from radar data for European and North American flights and the Official Airline Guide (OAG) database for the remaining global flight movements (Lee et al., 2009; Owen et al., 2010). For this specific study, the methodology used to derive emissions for the global chemistry–transport model LMDZ-INCA is further described in the following Sect. 2.1 for present-day baseline emissions and in Sect. 2.2 for the future (2050) emission scenarios.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Present-day baseline emissions</title>
      <p id="d1e1076">The aircraft emission inventory used for present-day baseline emissions
is based on the EU project REACT4C (Matthes et al., 2012, 2021; Søvde et
al., 2014; Grewe et al., 2014) and is representative of the year 2006. This
inventory will be referred to as REACT4C_2006 in this paper.
The REACT4C_2006 data include three-dimensional gridded
distributions of kilometres travelled, fuel consumption, as well as CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and BC (soot) emissions. Flight data are derived
from CAEP8 data using the “great circle distance” method corrected with
the CAEP8 formula. This dataset is available on a
latitude–longitude–altitude grid for 12 months with a horizontal resolution
of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and a 610 m vertical resolution. In this
inventory, the global mean NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission index (EI) is 12.1 gNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel (12.7 gNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> below 1800 m and 12.3 gNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> above 8400 m).
For BC, the mean EI is 0.023 gBC kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel (0.046 gBC kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> below 1800 m and
0.015 gBC kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> above 8400 m). Additional species are needed to run the global chemistry–transport model. For H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, carbon monoxide (CO) and total non-methane HCs, we use the three-dimensional emissions from the AERO2K project inventory (Eyers et al, 2005). The EIs for these species are derived for the AERO2K vertical levels (500 ft vertical resolution) and interpolated onto the REACT4C vertical levels. Based on the REACT4C fuel burn, we then derive the H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, CO, and HC three-dimensional and monthly emissions representative of the year 2006. For HC, we use the speciation given by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA; 2009) in order to derive the emissions of the LMDZ-INCA model's individual HCs. For organic carbon (OC), SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, we use the mean EIs reported by Lee et al. (2010). For OC, Lee et al. (2010) provide a range of 0.0065–0.05 g kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. As was done by Balkanski et al. (2010) and Righi et al. (2016), we choose the highest EI value of 0.05 g kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel and determine a maximum value for OC produced from aircraft. For SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, the mean EIs are respectively 0.8 and 0.04 g kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel. From REACT4C_2006, we derive global EIs of 3.15 kgCO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel, 1.23 kgH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel, 3.25 gCO kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel, and 0.405 gHC kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel, which compare well to the EI<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and EI<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> used in the recent review of Lee et al. (2021). They are somewhat lower than the EIs used in Lee et
al. (2021) for BC (EI<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>0.03 gBC kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel), NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
(EI<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> gNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel) and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (EI<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel). Table 1 summarizes the total emissions for the baseline REACT4C_2006 inventory. Figure S1 shows the zonal and annual mean distribution of REACT4C_2006 fuel use, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and BC
emissions.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1540">Total global aircraft emissions corresponding to the baseline
REACT4C_2006 and QUANTIFY_2000 inventories.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Species</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Units</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">REACT4C_2006</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">QUANTIFY_2000</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Fuel</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Tg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">178</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">214</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Tg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">560</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">672</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">TgN yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.84</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Gg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">GgS yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">85</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Gg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">91</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">OC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Gg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">8.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">10.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">GgS yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.8</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Tg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">220</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">264</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CO</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Tg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.72</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e1876">The REACT4C_2006 inventory is chosen for the present-day baseline simulation since this inventory provides, in addition to the baseline emissions, two additional mitigation inventories. These mitigation scenarios based on the original REACT4C_2006 emissions were used in this study in order to investigate the sensitivity of the chemical perturbations and associated RFs to a cruise altitude variation (Søvde et al., 2014; Matthes et al., 2021).
The REACT4C_PLUS corresponds to the original REACT4C_2006 inventory with flight altitude increased by 2000 ft (610 m), while in REACT4C_MINUS, the flight altitudes decreased by 2000 ft. While the total distance flown is approximately equal in all REACT4C inventories as fuel efficiency increases with altitude, the fuel use is 178, 177, and 181 Tg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the baseline, REACT4C_PLUS, and REACT4C_MINUS inventories, respectively. As a consequence, the total NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are respectively 0.71, 0.72, and 0.71 TgN yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1913">In order to compare the future perturbations based on the QUANTIFY project
emissions (see next section) to the present-day perturbations, another
reference inventory has been used in this paper. This inventory, labelled
QUANTIFY_2000, is based on the QUANTIFY assumptions as
described in Owen et al. (2010). In particular, this QUANTIFY_2000 reference is scaled based on International Energy Agency (IEA) sales justifying the higher fuel burn compared to REACT4C_2006. The QUANTIFY emission inventory has been extended to the additional species needed in the global
chemistry–transport model as described above. As a consequence of the 20 % higher fuel consumption and different assumptions for EIs (for BC and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) in this inventory, the total emissions of primary species are
higher by 18 %–25 % than those provided for REACT4C_2006
(Table 1). This inventory is only used for the sake of comparison with the
more recent REACT4C_2006 inventory and as baseline for the
future perturbations for which 2050 QUANTIFY inventories are used.</p>
      <p id="d1e1925">Table S1 gives the total global emissions for the REACT4C_2006 and QUANTIFY_2000 inventories used in this study and
compares it to the Aviation Climate Change Research Initiative (ACCRI) 2006
Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) (Wilkerson et al., 2010; Brasseur et al.,
2016) and Community Emissions Data System (CEDS) 2006 (Hoesly et al., 2018)
inventories. The AEDT and CEDS inventories use the US governmental's Volpe
National Transportation Systems Centre data. It should be noted that these
inventories differ in terms of not only total fuel use and global emissions
but also vertical distributions as described in Skowron et al. (2013). The QUANTIFY_2000 CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are close to the estimate of 686 TgCO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for 2000 provided by Lee et al. (2021). In 2006, Lee et al. (2021) estimated an emission of 745 TgCO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, larger
than the REACT4C_2006, ACCRI, and CEDS inventories by 33 %, 25 %, and 4 %, respectively. Over the 2006–2018 period, Lee et al. (2021) estimated an increase of 39 %, reaching 1034 Tg CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in
2018. The RFs calculated with the REACT4C_2006 inventory will be rescaled based on these CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions for 2018 in order to be compared to the forcings provided by Lee et al. (2021) at the end of this study.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Future 2050 emission scenarios</title>
      <p id="d1e2018">In this study, the future aircraft emission inventories prepared during the
QUANTIFY EU project, and representative of the year 2050, are used (Owen et
al., 2010). These scenarios were developed more than 10 years ago based on
earlier economic assumptions regarding future Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
growth and aviation demands in various regions according to the storylines of the former Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES) (Nakicenovic and Swart, 2000). They are still used in this study since they can be considered as benchmark scenarios, used in numerous former model simulations and intercomparisons (e.g. Koffi et al., 2010; Hodnebrog et al., 2011, 2012; Righi et al., 2016). These scenarios compare fairly well to the more recent inventories in terms of total future aircraft emissions. Three different aircraft emission inventories are selected in this study: the A1B (labelled QUANTIFY_A1 in the following discussion), B1
(QUANTIFY_B1), and B1_ACARE (QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE) scenarios. These are described in detail in Owen et al. (2010) and are only briefly
summarized in the following discussion. The scenario A1B is representative of an intense growth of the aviation sector during the first part of the century, where global demand is driven by growth of the global economy. Due to technological improvements and the introduction of new and less polluting
aeroplanes within the overall fleet, the fuel efficiency improvement is
assumed to be approximately 1 % yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the period 2000–2050. In
contrast, scenario B1 is a mitigation scenario in which the propensity
to travel is reduced due to the goal of limiting the environmental impact of
aviation and improving local air quality in particular. The fuel efficiency
improves by 1 % yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the 2000–2020 period and increases by 1.3 % yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> after 2020. This leads to a significant reduction of
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and BC global emissions in 2050 for this scenario.
Finally, assuming the technology targets of the Advisory Council for
Aeronautical Research in Europe (ACARE) in 2010, the alternative scenario,
B1_ACARE, is an ambitious mitigation scenario. Here the main goal
is to limit the environmental impact of aviation. In this scenario, the fuel
efficiency assumptions are further tightened and the efficiency improves by
2.1 % yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> after 2020. As a result, the fuel consumption is divided
by more than a factor 2 compared to the A1B scenario in 2050. The reduction
hypotheses behind this extreme goal are the ACARE 2050 goals, which, for
example, aim at a 40 % improvement in aircraft fuel efficiency (with a
further 10 % improvement from air traffic management) compared to an
equivalent new aircraft introduced in 2000. The variables available from the
QUANTIFY three-dimensional inventories are the fuel burn, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and BC
emissions. The highest NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> EIs derived from these inventories are for
the A1B scenario and reaches 15.2 gNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel (20 gNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> below 1800 m and 13.3 gNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> above 8400 m). For the mitigation scenarios B1 and B1_ACARE, the technology improvement strongly impacts the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and the EIs decrease by about a factor of 2 (i.e. 7.9 gNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel and 7.3 gNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel for B1 and B1_ACARE, respectively). For BC, the EI remains fairly constant in the various QUANTIFY future scenarios (0.022, 0.021, and 0.019 gBC kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> fuel for A1B, B1, and B1_ACARE, respectively). The EIs for other species (i.e. H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, CO, HC, OC, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) are assumed to be similar to those used for the REACT4C emission inventory.</p>
      <p id="d1e2261">In addition to the QUANTIFY A1, B1, and B1_ACARE scenarios,
two other mitigation scenarios are used for the perturbation simulations.
The QUANTIFY_LowNOx scenario is identical to the A1 scenario
with the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> EI divided by a factor of 2. This scenario is
intended to illustrate one of the ACARE objectives of reducing NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions by the 2050 time-horizon compared to 2000. Similarly, the
A1_Desulfurized scenario corresponds to the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario, with SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and sulfate emissions imposed to 0 to illustrate the impact of desulfurized fuels on the chemical composition perturbations and climate. Table 2 summarizes the total global emissions in 2050 for the different considered species and for the QUANTIFY_A1, QUANTIFY_B1 and QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE scenarios. As expected, for the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario, an increase in overall fuel consumption compared to the QUANTIFY_2000 of a factor of 3 is obtained and a factor 4 for NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. For the QUANTIFY_B1 and QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE scenarios, the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are reduced by a factor of 3.3 and 4.8, respectively, compared to the A1B scenario. The BC emissions are reduced by a factor of 1.8 and 2.5, respectively, and the SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions by a factor of 1.7 and 2.3
respectively. Figure S1 compares the zonal and annual mean distribution of
REACT4C_2006 and QUANTIFY_A1_2050 fuel use, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and BC emissions.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2331">Total global aircraft emissions for future 2050 baseline scenario
QUANTIFY_A1 and for the two mitigation scenarios
QUANTIFY_B1 and QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Species</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Units</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">A1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">B1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">B1_ACARE</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Fuel</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Tg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">716</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">434</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">313</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Tg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2257</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1367</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">986</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">TgN yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.69</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Gg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">16.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">8.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">6.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">GgS yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">280</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">170</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">120</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Gg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">280</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">150</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">110</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">OC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Gg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">35.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">15.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">GgS yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Tg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">886</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">537</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">387</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CO</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Tg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2707">For 2050, the total emissions from the QUANTIFY inventories are compared to
the recent Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) scenarios (Hoesly et al.,
2018) and the ACCRI AEDT scenarios (Brasseur et al., 2016) in Table S2.
The ACCRI 2050-Base scenario is a high-emission scenario providing emissions
even higher than the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario, particularly in
terms of BC (81 % higher), SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (87 % higher),
and to a lesser extent, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (20 % higher) emissions. We also note for
comparison that Skowron et al. (2021) recently assumed a high air traffic
growth and low technology development reaching a high NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission of
5.59 TgN yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2050 in their “high scenario”, and a low air traffic growth and optimistic technology development reaching 2.17 TgN yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2050 for the “low scenario”, intermediately between the A1B and B1 scenarios in terms of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. The ACCRI 2050-S1 scenario also provides emissions intermediately between the A1B and B1 scenarios in terms of global NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and BC emissions. Additionally, the SSP3-7.0 scenario, used as a reference in the AerChemMIP model intercomparison (Collins et al., 2017), provides NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions intermediately between the QUANTIFY_A1 and QUANTIFY_B1 and BC and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions close to QUANTIFY_A1. The mitigation scenario SSP1-2.6, also used as a mitigation option for the AerChemMIP simulations, is close to the
QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE in terms of global emissions. This comparison suggests that the benchmark QUANTIFY scenarios used in this study are generally consistent with more recent aircraft scenarios in terms of global mean emissions and provide a reasonable estimate for both baseline and mitigation scenarios.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>The LMDZ-INCA model</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Model description</title>
      <p id="d1e2815">The LMDZ-INCA global chemistry–aerosol–climate model couples the
LMDZ (Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique, version 6) general
circulation model (GCM; Hourdin et al., 2020) and the INCA (INteraction with
Chemistry and Aerosols, version 5) model (Hauglustaine et al., 2004, 2014) online. The interaction between the atmosphere and the land surface is ensured through the coupling of LMDZ with the ORCHIDEE (ORganizing Carbon and
Hydrology In Dynamic Ecosystems, version 1.9) dynamical vegetation model
(Krinner et al., 2005). In the present configuration, we use the “Standard
Physics” parameterization of the GCM (Boucher et al., 2020). The model
includes 39 hybrid vertical levels extending up to 70 km. The horizontal
resolution is 1.9<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in latitude and 3.75<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in longitude.
The primitive equations in the GCM are solved with a 3 min time step,
large-scale transport of tracers is carried out every 15 min, and physical
and chemical processes are calculated at a 30 min time interval. For a more
detailed description and an extended evaluation of the GCM, we refer to
Hourdin et al. (2020). The large-scale advection of tracers is calculated
based on a monotonic finite-volume second-order scheme (Van Leer, 1977;
Hourdin and Armengaud, 1999). Deep convection is parameterized according to
the scheme of Emanuel (1991). The turbulent mixing in the planetary boundary
layer is based on a local second-order closure formalism. The transport and
mixing of tracers in the LMDZ GCM have been investigated and evaluated
against observations for both inert tracers and radioactive tracers (e.g.
Hourdin and Issartel, 2000; Hauglustaine et al., 2004), and in the framework
of inverse modelling studies (e.g. Bousquet et al., 2011; Zhao et al.,
2019).</p>
      <p id="d1e2836">The INCA model initially included a state-of-the-art CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-CO-NMHC-O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> tropospheric photochemistry (Hauglustaine et al., 2004; Folberth et al., 2006). The tropospheric photochemistry and aerosol scheme used in this model version is described through a total of 123 tracers including 22 tracers to represent aerosols. The model includes 234 homogeneous chemical reactions, 43 photolytic reactions, and 30 heterogeneous reactions. Please refer to Hauglustaine et al. (2004) and Folberth et al. (2006) for the list of reactions included in the tropospheric chemistry scheme. The gas-phase version of the model has been extensively compared to observations in the lower stratosphere and upper troposphere. For aerosols, the INCA model simulates the distribution of aerosols with anthropogenic sources such as sulfates, nitrates, BC, OC, as well as natural aerosols such as sea salt and dust. The heterogeneous reactions on both natural and anthropogenic tropospheric aerosols are included in the model (Bauer et al., 2004; Hauglustaine et al., 2004, 2014). The aerosol model keeps track of both the number and the mass of aerosols using a modal approach to treat the size distribution, which is described by a superposition of five log-normal modes (Schulz, 2007), each with a fixed spread. To treat the optically relevant aerosol-size diversity, particle modes exist for three ranges: sub-micronic (diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) corresponding to the accumulation mode, micronic (diameter between 1 and 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) corresponding to coarse particles, and super-micronic or super coarse particles (diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m). This treatment in modes is computationally much more efficient compared to a bin scheme (Schulz et al., 1998). Furthermore, to account for the diversity in chemical composition, hygroscopicity, and mixing state, we distinguish between soluble and insoluble modes. In both sub-micron and micron size, soluble and insoluble aerosols are treated separately. Sea salt, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and methane sulfonic acid (MSA) are treated as soluble components of the aerosol, dust is treated as insoluble, whereas BC and OC appear in both the soluble and insoluble fractions. The ageing of primary insoluble carbonaceous particles transfers insoluble aerosol number and mass to soluble with a half-life of 1.1 d. Ammonia and nitrate
aerosols are considered as described by Hauglustaine et al. (2014). The
aerosol component of the LMDZ-INCA model has been extensively evaluated
during the various phases of AEROCOM (e.g. Gliß et al., 2021; Bian et
al., 2017).</p>
      <p id="d1e2929">Earlier versions of the LMDZ-INCA model only including gas-phase
tropospheric chemistry were used previously to assess the impact of
subsonic aircraft on tropospheric ozone (Koffi et al., 2010; Hauglustaine
and Koffi, 2012). These previous versions of the LMDZ-INCA model prescribed the ozone distribution to satellite observations above a potential temperature of 380 K, providing a strong constraint on the ozone
perturbation at aircraft flight altitudes. In order to assess the impact of
aircraft emissions on atmospheric composition, the model has been extended
to include an interactive chemistry in the stratosphere and mesosphere.
Chemical species and reactions specific to the middle atmosphere have been
included. A total of 31 species were added to the standard chemical scheme,
mostly belonging to the chlorine and bromine chemistry, along with 66 gas-phase reactions and 26 photolytic reactions. Water vapour is now affected by both physical processes in LMDZ and, in the stratosphere, an additional H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O tracer is introduced in INCA to account for photochemical
production and destruction. In addition, heterogeneous processes on polar
stratospheric clouds (PSCs) and stratospheric aerosols are parameterized in
INCA following the scheme implemented in Lefèvre et al. (1994). The PSCs are first predicted as a function of the local partial pressures of H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O and HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, using the saturation vapour pressures for type I PSC (nitric acid trihydrate crystals) and for type II PSC (water ice) (Hanson et al., 1988; Carslaw et al., 1995). The excess of H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O and HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is removed from the gas phase when saturation occurs and is used to compute the surface area concentration in the PSC region. Heterogeneous reaction rates are calculated
explicitly, as a function of the surface area available, mean molecular
velocity, and the reaction probabilities. Furthermore, the PSC scheme
includes sedimentation of the cloud material. The fallout of PSC particles
affects the vertical distribution of H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and HCl. Condensed
species are returned to the gas phase when clouds evaporate. In the presence
of PSCs, the heterogeneous reactions convert bromine and chlorine reservoirs
(HCl, HBr, ClONO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, BrONO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) into reactive species (Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
ClNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, HOCl, Br<inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, BrNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, HOBr) based on nine additional
heterogeneous reactions introduced in the chemical scheme. The distribution
of stratospheric aerosols is prescribed according to the Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI) exercise (Thomason et al., 2018).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Model evaluation</title>
      <p id="d1e3059">We mostly refer to previous publications for a general evaluation of the
LMDZ-INCA model performances and comparison against observations for both
gas-phase chemistry and aerosols (e.g. Brunner et al., 2003, 2005;
Hauglustaine et al., 2004; Folberth et al., 2006; Myhre et al., 2013;
Hauglustaine et al., 2014; Koffi et al., 2016). The version of the LMDZ-INCA
model used in this study and extended to the stratosphere has been evaluated
by comparing model outputs with observations, particularly in the
upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, before the model has been applied
to investigate the impact of aircraft emissions. In this study, we summarize
this evaluation for two key observational datasets.</p>
      <p id="d1e3062">Figure 1 summarizes the assessment of the modelled ozone seasonal cycle
against ozonesondes as compiled by Tilmes et al. (2012) and with respect to
the latitude and pressure domains. We present Taylor diagrams to summarize
the model biases and correlations with the dataset. The model results are interpolated on both the horizontal and vertical to mimic the 42 ozonesonde station observations over the 1995–2011 observational period.
