Link: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-026-10286-0

Nature, Published online: 01 April 2026; doi:10.1038/s41586-026-10286-0

In-flight observations show that the use of lean-burn combustion succeeds in reducing soot emissions from aircraft—yet contrail ice crystals still form and nucleate on volatile particles.

From Nature via this RSS feed

I think many people are going to get the wrong idea, if only glancing at that article..

the contrail-formation is dependent on the moisture in the fuel.

& they're saying that the contrail-formation per kg of fuel doesn't go down .. but why the hell would anybody measure lean-engine flights vs rich-engine-flights that way??

It's the fuel-per-flight/fuel-per-passenger-km which matters, & the lean-burn engines burn less fuel, so therefore they have less contrail per passenger-km or per flight-of-100-passengers & so therefore .. the way the article's written is .. from a perspective that no sane person would ever be considering it from.

It's like saying that the CO2 per litre of gasoline doesn't go down in hybrid vehicles..

No, but the fuel consumption per km of moving your passengers/cargo DOES go down ..

it's a perspective that simply doesn't fit the real-world context.

_ /\ _