Articles | Volume 16, issue 5
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2843–2862, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2843-2016

Special issue: The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP):...

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2843–2862, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2843-2016
Research article
04 Mar 2016
Research article | 04 Mar 2016

Climatic impacts of stratospheric geoengineering with sulfate, black carbon and titania injection

Anthony C. Jones et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 7,123 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
2,986 3,880 257 7,123 713 76 75
  • HTML: 2,986
  • PDF: 3,880
  • XML: 257
  • Total: 7,123
  • Supplement: 713
  • BibTeX: 76
  • EndNote: 75
Views and downloads (calculated since 03 Nov 2015)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 03 Nov 2015)

Cited

Saved (final revised paper)

Saved (preprint)

Discussed (final revised paper)

Latest update: 01 Jul 2022
Download
Short summary
In this paper we assess the potential climatic impacts of geoengineering with sulfate, black carbon and titania injection strategies. We find that black carbon injection results in severe stratospheric warming and precipitation impacts, and therefore black carbon is unsuitable for geoengineering purposes. As the injection rates and climatic impacts for titania are close to those for sulfate, there appears little benefit of using titania when compared to injection of sulfur dioxide.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint