Periodic Reporting for period 1 - CLAIM (Clean Aviation Support for Impact Monitoring)
Période du rapport: 2024-01-01 au 2025-06-30
CLAIM was launched to address the urgent need for science-based methods to assess aviation’s full climate impact, including non-CO2 effects that remain underrepresented in policy and research frameworks. In line with the European Green Deal, “Fit for 55,” and the 2050 climate-neutrality target, the project tackled the lack of harmonised climate metrics that can support decision-making across research, policy, and industry. The main objective was to provide a consolidated scientific basis by comparing simplified and advanced metrics, clarifying their strengths, limitations, and use cases. CLAIM also explored integration of such metrics into tools and frameworks for Clean Aviation, SESAR, and broader EU initiatives. The project built its pathway to impact on two pillars: advancing climate metric science and engaging stakeholders to ensure uptake. While rooted in climate and engineering sciences, CLAIM also integrated perspectives from the social sciences by aligning outputs with decision-making contexts and communication needs.
CLAIM’s technical work was carried out in two scientific work packages. WP2 (Climate Impact Monitoring) focused on evaluating and recommending climate metrics and methodologies. It began with a review of existing metrics and a structured down-selection procedure, validated through workshops with international stakeholders. Neutrality and robustness emerged as key requirements. Case studies across different aircraft, networks, and fuels highlighted that simplified methods cannot capture location- and altitude-dependent non-CO2 effects, such as contrails and NOₓ-induced ozone, and are therefore unsuitable for detailed technology assessments. Based on this, WP2 proposed a four-layer climate impact assessment framework linking technology, emissions, atmospheric responses, and metrics, which was refined with stakeholder feedback. For the climate metrics, the Average Temperature Response (ATR100) and the efficacy-weighted Global Warming Potential (EGWP100), both evaluated over a 100-year time horizon, were identified as the most suitable choices for the purpose of technology climate impact assessment.
WP3 (Technology Impact Monitoring) performed a technology watch exercise for Clean Aviation. A structured taxonomy and databases of roadmaps and emerging technologies were developed, alongside a review of disruptive aircraft concepts and research infrastructures. Using the WP2 framework, WP3 performed preliminary environmental performance analyses of Clean Aviation-like concepts, including hybrid-electric and short/medium-range aircraft. Mission-based emission inventories were propagated to fleet-level impacts, showing how assumptions on sustainable aviation fuel performance, network choice, and reference aircraft affect climate mitigation potential. Results indicated that new aircraft can approach Clean Aviation targets but remain highly sensitive to underlying assumptions. WP3 also identified capability gaps in Europe for hydrogen and hybrid-electric propulsion, spanning modelling, testing, and system integration.
WP3 (Technology Impact Monitoring) performed a technology watch exercise for Clean Aviation. A structured taxonomy and databases of roadmaps and emerging technologies were developed, alongside a review of disruptive aircraft concepts and research infrastructures. Using the WP2 framework, WP3 performed preliminary environmental performance analyses of Clean Aviation-like concepts, including hybrid-electric and short/medium-range aircraft. Mission-based emission inventories were propagated to fleet-level impacts, showing how assumptions on sustainable aviation fuel performance, network choice, and reference aircraft affect climate mitigation potential. Results indicated that new aircraft can approach Clean Aviation targets but remain highly sensitive to underlying assumptions. WP3 also identified capability gaps in Europe for hydrogen and hybrid-electric propulsion, spanning modelling, testing, and system integration.
CLAIM advanced beyond prior approaches by combining methodological progress with structured validation from stakeholders across research, industry, and policy. The systematic review and selection of metrics, backed by cross-sector feedback, ensured scientific robustness and practical applicability. The four-layer climate impact framework represented a clear step forward, explicitly capturing how emission location, altitude, and timing shape climate outcomes. Its demonstration in academic case studies and aircraft assessments provides a credible reference for future Clean Aviation projects and other Horizon Europe Programmes such as Impact Monitor Framework.
In technology monitoring, CLAIM introduced structured databases and a taxonomy for roadmaps and technologies, creating new transparency and comparability in evaluating disruptive innovations. Applying the four-layer framework to hybrid-electric and short medium concepts demonstrated its value for assessing climate impacts, while revealing critical sensitivities to fuel properties, operational choices, and baseline assumptions. Finally, CLAIM identified European capability gaps in hydrogen and hybrid-electric propulsion, providing orientation for future R&I investments.
In technology monitoring, CLAIM introduced structured databases and a taxonomy for roadmaps and technologies, creating new transparency and comparability in evaluating disruptive innovations. Applying the four-layer framework to hybrid-electric and short medium concepts demonstrated its value for assessing climate impacts, while revealing critical sensitivities to fuel properties, operational choices, and baseline assumptions. Finally, CLAIM identified European capability gaps in hydrogen and hybrid-electric propulsion, providing orientation for future R&I investments.