Articles | Volume 23, issue 1
Research article
 | Highlight paper
05 Jan 2023
Research article | Highlight paper |  | 05 Jan 2023

Dependence of strategic solar climate intervention on background scenario and model physics

John T. Fasullo and Jadwiga H. Richter

Related authors

An Overview of the E3SM version 2 Large Ensemble and Comparison to other E3SM and CESM Large Ensembles
John Fasullo, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Julie Caron, Nan Rosenbloom, Gerald Meehl, Warren Strand, Sasha Glanville, Samantha Stevenson, Maria Molina, Christine Shields, Chengzhu Zhang, James Benedict, and Tony Bartoletti
EGUsphere,,, 2023
Short summary
New model ensemble reveals how forcing uncertainty and model structure alter climate simulated across CMIP generations of the Community Earth System Model
Marika M. Holland, Cecile Hannay, John Fasullo, Alexandra Jahn, Jennifer E. Kay, Michael Mills, Isla R. Simpson, William Wieder, Peter Lawrence, Erik Kluzek, and David Bailey
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss.,,, 2023
Preprint under review for GMD
Short summary
Evaluating simulated climate patterns from the CMIP archives using satellite and reanalysis datasets using the Climate Model Assessment Tool (CMATv1)
John T. Fasullo
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3627–3642,,, 2020
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Radiation | Research Activity: Atmospheric Modelling and Data Analysis | Altitude Range: Troposphere | Science Focus: Physics (physical properties and processes)
Sensitivity of cirrus and contrail radiative effect on cloud microphysical and environmental parameters
Kevin Wolf, Nicolas Bellouin, and Olivier Boucher
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 14003–14037,,, 2023
Short summary
Evaluation of liquid cloud albedo susceptibility in E3SM using coupled eastern North Atlantic surface and satellite retrievals
Adam C. Varble, Po-Lun Ma, Matthew W. Christensen, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Shuaiqi Tang, and Jerome Fast
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13523–13553,,, 2023
Short summary
Constraints on simulated past Arctic amplification and lapse rate feedback from observations
Olivia Linke, Johannes Quaas, Finja Baumer, Sebastian Becker, Jan Chylik, Sandro Dahlke, André Ehrlich, Dörthe Handorf, Christoph Jacobi, Heike Kalesse-Los, Luca Lelli, Sina Mehrdad, Roel A. J. Neggers, Johannes Riebold, Pablo Saavedra Garfias, Niklas Schnierstein, Matthew D. Shupe, Chris Smith, Gunnar Spreen, Baptiste Verneuil, Kameswara S. Vinjamuri, Marco Vountas, and Manfred Wendisch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 9963–9992,,, 2023
Short summary
Comparison of methods to estimate aerosol effective radiative forcings in climate models
Mark D. Zelinka, Christopher J. Smith, Yi Qin, and Karl E. Taylor
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8879–8898,,, 2023
Short summary
Montreal Protocol's impact on the ozone layer and climate
Tatiana Egorova, Jan Sedlacek, Timofei Sukhodolov, Arseniy Karagodin-Doyennel, Franziska Zilker, and Eugene Rozanov
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 5135–5147,,, 2023
Short summary

Cited articles

Abiodun, B. J., Odoulami, R. C., Sawadogo, W., Olumuyiwa, A., Abayomi, O., Abatan, A., New, M., Lennard, C., Izidine, P., Egbebiyi, T. S., and MacMartin, D. G.: Potential impacts of stratospheric aerosol injection on drought risk managements over major river basins in Africa, Climatic Change, 169, 1–19,, 2021. 
Bala, G., Caldeira, K., and Nemani, R.: Fast versus slow response in climate change: Implications for the global hydrological cycle, Clim. Dynam., 35, 423–434,, 2010. 
Banerjee, A., Butler, A. H., Polvani, L. M., Robock, A., Simpson, I. R., and Sun, L.: Robust winter warming over Eurasia under stratospheric sulphate geoengineering–the role of stratospheric dynamics, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6985–6997,, 2021. 
Burgess, M. G., Ritchie, J., Shapland, J., and Pielke Jr., R.: IPCC baseline scenarios have over-projected CO2 emissions and economic growth, Environ. Res. Lett., 16, 014016,, 2021. 
Executive editor
Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is often discussed in the media and in policy circles as a possible action to limit future increase in global temperatures. Indeed it has been demonstrated in model simulations that in principle injection could be 'controlled', using model information, to meet specific targets on the temperature increase and its spatial distribution. This paper shows that the simulated climate response to SAI is strongly model-dependent, reflecting fundamental uncertainties in model representation of key processes. In particular this means that the SAI determined by the control algorithms as those required to achieve temperature targets different significantly from one model to another. Specific mechanisms, in particular the difference in rapid response in clouds and in precipitation to an imposed radiative perturbation and the ensuing ocean circulation response, are identified that contribute to the strong differences in model response to SAI. There is also a strong sensitivity to the pre-existing sulphate distribution which will be determined by future anthropogenic emissions. The authors note that these inter-model differences are unlikely to be resolved quickly and that controlled SAI, to achieve specific temperature goals and with well-quantified risks of unexpected consequences, is likely to remain out of reach for many years.
Short summary
The continued high levels of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions increase the likelihood that key climate warming thresholds will be exceeded in the coming decades. Here we examine a recently proposed geoengineering approach using two recently produced climate model experiments. We find the associated latitudinal distribution of aerosol mass to exhibit substantial uncertainty, suggesting the need for significant flexibility in the location and amount of aerosol delivery, if implemented.
Final-revised paper