Articles | Volume 21, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4231-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4231-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
19 Mar 2021
Research article |
| 19 Mar 2021
| 19 Mar 2021
Comparing different generations of idealized solar geoengineering simulations in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP)
Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA
Atmospheric Sciences and Global Change Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA
Douglas G. MacMartin
Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Daniele Visioni
Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Olivier Boucher
Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace (IPSL), Sorbonne Université/CNRS, Paris, France
Jason N. S. Cole
Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Jim Haywood
College of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
UK Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Andy Jones
UK Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Thibaut Lurton
Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace (IPSL), Sorbonne Université/CNRS, Paris, France
Pierre Nabat
CNRM, Université de Toulouse, Météo-France, CNRS, Météo-France, Toulouse, France
Ulrike Niemeier
Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, Germany
Alan Robock
Department of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
Roland Séférian
CNRM, Université de Toulouse, Météo-France, CNRS, Météo-France, Toulouse, France
Simone Tilmes
Atmospheric Chemistry Observations and Modeling Laboratory, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Viewed
Total article views: 4,914 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 28 Aug 2020)
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3,736 | 1,080 | 98 | 4,914 | 123 | 111 |
- HTML: 3,736
- PDF: 1,080
- XML: 98
- Total: 4,914
- BibTeX: 123
- EndNote: 111
Total article views: 4,447 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 19 Mar 2021)
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3,488 | 865 | 94 | 4,447 | 117 | 101 |
- HTML: 3,488
- PDF: 865
- XML: 94
- Total: 4,447
- BibTeX: 117
- EndNote: 101
Total article views: 467 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 28 Aug 2020)
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 248 | 215 | 4 | 467 | 6 | 10 |
- HTML: 248
- PDF: 215
- XML: 4
- Total: 467
- BibTeX: 6
- EndNote: 10
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Total article views: 4,914 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 5,046 with geography defined
and -132 with unknown origin.
Total article views: 4,447 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 4,516 with geography defined
and -69 with unknown origin.
Total article views: 467 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 530 with geography defined
and -63 with unknown origin.
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
1
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
1
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
1
Cited
24 citations as recorded by crossref.
- Assessing the potential for crop albedo enhancement in reducing heatwave frequency, duration, and intensity under future climate change J. Kala et al. 10.1016/j.wace.2022.100415
- Identifying the sources of uncertainty in climate model simulations of solar radiation modification with the G6sulfur and G6solar Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) simulations D. Visioni et al. 10.5194/acp-21-10039-2021
- The impact of stratospheric aerosol intervention on the North Atlantic and Quasi-Biennial Oscillations in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) G6sulfur experiment A. Jones et al. 10.5194/acp-22-2999-2022
- Assessing Responses and Impacts of Solar climate intervention on the Earth system with stratospheric aerosol injection (ARISE-SAI): protocol and initial results from the first simulations J. Richter et al. 10.5194/gmd-15-8221-2022
- Overlooked Long‐Term Atmospheric Chemical Feedbacks Alter the Impact of Solar Geoengineering: Implications for Tropospheric Oxidative Capacity J. Moch et al. 10.1029/2023AV000911
- A Numerical Modeling Study on the Earth’s Surface Brightening Effect of Cirrus Thinning X. Shi et al. 10.3390/atmos15020189
- Dependence of strategic solar climate intervention on background scenario and model physics J. Fasullo & J. Richter 10.5194/acp-23-163-2023
- Impact of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection Geoengineering on the Summer Climate Over East Asia Z. Liu et al. 10.1029/2021JD035049
- Whose climate intervention? Solar geoengineering, fractions of capital, and hegemonic strategy K. Surprise & J. Sapinski 10.1177/03098168221114386
- On the Linearity of External Forcing Response in Solar Geoengineering Experiments J. Virgin & C. Fletcher 10.1029/2022GL100200
- Governing Climate Geoengineering: Side Payments Are Not Enough R. Ghidoni et al. 10.1086/724286
- Australia, we need to talk about solar geoengineering J. Symons et al. 10.1080/10357718.2024.2333811
- G6-1.5K-SAI: a new Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) experiment integrating recent advances in solar radiation modification studies D. Visioni et al. 10.5194/gmd-17-2583-2024
- Potential effects of climate change and solar radiation modification on renewable energy resources A. Kumler et al. 10.1016/j.rser.2024.114934
- Dependency of the impacts of geoengineering on the stratospheric sulfur injection strategy – Part 1: Intercomparison of modal and sectional aerosol modules A. Laakso et al. 10.5194/acp-22-93-2022
- Opinion: The scientific and community-building roles of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) – past, present, and future D. Visioni et al. 10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023
- Solar Geoengineering: Trials, Innovation, Investments and the Need for Governance Y. Ramos & F. Santos 10.2139/ssrn.5068179
- Climate intervention using marine cloud brightening (MCB) compared with stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) in the UKESM1 climate model J. Haywood et al. 10.5194/acp-23-15305-2023
- Clouds dissipate quickly during solar eclipses as the land surface cools V. Trees et al. 10.1038/s43247-024-01213-0
- Solar geoengineering: Scenarios of future governance challenges E. Parson & J. Reynolds 10.1016/j.futures.2021.102806
- Indices of extremes: geographic patterns of change in extremes and associated vegetation impacts under climate intervention M. Tye et al. 10.5194/esd-13-1233-2022
- Antipyretic Medication for a Feverish Planet M. Stoffel et al. 10.1007/s41748-020-00182-6
- North Atlantic Oscillation response in GeoMIP experiments G6solar and G6sulfur: why detailed modelling is needed for understanding regional implications of solar radiation management A. Jones et al. 10.5194/acp-21-1287-2021
- Conducting more inclusive solar geoengineering research: A feminist science framework B. Kravitz & T. Sikka 10.1177/25148486221132831
21 citations as recorded by crossref.