The pressure levels are further grouped into pressure ranges represented by different colours for the sake of clarity. In terms of yearly mean biases, we
distinguish two distribution modes for the three geographical domains,
although it is less visible in the tropics (0–30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>): the 100–200 hPa pressure range (corresponding to the lower stratosphere in the
middle (30–60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and high (60–90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) latitudes), and the
other pressure intervals throughout the troposphere. On the one hand, the 200–1000 hPa mean values show a tendency towards negative biases, especially at high latitudes where the modelled yearly averages spread from about 60 % to 100 % with respect to the observations, contrasting with the 80 % to 110 % interval elsewhere. On the other hand, most of 100–200 hPa yearly mean values are positively biased. In the middle and high latitudes, almost all the significant positive biases concern this pressure domain.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e3094">Taylor diagram comparing the mean and temporal correlation of
ozone volume mixing ratio between ozonesonde climatology over the 1995–2011
period (Tilmes et al., 2012) and LMDZ-INCA model results, interpolated to
the sample locations and vertical levels for high latitudes
(60–90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), mid-latitudes (30–60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and tropical
(0–30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) stations. The colours correspond to different pressure
ranges, each including different pressure levels (100–200 hPa: 3 levels;
200–300 hPa: 2 levels; 300–400 hPa: 2 levels; 400–800 hPa: 5 levels; 800–900 hPa: 2 levels; 900–1000 hPa: 2 levels).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3131">With regards to correlation between observed and modelled seasonal cycles, Pearson's <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> coefficient mainly spreads from 0.60 up to 0.95, and is mostly
greater than 0.8. Outside the tropics, this metric also shows distinct
distribution modes between the same pressure domains. Higher correlations
are reported in the 100–200 hPa interval where most <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values are greater
than 0.9 and part of them even reach the 0.99 value. Note that the six
high-latitude points showing a poor correlation and a strong positive bias
correspond to the three stations located in the southern polar region
(Marambio, 64<inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S; Syowa, 69<inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S; Neumayer, 70<inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S) at 125 and 150 hPa. Consequently, although the simulation tends to
overestimate lower-stratospheric ozone in the middle and high latitudes, it
reproduces the seasonality particularly well outside the southern pole.</p>
      <p id="d1e3175">As with the Taylor diagrams, Fig. 2 provides the assessment of the modelled
geographical distribution against IAGOS observations for ozone and CO,
averaged over the periods December 1994–November 2017 and December 2001–November 2017, respectively (Cohen et al., 2018). The IAGOS (<uri>https://www.iagos.org/</uri>, last access: 7 September 2022) is a European research infrastructure performing in situ measurements on board several passenger aircraft (Petzold et al., 2015). Amongst the observed variables, ozone and CO have been monitored since August 1994 and December 2001, respectively. Information on the instruments is available in Thouret et al. (1998) and Marenco et al. (1998) for ozone and in Nédélec et al. (2003, 2015) for CO. The model assessment against the aircraft-based
measurements is performed using the Interpol-IAGOS software (Cohen et al.,
2021) that entails projecting the IAGOS data onto the model grid and
deriving monthly means for each sampled grid cell. The model monthly averages
are then derived from the daily output by applying a mask with respect to
the IAGOS sampling. Lastly, for each dataset, these monthly outputs are used
to derive seasonal and annual climatologies. For this comparison we apply
the methodology for comparison with the global model described in Cohen et
al. (2021). Since all four cruise-altitude levels are regularly crossed
by the tropopause, each of them will contain both high-ozone (low-CO) and
low-ozone (high-CO) grid cells. To account for these discrepancies
while deriving a mean bias, thus to avoid absolute biases in high values to
govern the results, the normalized mean value shown in these graphics is
derived from the modified normalized mean bias (MNMB).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e3183">Taylor diagram comparing the mean and geographical correlation of the volume mixing ratio of ozone (left) and carbon monoxide (right) between the IAGOS database (Cohen et al., 2018, 2021) and the LMDZ-INCA model results. The error bars denote the first and third quartiles of the model to
IAGOS biases for a given vertical level and season.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3192">In yearly means, the normalized mean value for ozone spreads from about
70 % up to 125 % and increases with the altitude, consistently with Fig. 1. It is also the case with the dependence on the season, represented by a 10 % difference at 300 hPa and a 30 % difference at 180 hPa. The same scheme is reproduced between the three highest levels, i.e. a lower
summertime value and a greater wintertime value, likely depending on the
distance from the tropopause. It suggests that the vertical ozone gradient
in the lower stratosphere is overestimated by the model. However, the ozone
geographical distribution is remarkably well correlated between the
simulation and the observations, with all the yearly <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> coefficients greater
than 0.92. This is especially the case at the highest levels. One possible
reason is a good representation of tropopause motions at northern
mid-latitudes, which ensures a realistic proportion between stratospheric
and tropospheric air masses in most grid cells. Carbon monoxide is
characterized by relatively small biases at the IAGOS-coverage scale,
showing a balance between regional positive and negative biases. As for
ozone, the correlation increases with altitude. However, the poor
correlation reported at the lowest level highlights the difficulties to
simulate the upward transport of pollutants in the troposphere.</p>
      <p id="d1e3202">The distribution of aerosol surface concentrations (sulfates, nitrates,
ammonium) calculated with this version of the model has been evaluated and
compared to surface stations by Hauglustaine et al. (2014) over Europe and
Northern America and by Li et al. (2016) over China; it is not repeated
here. However, Fig. S2 compares the calculated total aerosol optical depth
(AOD) at 550 nm to the AERONET and MODIS observations for Eastern and
Central China, Western Europe and the Eastern United States. A very good
agreement is obtained for MODIS data with biases of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, 1.4 %, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for these three regions, respectively, and a correlation
coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.59, 0.55, and 0.86. Larger biases are calculated against
AERONET data, particularly over regions characterized with very high
aerosol loading such as China. Biases of respectively <inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, 10 %, and 24 % are obtained for the three regions with correlation coefficients of 0.5, 0.45, and 0.78.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Model setup</title>
      <p id="d1e3250">In this study, meteorological data from the European Centre for Medium-Range
Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) ERA-Interim reanalysis were used. The
relaxation of the GCM winds towards ECMWF meteorology is performed by
applying a correction term  at each time step to the GCM u and v wind
components with a relaxation time of 2.5 h (Hourdin and Issartel, 2000;
Hauglustaine et al., 2004). The ECMWF fields are provided every 6 h and
interpolated onto the LMDZ grid. We focus this work on the impact of
aircraft emissions on atmospheric composition, its future evolution, and its
direct RF of climate. In order to isolate the impact of
aircraft emissions, all snapshot simulations are performed under present-day
climate conditions and run for a period of 10 years after a 2-year
spin-up. Therefore, ECMWF meteorological data for 2000–2009 are used. The
perturbations are averaged over the last 3 years of the simulations. The impact of climate change on aircraft perturbations is however an interesting topic to be investigated in future studies.</p>
      <p id="d1e3253">For the baseline simulations, the anthropogenic emissions compiled by
Lamarque et al. (2010) are added to the natural fluxes used in the INCA
model. The ORCHIDEE vegetation model was used to calculate the
biogenic surface fluxes of isoprene, terpenes, acetone, and methanol as well as NO soil emissions offline as described by Lathière et al. (2005). The NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from natural soils and ocean are taken from Bouwman et al. (1997). Natural emissions of dust and sea salt are computed using the 10 m wind components from the ECMWF reanalysis. For the future simulations (2050), the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) 6.0 anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions provided by Lamarque et al. (2011) are used. Natural emissions for both gaseous species and particles are kept to their
present-day level. Lightning is an important source of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the
upper troposphere at aircraft cruise altitudes. The lightning NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions are parameterized in the model based on convective cloud heights
as described in Jourdain et al. (2001). Based on this parameterization, the
total lightning NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions for the baseline simulation is 5.5 TgN yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The methane surface mixing ratio used for both chemistry simulations and RF calculations is fixed to 1769 and 1895 ppbv for the
present-day (2006) and 2050 baseline simulations, respectively. For
N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, the surface mixing ratio is fixed to 323 and 355 ppbv for 2006 and
2050, respectively.</p>
      <p id="d1e3314">The impact of aviation emissions on atmospheric composition is calculated
based on a 100 % perturbation methodology, comparing the results of the
simulations with aircraft emissions to a reference simulation with zero
aircraft emissions. As discussed by Søvde et al. (2014), in previous
work, both 5 % perturbations (e.g. Hoor et al., 2009; Hodnebrog et al.,
2012) and 100 % perturbations (e.g. Gauss et al., 2006; Søvde et al.,
2014) were applied. Koffi et al. (2010) compared the two methodologies
and found that the 100 % perturbation of transport emissions induces a
6 % higher transport-induced ozone burden perturbation in the case of
aircraft emissions. As noted by Søvde et al. (2014), the small
perturbation approach is more adapted when different transport modes,
affected differently by non-linearities, are compared. The 100 %
perturbation gives the overall effect of aircraft, without considering
compensating effects from other emission sectors due to chemical
non-linearity (Koffi et al., 2010; Søvde et al., 2014; Grewe et al.,
2019). This non-linear chemistry mostly depends on the background of
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and HCs, and increases with larger perturbations in
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. In this study we only focus on aircraft emissions, in contrast to
other studies which compared the impact of emissions from different transport
modes (e.g. Hoor et al., 2009; Koffi et al., 2010; Hodnebrog et al., 2012).
A sensitivity analysis (as we envisaged our simulations) aims at
characterizing the concentration change resulting from a given emissions
change (Clappier et al., 2017). On the other hand, source apportionment
approaches aim to quantify contributions by attributing a fraction of the
pollutant concentration to each emission source (e.g. tagged species
approach) (Grewe et al., 2010, 2019; Clappier et al., 2017; Matthes et al., 2021). The two methods provide different results but also
different information. The source apportionment accounts for non-linearities
and is used to retrieve information on the source contribution to the
concentration of one pollutant (e.g. contributions of different transport
modes to ozone). Sensitivity or impact methods are used to determine the
impact of abatement strategies. In this study, which only focuses on aircraft
impact, we adopt the 100 % perturbation, keeping in mind that this may
mask some mild non-linearities. Table 3 summarizes the simulations performed
and analysed in this study.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e3339">LMDZ-INCA model simulations performed in this study.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Simulation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Description</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col2"> Present-day  </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Base case</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">No aircraft emissions.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_2006</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Present-day with REACT4C_2006 aircraft emissions.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_PLUS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">REACT4C_2006 with aircraft flight altitude increased by 2000 ft.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_MINUS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">REACT4C_2006 with aircraft flight altitude decreased by 2000 ft.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_2000</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Present-day with QUANTIFY_2000 aircraft emissions.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col2">Future (2050) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Base case</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">No aircraft emissions.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Reference future with QUANTIFY_A1 aircraft emissions.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1_LowNOx</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Future with QUANTIFY_A1 aircraft emissions with NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1_Desulfurized</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Future with QUANTIFY_A1 aircraft emissions with SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions <inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_B1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Future with QUANTIFY_B1 aircraft mitigation emissions.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Future with QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE aircraft mitigation emissions.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Radiative forcing (RF) calculations</title>
      <p id="d1e3519">Several RFs associated with atmospheric composition changes due to aircraft emissions are computed online during the LMDZ-INCA simulations. This is the case for the various components of the direct aerosol forcing in particular. The radiative calculations in the GCM are based on an improved version of the ECMWF scheme developed by Fouquart and Bonnel (1980) in the solar part of the spectrum and by Morcrette (1991) in the thermal infrared. The short-wave spectrum is divided into two intervals: 0.25–0.68 and 0.68–4.00 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m. The model accounts for the diurnal cycle of solar radiation and allows fractional cloudiness to form in a grid box. These RFs are calculated as instantaneous, clear-sky and all-sky forcings at the surface and at the top of the atmosphere. In Sect. 6, the all-sky forcings at the top of the atmosphere will be presented for aerosols as was done for instance by Hauglustaine et al. (2014).</p>
      <p id="d1e3530">A different protocol is used for ozone and stratospheric water vapour. For
these two species, the RFs at the tropopause are calculated
with an offline version of the LMDZ GCM radiative transfer model described
above. In this offline version, the forcings are calculated on a monthly
mean basis using the temperature, water vapour, cloud distributions, optical properties, surface albedo, and ozone fields stored from the GCM
simulations and read from pre-established history files. The fixed-dynamical
heating approximation is then applied to the calculations with a thermal
adjustment of the stratosphere. The radiative code iterates until the
forcings at the top of the atmosphere converge with the forcings at the
tropopause. The iterations are performed with a 1-day time step over 200 d. This offline radiative transfer model has already been used to calculate the tropospheric ozone RFs in Berntsen et al. (2005) and more recently, in Li et al. (2016).</p>
      <p id="d1e3533">As described in previous work (e.g. Fuglestvedt et al., 1999; Skowron et
al., 2013), the decrease in methane mixing ratio due to aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions and associated with enhanced oxidation by OH, is responsible for a
long-term methane direct RF that we calculate at equilibrium
based on the change in the methane photochemical lifetime, including the
methane feedback on its own lifetime. According to this methodology, the
steady-state methane mixing ratio decrease due to aircraft emissions is
given by (Prather, 1994; Fiore et al., 2009; Holmes, 2018)
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M266" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the new steady-state methane mixing ratio,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the reference methane mixing ratio (taken as 1769
ppbv for the present day and 1985 ppbv in 2050), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes the methane
feedback on its own lifetime (Prather et al., 2001; Holmes et al., 2011),
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (%) is the change in the
methane lifetime due to aircraft emissions and subsequent OH
perturbation. The associated direct RF of climate of this
change in methane is calculated using the simple formula revised by Etminan
et al. (2016). As reported by these authors, the inclusion of the short-wave
contribution in this revised expression results, for instance, in a 24.5 % increase of the methane forcing associated with a halving of its
concentration, compared to the previous literature (Myhre et al., 1998). For
the methane feedback factor, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, Prather et al. (2001) derived a best estimate value of 1.4 based on a multimodel range of 1.33–1.45. A similar best estimate value was recommended by Holmes et al. (2011). Fiore et al. (2009) derived a multimodel ensemble mean of 1.33 and a range of 1.25–1.43, including a value of 1.31 contributed with an earlier version of the LMDZ-INCA model. The feedback factor has been recalculated in this study for the current version of our model based on a reference simulation and a
10 % perturbation in methane surface mixing ratio simulation. Based on
this set of simulations and the methodology described in Fiore et al. (2009), we recalculated a methane feedback factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of 1.36, in agreement with
the previous estimates. This factor is then used in Eq. (1) in order to
derive the change in methane mixing ratio due to aircraft emissions and the
associated RF of climate. It should be noted that this estimate of the methane feedback is based on fixed surface CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations. Other methodologies have also been proposed to evaluate this feedback and in particular, the use of methane surface fluxes (Khodayari et al., 2015; Pitari et al., 2016). Khodayari et al. (2015) concluded that for the simulations with fixed CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at the lower boundary condition, the parameterization based on Eq. (1) using the global mean lifetime approach overestimates the change in CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> by 8.6 % compared to the change calculated directly from the model using CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> surface emissions. The overestimation is 12.1 %–20.0 % if using other lifetime approaches. They concluded that the parameterization based on Eq. (1) is good within
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % when using the global mean lifetime approach.</p>
      <p id="d1e3717">The indirect forcings associated with this change in methane mixing ratio
through long-term tropospheric ozone and stratospheric water-vapour
adjustments were recalculated with the LMDZ-INCA global model. This was done
by imposing the new steady-state methane surface mixing ratio <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (1744 ppbv) calculated from Eq. (1) for the present-day
REACT4C_2006 simulation in the three-dimensional model and running it
for a period of 10 years in order to determine the associated change in
ozone and stratospheric water vapour by comparing it to a reference simulation using <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (1769 ppbv) as methane surface mixing ratio. In this case, we calculated a change in ozone after 10 years of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.93</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Tg (0.085 DU) and a change in stratospheric water vapour of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Tg. Thereafter, we calculated ozone and stratospheric water vapour RFs for these perturbations. These calculations provide an indirect long-term ozone forcing of 116 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ppmv<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and an indirect long-term
stratospheric water vapour forcing of 27 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ppmv<inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. The ozone forcing is smaller by 17 % compared to the value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">140</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ppmv<inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> provided by Forster et al. (2021), but well within the provided confidence level. For stratospheric H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O, the forcing is subject to a larger uncertainty, and we derive a lower forcing by 32 % compared to the value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ppmv<inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> provided by Forster et al. (2021), but also well within the confidence level. These calculated forcings were then used to derive the indirect long-term ozone and water vapour forcings for the other aircraft emission scenarios based on a simple scaling with the methane mixing ratio change calculated with Eq. (1) for all simulations.</p>
      <p id="d1e3923">Carbon dioxide is the end product of the methane atmospheric oxidation. Hence, the production of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is an indirect RF resulting from the change in methane mixing ratio due to increased oxidation by OH from aviation NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. Since intermediate carbon containing methane oxidation products are subject to dry and wet deposition, not every oxidized methane molecule results in a produced CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> molecule. In this study, we assume that 1 molec. of change in CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> oxidation leads to 0.6 molec. of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> produced (Folberth et al., 2005; Boucher et al., 2009). The decrease in CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> due to enhanced oxidation is then translated into a change in CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and converted to an RF based on the simple formula from Myhre et al. (1998). Based on the REACT4C_2006 change in methane mixing ratio, we derive an indirect CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of 8.25 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ppmv<inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. This normalized number
is used to calculate the forcings for the other simulations.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Present-day baseline perturbations</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Aviation impact on atmospheric composition</title>
      <p id="d1e4069">Figure 3 presents the daily changes in concentration associated with the
base REACT4C_2006 aircraft emission inventory for several key
species at 250 hPa (i.e. cruise altitude). For NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, a strong seasonal
cycle is calculated with a fall–winter maximum reaching 39 pptv and a summer minimum of 15–20 pptv located at 30–60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and
corresponding mostly to the transatlantic flight corridors. A northward
transport of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, associated with the transport of mid-latitude air
masses to the polar regions is visible. During spring, the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing
ratio increases by up to 20 pptv at high latitudes. The geographical
distribution depicted in Fig. 4 shows that NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> increases by up to 60 pptv in regions with high aircraft emissions over Europe and North America.
It also extends to Northeast Asia and Japan, reaching more than 40 pptv. As
a consequence of this increase in NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations, ozone increases
by 3–6 ppbv at flight altitude at northern mid-latitudes. A marked seasonal
cycle (Fig. 3), associated with the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> increase and higher
photochemical activity, is calculated at mid–high northern latitudes and
peaks in May. This maximum reached in May at high latitudes results from
a combination of a more intense photochemical activity in summer combined
with a more intense transport poleward in spring. As a consequence, the peak
is reached at the end of the spring season. A maximum zonal mean ozone
increase reaching almost 7 ppbv is calculated in polar regions where
photochemistry is active and where mid-latitude ozone is transported and
accumulates. Due to its longer lifetime, the change in ozone at 250 hPa
reaches 2–4 ppbv over most of the Northern Hemisphere above 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N
(Fig. 4).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e4147">Daily and zonally averaged perturbations due to aircraft emissions
at 250 hPa of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (pptv), O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppbv), OH (10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> pptv), H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O (ppbv), BC (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) for the
REACT4C_2006 inventory.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e4231">Spatial distribution of the 250 hPa perturbations due to aircraft
emissions for the month of January <bold>(a, c)</bold> and May <bold>(b, d)</bold> for the mixing ratios of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (pptv) and ozone (ppbv) for the REACT4C_2006 inventory.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4256">The zonal mean distributions of the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> perturbations are
shown in Fig. 5 for January and May. These 2 months are chosen in order to
illustrate the minimum and maximum perturbations in atmospheric composition.
The NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> increase reaches a maximum of about 45 pptv (60 %) at 250 hPa and at 40–60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N during both seasons. In May, the
mixing of air masses towards higher latitudes is visible with increased
mixing ratios reaching about 25 pptv at the pole. The induced ozone
perturbation ranges from a maximum of 3 ppbv in January to a maximum of 6–7 ppbv in May (4 %). These results agree with the model intercomparison of Søvde et al. (2014) who calculated, with the same aircraft emission inventory, a maximum ozone increase ranging from 4.8 to 8.8 ppbv during summer, and a lower impact in winter associated with less photochemical activity, and ranging from 3.4 to 4.4 ppbv. They are also in agreement in terms of distribution and ozone increase with the earlier model
intercomparison results by Hoor et al. (2009) obtained with the
QUANTIFY_2000 emission inventory, and with the peak absolute ozone increase of 5 to 8 ppbv calculated by Olsen et al. (2013). The
calculated maximum ozone perturbation occurs between 300 and 200 hPa in both
seasons. A downward transport of the ozone produced is visible down to 800 hPa at 30–40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N. Due to higher photochemical activity
at high latitudes (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N), and mixing and
accumulation of air masses around the pole, the ozone increase is centred
in polar regions during May. In winter, this maximum is located at lower
latitudes between 40 and 60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, as illustrated in
Fig. 4. The maximum perturbation associated with aircraft emissions appears
just above the tropopause at high latitudes, showing the need to account for chemistry in both the troposphere and the stratosphere (Gauss et al.,
2006; Søvde et al., 2014; Khodayari et al., 2014a). As a result of the
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and hence ozone increases, an increase of OH located between
30 and 50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, depending on the solar radiation
seasonal cycle, and reaching <inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pptv is calculated (Fig. 3).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e4374">Zonal mean perturbations due to aircraft emissions for January
<bold>(a, c, e)</bold> and May <bold>(b, d, f)</bold> of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (pptv), O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppbv), and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O (ppbv) for the REACT4C_2006 inventory. The solid line represents the model tropopause pressure.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4416">The increase in water vapour associated with H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O aircraft emissions
shows a strong seasonal cycle and reaches a maximum of 3.5 ppbv in spring at
250 hPa (Fig. 3). The zonal mean distribution (Fig. 5) shows that the
maximum is located in the stratosphere where the water vapour lifetime is
longer. The increase in stratospheric water vapour reaches 19 ppbv (0.2 %) at 200 hPa in January at 60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N. In May, the increase reaches about 10 ppbv at this latitude. This is significantly lower than the 64 ppbv annual mean maximum increase calculated by Wilcox et al. (2012) with a Lagrangian model and considering water vapour as a passive tracer. With a
Lagrangian model, Morris et al. (2003) also calculated an increase of water
vapour due to aircraft emissions of more than 150 ppbv just above the
tropopause and less than 2 ppbv in the stratosphere. In our model setup,
the increase of water vapour is reset to zero below the model tropopause at
each time step, strictly limiting the aircraft perturbation to a
stratospheric perturbation.</p>
      <p id="d1e4437">For BC (Fig. 3), the seasonal cycle is well marked with a maximum reaching
0.16 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in winter–spring and a minimum in summer of
0.01 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. This aerosol accumulates at cruise altitude during winter, leading to a marked maximum. In summer, due to more intense atmospheric mixing, these high concentrations are mixed to lower altitudes. Meridional and poleward transport is also visible for these particles and higher concentrations are reached from 40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N to the pole, in agreement with the transport of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> discussed earlier. The change in SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration (not shown) exhibits a similar feature with a winter maximum reaching more than 6 pptv. For this aerosol precursor, despite direct
aircraft emissions, a decrease is calculated in summer reaching 3.5 pptv,
and corresponding to the SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> oxidation by OH-forming sulfate particles.
As a consequence of this enhanced production, a maximum increase in SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
is calculated from May to September and reaches 8–12 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 3).</p>
      <p id="d1e4522">Figure 6 shows the geographical distribution of the BC perturbation at 250 hPa. In January, the maximum reaching 0.17 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is located over source regions in North America, Europe, and Eastern Asia with zonal transport over the Pacific and Atlantic flight corridors. The distribution in May clearly shows transport and accumulation of BC in polar regions. The zonal mean distribution of the BC perturbation is shown in Fig. 7 and exhibits a maximum of 0.15 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (1 %) between 300 and 200 hPa at 40–70<inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N. A redistribution of these flight altitude emissions
through subsidence is visible with a secondary maximum of about 0.08 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (0.15 %) calculated in the lower troposphere around
30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N. These results are in line with the perturbations calculated
by Righi et al. (2016) and range from 0.05–0.1 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in annual mean
at cruise altitude in the Northern Hemisphere. In the lower troposphere,
Righi et al. (2016) calculated a somewhat higher BC concentration increase,
reaching up to 0.5 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> near the surface.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e4607">Spatial distributions of the 250 hPa perturbations due to aircraft
emissions for January <bold>(a, c, e)</bold> and May <bold>(b, d, f)</bold> for BC, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) for the REACT4C_2006 inventory.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e4654">Zonal mean perturbations due to aircraft emissions for January
(left) and May (right) of BC (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (pptv), SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
(ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) for the REACT4C_2006
inventory. The solid line represents the tropopause pressure.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4727">The geographical distribution of sulfates at 250 hPa (Fig. 6), clearly shows
a strong seasonal cycle associated with increased oxidation of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in
spring, reaching 14 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in May over a large part of Europe and Asia. In Fig. 7, the zonal mean SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> perturbation varies between 8 ppt (40 %) in January and 5 ppt (30 %) in May at 200 hPa between
40 and 90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N. The associated sulfate perturbation
reaches a maximum of 10 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (4 %) in May with a minimum of 5 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (3 %) simulated in January and localized, as for BC, between 300 and 200 hPa at the latitude band between 30–50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N
and with a clear poleward transport in May. As seen for BC, a significant
subsidence of the sulfate perturbation is calculated between 30–40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N. Again, these results agree with the perturbations
calculated by Righi et al. (2016) with the EMAC model, reaching 2–5 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in annual mean at cruise altitude in the Northern Hemisphere. In the lower troposphere, Righi et al. (2016) calculated a higher SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration increase reaching up to 10 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> near the surface. Since similar EIs are used in both studies, this points towards
a more efficient removal of aerosols in LMDZ-INCA than in EMAC.</p>
      <p id="d1e4854">Nitrates are not emitted by aviation, but their distribution is affected by
two competing processes. On the one hand, the increase of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> reduces the amount of NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> available for ammonium nitrate formation, and on the other hand, the increase of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> enhances the production of nitrates. At cruise altitudes, the strong increase in SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> dominates and an overall decrease in nitrates of up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (7 %) is calculated in May over Europe and Asia, collocated with the increase in sulfates (Fig. 6). In regions characterized by high NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations, in India or Southeast Asia, enough ammonia is still present after ammonium sulfate production to increase the production of ammonium nitrate when more NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> associated with aircraft emissions are present. This is the case, particularly in January around 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N in the lower troposphere (Fig. 7), but also at cruise altitudes in localized areas in India and Southeast Asia (Fig. 6). In these regions, an increase of nitrates reaching more than 9 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is calculated. Righi et al. (2016) calculated a very similar zonal mean pattern for the nitrate concentration perturbation, decreasing in the upper troposphere by up to 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in annual mean and increasing by 5–10 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the lower troposphere. Similarly, the zonal mean perturbation pattern for nitrate aerosols agrees with the results presented by Unger (2011).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Impact of flight altitude changes</title>
      <p id="d1e5004">The atmospheric lifetime of pollutants emitted by aviation is highly
dependent on the altitude at which they are injected into the atmosphere
(Grewe et al., 2002; Gauss et al., 2006; Frömming et al., 2012; Søvde
et al., 2014; Matthes et al., 2017). The sensitivity of the calculated
perturbations to the flight altitude is illustrated in this section based on
the REACT4C_PLUS and REACT4C_MINUS emissions, respectively corresponding to an increase or decrease of the flight cruise altitude at 2000 ft compared to the REACT4C_2006 baseline inventory.</p>
      <p id="d1e5007">Figure 8 shows the impact of the flight altitude variation on the zonal mean
distribution of key species compared to the baseline scenario. These
variations are illustrated for May conditions when the maximum impact of
aircraft emissions is calculated by the model, as illustrated in the
previous section. As a consequence of the chemical lifetime increase with altitude, a higher (resp. lower) flight cruise altitude increases (resp. decreases) the change in ozone mixing ratio by 1.7 ppbv (30 %) (resp. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ppbv) between 150 and 250 hPa compared to the baseline scenario. The impact on ozone is comparable to the results obtained by Søvde et al. (2014) and Matthes et al. (2017, 2021) (1–2 ppb in summer and 0.4–1 ppb in winter). Similarly, the BC concentration increases by 0.031 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (20 %) when the flight altitude is increased and, in contrast, decreases by 0.032 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> with a lowered flight altitude.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e5046">Zonal mean difference for the months of May for O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppbv), BC
(ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) between the REACT4C_PLUS (left) and REACT4C_MINUS (right) simulations and REACT4C_2006 as the reference. The solid line represents the tropopause pressure.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e5120">Directly related to the response of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to flight altitude changes, the
concentration of sulfates shows a behaviour similar to the primary aerosol
BC, and increases by a maximum of 2.3 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (22 %) between 250 and 150 hPa at 40–90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N in the REACT4C_PLUS simulation and decreases by 2.3 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the REACT4C_MINUS simulation. In contrast, the variation of nitrate aerosols shows an opposite behaviour associated with the change in sulfates. An increase in sulfates reduces the NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> available for forming ammonium nitrate particles in favour of ammonium sulfates, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> decreases by 0.84 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (23 %) at flight altitude in the REACT4C_PLUS simulation. Please note that the change in sulfates is maximum at high latitudes but the maximum perturbation in nitrates occurs at lower latitudes (around 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) where more NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is present at this altitude. Similarly, the decrease in sulfate concentration calculated in the REACT4C_MINUS scenario induces an increase of ammonium nitrate particles of 0.83 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 200 hPa. These sensitivity simulations show that changing the aircraft flight altitude has a marked impact on the ozone and aerosol responses to emissions (of about 20 %–30 % compared to the baseline simulation in May), and hence on the associated RFs, as will be analysed in the Sect. 6.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <label>5</label><title>Future impact of aviation</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1">
  <label>5.1</label><title>Future baseline scenario</title>
      <p id="d1e5243">In addition to these simulations using the REACT4C_2006
emission inventory, a set of future simulations using the QUANTIFY emission
inventories has been conducted for the year 2050. The corresponding
distributions of the baseline perturbations for the QUANTIFY_2000 inventory are in line with the results obtained for REACT4C_2006 (Fig. S3). However, in the case of the QUANTIFY_2000 emissions, particularly due to the higher fuel consumption, the maximum perturbations are generally slightly higher. In the zonal mean, these perturbations reach 6.8 ppbv for ozone in May, between 250 and 350 hPa, 0.16 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for BC, 11.3 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.95</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, to be compared with 6.4 ppbv, 0.15, 10.2, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.71</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, in the case of REACT4C_2006 (see Sect. 4).</p>
      <p id="d1e5333">For future simulations (2050), the baseline simulation corresponds to the
aviation emissions from the QUANTIFY_A1 inventory. Figure 9 illustrates the perturbation associated with aircraft emissions for this scenario for key constituents (May as the seasonal maximum of the perturbation). The NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing ratio increases in the upper troposphere by up to 194 pptv in January at 200 hPa and 170 pptv (250 %) in May (not shown). As a consequence, ozone increases from 9.2 ppbv in January to up to 19.6 ppbv (15 %) in May at flight altitude. These values are comparable to the values calculated by Søvde et al. (2007) (7 to 18 ppbv for monthly averages in January and May, respectively) but higher than the ozone increase calculated by Koffi et al. (2010) (10 ppbv in July) and the model mean given by Hodnebrog et al. (2012) for the same emission inventory. We note however that only a few models used in Hodnebrog et al. (2012) included an interactive chemistry in the stratosphere, thereby imposing ozone to
climatologies or calculated with simplified parameterizations in this
region. This could consequently dampen the response of ozone in
the upper troposphere. This finding is confirmed by the higher tropospheric
ozone increase associated with aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions calculated by
global models, including interactive chemistry in both the troposphere and
the stratosphere (Olsen et al., 2013; Khodayari et al., 2014a; Brasseur et al., 2016; Skowron et al., 2021). The increase in BC is also significant and reaches 0.6 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in January and 0.55 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (5 %) in May, a factor of 3 larger than the QUANTIFY_2000 perturbation. As noted earlier, in addition to the maximum increase at flight altitude, a secondary maximum reaching 0.3 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and associated with the downward redistribution of aircraft emissions is also calculated at ground level. The increase in SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> for this scenario reaches 15.6 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in January and 32.8 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (15 %) in May. The marked increase in SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations at cruise altitude is responsible for a subsequent decrease in NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> reaching <inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in May (50 %). Below about 500 hPa, an increase in NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations reaching 14 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (10 %) in May and as much as 47 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (5 %) in January is simulated. These increased surface concentrations in 2050 are mostly associated with much higher NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> background concentrations at the surface in the future (particularly in Southeast Asia) (Hauglustaine et al., 2014), and subsequent enhanced NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> formation due to redistribution of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions to lower levels forming ammonium nitrates. This result agrees with the findings of Righi et al. (2016) and Unger (2011), who calculated a decrease of nitrate particles in the NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-limited mid-upper troposphere due to aircraft emissions as well as an increase in the lower troposphere and at surface. This is however in contrast with the results of Unger et al. (2013), who calculated an increase of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> associated with aircraft emissions in most of the troposphere, with a moderate 2 %–3 %
decrease in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, and consequently
derived a strong negative forcing by nitrate particles as also reported by Brasseur et al. (2016). Please note that the impact of future climate change
on aircraft perturbations is not considered in our simulations and should be
investigated in forthcoming studies.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e5556">Zonal mean perturbations due to aircraft emissions for the months
of January (left) and May (right) for O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppbv), BC (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M441" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M442" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), averaged for the future scenario QUANTIFY A1 2050. The solid line represents the tropopause pressure.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2">
  <label>5.2</label><title>Mitigation scenarios</title>
      <p id="d1e5637">Two alternative future scenarios are derived from the future scenario
QUANTIFY_A1. As described in Sect. 2, the
QUANTIFY_LowNOx scenario simulates the impact of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M443" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions reduced by a factor of 2, mimicking a significant improvement of the engine combustion technology with respect to the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M444" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> EI. The
QUANTIFY_A1_Desulfurized scenario simulates the impact of a desulfurized fuel. In addition, two alternative scenarios representing two aircraft emission mitigation trajectories are used, i.e. the QUANTIFY_B1 and QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE scenarios described by Owen et al. (2010) and summarized in Sect. 2.</p>
      <p id="d1e5658">Figure 10 shows the impact of the LowNOx and Desulfurized future emission
scenarios on the zonal mean distribution of key atmospheric species. The low
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M445" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions have a significant impact on the ozone increase. In this case, the zonal mean ozone increase reaches a maximum of 5.9 ppbv in January (not shown) and 12 ppbv (8 %) in May at 200 hPa. This corresponds to a
reduction of 3 ppbv in January and 7 ppbv (40 %) in May compared to the
QUANTIFY_A1 scenario (Fig. 9). In this scenario, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M446" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is
only moderately affected at flight altitude and the maximum SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M447" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
increase in May remains close to 33 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M448" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>(15 %). However, in the
lower troposphere, less sulfates are produced in the aqueous phase at lower
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M449" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations, especially in subsidence regions. The increase in
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M450" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at the surface is significantly reduced and decreases from about 17 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M451" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M452" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N in the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario to
less than 10 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M453" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the QUANTIFY_LowNOx simulation. Moreover, as shown in Fig. 10, the impact on NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M454" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is very limited at the
flight cruise altitude. However, in the lower troposphere, the formation of
nitrates through the reaction with NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M455" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is decreased at lower NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M456" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions and the increased NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M457" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration at the surface reaches 7 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M458" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> to be compared with the 14 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M459" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> calculated in the QUANTIFY_A1 simulation (Fig. 9). This is a reduction factor of 2, linear with the decrease in total NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M460" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aircraft emissions in this scenario. This LowNOx scenario has a significant impact on air quality, reducing not only tropospheric ozone but also the concentration of sulfates and nitrates in the lower troposphere.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e5824">Zonal mean perturbations due to aircraft emissions for May of
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M461" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppbv), SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M462" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M463" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M464" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) for the LowNOx <bold>(a, c, e)</bold> and Desulfurized <bold>(b, d, f)</bold> scenarios. The solid line represents the tropopause pressure.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e5880">In comparison to the QUANTIFY_A1 baseline scenario, the
QUANTIFY_A1_Desulfurized simulation has, as
expected, a significant impact on the SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M465" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aircraft perturbation, and
consequently on the formation of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M466" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. As seen from Fig. 10, since no
emission of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M467" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M468" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are considered in this simulation, the
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M469" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> increase reaching 13 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M470" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (5 %) in May around 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M471" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and at 300–200 hPa is only associated with the increased production from SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M472" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> oxidation at higher ozone and OH concentrations. As a consequence of the reduced change in SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M473" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, a very moderate decrease in nitrates reaching only <inline-formula><mml:math id="M474" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M475" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (5 %) is calculated at flight altitude. In the lower troposphere, the increase in NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M476" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> associated with the production of ammonium nitrate from surface NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M477" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M478" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> reaches 14 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M479" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (10 %), as also calculated in the QUANTIFY_A1_Desulfurized scenario. These results agree with Unger (2011) and Kapadia et al. (2016), who calculated a similar impact of desulfurized fuel, a much lower increase of sulfates and nitrates at flight altitude, and a significant increase in nitrates in the lower troposphere. As in Unger (2011), but in contrast with earlier work by Pitari et al. (2002), little effect of sulfate aerosols on ozone via heterogeneous chemistry is predicted in the upper troposphere. The impact of aircraft desulfurized fuel is close to the regular fuel ozone perturbation.</p>
      <p id="d1e6030">The results for the alternative economic and technological scenarios,
QUANTIFY_B1 and QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE (Owen et al., 2010), are illustrated in Fig. 11. A primary objective of the QUANTIFY_B1 mitigation scenario is to improve air quality; therefore the reduction of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M480" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M481" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and BC emissions are relatively important compared to the baseline future scenario QUANTIFY_A1. In this case, as a consequence
of lower NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M482" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M483" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> perturbation is reduced by more
than a factor of 2 compared to QUANTIFY_A1, and the ozone zonal mean increase reaches a maximum of 4.5 ppbv in January (not shown) and 8.6 ppbv (6 %) in May compared to 9.2 and 19.6 ppbv in January and
May, respectively, for the QUANTIFY_A1 simulation. For this
mitigation scenario, Hodnebrog et al. (2011) derived a model mean ozone
increase at cruise altitude of 3 ppbv in January and about 5 ppbv in July,
somewhat lower than our results. Again, it should be noted that none
of the models used in Hodnebrog et al. (2012) included an interactive
chemistry in the stratosphere. The BC perturbation reaches a maximum of 0.35 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M484" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (3 %) at flight altitude, to be compared with 0.55 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M485" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the QUANTIFY_A1 simulation. The sulfate concentrations
increase in May by up to 22 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M486" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (9 %), and consequently, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M487" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> increase and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M488" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are reduced by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M489" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M490" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (40 %) at flight altitude, compared to 33 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M491" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M492" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, for
the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario. The alternative scenario, QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE, is the most ambitious mitigation future scenario used in this study, with very strong emission reductions. This scenario is an “extreme” scenario to limit the environmental impact of aviation. In this scenario, the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M493" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are reduced by almost a factor of 5 and the ozone increase reaches a maximum of 6.2 ppbv (4 %) in May, a value even lower than the ozone increase calculated under the QUANTIFY_2000 (6.8 ppbv) and
REACT4C_2006 (6.4 ppbv) simulations. A significantly
attenuated aerosol increase is also calculated for the QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE scenario, and BC and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M494" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> increase by up to 0.25 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M495" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (2 %) and 16 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M496" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (7 %) at flight altitude, respectively. The nitrate concentration decreases by 10 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M497" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (30 %) at flight altitude and increases by up to 3.8 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M498" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (3 %) in the lower troposphere (Fig. 11).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e6238">Zonal mean perturbations due to aircraft emissions for May of
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M499" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppbv), BC, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M500" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M501" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M502" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) for the QUANTIFY 2050 B1 (left) and B1 ACARE (right) scenarios. The solid line represents the
tropopause pressure.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11987/2022/acp-22-11987-2022-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6">
  <label>6</label><title>Radiative forcing (RF) of climate</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS1">
  <label>6.1</label><title>Changes in ozone burden and methane lifetime</title>
      <p id="d1e6302">Table 4 summarizes the impact of aircraft emissions on the global burden of
ozone and methane lifetime. Ozone increases by 4.7 Tg (0.430 DU) for
the REACT4C_2006 reference scenario and an ozone production
efficiency of 6.6 TgO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M503" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M504" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is derived. The ozone sensitivity to
aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M505" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (0.6 DU TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M506" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) is similar to the adopted mean value reported by Holmes et al. (2011) (Table S4) and in the higher range of the 0.39–0.63 DU TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M507" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> model range provided by Myhre et al. (2011). A somewhat higher value (0.79 DU TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M508" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for present-day conditions) was derived by Khodayari et al. (2014b) with the AEDT inventory. We note however that the ozone burden calculated by Koffi et al. (2010), presented in a model intercomparison by Hoor et al. (2009) (model mean of 5.6 TgO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M509" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M510" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and Myrhe et al. (2011), was only for global models including tropospheric chemistry. In most of these earlier models (and in particular in an earlier 19-level version of LMDZ-INCA), the stratospheric chemistry was not included and ozone constrained to climatologies above a potential temperature of 380 K. This neglects the ozone change above the tropopause, as seen from Fig. 5. Olsen et al. (2013) derived a high model spread for the ozone burden change per emitted NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M511" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of 2.5–11 TgO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M512" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M513" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> with some linearity of the model responses to the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M514" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission. At higher flight altitudes (REACT4C_PLUS), the increase in ozone is about 15 % higher than for the reference case, and at lower cruise altitude (REACT4C_MINUS) the increase in ozone is 11 % lower, reflecting longer NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M515" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> residence times at higher altitudes. This results in an increase in ozone production efficiency reaching 7.5 at higher flight altitudes and a decrease to 5.8 at lower flight cruise altitudes. In the case of QUANTIFY_2000, the ozone burden increases by 5.0 Tg (0.457
DU) and the ozone production efficiency is slightly lower (6.0) than for the
REACT4C_2006 inventory, reflecting aircraft emissions deposited at somewhat lower flight altitudes (Skowron et al., 2013). The reference present-day methane chemical lifetime calculated with this model version is 10.6 years, close to the present-day (2000) value reported by Voulgarakis et al. (2013) for a previous version of the LMDZ-INCA model. Due to the increase in OH concentration when NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M516" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aircraft emissions are considered, based on the REACT4C_2006 emission scenario, the methane chemical lifetime decreases by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M517" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M518" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for the QUANTIFY_2000 aircraft emissions). A somewhat higher value (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M519" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M520" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for present-day conditions) was derived by Khodayari et al. (2014b) with the AEDT inventory.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e6497">Annual aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M521" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (ENO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M522" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, TgN), ozone burden
variation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M523" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M524" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, TgO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M525" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), ozone to NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M526" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> sensitivity
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M527" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M528" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M529" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> ENO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M530" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, TgO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M531" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M532" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN), methane lifetime variation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M533" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, %), and methane lifetime to NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M534" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> sensitivity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M535" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M536" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> ENO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M537" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, % TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M538" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), for the various simulations.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Scenario</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">ENO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M539" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M540" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M541" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M542" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M543" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M544" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> ENO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M545" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M546" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M547" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M548" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> ENO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M549" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_2006</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.58</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M550" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M551" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.43</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_2000</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M552" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M553" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.37</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_PLUS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M554" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M555" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.41</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_MINUS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M556" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M557" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.42</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3.31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20.33</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M558" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.67</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M559" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.41</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1_LowNOx</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">11.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M560" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M561" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.58</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1_Desulfurized</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3.31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M562" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.66</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M563" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.41</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_B1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">7.95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M564" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.76</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M565" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M566" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M567" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.73</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e7163">For the 2050 scenarios, ozone increases by up to 20.3 Tg (1.86 DU) for the
QUANTIFY_A1 scenario and by 7–8 Tg (0.64–0.73 DU) for the B1
and B1_ACARE scenarios. Despite the very different
atmospheric background in 2050, the derived ozone production efficiency for
the A1 scenario (6.14) is rather close to the QUANTIFY_2000
reference value (6.0). A higher ozone production efficiency of 7.7 and 7.9 is derived in the case of the B1 and B1_ACARE scenarios, respectively. A similar feature was derived by Hodnebrog et al. (2011, 2012) for the QUANTIFY inventories in 2050, with ozone production efficiencies averaged among several models (and for different background conditions) of 5.7, 7.4, 7.9 for the A1, B1 and B1_ACARE scenarios, respectively. For the A1_LowNOx scenario (future NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M568" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions reduced by 50 %), the ozone burden decreases by 56 % compared to the A1 scenario, showing a very slight non-linearity. We calculate a methane reference lifetime of 11.4 years in 2050. Due to aircraft emissions, the future methane lifetime decreases by 4.7 % for the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario and by 1.8 % and 1.2 % for the B1
and B1_ACARE scenarios, respectively. The calculated future ozone changes can also be compared with more recent estimates involving global models, including both tropospheric and stratospheric chemistry. With the ACCRI_2050_Base and 2050-S1 emissions (Table S2), Olsen et al. (2013) derived a global ozone burden increase ranging from 10.3 to 18.6 Tg (2.6–7.24 TgO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M569" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M570" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and from 4.5 to 13.8 Tg (2.9–8.8 TgO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M571" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M572" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), respectively. More recently, using the MOZART-3 model and based on high (5.59 TgN) and low (2.17 TgN) future (2050) aircraft emission scenarios, Skowron et al. (2021) calculated the  global ozone increases of 31 and 15.4 Tg with some variation depending on
the surface emission scenario, providing 5.5 and 7.1 TgO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M573" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M574" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively. Our results agree with the ozone sensitivity to NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M575" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
and all these future simulations point to a decreasing ozone production
efficiency at higher NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M576" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. We re-emphasize that the impact of
future climate change on aircraft perturbations is not considered in our
simulations and should be investigated in forthcoming studies.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS2">
  <label>6.2</label><?xmltex \opttitle{Radiative forcing (RF) from NO${}_{{x}}$ emissions}?><title>Radiative forcing (RF) from NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M577" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions</title>
      <p id="d1e7275">The calculated RF of climate for the different scenarios are
summarized in Table 5. The increase in tropospheric ozone due to the
aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M578" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions is responsible for a positive RF F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M579" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of 15.9 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M580" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the case of the reference scenario
REACT4C_2006. This forcing increases by 1.85 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M581" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (12 %) when the flight altitude is increased in the case of REACT4C_PLUS and decreases by 1.59 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M582" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (10 %) when the flight altitude is decreased in the case of REACT4C_MINUS. In the case of QUANTIFY_2000, the calculated ozone forcing is 17.2 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M583" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, a value somewhat higher than REACT4C_2006
due to higher NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M584" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. This value agrees with the ozone forcings
calculated by Hoor et al. (2009) in a multi-model study; they derived a mean
forcing of 16.3 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M585" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the QUANTIFY_2000 scenario.
The calculated ozone forcing provides a forcing relative to the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M586" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions of 22.35 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M587" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M588" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. This value is in good agreement with Myhre et al. (2011), who calculated a range for five models of 16–25 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M589" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M590" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and Holmes et al. (2011), who calculated a forcing of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M591" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M592" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M593" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> based on factor
decomposition . As noted by Skowron et al. (2013), the ozone forcing is largely dependent on the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M594" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission vertical profile with normalized forcings, ranging from 16.5 to 20.5 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M595" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M596" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in their MOZART-3 simulations depending on the aircraft emission inventory considered. More recently, Lee et al. (2021) derived a best estimate value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M597" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25.1</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M598" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M599" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. As obtained by Holmes et al. (2011), we derive an ozone forcing per DU of 37.1 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M600" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> DU<inline-formula><mml:math id="M601" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, in agreement with this previous work (Table S4). With different emission inventories, Olsen et al. (2013) reported an even wider range for the normalized ozone forcing of 6–37 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M602" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M603" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. For the future scenarios, the tropospheric ozone forcing reaches 70.6 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M604" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario and 27.6 and 18.7 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M605" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the case of the B1 and B1_ACARE mitigation scenarios, respectively. These values agree with the ozone forcings calculated by Hodnebrog et al. (2011, 2012) in a multi-model study, who derived forcings of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M606" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">61.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M607" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24.1</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M608" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18.9</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M609" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the QUANTIFY_A1, QUANTIFY_B1 and B1_ACARE, respectively. For the reduced NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M610" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission scenario (A1_LowNOx), the ozone forcing is 55 % of the A1 scenario value, in line with the change in ozone burden.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Table 5</label><caption><p id="d1e7665">Radiative forcings (RFs) of ozone, methane, black carbon (BC), sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon (OC) and stratospheric water vapour calculated for the different simulations (mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M611" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). The RF of methane is
the sum of 4 terms as depicted in Table 5.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Scenario</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M612" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M613" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M614" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BC</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M615" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M616" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M617" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OC</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M618" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Total</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_2006</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">15.87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M619" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M620" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.87</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.07</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M621" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M622" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_2006_NOx_Only</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">15.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M623" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.72</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M624" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M625" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M626" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.93</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_2000</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">17.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M627" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M628" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.33</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M629" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M630" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_PLUS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">17.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M631" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M632" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.38</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M633" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M634" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.72</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_MINUS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M635" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.68</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M636" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M637" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M638" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">70.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M639" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70.84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.88</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M640" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.66</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M641" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M642" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1_LowNOx</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">39.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M643" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39.45</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M644" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.88</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M645" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M646" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.11</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1_Desulfurized</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">70.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M647" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70.65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M648" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.47</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M649" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M650" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M651" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_B1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">27.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M652" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">26.43</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M653" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.38</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M654" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M655" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.73</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">18.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M656" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17.90</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M657" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M658" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.07</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M659" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.52</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e8461">The total methane forcing F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M660" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is broken down into four distinct
forcings (Table 6). We calculate a direct RF at equilibrium associated with the methane decrease F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M661" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OH</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M662" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M663" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for
the present-day REACT4C_2006 simulation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M664" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M665" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
for the QUANTIFY_2000 simulation). For future conditions, the
direct methane forcing ranges from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M666" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M667" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the
QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M668" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">52.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M669" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the
QUANTIFY_A1 scenario. The indirect forcings associated with
this change in methane mixing ratio through long-term tropospheric ozone
(F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M670" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) and stratospheric water vapour (F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M671" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SWV</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) adjustments, calculated for the REACT4C_2006 simulation
are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M672" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.82</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M673" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M674" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M675" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M676" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.74</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M677" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, for the QUANTIFY_2000
simulation). For the future simulations, we calculate ozone long-term
forcings F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M678" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> ranging from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M679" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M680" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (B1_ACARE) to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M681" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.96</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M682" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (A1), and a stratospheric water vapour forcings
F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M683" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SWV</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> ranging from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M684" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.82</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M685" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (B1_ACARE) to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M686" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M687" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (A1). The indirect RFs from CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M688" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> production (F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M689" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M690" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M691" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.23</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M692" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the present-day simulations REACT4C_2006 and QUANTIFY_2000, respectively, and range from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M693" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M694" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>(B1_ACARE) to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M695" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.81</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M696" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (A1) in 2050. The sum of these four components provides F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M697" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> the total methane RF associated with aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M698" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. This total forcing is
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M699" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M700" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M701" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the present-day REACT4C_2004 and QUANTIFY_2000 inventories, respectively. In 2050, the total methane forcing ranges from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M702" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M703" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M704" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M705" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the A1 scenario (Table 6). The change in methane mixing ratio itself represents 75 % of this total methane forcing. The indirect changes through long-term tropospheric ozone, stratospheric water vapour and oxidation to CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M706" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> contribute 19 %, 4 %, and 1 %, respectively.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Table 6</label><caption><p id="d1e9033">Decomposition of the total methane forcing F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M707" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> into its
various direct and indirect forcings. The forcings are associated with
changes in methane lifetime (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M708" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OH</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), tropospheric ozone production
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M709" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), stratospheric water vapour production (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M710" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SWV</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M711" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> production (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M712" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M713" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Scenario</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M714" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OH</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M715" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M716" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SWV</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M717" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M718" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_2006</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M719" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M720" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.82</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M721" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M722" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M723" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">REACT4C_2006_NOx_Only</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M724" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M725" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.83</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M726" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M727" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M728" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.72</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_2000</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M729" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.52</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M730" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M731" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.74</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M732" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.23</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M733" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M734" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">52.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M735" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.96</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M736" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M737" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.81</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M738" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70.84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1_LowNOx</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M739" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">29.37</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M740" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M741" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M742" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.45</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M743" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39.45</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_A1_Desulfurized</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M744" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">52.71</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M745" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.93</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M746" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M747" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M748" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70.65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_B1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M749" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19.66</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M750" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M751" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M752" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M753" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">26.43</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M754" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.31</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M755" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M756" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.82</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M757" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M758" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17.90</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e9762">As seen in Table 5, the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M759" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing components resulting from the
tropospheric ozone positive forcing and the methane negative forcing largely
offset each other, resulting in a slightly positive forcing of 1.2 and 0.5 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M760" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the REACT4C_2006 and QUANTIFY_2000 present-day simulations, respectively. In 2050, a net negative forcing of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M761" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.28</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M762" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is calculated for the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario. For
the alternative scenarios B1 and B1_ACARE, we still derive
positive forcings of 1.14 and 0.84 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M763" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. This partial compensation and the resulting positive or negative NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M764" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net forcing depends on the level of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M765" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> present in the background atmosphere and the location of
emissions (Stevenson and Derwent, 2009; Gilmore et al., 2013; Skowron et
al., 2021). Thus, for the future, higher concentrations of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M766" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> increase
the OH response and the effect of methane so that even total NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M767" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcings become negative. Table S3 compares the methane forcings calculated with the revised CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M768" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> RF parameterization proposed by Etminan et al. (2016) and by the former parameterization (Myhre et al., 1998). The net NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M769" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> negative forcings calculated for future conditions in this study are largely affected by this methane forcing parameterization.
