Dear authors,

both reviewers appreciate your efforts improving the paper. While one reviewers recommends
publication now, the second reviewer still has concerns (injection of SO2 vs. injection of aerosol particles and the improvement achieved by the method).

I would therefore ask you to provide a revised version of your paper that addresses the remaining issues.

Greetings Rolf Müller

Dear authors,

thanks for your revised version. As you see there are still some comments by a referee.
The main question seems to be in how far, the impact on radiative forcing of the new methods (your table 2) is reflected in the "take home messages" in the abstract. I would like to ask you to consider this aspect when revising your paper. Perhaps there could be a way of actually giving (some) numbers for radiative forcing, rather than referring to the "impact"?

Greetings

Rolf Müller

Dear authors,

thank you for the changes in the abstract; I think your paper should be now published.

My recommendation is that you rethink the term "short forecast transport barriers", which has been
now introduced in the abstract. This term is perhaps not straightforward to understand for the general reader.

Congratulations and all the best

Rolf Müller