Talk:Aviation and climate change

message: I have created this new article.  I am aware it is vey far from complete or comprehensive, and that numerous citations are required.
I would value help on this article, particularly with categories. tks Normalmouth 09:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening text 

message: I hve made a number of improvements to the text, included citations where appropriate and have added some categories. Input on this page is much appreciated. Normalmouth 09:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  28 August 

message: I have amended the text and submitted it for comment to WikiProject Climate Change.Normalmouth 22:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to say that having read the page, it seems pretty good. Good work William M. Connolley 21:31, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Climate change discussion request

message: I remember reading of a study that claims that the effects of daytime aviation vs. nighttime aviation vary greatly. This would be because of sun's heat being reflected back into space by the emissions themselves during daytime aviation whereas in the night they would keep heat from escaping into space. Zinjixmaggir 08:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nighttime vs. daytime aviation effects on climate? 

message: According to the wiki article on contrails are described as increasing the earth's albedo, which would make sense.  This article states however that this is a "warming effect."  Now I can see how an airplane might warm the air by its flight, I don't understand, and the article does not explain how increasing the amount of water in the upper atmosphere might contribute to global warming, rather it would seem to be more likely to lead to cooling. 02:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WV is a greenhouse gas. Normally emitting it doesn't matter, cos its in natural balance, but high up the atmos can be very dry and so airplane WV can be important William M. Connolley 09:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Water vapor

message: Surely CO2 emissions are much more problematic, because CO2 is persistent in the atmosphere, and the effect is integrated over tens of years. In contrast, I'd have thought that excess water vapour would be quickly removed as rain, or stirred into the lower-atmosphere where it can form clouds; likewise, the O3 would get 'stirred' back to the ozone layer. To me, it doesn't make intuitive sense that the other gases can have a significant long term effect. However, I don't understand this properly, and I'd like to see an explanation from an expert as to why my "common sense" interpretation is wrong. . --RichardNeill 13:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persistence? 

message: Worth mentioning that the efficiency of a 747 aircraft is (approx) 100 passenger-miles per gallon. (ref somewhere on Boeing's website).
This is equivalent to a fully-loaded family car. Thus, if the alternative to flying is "not to travel at all", then it's sensible. However, the alternative of "travel by car/boat instead" is probably no better for the environment, and may well be worse. Obviously, this argument depends hugely on the factors involved, but the topic probably merits discussion. --RichardNeill 13:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternatives 

message: On reading this page I felt that the arguments were very one sided supporting aviation contributing significantly to climate change.  I believe there are counter arguments to this (also to the entire issue of 'climate change' itself - although maybe that should not be up for debate here).  Also in order to ensure NPOV it may be worth including some of the arguments listed in the 'alternatives' post above, particularly ith reference to the alternatives (shipping/road transport) probably not being any better for the climate.
I feel it's also worth mentioning that the public seems to see aviation in a very bad light at the moment, and to me this article seems to propagte that view.  There are far worse things for the evironment out there.
I'm sorry that I can't give you any references to back up my assertions at this point.  I will see what I can find in the near future.
::Well, I wrote it and I'm certainly not anti-aviation so I'd be grateful to knwo which sections you are unhappy with. To my mind, it represents a balanced account of aviation's contribution to man-made climate change. Normalmouth 12:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV-check