The methane forcing F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M770" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OH</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is 23 % higher when the parameterization of Etminan et al. (2016) is used and the total methane forcing is about 15 % higher. In the case of the methane forcing former parameterization (Myhre et al., 1998),
positive NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M771" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net forcings ranging from 3.3–5.0 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M772" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for
present-day conditions to 3.3–9.7 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M773" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2050 are calculated. A
similar conclusion regarding the possibility to have negative NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M774" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net
forcings has been reached by Skowron et al. (2021). The RFs associated with NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M775" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are decomposed into its various factors following the methodology of Holmes et al. (2011) and compared to previous estimates in Table S4. A good agreement is found between the various components
or sensitivities of the chemistry and the RFs with the previous estimate provided by Holmes et al. (2011). The major difference arises from the methane forcing calculation based on Etminan et al. (2016) in our study. Similarly, the forcings normalized by emissions are also generally in agreement with Lee et al. (2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e9944">The sensitivity of the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M776" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> associated forcings with aircraft flight
altitudes was investigated in earlier studies (Gauss et al., 2006;
Frömming et al., 2012; Søvde et al., 2014). In particular, based on
the REACT4C emission inventories, Søvde et al. (2014) derived, in a
multi-model study, an increase of the total NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M777" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M778" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M779" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for aircraft cruising at higher altitudes and a decrease of the forcing by the same value for aircraft cruising at lower altitudes, with a change essentially due to the ozone forcing. In this study, the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M780" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net forcing is increased by 1.74 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M781" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for aircraft cruising at higher altitudes and decreased by 1.58 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M782" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at lower altitudes. These values agree with this previous estimate. It should be noted that, based on the parameterization of Etminan et al. (2016), the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M783" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net forcing turns from positive to negative when the aircraft cruise altitude is reduced (Table S3).</p>
      <p id="d1e10032">As illustrated by the REACT4C_2006_NOx_Only simulation results (only the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M784" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are perturbed by aviation without including the other chemical and aerosol emissions) shown in Tables 5 and S4, additional forcings arise from aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M785" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. This sensitivity simulation shows that the change in OH associated with NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M786" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions is responsible for an increased formation of sulfate particles and a negative forcing from these
aerosols of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M787" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M788" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Similarly, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M789" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and
concentrations increase the formation of nitrate particles, also responsible
for an additional negative forcing of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M790" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M791" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The nitrate forcing calculated by Pitari et al. (2016) is much higher (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M792" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M793" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), but the role played by ammonia was not considered in this earlier study. It is important to consider the ammonium cycle because,  as we discussed earlier, increased NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M794" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> from aircraft emissions increase nitrate particles in the lower troposphere. However, in the upper troposphere, increased sulfate concentrations will favour the titration of ammonia to form ammonium sulfates leading to lower ammonium nitrate concentrations despite the increased NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M795" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M796" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations. The total forcing of sulfate and nitrate aerosols associated with NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M797" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M798" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M799" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. When these aerosol direct RFs are considered, the total net NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M800" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing switches from a positive value of 1.19 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M801" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for tropospheric ozone plus methane to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M802" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.93</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M803" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. When these indirect terms are accounted for, we derive a negative net NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M804" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> RF per TgN emitted by aviation as summarized in Table S4. The inclusion of forcings associated with particles (SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M805" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M806" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) has been found to change the sign of the next NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M807" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> RFs compared to the earlier studies of Holmes et al. (2011) and Lee et al. (2021). It should be noted that the forcings associated with aerosols are of course
subject to large uncertainties in the models (Lee et al., 2021; Forster et
al., 2021) and more model simulations are needed in order to gain more
confidence in these results.</p>
      <p id="d1e10278">It should also be noted that these two forcings from ozone and methane
represent perturbations at a steady state. This assumption is correct for
tropospheric ozone which has an average of a few weeks, but not for
methane which has a lifetime of 10.6 years in our model. For methane, the
response does not reach a steady state in any given year and the response in
a particular year depends on the historical time-evolving emissions. This
limitation was discussed and illustrated by Khodayari et al. (2014b), Grewe et al. (2019), Lee et al. (2021) and Matthes et al. (2021).
For this reason, a transient correction factor was applied to the total
methane forcing by Myhre et al. (2011), Hodnebrog et al. (2011, 2012),
Matthes et al. (2021), and the best estimate value was provided by Lee et al. (2021). However, this factor was not considered in Brasseur et al. (2016) or, more recently, in Skowron et al. (2021). The major difficulty with this non-steady state factor is that its determination is strongly model dependent. Due to the long time integration needed to investigate the methane response, complex models have not been used to date, and the non-steady state factor was determined based on simplified or
parameterized chemistry–climate models (Grewe and Stenke, 2008; Lee et al.,
2021). Another difficulty in determining this factor, and in particular for
future scenarios, arises from its dependency on the considered year or
the assumed future emission pathway. For the QUANTIFY_2000 emissions, Myhre et al. (2011) derived, based on the methodology of Grewe and Stenke (2008), a non-steady state correction factor of 0.65. A similar factor
was used by Matthes et al. (2021). This factor was recently reassessed by Lee et al. (2021) with a two-dimensional model and factors of 0.73 and 0.79 were determined for 2000 and 2018, respectively. For the future 2050 scenarios, Hodnebrog et al. (2011, 2012) derived factors of 0.74, 1.0, and 1.15 for the QUANTIFY A1B, B1, and B1_ACARE, respectively. Considering the uncertainty associated with this factor, the forcings calculated in this study assumed a steady-state methane perturbation, as was done by Skowron et al. (2021). However, for sake of completeness, Table S5 compares the standard steady-state forcings and the forcings with non-steady factors applied. The factors provided by Lee et al. (2021) for the 2000 and 2005 simulations and by Hodnebrog et al. (2011, 2012) for the 2050 scenarios were used. When these non-steady methane forcings are considered, the future NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M808" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net forcings are generally higher and even switch back to positive in 2050. However, we are aware of the high uncertainty in these factors and the need for future work in order to provide a more robust estimate of this non-steady state correction and overall methodology.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS3">
  <label>6.3</label><?xmltex \opttitle{Direct radiative forcing from SO${}_{{2}}$ and particulate carbon emissions}?><title>Direct radiative forcing from SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M809" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and particulate carbon emissions</title>
      <p id="d1e10308">The concentrations of several types of particles are perturbed by aircraft
emissions and hence provide direct RFs (Table 5). Direct
emissions of soot particles induce a positive RF of 0.46 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M810" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the REACT4C_2006 inventory and 0.54 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M811" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the QUANTIFY_2000 inventory. With the REACT4C inventory, Pitari et al. (2015) calculated a higher direct soot forcing of 0.78 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M812" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. We note however that the soot RF is subject to large uncertainties. In 2050, this forcing reaches 1.88 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M813" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario. For these particles we derive a normalized forcing of 108–115 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M814" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Tg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M815" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for present-day conditions, in the range provided by Balkanski et al. (2010) of 8–140 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M816" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Tg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M817" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and calculated based on the QUANTIFY emissions. The calculated normalized forcing is also in good agreement with the recent study of Brasseur et al. (2016), providing a range of 101–168 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M818" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Tg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M819" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e10432">Sulfate particle concentrations are also perturbed by the aviation SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M820" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions and the direct SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M821" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. The negative forcing
associated with an increase of these particles largely dominates the effect
of the other particles and ranges from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M822" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.87</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M823" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.33</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M824" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
for the REACT4C_2006 and QUANTIFY_2000 present-day simulations to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M825" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M826" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2050 under the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario. With the REACT4C inventory, Pitari et al. (2015) calculated a direct sulfate forcing of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M827" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M828" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, a value close to the one in this study. For these particles, we derive a normalized direct forcing of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M829" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">52.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (REACT4C_2006) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M830" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">49.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(QUANTIFY_2000) mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M831" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M832" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for present-day conditions, in the range provided by Unger (2011) of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M833" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M834" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M835" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and
Brasseur et al. (2016) of [<inline-formula><mml:math id="M836" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>] mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M837" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M838" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The atmospheric distribution of ammonium nitrate particles is indirectly affected by aviation emissions and dominated by the increase in sulfates favouring the formation of ammonium sulfates over ammonium nitrates. The decrease in nitrate particles is responsible for a positive forcing ranging from 0.07 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M839" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the present-day scenario to 1.3 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M840" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2050 for the A1
scenario. The impact of aircraft emissions on nitrates largely depends on
the NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M841" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M842" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> levels in the upper troposphere, as discussed by
Unger et al. (2013), who calculated a much larger nitrate forcing from
aircraft in their future simulations. The results of LMDZ-INCA showed a good
comparison with other models as illustrated by the model intercomparison
presented by Bian et al. (2017). A slight negative forcing reaching <inline-formula><mml:math id="M843" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M844" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2050 is associated with the emission of OC by
aviation. In total, aerosols are responsible for a negative direct forcing
largely dominated by sulfate particles and ranging from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M845" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M846" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the case of REACT4C_2006 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M847" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M848" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2050 for the
A1 scenario.</p>
      <p id="d1e10759">The variation of aircraft flight altitudes modifies the residence time of
particles in the atmosphere. A longer lifetime is associated with a higher
injection altitude and therefore influences concentration changes and the
RF associated with these particles. The forcing associated
with soot particles increases from 0.46 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M849" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the
REACT4C_2006 scenario to 0.49 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M850" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at higher flight
altitudes and decreases to 0.44 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M851" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at lower altitudes. The dominant
forcing from aviation-induced particles remains the negative forcing from
sulfates. This forcing decreases from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M852" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.87</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M853" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.38</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M854" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
at higher flight altitudes and increases to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M855" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M856" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at lower
altitudes. The total aerosol forcing is dominated by sulfates and its
variation with flight altitudes reflects the variation of the sulfate
negative forcing. The total aerosol direct forcing decreases to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M857" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M858" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M859" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) at lower flight altitudes (REACT4C_MINUS) and increases to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M860" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M861" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M862" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) at higher flight
altitudes (REACT4C_PLUS).</p>
      <p id="d1e10919">For the future QUANTIFY_A1 simulation, the use of
desulfurized fuel reduces the sulfate direct forcing by 55 %. The
remaining sulfate forcing is associated with changes in OH and increased
sulfate formation. However, the reduced direct SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M863" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M864" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>)
emissions have the consequence of decreasing the sulfate forcing to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M865" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M866" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The use of desulfurized fuel also has an impact on nitrate particles. In this case, the nitrates are essentially affected by increased NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M867" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations and a negative forcing of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M868" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M869" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is calculated. In total, the use of desulfurized fuel decreases the forcing of particles from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M870" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M871" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M872" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The ozone forcing is only slightly affected by the removal of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M873" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aircraft emissions in agreement with Unger (2011).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS4">
  <label>6.4</label><title>Radiative forcing (RF) from water vapour emissions</title>
      <p id="d1e11043">The RF associated with water vapour increase in the
stratosphere due to direct aircraft emissions and calculated with the
LMDZ-INCA model is 0.13–0.16 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M874" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for present-day conditions
(REACT4C_2006 and QUANTIFY_2000) and increases
to 0.52 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M875" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2050 under the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario
(Table 5). Based on earlier literature, Lee et al. (2009) reported a best
estimate for this forcing of 2.8 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M876" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> with a range of 0.39–20.3 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M877" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. More recently, Lee et al. (2021) reported values ranging from 0.4 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M878" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Wilcox et al., 2012) to 1.5 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M879" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Frömming et al., 2012;
Lim et al., 2015) and even to 3.0 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M880" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Penner et al., 1999), and
derived a best estimate for this forcing of 2.0 (0.8, 3.2) mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M881" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The
forcing recalculated with the LMDZ-INCA chemistry–transport model is at the
lower range of this previous literature.</p>
      <p id="d1e11143">Myhre et al. (2009) performed an intercomparison of stratospheric water
vapour RFs from several models imposing idealized stratospheric H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M882" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O perturbations. In particular, a simulation imposing
an increase of water vapour in the stratosphere from 3 to 3.7 ppmv has been
performed. In this case, based on six different models, the calculated net
RFs at the tropopause ranged from 0.16 to 0.38 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M883" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> with
a mean at 0.25 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M884" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The long-wave forcings range from 0.19 to 0.40 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M885" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and the short-wave forcings range from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M886" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.020</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M887" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.058</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M888" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.
In order to evaluate our radiative transfer model, we have performed this
benchmark simulation with the LMDZ-INCA model version used in the present
study. We calculate a net RF at the tropopause of 0.18 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M889" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (long-wave: 0.22 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M890" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; short-wave: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M891" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.038</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M892" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). These
forcings agree with the model ranges provided by Myhre et al. (2009) for
both forcing components.</p>
      <p id="d1e11270">The water vapour forcing associated with aircraft emissions calculated in
this study is based on a detailed calculation involving stratospheric
chemistry and transport; it only includes the water vapour change above the
tropopause. This forcing is at the lower range of previous estimates. It
should be noted that these previous estimates are based on different model
setups. For instance, Wilcox et al. (2012) used a Lagrangian model for
transport imposing a water vapour lifetime, and Frömming et al. (2012)
provided a water vapour forcing including both the H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M893" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O change in the
stratosphere and upper troposphere. In Brasseur et al. (2016), the reported
stratospheric water vapour forcings by two models (1.3 and 2.0
mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M894" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) accounted for both direct H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M895" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O emissions and
photochemical production by methane. A more detailed evaluation of this
stratospheric water vapour forcing associated with direct aircraft emissions
is still needed based on various models using the same protocol for
calculation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS5">
  <label>6.5</label><title>Total direct radiative forcing (RF) from atmospheric composition changes</title>
      <p id="d1e11312">The total RF from aircraft emissions and associated with
changes in atmospheric chemistry and direct aerosols forcings are given in
Table 5. The total forcing calculated with the LMDZ-INCA model are negative
for both the present-day and future (2050) simulations. The total
forcing ranges from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M896" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M897" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the present-day inventory
REACT4C_2006 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M898" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M899" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the case of the
QUANTIFY_2000 inventory) to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M900" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M901" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2050 for the
QUANTIFY_B1_ACARE scenario and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M902" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M903" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the QUANTIFY_A1 scenario. A total negative forcing from reactive species and aerosol direct forcings was also calculated by Unger et al. (2013) for both present and future conditions based on the AEDT emission inventories. The total forcing associated with NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M904" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-only emissions (REACT4C_2006_NOx_Only) also becomes negative (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M905" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.93</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M906" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) when the
indirect forcings from sulfate and nitrate particles are considered. The
comparison with the baseline simulation (REACT4C_2006)
indicates that the climate effect of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M907" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions amounts to about
45 % of the total perturbation. In the future simulations, this translates to a decrease of the total forcing by about 30 % when the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M908" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions are reduced by 50 %. Since sulfates dominate the particulate
RF from aircraft, lowering the fuel sulfur content is another
potential mitigation option to reduce the total forcing. For the future
QUANTIFY_A1 simulation, the use of desulfurized fuel reduces
the total forcing by more than 45 %.</p>
      <p id="d1e11454">The net effect of decreasing the flight cruise altitude by 2000 ft is to
increase the total negative forcing from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M909" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M910" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M911" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M912" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">57</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %). Increasing the flight altitude by 2000 ft decreases the
negative forcing to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M913" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M914" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M915" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %). The variation of the
total forcing with flight altitude is dominated by the high sensitivity of
the ozone positive forcing to the altitude of the perturbation, with the
variation of the negative sulfate forcing being of secondary importance for these sensitivity simulations.</p>
      <p id="d1e11532">The RFs and ERFs from aircraft emissions calculated in this study are compared to the recent review by Lee et al. (2021) in Table 7. For this comparison, the forcings are scaled to the 2018 aircraft fuel and the ERF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M916" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> RF ratios provided by Lee et al. (2021) are applied to derive the ERF. For the methane forcing, we also apply the transient correction factor (see Sect. 6.2), recalculated and applied by Lee et al. (2021), for the best estimates (0.79). Overall, the agreement for the total forcing between this study and the best estimate from Lee et al. (2021), based on the previous literature, is reasonable.
However, a detailed comparison shows that both the ozone positive and
methane negative forcings are lower in LMDZ-INCA compared to the assessment by Lee et al. (2021), but remain in the 5 %–95 % uncertainty range provided in that study. The ozone forcing calculated in this study is in better agreement with the Holmes et al. (2011) best estimate as discussed earlier (see also Table S4). As indicated above, the stratospheric water vapour
forcing is also significantly lower and requires further attention. Furthermore, it is important to note that the total ERF is now positive and equal to 8.9 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M917" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (comparing well with the 8.6 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M918" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> best estimate from Lee
et al., 2021), while the total RF calculated in Table 5 was negative (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M919" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M920" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). This is due to the increase in Lee et al. (2021) of the ozone ERF by almost 40 % compared to the RF
while keeping the aerosol forcings unchanged (ERF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M921" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> RF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M922" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1). Considering the uncertainty in determining the ERF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M923" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> RF ratio for the different forcing agents, depending on the climate model used, this feature also clearly requires further investigation. A similar conclusion applies to the methane transient factor estimate.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T7"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Table 7</label><caption><p id="d1e11614">Comparison of ozone, methane, black carbon (BC), sulfates,
nitrates, organic carbon (OC), and stratospheric water vapour radiative
forcings (RFs) and effective radiative forcings (ERFs) calculated for the
REACT4C_2006 simulation and compared to Lee et al. (2021)
(mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M924" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). For this comparison, the REACT4C_2006 forcings
are rescaled based on the total aviation fuel for 2018 and the ERF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M925" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> RF
factors provided by Lee et al. (2021) are applied to derive the ERFs. For
methane, the correction factor (0.79), recalculated by Lee et al. (2021) for
the year 2018 to account for the non-steady state of CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M926" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> responses to
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M927" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, is also applied. The RFs and ERFs from Lee et al. (2021)
provide the median and 5 %–95 % confidence intervals, and the total forcings were recalculated based on a 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M928" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Monte Carlo sampling from the discrete probability density function (PDF) provided by Lee et al. (2021).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">Lee et al. (2021) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center">This work </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RF</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">ERF</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">RF</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">ERF</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M929" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M930" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">36.0</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">56</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M931" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">49.3</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">32</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">76</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">29.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">40.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M932" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M933" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">29.6</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">55</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M934" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">34.9</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">65</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M935" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M936" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M937" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BC</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M938" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.94</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.0</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M939" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.94</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.0</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.86</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M940" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M941" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M942" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M943" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M944" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M945" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.14</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M946" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OC</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M947" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M948" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">F<inline-formula><mml:math id="M949" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M950" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M951" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.24</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Total</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M952" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">28</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M953" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.6</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">26</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">38</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M954" display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M955" display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.9</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S7" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>7</label><title>Summary and conclusion</title>
      <p id="d1e12173">Aviation NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M956" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions not only have an impact on global climate by
changing ozone and methane levels in the atmosphere, but also contribute to
the deterioration of local air quality. Improved combustor performance from future aircraft can not only contribute to reducing the impact of aircraft on climate but also provide a co-beneficial improvement of air quality.
Historically however, reductions in aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M957" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions have tended
to increase fuel burn and hence CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M958" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. Thus, a trade-off
generally arises between reducing aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M959" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M960" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions.
In order to properly assess the co-benefit with air quality improvement and
the trade-off with climate change due to CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M961" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, it appears
essential to better quantify the climate impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M962" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions and its future evolution.</p>
      <p id="d1e12240">In this paper, a new version of the LMDZ-INCA global model is applied to
re-evaluate the impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M963" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and aerosol emissions on
climate. This version of the model is better designed to investigate the
role played by aircraft emissions in the upper troposphere and
lower stratosphere, including the gas-phase chemistry in both the
troposphere and the stratosphere. The model results have been compared to ozone soundings and to IAGOS data for O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M964" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CO in the
upper troposphere and lower stratosphere. In addition, tropospheric aerosols
are also considered including the sulfate–nitrate–ammonium cycle and
heterogeneous reactions between gas-phase chemistry and aerosols. With this
model, we investigate the impact of present-day baseline and future
(2050) aircraft emissions on atmospheric composition and the associated
RFs of climate for ozone, methane and the aerosol direct
forcings.</p>
      <p id="d1e12261">The key results from this study can be summarized as follows:
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e12266">The results from the various simulations performed in this study confirm
that the efficiency of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M965" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to produce ozone is largely dependent on
the cruise altitude. Flying higher increases the impact of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M966" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> on ozone and flying lower reduces the impact on ozone. In the future, an ozone
production 4 times higher than that for the present-day simulation is calculated, i.e. an increase roughly linear with the increase in NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M967" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. The future evolution of the ozone production efficiency indicates that this efficiency increases with the background methane and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M968" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations. The efficiency also increases with decreasing aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M969" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e12315">As a result of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M970" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aircraft emissions, the atmospheric methane sink
is decreased by about 1 % for the present-day simulations and up to
4.7 % in 2050. We found that the methane lifetime variation is less sensitive
to the location of the aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M971" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions than the ozone change. Similarly,
the methane sink appears slightly less sensitive to the amount of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M972" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emitted than the ozone production. This agrees with Holmes et al. (2011) and Skowron et al. (2021), who found ozone to be more responsive to aircraft
emissions than methane. The net NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M973" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M974" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is
largely affected by the revised CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M975" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> RF formula provided
by Etminan et al. (2016), which increases the total CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M976" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
negative forcing by 15 %. As a consequence, the ozone positive forcing and
the methane negative forcing largely offset each other, resulting in a
slightly positive forcing for present-day simulations. In 2050, the net
forcing even turns negative, essentially due to higher methane background
concentrations. Skowron et al. (2021) also reached a similar conclusion
that the revision of the methane RF significantly reduced the
aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M977" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing and that, in the future, this forcing could even
turn negative, providing a different perspective of the impact that aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M978" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions have on climate.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e12412">Additional RFs involving particle formation arise from
aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M979" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and the sulfate–nitrate–ammonium cycle is also
important to consider. The increased OH concentrations associated with
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M980" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are responsible for an enhanced conversion of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M981" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to
sulfate particles and an associated negative forcing. Aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M982" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions also increase nitrate particles in the lower troposphere
where ammonia concentrations are higher. In the upper troposphere, increased
sulfate concentrations favour the titration of ammonia to form ammonium
sulfates, leading to lower ammonium nitrate concentrations (despite the
increased NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M983" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M984" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations). Overall, the indirect
forcings of sulfate and nitrate aerosols associated with NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M985" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions
is negative and estimated to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M986" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M987" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M988" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. When these aerosol RFs are considered, the net NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M989" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing, due to O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M990" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
and CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M991" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and estimated to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M992" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2 mW m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M993" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> TgN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M994" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, turns from a positive value to a negative value, even for present-day conditions. The aerosol indirect forcings are subject to large uncertainties and are particularly sensitive to the model sulfate–ammonium–nitrate scheme (Unger et al., 2011;
Righi et al., 2013; Pitari et al., 2016; Brasseur et al., 2016). Further
investigation is clearly needed in order to gain more insight into these
aircraft indirect forcings. Despite these uncertainties, the results suggest
that, in addition to the increased methane negative forcing discussed above,
indirect forcing from sulfate and nitrate particles could turn the aircraft
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M995" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> RF from positive to negative, not only for future scenarios, but also under present-day conditions.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e12582">The concentrations of several types of particles are perturbed by
aircraft emissions and hence provide direct RFs of climate.
The negative forcing associated with sulfates largely dominates the effect
of the other particles. The sulfate direct RF is estimated to
be associated with about 50 % of the direct SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M996" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M997" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aircraft
emissions and about 50 % of the increased conversion of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M998" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M999" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at higher OH concentrations, and hence related to the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1000" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions. In the future, the use of desulfurized fuel reduces the sulfate
direct forcing and also has an impact on nitrate particles. Lowering the
fuel sulfur content is therefore a potential mitigation option to reduce this
aircraft negative forcing by more than 45 %. We found that the ozone forcing was
only slightly affected by heterogeneous chemistry in the upper troposphere.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e12631">The RF associated with direct aircraft emissions of water
vapour in the stratosphere is calculated in this study based on a detailed
calculation involving stratospheric chemistry and transport; it only includes the water vapour change above the tropopause. This forcing is at the lower range of previous estimates. It should be noted that these previous
estimates are based on very different model setups. This forcing is likely
to be small; however, a more detailed evaluation of this stratospheric water
vapour forcing associated with direct aircraft emissions is still needed
based on several models using the same protocol for calculation.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e12635">Overall, the agreement for the non-CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1001" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> total forcing between this
study and the best estimate from Lee et al. (2021) is reasonable. However, a
detailed comparison reveals several key differences and points to the key
uncertainties associated with the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1002" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and aerosol direct forcings. Both
the ozone positive and methane negative forcings are lower in LMDZ-INCA
compared to the assessment of Lee et al. (2021), while remaining in the
5 %–95 % confidence range. This is mostly due to the increase in Lee et al. (2021) of the ozone ERF by almost 40 % compared to the RF
while keeping the aerosol forcings unchanged (ERF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1003" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> RF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1004" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1). Considering the uncertainty in the determination of the ERF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1005" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> RF ratio for the different
forcing agents, depending on the climate model used, this feature
clearly requires further investigation. A similar conclusion applies to the
methane transient factor estimate which can flip the sign of the total
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1006" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> forcing.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e12688">Several previous studies have suggested that cruise emissions could be a
significant or even dominant contribution to aviation-attributable surface
level particulate matter and ozone (e.g. Barrett et al., 2010; Unger, 2011;
Hauglustaine and Koffi, 2012; Lee et al., 2013; Eastham and Barrett, 2016).
Our results confirm this important subsidence of ozone produced in the free
troposphere by cruise altitude NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1007" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, down to the lower
troposphere and surface. A similar downward transport of BC and
sulfates is also simulated by the global model with a significant increase
of particulate matter levels at the surface. We further find that aircraft
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1008" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are responsible, in the lower troposphere, for an
important formation of ammonium nitrate particles, particularly in regions
with high ammonia concentrations. Since ammonia concentrations are predicted
to increase in the future (Hauglustaine et al., 2014), the aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1009" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions could become a significant source of nitrate particles near the
ground, in addition to already contributing significantly to ground-level
sulfates and ozone concentrations.</p></list-item></list></p>
      <p id="d1e12718">These results show that several mitigation options involving aircraft flight
operation and cruise altitude changes, traffic growth, engine technology,
and fuel type, exist to reduce the climate impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1010" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions. However, our results, based on a current state-of-the-art global
model, also show that the climate forcing of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1011" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions is
likely to be small or even turn to negative (cooling), depending on
atmospheric NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1012" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> or CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1013" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> future background concentrations, and when
the impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1014" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions on sulfate and nitrate particles is considered.
Following previous work methodology, in order to better emphasize the impact
of aircraft emissions on atmospheric composition, the impact of future
climate change on aircraft perturbations is not considered in our
simulations, performed based on a present-day, unchanged meteorology in
2050. The simulations performed by Olivié et al. (2012) and Huszar et
al. (2013) accounted for future climate change; however, the impact of
future climate on atmospheric composition changes due to aircraft emissions
is not isolated. Changes in upper-tropospheric temperature, humidity, and
dynamics have the potential to affect the response of the atmosphere to
aircraft emissions. These perturbations are likely to be more pronounced at
a longer time horizon than at the 2050 timeframe considered in our
simulations, but this topic is clearly a subject to be investigated in
forthcoming studies. There are still large uncertainties regarding the estimate of
the aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1015" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net impact on climate. In particular, the use of ERFs or accounting for the methane transient forcing varies among the different models. These methodological concepts
also require further investigation in order to determine the best
appropriate metric to express the climate impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1016" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. Large uncertainties remain regarding the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1017" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> net impact on climate and particularly on the indirect forcings associated with aerosols, which are even
more uncertain than the other forcings from gaseous species. Hence, additional studies with a range of models are needed in order to provide a more
consolidated view. Nevertheless, the results seem to suggest that reducing
aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1018" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions is primarily beneficial for improving air
quality and reducing ground-level O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1019" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and particulate matter (PM) concentrations. New technologies in combustor design, which could help to
simultaneously reduce NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1020" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1021" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, do not appear to be
essential for aircraft non-CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1022" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> climate mitigation, but can be
co-beneficial for climate change mitigation from CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1023" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission reduction
and air quality improvement from reduced aviation NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1024" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codeavailability"><title>Code availability</title>

      <p id="d1e12862">The LMDZ-INCA global model is part of the Institut Pierre Simon Laplace (IPSL) Climate Modelling Center Coupled Model. The documentation on the code and the code itself can be found at <uri>https://cmc.ipsl.fr/ipslclimate-models/ipsl-cm6/</uri> (IPSL, 2022). The Python codes used for analysing the data and plotting the analysed data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. The distribution of the IAGOS data onto LMDZ-INCA grids is based on an updated version of the Interpol-IAGOS software, available at <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.25326/81" ext-link-type="DOI">10.25326/81</ext-link> (Cohen et al., 2020).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e12874">To access datasets of LMDZ-INCA results, please contact Didier Hauglustaine. The IAGOS data set can be found at <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.25326/20" ext-link-type="DOI">10.25326/20</ext-link> (IAGOS, 2022).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e12880">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11987-2022-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11987-2022-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e12889">DAH and ET set up the LMDZ-INCA model simulations and analysed and post-processed the LMDZ-INCA model results. DAH calculated the radiative forcings. YC contributed to the LMDZ-INCA model valuation. AC is involved in the development of the INCA model and its coupling with the LMDZ model. RV and FL contributed to the development of the INCA model version used in this study. SM was involved in the discussion of the results and supported the writing of the document. The manuscript was written by DAH, then reviewed by the authors and approved by all the authors.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e12895">The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e12902">Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e12908">We thank Yunjiang Zhang for preparing the model aerosol optical depth evaluation against MODIS and AERONET data. The simulations were performed using HPC resources from GENCI (Grand Equipement National de Calcul Intensif).</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e12913">This study was partly funded by the Direction Générale de l’Aviation Civile (DGAC) under the IMPACT and CLIMAVIATION projects and by the European Union Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the ACACIA project (grant agreement no. 875036).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e12919">This paper was edited by Holger Tost and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Balkanski, Y., Myhre, G., Gauss, M., Rädel, G., Highwood, E. J., and Shine, K. P.: Direct radiative effect of aerosols emitted by transport: from road, shipping and aviation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 4477–4489, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-4477-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-4477-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Barrett, S. R. H., Britter, R. E., and Waitz, I. A.: Global mortality
attributable to aircraft cruise emissions, Environ. Sci. Technol., 44, 7736–7742, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es101325r" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/es101325r</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bauer, S., Balkanski, Y., Schulz, M., Hauglustaine, D. A., and Dentener, F.:
Heterogeneous chemistry on mineral aerosol surfaces: a global modelling
study on the influence on tropospheric ozone chemistry and comparison to
observations, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D02304,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003868" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD003868</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Berntsen, T. K., Fuglestvedt, J. S., Joshi, M., Shine, K. P., Stuber, N.,
Ponater, M., Sausen, R., Hauglustaine, D. A., and Li, L.: Climate response
to regional emissions of ozone precursors; sensitivities and warming
potentials, Tellus B, 57, 283–304, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bian, H., Chin, M., Hauglustaine, D. A., Schulz, M., Myhre, G., Bauer, S. E., Lund, M. T., Karydis, V. A., Kucsera, T. L., Pan, X., Pozzer, A., Skeie, R. B., Steenrod, S. D., Sudo, K., Tsigaridis, K., Tsimpidi, A. P., and Tsyro, S. G.: Investigation of global particulate nitrate from the AeroCom phase III experiment, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 12911–12940, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12911-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-12911-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Boucher, O., Friedlingstein, P., Collins, B., and Shine, K. P.: The indirect
global warming potential and global temperature change potential due to
methane oxidation, Environ. Res. Lett., 4, 4, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/044007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/044007</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Boucher, O., Servonnat, J., Albright, A. L., Aumont, O., Balkanski, Y., Bastrikov, V., Bekki, S., Bonnet, R., Bony, S., Bopp, L., Braconnot, P., Brockmann, P., Cadule, P., Caubel, A., Cheruy, F., Codron, F., Cozic, A., Cugnet, D., D'Andrea, P., Davini, de Lavergne, C., Denvil, S., Deshayes, J., Devilliers, M., Ducharne, A., Dufresne, J.-L., Dupont, E., Éthé, C., Fairhead, L., Falletti, F., Flavoni, S., Foujols, M.-A., Gardoll, S., Gastineau, G., Ghattas, J., Grandpeix, J.-Y., Guenet, B., Guez, L., Guilyardi, E., Guimberteau, M., Hauglustaine, D., Hourdin, F., Idelkadi, A., Joussaume, S., Kageyama, M., Khodri, M., Krinner, G., Lebas, N., Levavasseur, G., Lévy, C., Li, L., Lott, F., Lurton, T., Luyssaert, S., Madec, G., Madeleine, J. B., Maignan, F., Marchand, M., Marti, O., Mellul, L., Meurdesoif, Y., Mignot, J., Musat, I., Ottlé, C., Peylin, P., Planton, Y., Polcher, J., Rio, C., Rochetin, N., Rousset, C., Sepulchre, P., Sima, A., Swingedouw, D., Thiéblemont, R., Traore, A., K., Vancoppenolle, M., Vial, J., Vialard, J., Viovy, N., and Vuichard, N.: Presentation and evaluation of the IPSL-CM6A-LR
climate model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002010.
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019MS002010</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Boucher, O., Borella, A., Gasser, T., and Hauglustaine, D.: On the
contribution of global aviation to the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1025" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> radiative forcing of climate,
Atmos. Environ., 267, 118761,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118762" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118762</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bousquet, P., Yver, C., Pison, I., Li, Y. S., Fortems, A., Hauglustaine, D.,
Szopa, S., Rayner, P. J., Novelli, P., Langenfelds, R., Steele, P., Ramonet,
M., Schmidt, M., Foster, P., Morfopulos, C., and Ciais, P.: A 3D synthesis
inversion of the molecular hydrogen cycle: sources and sinks budget
implications for the soil uptake, J. Geophys. Res., 116, D01302,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014599" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JD014599</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bouwman, A. F., Lee, D. S., Asman, W. A. H., Dentener, F. J., Van Der Hoek,
K. W., and Olivier, J. G. J.: A global high-resolution emission inventory
for ammonia, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 11, 561–587, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Brasseur, G. P., Cox, R. A., Hauglustaine, D. A., Isaksen, I., Lelieveld, J.,
Lister, D. H., Sausen, R., Schumann, U., Wahner, A., and Wiesen, P.: European
scientific assessment of the atmospheric effects of aircraft emissions,
Atmos. Environ., 32, 2329–2418, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brasseur, G. P., Gupta, M., Anderson, B. E., Balasubramanian, S., Barrett, S., Duda, D., Fleming, G., Forster, P. M., Fuglestvedt, J., Gettelman, A., Halthore, R. N., Jacob, S. D., Jacobson, M. Z., Khodayari, A., Liou, K.-N., Lund, M. T., Miake-Lye, R. C., Minnis, P., Olsen, S., Penner, J. E., Prinn, R., Schumann, U., Selkirk, H. B., Sokolov, A., Unger, N., Wolfe, P., Wong, H.-W., Wuebbles, D. W., Yi, B., Yang, P., and Zhou, C.: Impact of aviation on climate, B. Am. Meteorol.
Soc., 97, 561–583, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00089.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00089.1</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brunner, D., Staehelin, J., Rogers, H. L., Köhler, M. O., Pyle, J. A., Hauglustaine, D., Jourdain, L., Berntsen, T. K., Gauss, M., Isaksen, I. S. A., Meijer, E., van Velthoven, P., Pitari, G., Mancini, E., Grewe, G., and Sausen, R.: An evaluation of the performance of chemistry transport models by comparison with research aircraft observations. Part 1: Concepts and overall model performance, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 1609–1631, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-1609-2003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-3-1609-2003</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brunner, D., Staehelin, J., Rogers, H. L., Köhler, M. O., Pyle, J. A., Hauglustaine, D. A., Jourdain, L., Berntsen, T. K., Gauss, M., Isaksen, I. S. A., Meijer, E., van Velthoven, P., Pitari, G., Mancini, E., Grewe, V., and Sausen, R.: An evaluation of the performance of chemistry transport models – Part 2: Detailed comparison with two selected campaigns, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 107–129, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-107-2005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-5-107-2005</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cameron, M. A., Jacobson, M. Z., Barrett, S. R. H., Bian, H., Chen, C. C.,
Eastham, S. D., Gettelman, A., Khodayari, A., Liang, Q., Selkirk, H. B.,
Unger, N., Wuebbles, D. J., and Yue, X.: An intercomparative study of the
effects of aircraft emissions on surface air quality, J. Geophys. Res. 122,
8325–8344, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025594" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD025594</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Carslaw, K., Luo, B., and Peter, T.: An analytic expression for the
composite of aqueous HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1026" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1027" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1028" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> stratospheric aerosols
including gas phase removal of HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1029" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 1877–1880, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Clappier, A., Belis, C. A., Pernigotti, D., and Thunis, P.: Source apportionment and sensitivity analysis: two methodologies with two different purposes, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4245–4256, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4245-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-10-4245-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cohen, Y., Petetin, H., Thouret, V., Marécal, V., Josse, B., Clark, H., Sauvage, B., Fontaine, A., Athier, G., Blot, R., Boulanger, D., Cousin, J.-M., and Nédélec, P.: Climatology and long-term evolution of ozone and carbon monoxide in the upper troposphere–lower stratosphere (UTLS) at northern midlatitudes, as seen by IAGOS from 1995 to 2013, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 5415–5453, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-5415-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-5415-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cohen, Y., Marecal, V., Thouret, V., Josse, B., and Boulanger, D.: Interpol-IAGOS software, Aeris [software], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.25326/81" ext-link-type="DOI">10.25326/81</ext-link> (last access: 12 September 2022), 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cohen, Y., Marécal, V., Josse, B., and Thouret, V.: Interpol-IAGOS: a new method for assessing long-term chemistry–climate simulations in the UTLS based on IAGOS data, and its application to the MOCAGE CCMI REF-C1SD simulation, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2659–2689, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2659-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-14-2659-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Collins, W. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Schulz, M., Boucher, O., Eyring, V., Hegglin, M. I., Maycock, A., Myhre, G., Prather, M., Shindell, D., and Smith, S. J.: AerChemMIP: quantifying the effects of chemistry and aerosols in CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 585–607, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-585-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-10-585-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dahlmann, K, Grewe, V., Ponater, M., and Matthes, S.: Quantifying the
contributions of individual NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1030" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> sources to the trend in ozone radiative
forcing, Atmos. Environ, 45, 2860–2868,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.071" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.071</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Derwent, R. G., Collins, W. J., Johnson, C. E., and Stevenson, D. S.:
Transient behaviour of tropospheric ozone precursors in a global 3-D CTM and
their indirect greenhouse effects, Climatic Change, 49, 463–487,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010648913655" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1023/A:1010648913655</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Eastham, S. D. and Barrett, S. R. H.: Aviation-Attributable Ozone as a
Driver for Changes in Mortality Related to Air Quality and Skin Cancer,
Atmos. Environ., 144, 17–23, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.08.040" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.08.040</ext-link>,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Emanuel, K. A.: A scheme for representing cumulus convection in large-scale
models, J. Atmos. Sci., 48, 2313–2335, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Etminan, M., Myhre, G., Highwood, E. J., and Shine, K. P.: Radiative forcing of
carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide: A significant revision of the
methane radiative forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 12614–12623,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL071930" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016GL071930</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Eyers, C. J., Addleton, D., Atkinson, K., Broomhead, M. J., Christou, R.,
Elliff, T., Falk, R., Gee, I., Lee, D. S., Marizy, C., Michot, S., Middel,
J., Newton, P., Norman, P., Plohr, M., Raper, D., and Stanciou, N.: AERO2K
Global Aviation Emissions Inventories for 2002 and 2025, QINETIQ/04/01113,
Farnborough, Hants, UK, <uri>https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/7313363/aero2k-global-aviation-emissions-inventories-for-2002-and-2025</uri> (last access: 7 September 2022), 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Federal Aviation Administration (FAA): Recommended best practice for
quantifying speciated organic gas emissions from aircraft equipped with
turbofan, turbojet and turboprop engines, <ext-link xlink:href="https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/P1003YX3.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&amp;Client=EPA&amp;Index=2006+Thru+2010&amp;Docs=&amp;Query=&amp;Time=&amp;EndTime=&amp;SearchMethod=1&amp;TocRestrict=n&amp;Toc=&amp;TocEntry=&amp;QField=&amp;QFieldYear=&amp;QFieldMonth=&amp;QFieldDay=&amp;IntQFieldOp=0&amp;ExtQFieldOp=0&amp;XmlQuery=&amp;File=D:{\backslash}zyfiles{\backslash}Index Data{\backslash}06thru10{\backslash}Txt{\backslash}00000008{\backslash}P1003YX3.txt&amp;User=ANONYMOUS&amp;Password=anonymous&amp;SortMethod=h|-&amp;MaximumDocuments=1&amp;FuzzyDegree=0&amp;ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&amp;Display=hpfr&amp;DefSeekPage=x&amp;SearchBack=ZyActionL&amp;Back=ZyActionS&amp;BackDesc=Results page&amp;MaximumPages=1&amp;ZyEntry=1&amp;SeekPage=x&amp;ZyPURL#">https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/P1003YX3</ext-link> (last access: 7 September 2022), 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fiore, A. M., Dentener, F. J., Wild, O., Cuvelier, C., Schultz, M. G., Hess,
P., Textor, C., Schulz, M., Doherty, R. M., Horowitz, L. W., MacKenzie, I.
A., Sanderson, M. G., Shindell, D. T., Stevenson, D. S., Szopa, S., Van
Dingenen, R., Zeng, G., Atherton, C., Bergmann, D., Bey, I., Carmichael, G.,
Collins, W. J., Duncan, B. N., Faluvegi, G., Folberth, G., Gauss, M., Gong,
S., Hauglustaine, D., Holloway, T., Isaksen, I. S. A., Jacob, D. J., Jonson,
J. E., Kaminski, J. W., Keating, T. J., Lupu, A., Marmer, E., Montanaro, V.,
Park, R. J., Pitari, G., Pringle, K. J., Pyle, J. A., Schroeder, S.,
Vivanco, M. G., Wind, P., Wojcik, G., Wu, S., and Zuber, A.: Multimodel
estimates of intercontinental source-receptor relationships for ozone
pollution, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D04301.
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010816" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JD010816</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Folberth, G. A., Hauglustaine, D. A., Ciais, P., and Lathière, J.: On
the role of atmospheric chemistry in the global CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1031" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> budget, Geophys.
Res. Lett, 32, L08801, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021812" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004GL021812</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Folberth, G. A., Hauglustaine, D. A., Lathière, J., and Brocheton, F.: Interactive chemistry in the Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique general circulation model: model description and impact analysis of biogenic hydrocarbons on tropospheric chemistry, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 2273–2319, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-2273-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-2273-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Forster, P., Storelvmo, T., Armour, K., Collins, W., Dufresne, J.-L., Frame, D.,
Lunt, D. J., Mauritsen, T., Palmer, M. D., Watanabe, M., Wild, M., and Zhang, H.: 2021: The Earth's Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks, and Climate Sensitivity, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working
Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 923–1054, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/9781009157896.009</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Fouquart, Y. and Bonel, B.: Computations of solar heating of the earth's
atmosphere: a new parameterization, Beitr. Phys. Atmos., 53, 35–62, 1980.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Freeman, S., Lee, D. S., Lim, L. L., Skowron, A., and De Leon, R. R.:
Trading off aircraft fuel burn and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1032" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions for optimal climate
policy, Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 2498–2505, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Frömming, C., Ponater, M., Dahlmann, K., Grewe, V., Lee, D. S., and Sausen,
R.: Aviation-induced radiative forcing and surface temperature change in
dependency of the emission altitude, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D19104,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018204" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012JD018204</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Fuglestvedt, J. S., Berntsen, T. K., Isaksen, I. S. A., Mao, H. T., Liang,
X. Z., and Wang, W. C.: Climatic forcing of nitrogen oxides through changes
in tropospheric ozone and methane; global 3D model studies, Atmos. Environ.,
33, 961–977, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gauss, M., Isaksen, I. S. A., Lee, D. S., and Søvde, O. A.: Impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1033" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions on the atmosphere – tradeoffs to reduce the impact, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 1529–1548, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-1529-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-1529-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gilmore, C. K., Barrett, S. R. H., Koo, J., and Wang, Q.: Temporal and spatial
variability in the aviation NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1034" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-related O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1035" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> impact, Environ. Res. Lett., 8,
034027, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034027" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034027</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gliß, J., Mortier, A., Schulz, M., Andrews, E., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S.
