Articles | Volume 22, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-6135-2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-6135-2022
Research article
 | Highlight paper
 | 
10 May 2022
Research article | Highlight paper |  | 10 May 2022

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

Related authors

G6-1.5K-MCB: Marine Cloud Brightening scenario design for the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) in CESM2.1, E3SMv2.0, and UKESM1.1
Haruki Hirasawa, Matthew Henry, Philip J. Rasch, Robert Wood, Sarah J. Doherty, James Haywood, Alex Wong, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Ezra Brody, and Hailong Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 19, 3257–3283, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-3257-2026,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-3257-2026, 2026
Short summary
Stratospheric aerosol injection geoengineering has the potential to increase land carbon storage and to protect the Amazon rainforest
Isobel M. Parry, Paul D. L. Ritchie, Olivier Boucher, Peter M. Cox, James M. Haywood, Ulrike Niemeier, Roland Séférian, Simone Tilmes, and Daniele Visioni
Earth Syst. Dynam., 17, 387–414, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-17-387-2026,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-17-387-2026, 2026
Short summary
Impacts of the Icelandic Holuhraun volcanic eruption on cloud properties using regional model cloud-aerosol simulations
Masaru Yoshioka, Daniel P. Grosvenor, Amy H. Peace, Jim M. Haywood, Ying Chen, and Paul R. Field
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 26, 4341–4358, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-4341-2026,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-4341-2026, 2026
Short summary
Stratospheric ozone projections under sulfur-based stratospheric aerosol injection: Insights from the multi-model G6-1.5K-SAI experiment
Ewa M. Bednarz, Amy H. Butler, James M. Haywood, Matthew Henry, Andy Jones, Ben Kravitz, Walker R. Lee, Douglas G. MacMartin, Amanda C. Maycock, Takashi Sekiya, Shingo Watanabe, and Daniele Visioni
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-310,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-310, 2026
Short summary
Efficacy assessment of Stratospheric Aerosol Scrubbing as a Counter Climate Intervention strategy
Anthony C. Jones, James M. Haywood, Matthew Henry, and Alistair Duffey
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-6332,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-6332, 2026
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. 
Baker, L. H., Shaffrey, L. C., Sutton, R. T., Weisheimer, A., and Scaife, A. A.: An intercomparison of skill and overconfidence/underconfidence of the wintertime North Atlantic Oscillation in multimodel seasonal forecasts, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 7808–7817, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078838, 2018. 
Bala, G., Duffy, P. B., and Taylor, K. E.: Impact of geoengineering schemes on the global hydrological cycle, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 105, 7664–7669, 2008. 
Banerjee, A., Butler, A. H., Polvani, L. M., Robock, A., Simpson, I. R., and Sun, L.: Robust winter warming over Eurasia under stratospheric sulfate geoengineering – the role of stratospheric dynamics, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6985–6997, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6985-2021, 2021. 
Download
Short summary
Simulations are presented investigating the influence of moderately absorbing aerosol in the stratosphere to combat the impacts of climate change. A number of detrimental impacts are noted compared to sulfate aerosol, including (i) reduced cooling efficiency, (ii) increased deficits in global precipitation, (iii) delays in the recovery of the stratospheric ozone hole, and (iv) disruption of the stratospheric circulation and the wintertime storm tracks that impact European precipitation.
Share
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint