02.06.2017

# New Publications

0 Comments

Zhao, Liyun; et al. (2017): Glacier evolution in high-mountain Asia under stratospheric sulfate aerosol injection geoengineering

Zhao, Liyun; Yang, Yi; Cheng, Wei; Ji, Duoying; Moore, John C. (2017): Glacier evolution in high-mountain Asia under stratospheric sulfate aerosol injection geoengineering. In: Atmos. Chem. Phys. 17 (11), S. 6547–6564. DOI: 10.5194/acp-17-6547-2017 

"We examine this hypothesis for the glaciers in high-mountain Asia using a glacier mass balance model driven by climate simulations from the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). The G3 and G4 schemes specify use of stratospheric sulfate aerosols to reduce the radiative forcing under the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5 scenario for the 50 years between 2020 and 2069, and for a further 20 years after termination of geoengineering. We estimate and compare glacier volume loss for every glacier in the region using a glacier model based on surface mass balance parameterization under climate projections from three Earth system models under G3, five models under G4, and six models under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5."

LINK


Read more »

20.05.2017

# New Publications

0 Comments

Xia, Lili; et al. (2017): Impacts of Stratospheric Sulfate Geoengineering on Tropospheric Ozone

Xia, Lili; Nowack, Peer J.; Tilmes, Simone; Robock, Alan (2017): Impacts of Stratospheric Sulfate Geoengineering on Tropospheric Ozone. In: Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., S. 1–38. DOI: 10.5194/acp-2017-434

"Using a version of the Community Earth System Model from the National Center for Atmospheric Research that includes comprehensive tropospheric and stratospheric chemistry, we model both stratospheric sulfur injection and solar irradiance reduction schemes, with the aim of achieving equal levels of surface cooling relative to the Representative Concentration Pathway 6.0 scenario. This allows us to compare the impacts of sulfate aerosol and solar dimming on atmospheric ozone concentrations."

LINK


Read more »

22.03.2017

# New Publications

0 Comments

Visioni, Daniele; et al. (2017): Sulfate geoengineering. A review of the factors controlling the needed injection of sulfur dioxide

Visioni, Daniele; Pitari, Giovanni; Aquila, Valentina (2017): Sulfate geoengineering. A review of the factors controlling the needed injection of sulfur dioxide. In Atmos. Chem. Phys 17 (6), pp. 3879–3889. DOI: 10.5194/acp-17-3879-2017.

"A review of previous studies on these effects is presented here, with an outline of the important factors that control the amount of sulfur dioxide to be injected in an eventual realization of the experiment. However, we need to take into account that atmospheric models used for these studies have shown a wide range of climate sensitivity and differences in the response to stratospheric volcanic aerosols. In addition, large uncertainties exist in the estimate of some of these aerosol effects."

LINK


Read more »

06.03.2017

# New Publications

0 Comments

Smith, C. J.; et al. (2017): Impacts of stratospheric sulfate geoengineering on global solar photovoltaic and concentrating solar power resource. (in press)

Smith, C. J.; Crook, J. A.; Crook, R. (2017): Impacts of stratospheric sulfate geoengineering on global solar photovoltaic and concentrating solar power resource. (in press). In Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology.

"We analyze results from the HadGEM2-CCS climate model with stratospheric emissions of 10 Tg yr-1 of SO2, designed to offset global temperature rise by around 1°C. A reduction in concentrating solar power (CSP) output of 5.9% on average over land is shown under SSI compared to a baseline future climate change scenario (RCP4.5) due to a decrease in direct radiation."

LINK


Read more »

09.02.2017

# New Publications

0 Comments

Asayama, Shinichiro; et al. (2017): Ambivalent climate of opinions. Tensions and dilemmas in understanding geoengineering experimentation

Asayama, Shinichiro; Sugiyama, Masahiro; Ishii, Atsushi (2017): Ambivalent climate of opinions. Tensions and dilemmas in understanding geoengineering experimentation. In Geoforum 80, pp. 82–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.01.012.

"This paper examines how the meanings of geoengineering experimentation, specifically SAI field trials, are reconfigured in the deliberation of the lay public. To this end, we conducted focus groups with Japanese citizens in June 2015 on the geoengineering concept and SAI field trials."

LINK


Read more »

07.02.2017

# New Publications

0 Comments

Laakso, Anton; et al. (2017): Radiative and climate effects of stratospheric sulfur geoengineering using seasonally varying injection areas

Laakso, Anton; Korhonen, Hannele; Romakkaniemi, Sami; Kokkola, Harri (2017): Radiative and climate effects of stratospheric sulfur geoengineering using seasonally varying injection areas. In: Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., S. 1–25. DOI: 10.5194/acp-2017-107.

"In this study we employ alternative aerosol injection scenarios to investigate if the resulting radiative forcing can be optimized to be zonally more uniform without decreasing the global efficacy. We used a global aerosol-climate model together with an Earth system model to study the radiative and climate effects of stratospheric sulfur injection scenarios with different injection areas. According to our simulations, varying the SO2 injection area seasonally would result in a similar global mean cooling effect as injecting SO2 to the equator, but with a more uniform zonal distribution of shortwave radiative forcing."

LINK


Read more »

22.12.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

MacMartin, Douglas G.; Kravitz, Ben (2016): Dynamic climate emulators for solar geoengineering

MacMartin, Douglas G.; Kravitz, Ben (2016): Dynamic climate emulators for solar geoengineering. In: Atmos. Chem. Phys. 16 (24), S. 15789–15799. DOI: 10.5194/acp-16-15789-2016.

"Climate emulators trained on existing simulations can be used to project project the climate effects that result from different possible future pathways of anthropogenic forcing, without further relying on general circulation model (GCM) simulations. We extend this idea to include different amounts of solar geoengineering in addition to different pathways of greenhouse gas concentrations, by training emulators from a multi-model ensemble of simulations from the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP)."

Link


Read more »

18.12.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

Lo, Y. T. Eunice; et al. (2016): Detecting sulphate aerosol geoengineering with different methods

Lo, Y. T. Eunice; Charlton-Perez, Andrew J.; Lott, Fraser C.; Highwood, Eleanor J. (2016): Detecting sulphate aerosol geoengineering with different methods. In: Scientific reports 6, S. 39169. DOI: 10.1038/srep39169.

"Sulphate aerosol injection has been widely discussed as a possible way to engineer future climate. Monitoring it would require detecting its effects amidst internal variability and in the presence of other external forcings. We investigate how the use of different detection methods and filtering techniques affects the detectability of sulphate aerosol geoengineering in annual-mean global-mean near-surface air temperature. This is done by assuming a future scenario that injects 5 Tg yr−1 of sulphur dioxide into the stratosphere and cross-comparing simulations from 5 climate models."

Link


Read more »

18.12.2016

# Media

0 Comments

Chemistry World: Atmospheric limestone dust injection could halt global warming

"Geoengineering using limestone aerosols would also help to stop ozone layer depletion"

Link


Read more »

18.12.2016

# Media

0 Comments

EOS: A Date Under the Stars? Maybe Not with Aerosol Injection

"Injecting aerosols into the atmosphere on purpose could help cool Earth, but new research shows that it could also make the night sky brighter and negatively affect human health."

Link


Read more »