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)
Dynamical perturbation of the stratosphere by a pyrocumulonimbus injection of carbonaceous aerosols
Giorgio Doglioni, Valentina Aquila, Sampa Das, Peter R. Colarco, and Dino Zardi
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11049–11064, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11049-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11049-2022, 2022
Short summary
Important role of stratospheric injection height for the distribution and radiative forcing of smoke aerosol from the 2019–2020 Australian wildfires
Bernd Heinold, Holger Baars, Boris Barja, Matthew Christensen, Anne Kubin, Kevin Ohneiser, Kerstin Schepanski, Nick Schutgens, Fabian Senf, Roland Schrödner, Diego Villanueva, and Ina Tegen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9969–9985, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9969-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9969-2022, 2022
Short summary
Volcanic stratospheric injections up to 160 Tg(S) yield a Eurasian winter warming indistinguishable from internal variability
Kevin DallaSanta and Lorenzo M. Polvani
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 8843–8862, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-8843-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-8843-2022, 2022
Short summary
The effect of ash, water vapor, and heterogeneous chemistry on the evolution of a Pinatubo-size volcanic cloud
Mohamed Abdelkader, Georgiy Stenchikov, Andrea Pozzer, Holger Tost, and Jos Lelieveld
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-177,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-177, 2022
Revised manuscript accepted for ACP
Short summary
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

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