Articles | Volume 21, issue 24
Research article
20 Dec 2021
Research article |  | 20 Dec 2021

Evaluation of SO2, SO42− and an updated SO2 dry deposition parameterization in the United Kingdom Earth System Model

Catherine Hardacre, Jane P. Mulcahy, Richard J. Pope, Colin G. Jones, Steven T. Rumbold, Can Li, Colin Johnson, and Steven T. Turnock


Interactive discussion

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • CC1: 'Note bias in emissions data over western USA', Steven Smith, 13 May 2021
  • RC1: 'Comment on acp-2021-238', Anonymous Referee #2, 12 Jun 2021
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Catherine Hardacre, 16 Sep 2021
  • RC2: 'Comment on acp-2021-238', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Jun 2021
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Catherine Hardacre, 16 Sep 2021

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
AR by Catherine Hardacre on behalf of the Authors (14 Oct 2021)  Author's response    Author's tracked changes    Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (18 Oct 2021) by Leiming Zhang
RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (01 Nov 2021)
RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (04 Nov 2021)
ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (05 Nov 2021) by Leiming Zhang
AR by Catherine Hardacre on behalf of the Authors (12 Nov 2021)  Author's response    Manuscript
Short summary
We investigate UKESM1's ability to represent the sulfur (S) cycle in the recent historical period. The S cycle is a key driver of historical radiative forcing. Earth system models such as UKESM1 should represent the S cycle well so that we can have confidence in their projections of future climate. We compare UKESM1 to observations of sulfur compounds, finding that the model generally performs well. We also identify areas for UKESM1’s development, focussing on how SO2 is removed from the air.
Final-revised paper