Debunking Contrail Theory - Part 3

Water is a product of the combustion of jet fuel, and potentially a greater contributing factor to aerial condensation than relative humidity.

While reviewing a patent from June 30, 1970 labeled “Apparatus for suppressing contrails” I stumbled across a key fact that I had overlooked in part 1 and part 2 of this series. The inventor attributed the formation of contrails to combustion, not the condensation of the scarce water vapour present at high altitudes. I feel rather silly for overlooking this, but as a matter of integrity I feel called to discuss it.

The patent stated:

“... an engine burning 2000 pounds of fuel per hour would leave in its wake approximately five pounds of water per mile at an air speed of 500 miles per hour.”

A Boeing 737 burns an average of 5000 pounds of fuel per hour. Since Jet A fuel has a molar mass of roughly 170g, this converts to 13,341.53 moles. It also boasts a cruising speed of roughly 580mph (933.4km/h).

Balanced equation of Jet A combustion:

The specific molecular structure of Jet A is not precisely defined, as it is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons, but this equation shows us that each mole of Jet A produces 13 moles of water.

Moles of water per hour can be calculated by multiplying moles of fuel burnt by 13, which gives us 173,544.89moles of H20. The molar mass of water is 18g/mol, so our molar value translates to 3,122,807.92g of water.

A gram of water is equal to a ml in volume. Therefore, we have 3,122,800ml of water produced by combustion over the course of an hour. That equates to nearly 5,384ml (11.87 pounds) of water per mile (3,345ml/km). Regarding quantity of water produced by jet fuel combustion, my math is in agreement with the above statement by the patent holder of the contrail suppression apparatus.

To compare this to my previous work, in which I concluded that a Boeing 737 flying at 35,000ft in conditions of 100% relative humidity would produce roughly 650ml per second in water condensation, the water left in the wake of the same plane by combustion is approximately 870ml per second.

In this video, we can observe what 870ml per second looks like in the absense of extremely high relative humidity levels. With this video, the viewer can also compare this to the commonly observable giant white plumes left in the wake of some aircraft, which cannot be explained by condensation theory alone.

In closing

My conclusion remains the same. I believe that contrails do exist and are observable on days with very high humidity levels, but in my opinion condensation does not explain the scale and persistence of the scarring streaks left in the wake of some aircraft.

I intend to continue down this rabbit hole and share my findings, because I feel that this is a poorly understand topic, with few reliable resources, and huge mainstream push-back and mockery. During my experience researching, I have discovered that there are a lot of dead ends on the internet. There are relentless skeptics embedded in mainstream media and online forums, many half-formed arguments which validate the criticism, and plenty of documents lost to time.

I have heard from various sources that these ominous plumes can be attributed to aluminum, barium, and strontium, and that these heavy metals are being found in water systems, soil, rain and snow in toxic concentrations, and if that is true I intend to bring the evidence to my audience.

Finally, I am considering writing a 4th part to this series to investigate water density in cloud formations. Whether or not the relatively small amount of water produced by the condensation of a turbofan jet engine can be attributed to the enormous width of these plumes is a point of curiosity, and may further debunk the contrail argument.

Thank you for your time. Please help me alert the public of threats to our planet´s ecosystems by liking and sharing this Substack post, and subscribe if you have not already. I also cover cultural topics, and technological solutions. God bless.