E., Benedictow, A. M. K., Bian, H., Checa-Garcia, R., Chin, M., Ginoux, P.,
Griesfeller, J. J., Heckel, A., Kipling, Z., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H.,
Laj, P., Le Sager, P., Lund, M. T., Lund Myhre, C., Matsui, H., Myhre, G.,
Neubauer, D., van Noije, T., North, P., Olivié, D. J. L., Rémy, S.,
Sogacheva, L., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Tsyro, S. G.: AeroCom phase
III multi-model evaluation of the aerosol life cycle and optical properties
using ground- and space-based remote sensing as well as surface in situ
observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 87–128,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-87-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-87-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Grewe, V., Dameris, M., Fichter, C., and Lee, D.: Impact of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1036" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions. Part 2: Effects of lowering the flight altitude, Meteorol. Z., 3,
197–205, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Grewe, V. and Stenke, A.: AirClim: an efficient tool for climate evaluation of aircraft technology, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 4621–4639, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-4621-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-8-4621-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Grewe, V., Frömming, C., Matthes, S., Brinkop, S., Ponater, M., Dietmüller, S., Jöckel, P., Garny, H., Tsati, E., Dahlmann, K., Søvde, O. A., Fuglestvedt, J., Berntsen, T. K., Shine, K. P., Irvine, E. A., Champougny, T., and Hullah, P.: Aircraft routing with minimal climate impact: the REACT4C climate cost function modelling approach (V1.0), Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 175–201, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-175-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-7-175-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Grewe, V., Matthes, S., and Dahlmann, K.: The contribution of aviation NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1037" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to
climate change: are we ignoring methodological flaws?, Environ. Res. Lett.,
14, 121003, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab5dd7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/ab5dd7</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hanson, D., Ravishankara, A. R., and Solomon, S.: Heterogeneous reactions in
sulfuric acid aerosols: A framework for model calculations, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 3615–3629, 1988.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hauglustaine D. A., Granier, C., Brasseur G. P., and Mégie, G.: Impact
of present aircraft emissions of nitrogen oxides on tropospheric ozone and
climate forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 21, 2031–2034, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hauglustaine, D. A., Hourdin, F., Jourdain, L., Filiberti, M. A., Walters,
S., Lamarque, J. F., and Holland, E. A.: Interactive chemistry in the
Laboratoire de Meteorologie Dynamique general circulation model: Description
and background tropospheric chemistry evaluation, J. Geophys. Res., 109,
D04314, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003957" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD003957</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hauglustaine, D. A. and Koffi, B.: Boundary layer ozone pollution caused by
future aircraft emissions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L13808, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012GL052008</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hauglustaine, D. A., Balkanski, Y., and Schulz, M.: A global model simulation of present and future nitrate aerosols and their direct radiative forcing of climate, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 11031–11063, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11031-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-11031-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hodnebrog, Ø., Berntsen, T. K., Dessens, O., Gauss, M., Grewe, V., Isaksen, I. S. A., Koffi, B., Myhre, G., Olivié, D., Prather, M. J., Pyle, J. A., Stordal, F., Szopa, S., Tang, Q., van Velthoven, P., Williams, J. E., and Ødemark, K.: Future impact of non-land based traffic emissions on atmospheric ozone and OH – an optimistic scenario and a possible mitigation strategy, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 11293–11317, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11293-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-11293-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hodnebrog, Ø., Berntsen, T. K., Dessens, O., Gauss, M., Grewe, V., Isaksen, I. S. A., Koffi, B., Myhre, G., Olivié, D., Prather, M. J., Stordal, F., Szopa, S., Tang, Q., van Velthoven, P., and Williams, J. E.: Future impact of traffic emissions on atmospheric ozone and OH based on two scenarios, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 12211–12225, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-12211-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-12211-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hoesly, R. M., Smith, S. J., Feng, L., Klimont, Z., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Pitkanen, T., Seibert, J. J., Vu, L., Andres, R. J., Bolt, R. M., Bond, T. C., Dawidowski, L., Kholod, N., Kurokawa, J.-I., Li, M., Liu, L., Lu, Z., Moura, M. C. P., O'Rourke, P. R., and Zhang, Q.: Historical (1750–2014) anthropogenic emissions of reactive gases and aerosols from the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS), Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 369–408, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Holmes, C. D.: Methane feedback on atmospheric chemistry: Methods, models,
and mechanisms, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 10, 1087–1099,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001196" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017MS001196</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Holmes, C. D., Tang, Q., and Prather, M.: Uncertainties in climate assessment
for the case of aviation NO, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 10997–11002, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hoor, P., Borken-Kleefeld, J., Caro, D., Dessens, O., Endresen, O., Gauss, M., Grewe, V., Hauglustaine, D., Isaksen, I. S. A., Jöckel, P., Lelieveld, J., Myhre, G., Meijer, E., Olivie, D., Prather, M., Schnadt Poberaj, C., Shine, K. P., Staehelin, J., Tang, Q., van Aardenne, J., van Velthoven, P., and Sausen, R.: The impact of traffic emissions on atmospheric ozone and OH: results from QUANTIFY, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 3113–3136, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-3113-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-3113-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hourdin, F. and Armengaud, A.: The use of finite-volume methods for
atmospheric advection of trace species 1. Test of various formulations in a
general circulation model, Mon. Weather Rev., 127, 822–837, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hourdin, F. and Issartel, J. P., Sub-surface nuclear tests monitoring
through the CTBT xenon network, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 2245–2248, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hourdin, F., Grandpeix, J.-Y., Madeleine, J.-B., Chéruy, F., Rochetin, N., Musat, I., Idelkadi, A., Fairhead, L., Foujols, M.-A., Mellul, L., Traore, A.-K., Dufresne, J.-L., Boucher, O., Lefebvre, M.-P., Millour, E., Vignon, E., Jouaud, J., Diallo, F. B., Lott, F., Caubel, A., Meurdesoif, Y., and Ghattas, J.: LMDZ6A: the atmospheric component of the IPSL climate model with improved and better tuned physics, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001892, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001892" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019MS001892</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Huszar, P., Teyssèdre, H., Michou, M., Voldoire, A., Olivié, D. J. L., Saint-Martin, D., Cariolle, D., Senesi, S., Salas Y Melia, D., Alias, A., Karcher, F., Ricaud, P., and Halenka, T.: Modeling the present and future impact of aviation on climate: an AOGCM approach with online coupled chemistry, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 10027–10048, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-10027-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-10027-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>IAGOS: IAGOS, In-service Aircraft for a Global Observing System, Aeris, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.25326/20" ext-link-type="DOI">10.25326/20</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Institut Pierre Simon Laplace (IPSL): Climate Modelling Center Coupled Model,  <uri>https://cmc.ipsl.fr/ipslclimate-models/ipsl-cm6/</uri>, last access: 12 September 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ivanovich, C. C., Ocko, I. B., Piris-Cabezas, P., and Petsonk, A.: Climate benefits of proposed carbon dioxide mitigation strategies for international shipping and aviation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 14949–14965, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14949-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-14949-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jourdain, L. and Hauglustaine, D. A.: The global distribution of lightning
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1038" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> simulated on-line in a general circulation model, Phys. Chem. Earth, 26,
585–591, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kapadia, Z. Z., Spracklen, D. V., Arnold, S. R., Borman, D. J., Mann, G. W., Pringle, K. J., Monks, S. A., Reddington, C. L., Benduhn, F., Rap, A., Scott, C. E., Butt, E. W., and Yoshioka, M.: Impacts of aviation fuel sulfur content on climate and human health, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 10521–10541, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10521-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-10521-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kärcher, B.: Formation and radiative forcing of contrail cirrus, Nat.
Commun., 9, 1824, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04068-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-018-04068-0</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Khodayari, A., Tilmes, S., Olsen, S. C., Phoenix, D. B., Wuebbles, D. J., Lamarque, J.-F., and Chen, C.-C.: Aviation 2006 NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1039" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-induced effects on atmospheric ozone and HO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1040" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in Community Earth System Model (CESM), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9925–9939, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9925-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-9925-2014</ext-link>, 2014a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Khodayari, A., Olsen, S. C., and Wuebbles, D. J.: Evaluation of aviation
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1041" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-induced radiative forcings for 2005 and 2050, Atmos. Environ., 91,
95–103, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.03.044" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.03.044</ext-link>, 2014b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Khodayari, A., Olsen, S. C., Wuebbles, D. J., and Phoenix, D. B.: Aviation
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1042" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-induced CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1043" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> effect: fixed mixing ratio boundary conditions versus flux
boundary conditions, Atmos. Environ., 113, 135–139, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kinnison, D. E., Brasseur, G. P., Walters, S., Garcia, R. R., Marsh, D. R.,
Sassi, F., Harvey, V. L., Randall, C. E., Emmons, L., Lamarque, J. F., Hess,
P., Orlando, J. J., Tie, X. X., Randel, W., Pan, L. L., Gettelman, A.,
Granier, C., Diehl, T., Niemeier, U., and Simmons, A. J.: Sensitivity of
chemical tracers to meteorological parameters in the MOZART-3 chemical
transport model, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D20302,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007879" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JD007879</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Koffi, B., Szopa, S., Cozic, A., Hauglustaine, D., and van Velthoven, P.: Present and future impact of aircraft, road traffic and shipping emissions on global tropospheric ozone, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 11681–11705, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-11681-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-11681-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Koffi, B., Schulz, M. , Bréon, F.-M., Dentener, F., Steensen, B. M., Griesfeller, J., Winker, D., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Bellouin, N., Berntsen, T., Bian, H., Chin, M., Diehl, T., Easter, R., Ghan, S., Hauglustaine, D. A., Iversen, T.,
Kirkevag, A., Liu, X., Lohmann, U., Myhre, G., Rasch, P., Seland, O., Skeie, R. B.,
Steenrod, S. D., Stier, P., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., Vuolo, M. R., Yoon, J., and Zhang, K.: Evaluation of the aerosol vertical distribution in global
transport models through comparison against CALIOP measurements: update
based on the AeroCom phase II simulations, J. Geophys. Res., 121,
7254–7283, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024639" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD024639</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Krinner, G., Viovy, N., de Noblet-Ducoudre, N., Ogee, J., Polcher, J.,
Friedlingstein, P., Ciais, P., Sitch, S., and Prentice, I. C.: A dynamic
global vegetation model for studies of the coupled atmosphere- biosphere
system, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 19, GB1015, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002199" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003GB002199</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lamarque, J.-F., Bond, T. C., Eyring, V., Granier, C., Heil, A., Klimont, Z., Lee, D., Liousse, C., Mieville, A., Owen, B., Schultz, M. G., Shindell, D., Smith, S. J., Stehfest, E., Van Aardenne, J., Cooper, O. R., Kainuma, M., Mahowald, N., McConnell, J. R., Naik, V., Riahi, K., and van Vuuren, D. P.: Historical (1850–2000) gridded anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions of reactive gases and aerosols: methodology and application, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7017–7039, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lamarque, J.-F., Kyle, G. P., Meinshausen, M., Riahi, K., Smith, S. J., van
Vuuren, D. P., Conley, A. J., and Vitt, F.: Global and regional evolution of
short-lived radiatively-active gases and aerosols in the Representative
Concentration Pathways, Climatic Change, 109, 191–212,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0155-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10584-011-0155-0</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lathière, J., Hauglustaine, D. A., De Noblet-Ducoudré, N., Krinner,
G., and Folberth, G. A.: Past and future changes in biogenic volatile
organic compound emissions simulated with a global dynamic vegetation model,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L20818, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL024164" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005GL024164</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lee, D. S., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Newton, P. J., Wit, R. C. N., Lim,
L. L., Owen, B., and Sausen, R.: Aviation and global climate change in the
21st century, Atmos. Environ., 43, 3520–3537, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lee, D. S., Pitari, G., Grewe, V., Gierens, K., Penner, J. E., Petzold, A.,
Prather, M. J., Schumann, U., Bais, A., Berntsen, T., Iachetti, D., Lim, L.
L., and Sausen, R.: Transport impacts on atmosphere and climate: Aviation,
Atmos. Environ., 44, 4678–4734, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.06.005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.06.005</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lee, D. S., Fahey, D. W., Skowron, A., Allen, M. R., Burkhardt, U., Chen,
Q., Doherty, S. J., Freeman, S., Forster, P. M., Fuglestvedt, J., Gettelman,
A., De Léon, R. R., Lim, L. L., Lund, M. T., Millar, R. J., Owen, B.,
Penner, J. E., Pitari, G., Prather, M. J., Sausen, R., and Wilcox, L. J.:
The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for
2000 to 2018, Atmos. Environ., 244, 117834,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117834" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117834</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lee, H., Olsen, S. C., Wuebbles, D. J., and Youn, D.: Impacts of aircraft emissions on the air quality near the ground, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 5505–5522, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5505-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-5505-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lefèvre, F., Brasseur, G. P., Folkins, I., Smith, A. K., and Simon, P.:
Chemistry of the 1991–1992 stratospheric winter: three-dimensional model
simulations, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 8183, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/93JD03476" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/93JD03476</ext-link>, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li B., Gasser, T., Ciais, P., Piao, S., Tao, S., Balkanski, Y.,
Hauglustaine, D., Boisier, J.-P., Chen, Z., Li, L. Z., Li, Y., Liu, H., Liu,
J., Peng, S., Sun, Z., Wang, R., Wang, T., Yin, G., Yin, Y., Zeng, Z., and
Zhou, F.: The contribution of China's emissions to global climate forcing,
Nature, 531, 357–362, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17165" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nature17165</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lim, L. L., Lee, D. S., Owen, B., Skowron, A., Matthes, S., Burkhardt, U.,
Dietmuller, S., Pitari, G., Di Genova, G., Iachetti, D., Isaksen, I., and
Søvde, O. A.: REACT4C: Simplified mitigation study, TAC-4 Proceedings,
22 to 25 June 2015, Bad Kohlgrub, 181–185, ISSN 1434-8454, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lund, M. T., Aamaas, B., Berntsen, T., Bock, L., Burkhardt, U., Fuglestvedt, J. S., and Shine, K. P.: Emission metrics for quantifying regional climate impacts of aviation, Earth Syst. Dynam., 8, 547–563, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-8-547-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/esd-8-547-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Marenco, A., Thouret, V., Nédélec, P., Smit, H., Helten, M., Kley,
D., Karsher, F., Simon, P., Law, K., Pyle, J., Poschmann, G., Von Wrede, R.,
Hume, C., and Cook, T.: Measurement of ozone and water vapour by Airbus
in-service aircraft: The MOZAIC airborne programme, an overview, J. Geophys.
Res., 103, 25 631–642, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD00977" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/98JD00977</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Matthes, S., Schumann, U., Grewe, V., Frömming, C., Dahlmann, K., Koch,
A., and Mannstein, H.: Climate Optimized Air Transport, edited by:
Schumann, U., ISBN 978-3-642-30182-7, ISBN 978-3-642-30183-4 (eBook),
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30183-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-3-642-30183-4</ext-link>, Springer, Heidelberg, New York, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Matthes, S., Grewe, V., Dahlmann, K., Frömming, C., Irvine, E., Lim, L.,
Linke, F., Lührs, B., Owen, B., Shine, K., Stromatas, S., Yamashita, H., and Yin, F.: A concept for multi-dimensional environmental assessment of
aircraft trajectories, Aerospace, 4, 42,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace4030042" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/aerospace4030042</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Matthes., S, Lim, L., Burkhardt, U., Dahlmann, K., Dietmüller, S.,
Grewe, V. Haslerud, A. S., Hendricks, J., Owen, B., Pitari, G., Righi, M.,
and Skowron, A.: Mitigation of non-CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1044" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aviation's climate impact by
changing cruise altitudes, Aerospace, 8, 36,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8020036" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/aerospace8020036</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Morcrette, J.-J.: Radiation and cloud radiative properties in the European
Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts forecasting system, J. Geophys.
Res., 96, 9121–9132, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Morris, G. A., Rosenfield, J. E., Schoeberl, M. R., and Jackman, C. H.: Potential
impact of subsonic and supersonic aircraft exhaust on water vapour in the
lower stratosphere assessed via a trajectory model, J. Geophys. Res., 108,
4103, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002614" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002614</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Myhre, G., Highwood, E. J., Shine, K. P., and Stordal, F.: New estimates of radiative forcing due to well miwed greenhouse gases, Geophys. Res. Lett., 14, 2715–2718, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Myhre, G., Kvalevåg, M., Rädel, G., Cook, J., Shine, K. P., Clark,
H., Karcher, F., Markowicz, K., Kardas, A., Wolkenberg, P., Balkanski, Y.,
Ponater, M., Forster, P., Rap, A., and de Leon, R. R.: Intercomparison of
radiative forcing calculations of stratospheric water vapour and contrails,
Meteorol. Z., 18, 585–596, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2009/0411" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1127/0941-2948/2009/0411</ext-link>,
2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Myhre, G., Shine, K. P., Rädel, G., Gauss, M., Isaksen, I. S. A., Tang,
Q., Prather, M. J., Williams, J. E., van Velthoven, P., Dessens, O., Koffi,
B., Szopa, S., Hoor, P., Grewe, V., Borken-Kleefeld, J., Berntsen, T. K.,
and Fuglestvedt, J. S.: Radiative forcing due to changes in ozone and
methane caused by the transport sector, Atmos. Environ., 45, 387–394,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.10.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.10.001</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Myhre, G., Samset, B. H., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T. K., Bian, H., Bellouin, N., Chin, M., Diehl, T., Easter, R. C., Feichter, J., Ghan, S. J., Hauglustaine, D., Iversen, T., Kinne, S., Kirkevåg, A., Lamarque, J.-F., Lin, G., Liu, X., Lund, M. T., Luo, G., Ma, X., van Noije, T., Penner, J. E., Rasch, P. J., Ruiz, A., Seland, Ø., Skeie, R. B., Stier, P., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., Wang, P., Wang, Z., Xu, L., Yu, H., Yu, F., Yoon, J.-H., Zhang, K., Zhang, H., and Zhou, C.: Radiative forcing of the direct aerosol effect from AeroCom Phase II simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 1853–1877, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1853-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-1853-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Nakicenovic, N. and R. Swart (Eds.): IPCC special report on emissions
scenarios, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, ISBN 0 521 80081 1, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nedelec, P., Cammas, J.-P., Thouret, V., Athier, G., Cousin, J.-M., Legrand, C., Abonnel, C., Lecoeur, F., Cayez, G., and Marizy, C.: An improved infrared carbon monoxide analyser for routine measurements aboard commercial Airbus aircraft: technical validation and first scientific results of the MOZAIC III programme, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 1551–1564, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-1551-2003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-3-1551-2003</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nédélec, P., Blot, R., Boulanger, D., Athier, G., Cousin, J.-M.,
Gautron, B., Petzold, A., Volz-Thomas, A., and Thouret, V.: Instrumentation
on commercial aircraft for monitoring the atmospheric composition on a
global scale: the IAGOS system, technical overview of ozone and carbon
monoxide measurements, Tellus B, 67, 27791, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.27791" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/tellusb.v67.27791</ext-link>,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Olsen, S. C., Brasseur, G. P., Wuebbles, D. J., Barrett, S. R. H., Dang, H.,
Eastham, S. D., Jacobson, M. Z., Khodayari, A., Selkirk, H., Sokolov, A., and
Unger N.: Comparison of model estimates of the effects of aviation emissions
on atmospheric ozone and methane, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 6004–6009,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL057660" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013GL057660</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib97"><label>97</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Olivié, D. J. L., Cariolle, D., Teyssèdre, H., Salas, D., Voldoire, A., Clark, H., Saint-Martin, D., Michou, M., Karcher, F., Balkanski, Y., Gauss, M., Dessens, O., Koffi, B., and Sausen, R.: Modeling the climate impact of road transport, maritime shipping and aviation over the period 1860–2100 with an AOGCM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 1449–1480, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-1449-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-1449-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib98"><label>98</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Owen, B., Lee, D. S., and Lim, L.: Flying into the future: aviation
emissions scenarios to 2050, Environ. Sci. Technol., 44, 2255–2260,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es902530z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/es902530z</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib99"><label>99</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Penner, J. E., Lister, D. H., Griggs, D. J., Dokken, D. J., and McFarland, M.
(Eds.): Aviation and the global atmosphere, Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC), Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0 521 66300 8, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib100"><label>100</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Petzold, A., Thouret, V., Gerbig, C., Zahn, A., Brenninkmeijer, C.,
Gallagher, M., Hermann, M., Pontaud, M., Ziereis, H., Boulanger, D.,
Marshall, J., Nédélec, P., Smit, H., Friess, U., Flaud, J.-M.,
Wahner, A., Cammas, J.-P., and Volz-Thomas, A.: Global-scale atmosphere
monitoring by in-service aircraft – current achievements and future
prospects of the European Research Infrastructure IAGOS, Tellus B, 67, 28452,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28452" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/tellusb.v67.28452</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib101"><label>101</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pitari, G., Mancini, E., and Bregman, A.: Climate forcing of subsonic
aviation: Indirect role of sulfate particles via heterogeneous chemistry,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 29, 2057, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL015705" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002GL015705</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib102"><label>102</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pitari G., Iachetti, D., Di Genova, G., De Luca, N., Søvde, O. A.,
Hodnebrog, Ø., Lee, D. S., and Lim, L.: Impact of coupled NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1045" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>/aerosol
aircraft emissions on ozone photochemistry and radiative forcing,
Atmosphere, 6, 751–782, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos6060751" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/atmos6060751</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib103"><label>103</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pitari, G., Cionni, I., Di Genova, G., Søvde, O., and Lim, L.: Radiative forcing from aircraft emissions of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1046" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> : model calculations with CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1047" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> surface flux boundary condition, Meteorol. Z., 26, 663–687, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1127/metz/2016/0776" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1127/metz/2016/0776</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib104"><label>104</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Prashanth, P., Speth, R. L., Eastham, S. D., Sabnis, J. S., and Barrett, S. R. H.: Post-Combustion Emissions Control in Aero-Gas Turbine Engines, Energy Environ. Sci., 14, 916, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1039/D0EE02362K" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1039/D0EE02362K</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib105"><label>105</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Prashanth, P., Eastham, S. D., Speth, R. L., and Barrett, S. R. H.: Aerosol formation pathways from aviation emissions, Environ. Res. Commun., 4, 021002, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ac52" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/2515-7620/ac52</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib106"><label>106</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Prather, M. J.: Lifetimes and eigenstates in atmospheric chemistry, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 21, 801–804, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/94GL00840" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/94GL00840</ext-link>, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib107"><label>107</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Prather, M., Ehhalt, D., Dentener, F., Derwent, R., and Dlugokencky E.:
“Atmospheric chemistry and greenhouse gases”, in: Climate Change 2001: The
Scientific Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Houghton, J. T., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY,
USA, 2001, 239–287, ISBN 0521 80767 0, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib108"><label>108</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Righi, M., Hendricks, J., and Sausen, R.: The global impact of the transport
sectors on atmospheric aerosol: simulations for year 2000 emissions, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 13, 9939–9970, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9939-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-9939-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib109"><label>109</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Righi, M., Hendricks, J., and Sausen, R.: The global impact of the transport sectors on atmospheric aerosol in 2030 – Part 2: Aviation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 4481–4495, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4481-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-4481-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib110"><label>110</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Schulz, M.: Constraining Model Estimates of the Aerosol Radiative Forcing,
Thèse d'Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches, Université Pierre
et Marie Curie, Paris VI, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib111"><label>111</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Dulac, F., and Guelle W.: Role of aerosol size
distribution and source location in a three-dimensional simulation of a
Saharan dust episode tested against satellite-derived optical thickness, J.
Geophys. Res., 103, 10579–10592, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib112"><label>112</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Skowron, A., Lee, D. S., and De Leon, R. R.: The assessment of the impact of
aviation NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1048" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> on ozone and other radiative forcing responses – The
importance of representing cruise altitude accurately, Atmos. Environ., 74,
159–168, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib113"><label>113</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Skowron, A., Lee, D. S., De León, R. R., Lim, L. L., and Owen, B.:
Greater fuel efficiency is potentially preferable to reducing NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1049" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions
for aviation's climate impacts, Nat. Comm., 12, 564,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20771-3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-020-20771-3</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib114"><label>114</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Søvde, O. A., Gauss, M., Isaksen, I. S. A., Pitari, G., and Marizy, C.: Aircraft pollution – a futuristic view, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 3621–3632, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3621-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-3621-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib115"><label>115</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Søvde, O. A., Matthes, S., Skowron, A., Iachetti, D., Lim, L. L.,
Hodnebrog, Ø., Di Genova, G., Pitari, G., Lee, D. S., Myhre, G., and
Isaksen, I. S. A.: Aircraft emission mitigation by changing route altitude: A
multi-model estimate of aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1050" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission impact on O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1051" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
photochemistry, Atmos. Environ., 95, 468–479, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib116"><label>116</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stevenson, D. S. and Derwent, R. G.: How does the location of aircraft
nitrogen oxide emissions affect their climate impact?, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
36, L17810, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039422" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009GL039422</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib117"><label>117</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stevenson, D. S., Doherty, R. M., Sanderson, M. G., Collins, W. J., Johnson,
C. E., and Derwent, R. G.: Radiative forcing from aircraft NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1052" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions:
mechanisms and seasonal dependence, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D17307,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004759" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004JD004759</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib118"><label>118</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Szopa, S., Naik, V., Adhikary, B., Artaxo, P., Berntsen, T., Collins, W. D., Fuzzi, S., Gallardo, L., Kiendler-Scharr, A., Klimont, Z., Liao, H., Unger, N., and Zanis, P.: Short-Lived Climate Forcers, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 817–922, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/9781009157896.008</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib119"><label>119</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Terrenoire, E., Hauglustaine, D. A., Gasser T., and Penanhoat, O.: The
contribution of carbon dioxide emissions from the aviation sector to future
climate change, Environ. Res. Lett., 14, 084019,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab3086" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/ab3086</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib120"><label>120</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Thomason, L. W., Ernest, N., Millán, L., Rieger, L., Bourassa, A., Vernier, J.-P., Manney, G., Luo, B., Arfeuille, F., and Peter, T.: A global space-based stratospheric aerosol climatology: 1979–2016, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 469–492, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-469-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/essd-10-469-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib121"><label>121</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Thouret, V., Marenco, A., Logan, J. A., Nédélec, P., and Grouhel,
C.: Comparisons of ozone measurements from the MOZAIC airborne program and
the ozone sounding network at eight locations, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 25695–25720, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD02243" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/98JD02243</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib122"><label>122</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tilmes, S., Lamarque, J.-F., Emmons, L. K., Conley, A., Schultz, M. G., Saunois, M., Thouret, V., Thompson, A. M., Oltmans, S. J., Johnson, B., and Tarasick, D.: Technical Note: Ozonesonde climatology between 1995 and 2011: description, evaluation and applications, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 7475–7497, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7475-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-7475-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib123"><label>123</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Unger, N.: Global climate impact of civil aviation for standard and
desulfurized jet fuel, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, 1–6,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL049289" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011GL049289</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib124"><label>124</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Unger, N., Zhao, Y., and Dang, H.: Mid-21st century chemical forcing of
climate by the civil aviation sector, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 641–645,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50161" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/grl.50161</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib125"><label>125</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Van Leer, B.: Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme. Part IV:
a new approach to numerical convection, J. Comput. Phys., 23, 276-299, 1977.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib126"><label>126</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Voulgarakis, A., Naik, V., Lamarque, J.-F., Shindell, D. T., Young, P. J., Prather, M. J., Wild, O., Field, R. D., Bergmann, D., Cameron-Smith, P., Cionni, I., Collins, W. J., Dalsøren, S. B., Doherty, R. M., Eyring, V., Faluvegi, G., Folberth, G. A., Horowitz, L. W., Josse, B., MacKenzie, I. A., Nagashima, T., Plummer, D. A., Righi, M., Rumbold, S. T., Stevenson, D. S., Strode, S. A., Sudo, K., Szopa, S., and Zeng, G.: Analysis of present day and future OH and methane lifetime in the ACCMIP simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 2563–2587, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2563-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-2563-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib127"><label>127</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wilcox, L., Shine, K. P., and Hoskins, B. J.: Radiative forcing due to
aviation water vapour emissions. Atmos. Environ., 63, 1–13,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.08.072" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.08.072</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib128"><label>128</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wilkerson, J. T., Jacobson, M. Z., Malwitz, A., Balasubramanian, S., Wayson, R., Fleming, G., Naiman, A. D., and Lele, S. K.: Analysis of emission data from global commercial aviation: 2004 and 2006, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 6391–6408, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-6391-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-6391-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib129"><label>129</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yim, S. H. L., Lee, G. L., Lee, I. H., Allroggen, F., Ashok, A., Caiazzo,
F., Eastham, S. D., Malina, R., and Barrett, S. R. H.: Global, regional and
local health impacts of civil aviation emissions, Environ. Res. Lett., 1,
034001, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/3/034001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/10/3/034001</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib130"><label>130</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, Y., Saunois, M., Bousquet, P., Lin, X., Berchet, A., Hegglin, M. I., Canadell, J. G., Jackson, R. B., Hauglustaine, D. A., Szopa, S., Stavert, A. R., Abraham, N. L., Archibald, A. T., Bekki, S., Deushi, M., Jöckel, P., Josse, B., Kinnison, D., Kirner, O., Marécal, V., O'Connor, F. M., Plummer, D. A., Revell, L. E., Rozanov, E., Stenke, A., Strode, S., Tilmes, S., Dlugokencky, E. J., and Zheng, B.: Inter-model comparison of global hydroxyl radical (OH) distributions and their impact on atmospheric methane over the 2000–2016 period, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 13701–13723, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13701-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-13701-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Impact of present and future aircraft NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> and aerosol emissions on atmospheric composition and  associated direct radiative forcing of climate</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Balkanski, Y., Myhre, G., Gauss, M., Rädel, G., Highwood, E. J., and Shine, K. P.: Direct radiative effect of aerosols emitted by transport: from road, shipping and aviation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 4477–4489, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-4477-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-4477-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Barrett, S. R. H., Britter, R. E., and Waitz, I. A.: Global mortality
attributable to aircraft cruise emissions, Environ. Sci. Technol., 44, 7736–7742, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es101325r" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/es101325r</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Bauer, S., Balkanski, Y., Schulz, M., Hauglustaine, D. A., and Dentener, F.:
Heterogeneous chemistry on mineral aerosol surfaces: a global modelling
study on the influence on tropospheric ozone chemistry and comparison to
observations, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D02304,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003868" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003868</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Berntsen, T. K., Fuglestvedt, J. S., Joshi, M., Shine, K. P., Stuber, N.,
Ponater, M., Sausen, R., Hauglustaine, D. A., and Li, L.: Climate response
to regional emissions of ozone precursors; sensitivities and warming
potentials, Tellus B, 57, 283–304, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bian, H., Chin, M., Hauglustaine, D. A., Schulz, M., Myhre, G., Bauer, S. E., Lund, M. T., Karydis, V. A., Kucsera, T. L., Pan, X., Pozzer, A., Skeie, R. B., Steenrod, S. D., Sudo, K., Tsigaridis, K., Tsimpidi, A. P., and Tsyro, S. G.: Investigation of global particulate nitrate from the AeroCom phase III experiment, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 12911–12940, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12911-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12911-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Boucher, O., Friedlingstein, P., Collins, B., and Shine, K. P.: The indirect
global warming potential and global temperature change potential due to
methane oxidation, Environ. Res. Lett., 4, 4, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/044007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/044007</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Boucher, O., Servonnat, J., Albright, A. L., Aumont, O., Balkanski, Y., Bastrikov, V., Bekki, S., Bonnet, R., Bony, S., Bopp, L., Braconnot, P., Brockmann, P., Cadule, P., Caubel, A., Cheruy, F., Codron, F., Cozic, A., Cugnet, D., D'Andrea, P., Davini, de Lavergne, C., Denvil, S., Deshayes, J., Devilliers, M., Ducharne, A., Dufresne, J.-L., Dupont, E., Éthé, C., Fairhead, L., Falletti, F., Flavoni, S., Foujols, M.-A., Gardoll, S., Gastineau, G., Ghattas, J., Grandpeix, J.-Y., Guenet, B., Guez, L., Guilyardi, E., Guimberteau, M., Hauglustaine, D., Hourdin, F., Idelkadi, A., Joussaume, S., Kageyama, M., Khodri, M., Krinner, G., Lebas, N., Levavasseur, G., Lévy, C., Li, L., Lott, F., Lurton, T., Luyssaert, S., Madec, G., Madeleine, J. B., Maignan, F., Marchand, M., Marti, O., Mellul, L., Meurdesoif, Y., Mignot, J., Musat, I., Ottlé, C., Peylin, P., Planton, Y., Polcher, J., Rio, C., Rochetin, N., Rousset, C., Sepulchre, P., Sima, A., Swingedouw, D., Thiéblemont, R., Traore, A., K., Vancoppenolle, M., Vial, J., Vialard, J., Viovy, N., and Vuichard, N.: Presentation and evaluation of the IPSL-CM6A-LR
climate model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002010.
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002010</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Boucher, O., Borella, A., Gasser, T., and Hauglustaine, D.: On the
contribution of global aviation to the CO<sub>2</sub> radiative forcing of climate,
Atmos. Environ., 267, 118761,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118762" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118762</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Bousquet, P., Yver, C., Pison, I., Li, Y. S., Fortems, A., Hauglustaine, D.,
Szopa, S., Rayner, P. J., Novelli, P., Langenfelds, R., Steele, P., Ramonet,
M., Schmidt, M., Foster, P., Morfopulos, C., and Ciais, P.: A 3D synthesis
inversion of the molecular hydrogen cycle: sources and sinks budget
implications for the soil uptake, J. Geophys. Res., 116, D01302,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014599" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014599</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Bouwman, A. F., Lee, D. S., Asman, W. A. H., Dentener, F. J., Van Der Hoek,
K. W., and Olivier, J. G. J.: A global high-resolution emission inventory
for ammonia, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 11, 561–587, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Brasseur, G. P., Cox, R. A., Hauglustaine, D. A., Isaksen, I., Lelieveld, J.,
Lister, D. H., Sausen, R., Schumann, U., Wahner, A., and Wiesen, P.: European
scientific assessment of the atmospheric effects of aircraft emissions,
Atmos. Environ., 32, 2329–2418, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Brasseur, G. P., Gupta, M., Anderson, B. E., Balasubramanian, S., Barrett, S., Duda, D., Fleming, G., Forster, P. M., Fuglestvedt, J., Gettelman, A., Halthore, R. N., Jacob, S. D., Jacobson, M. Z., Khodayari, A., Liou, K.-N., Lund, M. T., Miake-Lye, R. C., Minnis, P., Olsen, S., Penner, J. E., Prinn, R., Schumann, U., Selkirk, H. B., Sokolov, A., Unger, N., Wolfe, P., Wong, H.-W., Wuebbles, D. W., Yi, B., Yang, P., and Zhou, C.: Impact of aviation on climate, B. Am. Meteorol.
Soc., 97, 561–583, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00089.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00089.1</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Brunner, D., Staehelin, J., Rogers, H. L., Köhler, M. O., Pyle, J. A., Hauglustaine, D., Jourdain, L., Berntsen, T. K., Gauss, M., Isaksen, I. S. A., Meijer, E., van Velthoven, P., Pitari, G., Mancini, E., Grewe, G., and Sausen, R.: An evaluation of the performance of chemistry transport models by comparison with research aircraft observations. Part 1: Concepts and overall model performance, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 1609–1631, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-1609-2003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-1609-2003</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Brunner, D., Staehelin, J., Rogers, H. L., Köhler, M. O., Pyle, J. A., Hauglustaine, D. A., Jourdain, L., Berntsen, T. K., Gauss, M., Isaksen, I. S. A., Meijer, E., van Velthoven, P., Pitari, G., Mancini, E., Grewe, V., and Sausen, R.: An evaluation of the performance of chemistry transport models – Part 2: Detailed comparison with two selected campaigns, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 107–129, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-107-2005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-107-2005</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Cameron, M. A., Jacobson, M. Z., Barrett, S. R. H., Bian, H., Chen, C. C.,
Eastham, S. D., Gettelman, A., Khodayari, A., Liang, Q., Selkirk, H. B.,
Unger, N., Wuebbles, D. J., and Yue, X.: An intercomparative study of the
effects of aircraft emissions on surface air quality, J. Geophys. Res. 122,
8325–8344, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025594" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025594</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Carslaw, K., Luo, B., and Peter, T.: An analytic expression for the
composite of aqueous HNO<sub>3 </sub>-H<sub>2</sub>SO<sub>4</sub> stratospheric aerosols
including gas phase removal of HNO<sub>3</sub>, Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 1877–1880, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Clappier, A., Belis, C. A., Pernigotti, D., and Thunis, P.: Source apportionment and sensitivity analysis: two methodologies with two different purposes, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4245–4256, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4245-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4245-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Cohen, Y., Petetin, H., Thouret, V., Marécal, V., Josse, B., Clark, H., Sauvage, B., Fontaine, A., Athier, G., Blot, R., Boulanger, D., Cousin, J.-M., and Nédélec, P.: Climatology and long-term evolution of ozone and carbon monoxide in the upper troposphere–lower stratosphere (UTLS) at northern midlatitudes, as seen by IAGOS from 1995 to 2013, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 5415–5453, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-5415-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-5415-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Cohen, Y., Marecal, V., Thouret, V., Josse, B., and Boulanger, D.: Interpol-IAGOS software, Aeris [software], <a href="https://doi.org/10.25326/81" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.25326/81</a> (last access: 12 September 2022), 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Cohen, Y., Marécal, V., Josse, B., and Thouret, V.: Interpol-IAGOS: a new method for assessing long-term chemistry–climate simulations in the UTLS based on IAGOS data, and its application to the MOCAGE CCMI REF-C1SD simulation, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2659–2689, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2659-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2659-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Collins, W. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Schulz, M., Boucher, O., Eyring, V., Hegglin, M. I., Maycock, A., Myhre, G., Prather, M., Shindell, D., and Smith, S. J.: AerChemMIP: quantifying the effects of chemistry and aerosols in CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 585–607, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-585-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-585-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Dahlmann, K, Grewe, V., Ponater, M., and Matthes, S.: Quantifying the
contributions of individual NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> sources to the trend in ozone radiative
forcing, Atmos. Environ, 45, 2860–2868,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.071" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.071</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Derwent, R. G., Collins, W. J., Johnson, C. E., and Stevenson, D. S.:
Transient behaviour of tropospheric ozone precursors in a global 3-D CTM and
their indirect greenhouse effects, Climatic Change, 49, 463–487,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010648913655" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010648913655</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Eastham, S. D. and Barrett, S. R. H.: Aviation-Attributable Ozone as a
Driver for Changes in Mortality Related to Air Quality and Skin Cancer,
Atmos. Environ., 144, 17–23, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.08.040" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.08.040</a>,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Emanuel, K. A.: A scheme for representing cumulus convection in large-scale
models, J. Atmos. Sci., 48, 2313–2335, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Etminan, M., Myhre, G., Highwood, E. J., and Shine, K. P.: Radiative forcing of
carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide: A significant revision of the
methane radiative forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 12614–12623,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL071930" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL071930</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Eyers, C. J., Addleton, D., Atkinson, K., Broomhead, M. J., Christou, R.,
Elliff, T., Falk, R., Gee, I., Lee, D. S., Marizy, C., Michot, S., Middel,
J., Newton, P., Norman, P., Plohr, M., Raper, D., and Stanciou, N.: AERO2K
Global Aviation Emissions Inventories for 2002 and 2025, QINETIQ/04/01113,
Farnborough, Hants, UK, <a href="https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/7313363/aero2k-global-aviation-emissions-inventories-for-2002-and-2025" target="_blank"/> (last access: 7 September 2022), 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA): Recommended best practice for
quantifying speciated organic gas emissions from aircraft equipped with
turbofan, turbojet and turboprop engines, <a href="https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/P1003YX3.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&amp;Client=EPA&amp;Index=2006+Thru+2010&amp;Docs=&amp;Query=&amp;Time=&amp;EndTime=&amp;SearchMethod=1&amp;TocRestrict=n&amp;Toc=&amp;TocEntry=&amp;QField=&amp;QFieldYear=&amp;QFieldMonth=&amp;QFieldDay=&amp;IntQFieldOp=0&amp;ExtQFieldOp=0&amp;XmlQuery=&amp;File=D:{\backslash}zyfiles{\backslash}Index Data{\backslash}06thru10{\backslash}Txt{\backslash}00000008{\backslash}P1003YX3.txt&amp;User=ANONYMOUS&amp;Password=anonymous&amp;SortMethod=h|-&amp;MaximumDocuments=1&amp;FuzzyDegree=0&amp;ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&amp;Display=hpfr&amp;DefSeekPage=x&amp;SearchBack=ZyActionL&amp;Back=ZyActionS&amp;BackDesc=Results page&amp;MaximumPages=1&amp;ZyEntry=1&amp;SeekPage=x&amp;ZyPURL#" target="_blank">https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/P1003YX3</a> (last access: 7 September 2022), 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Fiore, A. M., Dentener, F. J., Wild, O., Cuvelier, C., Schultz, M. G., Hess,
P., Textor, C., Schulz, M., Doherty, R. M., Horowitz, L. W., MacKenzie, I.
A., Sanderson, M. G., Shindell, D. T., Stevenson, D. S., Szopa, S., Van
Dingenen, R., Zeng, G., Atherton, C., Bergmann, D., Bey, I., Carmichael, G.,
Collins, W. J., Duncan, B. N., Faluvegi, G., Folberth, G., Gauss, M., Gong,
S., Hauglustaine, D., Holloway, T., Isaksen, I. S. A., Jacob, D. J., Jonson,
J. E., Kaminski, J. W., Keating, T. J., Lupu, A., Marmer, E., Montanaro, V.,
Park, R. J., Pitari, G., Pringle, K. J., Pyle, J. A., Schroeder, S.,
Vivanco, M. G., Wind, P., Wojcik, G., Wu, S., and Zuber, A.: Multimodel
estimates of intercontinental source-receptor relationships for ozone
pollution, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D04301.
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010816" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010816</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Folberth, G. A., Hauglustaine, D. A., Ciais, P., and Lathière, J.: On
the role of atmospheric chemistry in the global CO<sub>2</sub> budget, Geophys.
Res. Lett, 32, L08801, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021812" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021812</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Folberth, G. A., Hauglustaine, D. A., Lathière, J., and Brocheton, F.: Interactive chemistry in the Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique general circulation model: model description and impact analysis of biogenic hydrocarbons on tropospheric chemistry, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 2273–2319, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-2273-2006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-2273-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Forster, P., Storelvmo, T., Armour, K., Collins, W., Dufresne, J.-L., Frame, D.,
Lunt, D. J., Mauritsen, T., Palmer, M. D., Watanabe, M., Wild, M., and Zhang, H.: 2021: The Earth's Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks, and Climate Sensitivity, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working
Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 923–1054, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.009</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Fouquart, Y. and Bonel, B.: Computations of solar heating of the earth's
atmosphere: a new parameterization, Beitr. Phys. Atmos., 53, 35–62, 1980.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Freeman, S., Lee, D. S., Lim, L. L., Skowron, A., and De Leon, R. R.:
Trading off aircraft fuel burn and NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> emissions for optimal climate
policy, Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 2498–2505, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Frömming, C., Ponater, M., Dahlmann, K., Grewe, V., Lee, D. S., and Sausen,
R.: Aviation-induced radiative forcing and surface temperature change in
dependency of the emission altitude, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D19104,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018204" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018204</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Fuglestvedt, J. S., Berntsen, T. K., Isaksen, I. S. A., Mao, H. T., Liang,
X. Z., and Wang, W. C.: Climatic forcing of nitrogen oxides through changes
in tropospheric ozone and methane; global 3D model studies, Atmos. Environ.,
33, 961–977, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Gauss, M., Isaksen, I. S. A., Lee, D. S., and Søvde, O. A.: Impact of aircraft NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> emissions on the atmosphere – tradeoffs to reduce the impact, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 1529–1548, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-1529-2006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-1529-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Gilmore, C. K., Barrett, S. R. H., Koo, J., and Wang, Q.: Temporal and spatial
variability in the aviation NO<sub><i>x</i></sub>-related O<sub>3</sub> impact, Environ. Res. Lett., 8,
034027, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034027" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034027</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Gliß, J., Mortier, A., Schulz, M., Andrews, E., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S.
E., Benedictow, A. M. K., Bian, H., Checa-Garcia, R., Chin, M., Ginoux, P.,
Griesfeller, J. J., Heckel, A., Kipling, Z., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H.,
Laj, P., Le Sager, P., Lund, M. T., Lund Myhre, C., Matsui, H., Myhre, G.,
Neubauer, D., van Noije, T., North, P., Olivié, D. J. L., Rémy, S.,
Sogacheva, L., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Tsyro, S. G.: AeroCom phase
III multi-model evaluation of the aerosol life cycle and optical properties
using ground- and space-based remote sensing as well as surface in situ
observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 87–128,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-87-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-87-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Grewe, V., Dameris, M., Fichter, C., and Lee, D.: Impact of aircraft NO<sub><i>x</i></sub>
emissions. Part 2: Effects of lowering the flight altitude, Meteorol. Z., 3,
197–205, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Grewe, V. and Stenke, A.: AirClim: an efficient tool for climate evaluation of aircraft technology, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 4621–4639, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-4621-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-4621-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Grewe, V., Frömming, C., Matthes, S., Brinkop, S., Ponater, M., Dietmüller, S., Jöckel, P., Garny, H., Tsati, E., Dahlmann, K., Søvde, O. A., Fuglestvedt, J., Berntsen, T. K., Shine, K. P., Irvine, E. A., Champougny, T., and Hullah, P.: Aircraft routing with minimal climate impact: the REACT4C climate cost function modelling approach (V1.0), Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 175–201, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-175-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-175-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Grewe, V., Matthes, S., and Dahlmann, K.: The contribution of aviation NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> to
climate change: are we ignoring methodological flaws?, Environ. Res. Lett.,
14, 121003, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab5dd7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab5dd7</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Hanson, D., Ravishankara, A. R., and Solomon, S.: Heterogeneous reactions in
sulfuric acid aerosols: A framework for model calculations, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 3615–3629, 1988.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Hauglustaine D. A., Granier, C., Brasseur G. P., and Mégie, G.: Impact
of present aircraft emissions of nitrogen oxides on tropospheric ozone and
climate forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 21, 2031–2034, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Hauglustaine, D. A., Hourdin, F., Jourdain, L., Filiberti, M. A., Walters,
S., Lamarque, J. F., and Holland, E. A.: Interactive chemistry in the
Laboratoire de Meteorologie Dynamique general circulation model: Description
and background tropospheric chemistry evaluation, J. Geophys. Res., 109,
D04314, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003957" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003957</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Hauglustaine, D. A. and Koffi, B.: Boundary layer ozone pollution caused by
future aircraft emissions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L13808, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052008</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Hauglustaine, D. A., Balkanski, Y., and Schulz, M.: A global model simulation of present and future nitrate aerosols and their direct radiative forcing of climate, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 11031–11063, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11031-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11031-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Hodnebrog, Ø., Berntsen, T. K., Dessens, O., Gauss, M., Grewe, V., Isaksen, I. S. A., Koffi, B., Myhre, G., Olivié, D., Prather, M. J., Pyle, J. A., Stordal, F., Szopa, S., Tang, Q., van Velthoven, P., Williams, J. E., and Ødemark, K.: Future impact of non-land based traffic emissions on atmospheric ozone and OH – an optimistic scenario and a possible mitigation strategy, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 11293–11317, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11293-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11293-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Hodnebrog, Ø., Berntsen, T. K., Dessens, O., Gauss, M., Grewe, V., Isaksen, I. S. A., Koffi, B., Myhre, G., Olivié, D., Prather, M. J., Stordal, F., Szopa, S., Tang, Q., van Velthoven, P., and Williams, J. E.: Future impact of traffic emissions on atmospheric ozone and OH based on two scenarios, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 12211–12225, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-12211-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-12211-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Hoesly, R. M., Smith, S. J., Feng, L., Klimont, Z., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Pitkanen, T., Seibert, J. J., Vu, L., Andres, R. J., Bolt, R. M., Bond, T. C., Dawidowski, L., Kholod, N., Kurokawa, J.-I., Li, M., Liu, L., Lu, Z., Moura, M. C. P., O'Rourke, P. R., and Zhang, Q.: Historical (1750–2014) anthropogenic emissions of reactive gases and aerosols from the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS), Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 369–408, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Holmes, C. D.: Methane feedback on atmospheric chemistry: Methods, models,
and mechanisms, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 10, 1087–1099,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001196" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001196</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Holmes, C. D., Tang, Q., and Prather, M.: Uncertainties in climate assessment
for the case of aviation NO, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 10997–11002, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Hoor, P., Borken-Kleefeld, J., Caro, D., Dessens, O., Endresen, O., Gauss, M., Grewe, V., Hauglustaine, D., Isaksen, I. S. A., Jöckel, P., Lelieveld, J., Myhre, G., Meijer, E., Olivie, D., Prather, M., Schnadt Poberaj, C., Shine, K. P., Staehelin, J., Tang, Q., van Aardenne, J., van Velthoven, P., and Sausen, R.: The impact of traffic emissions on atmospheric ozone and OH: results from QUANTIFY, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 3113–3136, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-3113-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-3113-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Hourdin, F. and Armengaud, A.: The use of finite-volume methods for
atmospheric advection of trace species 1. Test of various formulations in a
general circulation model, Mon. Weather Rev., 127, 822–837, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Hourdin, F. and Issartel, J. P., Sub-surface nuclear tests monitoring
through the CTBT xenon network, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 2245–2248, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Hourdin, F., Grandpeix, J.-Y., Madeleine, J.-B., Chéruy, F., Rochetin, N., Musat, I., Idelkadi, A., Fairhead, L., Foujols, M.-A., Mellul, L., Traore, A.-K., Dufresne, J.-L., Boucher, O., Lefebvre, M.-P., Millour, E., Vignon, E., Jouaud, J., Diallo, F. B., Lott, F., Caubel, A., Meurdesoif, Y., and Ghattas, J.: LMDZ6A: the atmospheric component of the IPSL climate model with improved and better tuned physics, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001892, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001892" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001892</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Huszar, P., Teyssèdre, H., Michou, M., Voldoire, A., Olivié, D. J. L., Saint-Martin, D., Cariolle, D., Senesi, S., Salas Y Melia, D., Alias, A., Karcher, F., Ricaud, P., and Halenka, T.: Modeling the present and future impact of aviation on climate: an AOGCM approach with online coupled chemistry, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 10027–10048, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-10027-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-10027-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
IAGOS: IAGOS, In-service Aircraft for a Global Observing System, Aeris, <a href="https://doi.org/10.25326/20" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.25326/20</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Institut Pierre Simon Laplace (IPSL): Climate Modelling Center Coupled Model,  <a href="https://cmc.ipsl.fr/ipslclimate-models/ipsl-cm6/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 12 September 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Ivanovich, C. C., Ocko, I. B., Piris-Cabezas, P., and Petsonk, A.: Climate benefits of proposed carbon dioxide mitigation strategies for international shipping and aviation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 14949–14965, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14949-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14949-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Jourdain, L. and Hauglustaine, D. A.: The global distribution of lightning
NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> simulated on-line in a general circulation model, Phys. Chem. Earth, 26,
585–591, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Kapadia, Z. Z., Spracklen, D. V., Arnold, S. R., Borman, D. J., Mann, G. W., Pringle, K. J., Monks, S. A., Reddington, C. L., Benduhn, F., Rap, A., Scott, C. E., Butt, E. W., and Yoshioka, M.: Impacts of aviation fuel sulfur content on climate and human health, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 10521–10541, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10521-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10521-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Kärcher, B.: Formation and radiative forcing of contrail cirrus, Nat.
Commun., 9, 1824, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04068-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04068-0</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Khodayari, A., Tilmes, S., Olsen, S. C., Phoenix, D. B., Wuebbles, D. J., Lamarque, J.-F., and Chen, C.-C.: Aviation 2006 NO<sub><i>x</i></sub>-induced effects on atmospheric ozone and HO<sub><i>x</i></sub> in Community Earth System Model (CESM), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9925–9939, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9925-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9925-2014</a>, 2014a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Khodayari, A., Olsen, S. C., and Wuebbles, D. J.: Evaluation of aviation
NO<sub><i>x</i></sub>-induced radiative forcings for 2005 and 2050, Atmos. Environ., 91,
95–103, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.03.044" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.03.044</a>, 2014b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Khodayari, A., Olsen, S. C., Wuebbles, D. J., and Phoenix, D. B.: Aviation
NO<sub><i>x</i></sub>-induced CH<sub>4</sub> effect: fixed mixing ratio boundary conditions versus flux
boundary conditions, Atmos. Environ., 113, 135–139, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Kinnison, D. E., Brasseur, G. P., Walters, S., Garcia, R. R., Marsh, D. R.,
Sassi, F., Harvey, V. L., Randall, C. E., Emmons, L., Lamarque, J. F., Hess,
P., Orlando, J. J., Tie, X. X., Randel, W., Pan, L. L., Gettelman, A.,
Granier, C., Diehl, T., Niemeier, U., and Simmons, A. J.: Sensitivity of
chemical tracers to meteorological parameters in the MOZART-3 chemical
transport model, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D20302,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007879" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007879</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Koffi, B., Szopa, S., Cozic, A., Hauglustaine, D., and van Velthoven, P.: Present and future impact of aircraft, road traffic and shipping emissions on global tropospheric ozone, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 11681–11705, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-11681-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-11681-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Koffi, B., Schulz, M. , Bréon, F.-M., Dentener, F., Steensen, B. M., Griesfeller, J., Winker, D., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Bellouin, N., Berntsen, T., Bian, H., Chin, M., Diehl, T., Easter, R., Ghan, S., Hauglustaine, D. A., Iversen, T.,
Kirkevag, A., Liu, X., Lohmann, U., Myhre, G., Rasch, P., Seland, O., Skeie, R. B.,
Steenrod, S. D., Stier, P., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., Vuolo, M. R., Yoon, J., and Zhang, K.: Evaluation of the aerosol vertical distribution in global
transport models through comparison against CALIOP measurements: update
based on the AeroCom phase II simulations, J. Geophys. Res., 121,
7254–7283, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024639" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024639</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Krinner, G., Viovy, N., de Noblet-Ducoudre, N., Ogee, J., Polcher, J.,
Friedlingstein, P., Ciais, P., Sitch, S., and Prentice, I. C.: A dynamic
global vegetation model for studies of the coupled atmosphere- biosphere
system, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 19, GB1015, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002199" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002199</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Lamarque, J.-F., Bond, T. C., Eyring, V., Granier, C., Heil, A., Klimont, Z., Lee, D., Liousse, C., Mieville, A., Owen, B., Schultz, M. G., Shindell, D., Smith, S. J., Stehfest, E., Van Aardenne, J., Cooper, O. R., Kainuma, M., Mahowald, N., McConnell, J. R., Naik, V., Riahi, K., and van Vuuren, D. P.: Historical (1850–2000) gridded anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions of reactive gases and aerosols: methodology and application, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7017–7039, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Lamarque, J.-F., Kyle, G. P., Meinshausen, M., Riahi, K., Smith, S. J., van
Vuuren, D. P., Conley, A. J., and Vitt, F.: Global and regional evolution of
short-lived radiatively-active gases and aerosols in the Representative
Concentration Pathways, Climatic Change, 109, 191–212,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0155-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0155-0</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Lathière, J., Hauglustaine, D. A., De Noblet-Ducoudré, N., Krinner,
G., and Folberth, G. A.: Past and future changes in biogenic volatile
organic compound emissions simulated with a global dynamic vegetation model,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L20818, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL024164" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL024164</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Lee, D. S., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Newton, P. J., Wit, R. C. N., Lim,
L. L., Owen, B., and Sausen, R.: Aviation and global climate change in the
21st century, Atmos. Environ., 43, 3520–3537, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Lee, D. S., Pitari, G., Grewe, V., Gierens, K., Penner, J. E., Petzold, A.,
Prather, M. J., Schumann, U., Bais, A., Berntsen, T., Iachetti, D., Lim, L.
L., and Sausen, R.: Transport impacts on atmosphere and climate: Aviation,
Atmos. Environ., 44, 4678–4734, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.06.005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.06.005</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Lee, D. S., Fahey, D. W., Skowron, A., Allen, M. R., Burkhardt, U., Chen,
Q., Doherty, S. J., Freeman, S., Forster, P. M., Fuglestvedt, J., Gettelman,
A., De Léon, R. R., Lim, L. L., Lund, M. T., Millar, R. J., Owen, B.,
Penner, J. E., Pitari, G., Prather, M. J., Sausen, R., and Wilcox, L. J.:
The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for
2000 to 2018, Atmos. Environ., 244, 117834,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117834" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117834</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Lee, H., Olsen, S. C., Wuebbles, D. J., and Youn, D.: Impacts of aircraft emissions on the air quality near the ground, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 5505–5522, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5505-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5505-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Lefèvre, F., Brasseur, G. P., Folkins, I., Smith, A. K., and Simon, P.:
Chemistry of the 1991–1992 stratospheric winter: three-dimensional model
simulations, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 8183, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/93JD03476" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/93JD03476</a>, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
Li B., Gasser, T., Ciais, P., Piao, S., Tao, S., Balkanski, Y.,
Hauglustaine, D., Boisier, J.-P., Chen, Z., Li, L. Z., Li, Y., Liu, H., Liu,
J., Peng, S., Sun, Z., Wang, R., Wang, T., Yin, G., Yin, Y., Zeng, Z., and
Zhou, F.: The contribution of China's emissions to global climate forcing,
Nature, 531, 357–362, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17165" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17165</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation>
Lim, L. L., Lee, D. S., Owen, B., Skowron, A., Matthes, S., Burkhardt, U.,
Dietmuller, S., Pitari, G., Di Genova, G., Iachetti, D., Isaksen, I., and
Søvde, O. A.: REACT4C: Simplified mitigation study, TAC-4 Proceedings,
22 to 25 June 2015, Bad Kohlgrub, 181–185, ISSN 1434-8454, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation>
Lund, M. T., Aamaas, B., Berntsen, T., Bock, L., Burkhardt, U., Fuglestvedt, J. S., and Shine, K. P.: Emission metrics for quantifying regional climate impacts of aviation, Earth Syst. Dynam., 8, 547–563, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-8-547-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-8-547-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><mixed-citation>
Marenco, A., Thouret, V., Nédélec, P., Smit, H., Helten, M., Kley,
D., Karsher, F., Simon, P., Law, K., Pyle, J., Poschmann, G., Von Wrede, R.,
Hume, C., and Cook, T.: Measurement of ozone and water vapour by Airbus
in-service aircraft: The MOZAIC airborne programme, an overview, J. Geophys.
Res., 103, 25 631–642, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD00977" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD00977</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><mixed-citation>
Matthes, S., Schumann, U., Grewe, V., Frömming, C., Dahlmann, K., Koch,
A., and Mannstein, H.: Climate Optimized Air Transport, edited by:
Schumann, U., ISBN 978-3-642-30182-7, ISBN 978-3-642-30183-4 (eBook),
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30183-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30183-4</a>, Springer, Heidelberg, New York, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><mixed-citation>
Matthes, S., Grewe, V., Dahlmann, K., Frömming, C., Irvine, E., Lim, L.,
Linke, F., Lührs, B., Owen, B., Shine, K., Stromatas, S., Yamashita, H., and Yin, F.: A concept for multi-dimensional environmental assessment of
aircraft trajectories, Aerospace, 4, 42,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace4030042" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace4030042</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><mixed-citation>
Matthes., S, Lim, L., Burkhardt, U., Dahlmann, K., Dietmüller, S.,
Grewe, V. Haslerud, A. S., Hendricks, J., Owen, B., Pitari, G., Righi, M.,
and Skowron, A.: Mitigation of non-CO<sub>2</sub> aviation's climate impact by
changing cruise altitudes, Aerospace, 8, 36,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8020036" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8020036</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><mixed-citation>
Morcrette, J.-J.: Radiation and cloud radiative properties in the European
Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts forecasting system, J. Geophys.
Res., 96, 9121–9132, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><mixed-citation>
Morris, G. A., Rosenfield, J. E., Schoeberl, M. R., and Jackman, C. H.: Potential
impact of subsonic and supersonic aircraft exhaust on water vapour in the
lower stratosphere assessed via a trajectory model, J. Geophys. Res., 108,
4103, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002614" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002614</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><mixed-citation>
Myhre, G., Highwood, E. J., Shine, K. P., and Stordal, F.: New estimates of radiative forcing due to well miwed greenhouse gases, Geophys. Res. Lett., 14, 2715–2718, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><mixed-citation>
Myhre, G., Kvalevåg, M., Rädel, G., Cook, J., Shine, K. P., Clark,
H., Karcher, F., Markowicz, K., Kardas, A., Wolkenberg, P., Balkanski, Y.,
Ponater, M., Forster, P., Rap, A., and de Leon, R. R.: Intercomparison of
radiative forcing calculations of stratospheric water vapour and contrails,
Meteorol. Z., 18, 585–596, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2009/0411" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2009/0411</a>,
2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><mixed-citation>
Myhre, G., Shine, K. P., Rädel, G., Gauss, M., Isaksen, I. S. A., Tang,
Q., Prather, M. J., Williams, J. E., van Velthoven, P., Dessens, O., Koffi,
B., Szopa, S., Hoor, P., Grewe, V., Borken-Kleefeld, J., Berntsen, T. K.,
and Fuglestvedt, J. S.: Radiative forcing due to changes in ozone and
methane caused by the transport sector, Atmos. Environ., 45, 387–394,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.10.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.10.001</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><mixed-citation>
Myhre, G., Samset, B. H., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T. K., Bian, H., Bellouin, N., Chin, M., Diehl, T., Easter, R. C., Feichter, J., Ghan, S. J., Hauglustaine, D., Iversen, T., Kinne, S., Kirkevåg, A., Lamarque, J.-F., Lin, G., Liu, X., Lund, M. T., Luo, G., Ma, X., van Noije, T., Penner, J. E., Rasch, P. J., Ruiz, A., Seland, Ø., Skeie, R. B., Stier, P., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., Wang, P., Wang, Z., Xu, L., Yu, H., Yu, F., Yoon, J.-H., Zhang, K., Zhang, H., and Zhou, C.: Radiative forcing of the direct aerosol effect from AeroCom Phase II simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 1853–1877, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1853-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1853-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><mixed-citation>
Nakicenovic, N. and R. Swart (Eds.): IPCC special report on emissions
scenarios, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, ISBN 0 521 80081 1, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><mixed-citation>
Nedelec, P., Cammas, J.-P., Thouret, V., Athier, G., Cousin, J.-M., Legrand, C., Abonnel, C., Lecoeur, F., Cayez, G., and Marizy, C.: An improved infrared carbon monoxide analyser for routine measurements aboard commercial Airbus aircraft: technical validation and first scientific results of the MOZAIC III programme, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 1551–1564, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-1551-2003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-1551-2003</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><mixed-citation>
Nédélec, P., Blot, R., Boulanger, D., Athier, G., Cousin, J.-M.,
Gautron, B., Petzold, A., Volz-Thomas, A., and Thouret, V.: Instrumentation
on commercial aircraft for monitoring the atmospheric composition on a
global scale: the IAGOS system, technical overview of ozone and carbon
monoxide measurements, Tellus B, 67, 27791, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.27791" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.27791</a>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><mixed-citation>
Olsen, S. C., Brasseur, G. P., Wuebbles, D. J., Barrett, S. R. H., Dang, H.,
Eastham, S. D., Jacobson, M. Z., Khodayari, A., Selkirk, H., Sokolov, A., and
Unger N.: Comparison of model estimates of the effects of aviation emissions
on atmospheric ozone and methane, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 6004–6009,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL057660" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL057660</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib97"><label>97</label><mixed-citation>
Olivié, D. J. L., Cariolle, D., Teyssèdre, H., Salas, D., Voldoire, A., Clark, H., Saint-Martin, D., Michou, M., Karcher, F., Balkanski, Y., Gauss, M., Dessens, O., Koffi, B., and Sausen, R.: Modeling the climate impact of road transport, maritime shipping and aviation over the period 1860–2100 with an AOGCM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 1449–1480, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-1449-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-1449-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib98"><label>98</label><mixed-citation>
Owen, B., Lee, D. S., and Lim, L.: Flying into the future: aviation
emissions scenarios to 2050, Environ. Sci. Technol., 44, 2255–2260,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es902530z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/es902530z</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib99"><label>99</label><mixed-citation>
Penner, J. E., Lister, D. H., Griggs, D. J., Dokken, D. J., and McFarland, M.
(Eds.): Aviation and the global atmosphere, Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC), Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0 521 66300 8, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib100"><label>100</label><mixed-citation>
Petzold, A., Thouret, V., Gerbig, C., Zahn, A., Brenninkmeijer, C.,
Gallagher, M., Hermann, M., Pontaud, M., Ziereis, H., Boulanger, D.,
Marshall, J., Nédélec, P., Smit, H., Friess, U., Flaud, J.-M.,
Wahner, A., Cammas, J.-P., and Volz-Thomas, A.: Global-scale atmosphere
monitoring by in-service aircraft – current achievements and future
prospects of the European Research Infrastructure IAGOS, Tellus B, 67, 28452,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28452" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28452</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib101"><label>101</label><mixed-citation>
Pitari, G., Mancini, E., and Bregman, A.: Climate forcing of subsonic
aviation: Indirect role of sulfate particles via heterogeneous chemistry,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 29, 2057, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL015705" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL015705</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib102"><label>102</label><mixed-citation>
Pitari G., Iachetti, D., Di Genova, G., De Luca, N., Søvde, O. A.,
Hodnebrog, Ø., Lee, D. S., and Lim, L.: Impact of coupled NO<sub><i>x</i></sub>/aerosol
aircraft emissions on ozone photochemistry and radiative forcing,
Atmosphere, 6, 751–782, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos6060751" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos6060751</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib103"><label>103</label><mixed-citation>
Pitari, G., Cionni, I., Di Genova, G., Søvde, O., and Lim, L.: Radiative forcing from aircraft emissions of NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> : model calculations with CH<sub>4</sub> surface flux boundary condition, Meteorol. Z., 26, 663–687, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1127/metz/2016/0776" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1127/metz/2016/0776</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib104"><label>104</label><mixed-citation>
Prashanth, P., Speth, R. L., Eastham, S. D., Sabnis, J. S., and Barrett, S. R. H.: Post-Combustion Emissions Control in Aero-Gas Turbine Engines, Energy Environ. Sci., 14, 916, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1039/D0EE02362K" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1039/D0EE02362K</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib105"><label>105</label><mixed-citation>
Prashanth, P., Eastham, S. D., Speth, R. L., and Barrett, S. R. H.: Aerosol formation pathways from aviation emissions, Environ. Res. Commun., 4, 021002, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ac52" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ac52</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib106"><label>106</label><mixed-citation>
Prather, M. J.: Lifetimes and eigenstates in atmospheric chemistry, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 21, 801–804, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/94GL00840" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/94GL00840</a>, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib107"><label>107</label><mixed-citation>
Prather, M., Ehhalt, D., Dentener, F., Derwent, R., and Dlugokencky E.:
“Atmospheric chemistry and greenhouse gases”, in: Climate Change 2001: The
Scientific Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Houghton, J. T., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY,
USA, 2001, 239–287, ISBN 0521 80767 0, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib108"><label>108</label><mixed-citation>
Righi, M., Hendricks, J., and Sausen, R.: The global impact of the transport
sectors on atmospheric aerosol: simulations for year 2000 emissions, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 13, 9939–9970, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9939-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9939-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib109"><label>109</label><mixed-citation>
Righi, M., Hendricks, J., and Sausen, R.: The global impact of the transport sectors on atmospheric aerosol in 2030 – Part 2: Aviation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 4481–4495, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4481-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4481-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib110"><label>110</label><mixed-citation>
Schulz, M.: Constraining Model Estimates of the Aerosol Radiative Forcing,
Thèse d'Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches, Université Pierre
et Marie Curie, Paris VI, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib111"><label>111</label><mixed-citation>
Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Dulac, F., and Guelle W.: Role of aerosol size
distribution and source location in a three-dimensional simulation of a
Saharan dust episode tested against satellite-derived optical thickness, J.
Geophys. Res., 103, 10579–10592, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib112"><label>112</label><mixed-citation>
Skowron, A., Lee, D. S., and De Leon, R. R.: The assessment of the impact of
aviation NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> on ozone and other radiative forcing responses – The
importance of representing cruise altitude accurately, Atmos. Environ., 74,
159–168, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib113"><label>113</label><mixed-citation>
Skowron, A., Lee, D. S., De León, R. R., Lim, L. L., and Owen, B.:
Greater fuel efficiency is potentially preferable to reducing NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> emissions
for aviation's climate impacts, Nat. Comm., 12, 564,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20771-3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20771-3</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib114"><label>114</label><mixed-citation>
Søvde, O. A., Gauss, M., Isaksen, I. S. A., Pitari, G., and Marizy, C.: Aircraft pollution – a futuristic view, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 3621–3632, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3621-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3621-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib115"><label>115</label><mixed-citation>
Søvde, O. A., Matthes, S., Skowron, A., Iachetti, D., Lim, L. L.,
Hodnebrog, Ø., Di Genova, G., Pitari, G., Lee, D. S., Myhre, G., and
Isaksen, I. S. A.: Aircraft emission mitigation by changing route altitude: A
multi-model estimate of aircraft NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> emission impact on O<sub>3</sub>
photochemistry, Atmos. Environ., 95, 468–479, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib116"><label>116</label><mixed-citation>
Stevenson, D. S. and Derwent, R. G.: How does the location of aircraft
nitrogen oxide emissions affect their climate impact?, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
36, L17810, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039422" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039422</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib117"><label>117</label><mixed-citation>
Stevenson, D. S., Doherty, R. M., Sanderson, M. G., Collins, W. J., Johnson,
C. E., and Derwent, R. G.: Radiative forcing from aircraft NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> emissions:
mechanisms and seasonal dependence, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D17307,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004759" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004759</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib118"><label>118</label><mixed-citation>
Szopa, S., Naik, V., Adhikary, B., Artaxo, P., Berntsen, T., Collins, W. D., Fuzzi, S., Gallardo, L., Kiendler-Scharr, A., Klimont, Z., Liao, H., Unger, N., and Zanis, P.: Short-Lived Climate Forcers, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 817–922, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.008</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib119"><label>119</label><mixed-citation>
Terrenoire, E., Hauglustaine, D. A., Gasser T., and Penanhoat, O.: The
contribution of carbon dioxide emissions from the aviation sector to future
climate change, Environ. Res. Lett., 14, 084019,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab3086" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab3086</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib120"><label>120</label><mixed-citation>
Thomason, L. W., Ernest, N., Millán, L., Rieger, L., Bourassa, A., Vernier, J.-P., Manney, G., Luo, B., Arfeuille, F., and Peter, T.: A global space-based stratospheric aerosol climatology: 1979–2016, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 469–492, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-469-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-469-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib121"><label>121</label><mixed-citation>
Thouret, V., Marenco, A., Logan, J. A., Nédélec, P., and Grouhel,
C.: Comparisons of ozone measurements from the MOZAIC airborne program and
the ozone sounding network at eight locations, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 25695–25720, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD02243" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD02243</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib122"><label>122</label><mixed-citation>
Tilmes, S., Lamarque, J.-F., Emmons, L. K., Conley, A., Schultz, M. G., Saunois, M., Thouret, V., Thompson, A. M., Oltmans, S. J., Johnson, B., and Tarasick, D.: Technical Note: Ozonesonde climatology between 1995 and 2011: description, evaluation and applications, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 7475–7497, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7475-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7475-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib123"><label>123</label><mixed-citation>
Unger, N.: Global climate impact of civil aviation for standard and
desulfurized jet fuel, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, 1–6,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL049289" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL049289</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib124"><label>124</label><mixed-citation>
Unger, N., Zhao, Y., and Dang, H.: Mid-21st century chemical forcing of
climate by the civil aviation sector, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 641–645,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50161" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50161</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib125"><label>125</label><mixed-citation>
Van Leer, B.: Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme. Part IV:
a new approach to numerical convection, J. Comput. Phys., 23, 276-299, 1977.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib126"><label>126</label><mixed-citation>
Voulgarakis, A., Naik, V., Lamarque, J.-F., Shindell, D. T., Young, P. J., Prather, M. J., Wild, O., Field, R. D., Bergmann, D., Cameron-Smith, P., Cionni, I., Collins, W. J., Dalsøren, S. B., Doherty, R. M., Eyring, V., Faluvegi, G., Folberth, G. A., Horowitz, L. W., Josse, B., MacKenzie, I. A., Nagashima, T., Plummer, D. A., Righi, M., Rumbold, S. T., Stevenson, D. S., Strode, S. A., Sudo, K., Szopa, S., and Zeng, G.: Analysis of present day and future OH and methane lifetime in the ACCMIP simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 2563–2587, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2563-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2563-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib127"><label>127</label><mixed-citation>
Wilcox, L., Shine, K. P., and Hoskins, B. J.: Radiative forcing due to
aviation water vapour emissions. Atmos. Environ., 63, 1–13,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.08.072" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.08.072</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib128"><label>128</label><mixed-citation>
Wilkerson, J. T., Jacobson, M. Z., Malwitz, A., Balasubramanian, S., Wayson, R., Fleming, G., Naiman, A. D., and Lele, S. K.: Analysis of emission data from global commercial aviation: 2004 and 2006, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 6391–6408, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-6391-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-6391-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib129"><label>129</label><mixed-citation>
Yim, S. H. L., Lee, G. L., Lee, I. H., Allroggen, F., Ashok, A., Caiazzo,
F., Eastham, S. D., Malina, R., and Barrett, S. R. H.: Global, regional and
local health impacts of civil aviation emissions, Environ. Res. Lett., 1,
034001, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/3/034001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/3/034001</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib130"><label>130</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, Y., Saunois, M., Bousquet, P., Lin, X., Berchet, A., Hegglin, M. I., Canadell, J. G., Jackson, R. B., Hauglustaine, D. A., Szopa, S., Stavert, A. R., Abraham, N. L., Archibald, A. T., Bekki, S., Deushi, M., Jöckel, P., Josse, B., Kinnison, D., Kirner, O., Marécal, V., O'Connor, F. M., Plummer, D. A., Revell, L. E., Rozanov, E., Stenke, A., Strode, S., Tilmes, S., Dlugokencky, E. J., and Zheng, B.: Inter-model comparison of global hydroxyl radical (OH) distributions and their impact on atmospheric methane over the 2000–2016 period, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 13701–13723, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13701-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13701-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