- Assessing the potential for crop albedo enhancement in reducing heatwave frequency, duration, and intensity under future climate change J. Kala et al. 10.1016/j.wace.2022.100415
- Identifying the sources of uncertainty in climate model simulations of solar radiation modification with the G6sulfur and G6solar Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) simulations D. Visioni et al. 10.5194/acp-21-10039-2021
- The impact of stratospheric aerosol intervention on the North Atlantic and Quasi-Biennial Oscillations in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) G6sulfur experiment A. Jones et al. 10.5194/acp-22-2999-2022
- Assessing Responses and Impacts of Solar climate intervention on the Earth system with stratospheric aerosol injection (ARISE-SAI): protocol and initial results from the first simulations J. Richter et al. 10.5194/gmd-15-8221-2022
- Overlooked Long‐Term Atmospheric Chemical Feedbacks Alter the Impact of Solar Geoengineering: Implications for Tropospheric Oxidative Capacity J. Moch et al. 10.1029/2023AV000911
- A Numerical Modeling Study on the Earth’s Surface Brightening Effect of Cirrus Thinning X. Shi et al. 10.3390/atmos15020189
- Dependence of strategic solar climate intervention on background scenario and model physics J. Fasullo & J. Richter 10.5194/acp-23-163-2023
- Impact of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection Geoengineering on the Summer Climate Over East Asia Z. Liu et al. 10.1029/2021JD035049
- Whose climate intervention? Solar geoengineering, fractions of capital, and hegemonic strategy K. Surprise & J. Sapinski 10.1177/03098168221114386
- On the Linearity of External Forcing Response in Solar Geoengineering Experiments J. Virgin & C. Fletcher 10.1029/2022GL100200
- Governing Climate Geoengineering: Side Payments Are Not Enough R. Ghidoni et al. 10.1086/724286
- Australia, we need to talk about solar geoengineering J. Symons et al. 10.1080/10357718.2024.2333811
- G6-1.5K-SAI: a new Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) experiment integrating recent advances in solar radiation modification studies D. Visioni et al. 10.5194/gmd-17-2583-2024
- Potential effects of climate change and solar radiation modification on renewable energy resources A. Kumler et al. 10.1016/j.rser.2024.114934
- Dependency of the impacts of geoengineering on the stratospheric sulfur injection strategy – Part 1: Intercomparison of modal and sectional aerosol modules A. Laakso et al. 10.5194/acp-22-93-2022
- Opinion: The scientific and community-building roles of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) – past, present, and future D. Visioni et al. 10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023
- Solar Geoengineering: Trials, Innovation, Investments and the Need for Governance Y. Ramos & F. Santos 10.2139/ssrn.5068179
- Climate intervention using marine cloud brightening (MCB) compared with stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) in the UKESM1 climate model J. Haywood et al. 10.5194/acp-23-15305-2023
- Clouds dissipate quickly during solar eclipses as the land surface cools V. Trees et al. 10.1038/s43247-024-01213-0
- Solar geoengineering: Scenarios of future governance challenges E. Parson & J. Reynolds 10.1016/j.futures.2021.102806
- Indices of extremes: geographic patterns of change in extremes and associated vegetation impacts under climate intervention M. Tye et al. 10.5194/esd-13-1233-2022
3 citations as recorded by crossref.
- Antipyretic Medication for a Feverish Planet M. Stoffel et al. 10.1007/s41748-020-00182-6
- North Atlantic Oscillation response in GeoMIP experiments G6solar and G6sulfur: why detailed modelling is needed for understanding regional implications of solar radiation management A. Jones et al. 10.5194/acp-21-1287-2021
- Conducting more inclusive solar geoengineering research: A feminist science framework B. Kravitz & T. Sikka 10.1177/25148486221132831
Latest update: 20 Jan 2025
Short summary
This study investigates multi-model response to idealized geoengineering (high CO2 with solar reduction) across two different generations of climate models. We find that, with the exception of a few cases, the results are unchanged between the different generations. This gives us confidence that broad conclusions about the response to idealized geoengineering are robust.
This study investigates multi-model response to idealized geoengineering (high CO2 with solar...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint