Articles | Volume 22, issue 5
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2955–2973, 2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2955-2022
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2955–2973, 2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2955-2022
Research article
04 Mar 2022
Research article | 04 Mar 2022

An interactive stratospheric aerosol model intercomparison of solar geoengineering by stratospheric injection of SO2 or accumulation-mode sulfuric acid aerosols

Debra K. Weisenstein et al.

Related authors

Reformulating the bromine alpha factor and equivalent effective stratospheric chlorine (EESC): evolution of ozone destruction rates of bromine and chlorine in future climate scenarios
J. Eric Klobas, Debra K. Weisenstein, Ross J. Salawitch, and David M. Wilmouth
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 9459–9471, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9459-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9459-2020, 2020
Short summary
Stratospheric aerosol evolution after Pinatubo simulated with a coupled size-resolved aerosol–chemistry–climate model, SOCOL-AERv1.0
Timofei Sukhodolov, Jian-Xiong Sheng, Aryeh Feinberg, Bei-Ping Luo, Thomas Peter, Laura Revell, Andrea Stenke, Debra K. Weisenstein, and Eugene Rozanov
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2633–2647, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2633-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2633-2018, 2018
Short summary
The Interactive Stratospheric Aerosol Model Intercomparison Project (ISA-MIP): motivation and experimental design
Claudia Timmreck, Graham W. Mann, Valentina Aquila, Rene Hommel, Lindsay A. Lee, Anja Schmidt, Christoph Brühl, Simon Carn, Mian Chin, Sandip S. Dhomse, Thomas Diehl, Jason M. English, Michael J. Mills, Ryan Neely, Jianxiong Sheng, Matthew Toohey, and Debra Weisenstein
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2581–2608, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2581-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2581-2018, 2018
Short summary
Solar geoengineering using solid aerosol in the stratosphere
D. K. Weisenstein, D. W. Keith, and J. A. Dykema
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11835–11859, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11835-2015,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11835-2015, 2015
Short summary
A perturbed parameter model ensemble to investigate Mt. Pinatubo's 1991 initial sulfur mass emission
J.-X. Sheng, D. K. Weisenstein, B.-P. Luo, E. Rozanov, F. Arfeuille, and T. Peter
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11501–11512, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11501-2015,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11501-2015, 2015
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Aerosols | Research Activity: Atmospheric Modelling | Altitude Range: Stratosphere | Science Focus: Physics (physical properties and processes)
Assessing the consequences of including aerosol absorption in potential stratospheric aerosol injection climate intervention strategies
Jim M. Haywood, Andy Jones, Ben T. Johnson, and William McFarlane Smith
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 6135–6150, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-6135-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-6135-2022, 2022
Short summary
An approach to sulfate geoengineering with surface emissions of carbonyl sulfide
Ilaria Quaglia, Daniele Visioni, Giovanni Pitari, and Ben Kravitz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 5757–5773, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5757-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5757-2022, 2022
Short summary
Online treatment of eruption dynamics improves the volcanic ash and SO2 dispersion forecast: case of the 2019 Raikoke eruption
Julia Bruckert, Gholam Ali Hoshyaripour, Ákos Horváth, Lukas O. Muser, Fred J. Prata, Corinna Hoose, and Bernhard Vogel
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 3535–3552, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3535-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3535-2022, 2022
Short summary
The impact of stratospheric aerosol intervention on the North Atlantic and Quasi-Biennial Oscillations in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) G6sulfur experiment
Andy Jones, Jim M. Haywood, Adam A. Scaife, Olivier Boucher, Matthew Henry, Ben Kravitz, Thibaut Lurton, Pierre Nabat, Ulrike Niemeier, Roland Séférian, Simone Tilmes, and Daniele Visioni
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2999–3016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2999-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2999-2022, 2022
Short summary
Limitations of assuming internal mixing between different aerosol species: a case study with sulfate geoengineering simulations
Daniele Visioni, Simone Tilmes, Charles Bardeen, Michael Mills, Douglas G. MacMartin, Ben Kravitz, and Jadwiga H. Richter
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 1739–1756, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1739-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1739-2022, 2022
Short summary

Cited articles

Aquila, V., Garfinkel, C. I., Newman, P. A., Oman, L. D., and Waugh, D. W.: Modifications of the quasi-biennial oscillation by a geoengineering perturbation of the stratospheric aerosol layer, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 1738–1744, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL058818, 2014. 
Benduhn, F., Schallock, J., and Lawrence, M. G.: Early growth dynamical implications for the steerability of stratospheric solar radiation management via sulfur aerosol particles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 9956–9963, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070701, 2016. 
Budyko, M. I., Climate and Life, edited by: Miller, D. H., Academic Press, New York, USA, 508 pp., ISBN: 0121394506, 1974. 
Crutzen, P. J.: Albedo enhancement by stratospheric sulfur injections – A contribution to resolve a policy dilemma?, Climatic Change, 77, 211–219, 2006. 
Download
Short summary
This paper explores a potential method of geoengineering that could be used to slow the rate of change of climate over decadal scales. We use three climate models to explore how injections of accumulation-mode sulfuric acid aerosol change the large-scale stratospheric particle size distribution and radiative forcing response for the chosen scenarios. Radiative forcing per unit sulfur injected and relative to the change in aerosol burden is larger with particulate than with SO2 injections.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint