Articles | Volume 23, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-1687-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-1687-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
30 Jan 2023
Research article |
| 30 Jan 2023
| 30 Jan 2023
Future changes in atmospheric rivers over East Asia under stratospheric aerosol intervention
Ju Liang
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
College of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QE, UK
Jim Haywood
College of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QE, UK
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter EX1 3PB, UK
Related authors
Chenwei Fang, Jim M. Haywood, Ju Liang, Ben T. Johnson, Ying Chen, and Bin Zhu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8341–8368, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8341-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8341-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The responses of Asian summer monsoon duration and intensity to air pollution mitigation are identified given the net-zero future. We show that reducing scattering aerosols makes the rainy season longer and stronger across South Asia and East Asia but that absorbing aerosol reduction has the opposite effect. Our results hint at distinct monsoon responses to emission controls that target different aerosols.
Elizabeth Quaye, Ben T. Johnson, James M. Haywood, Guido R. van der Werf, Roland Vernooij, Stephen A. Sitch, and Tom Eames
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3936, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3936, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Short summary
We find aerosol optical depths in a global climate model are overestimated during extreme wildfire events if emissions are scaled up by a factor of two, typically applied to improve simulated aerosol on seasonal–annual timescales. We propose a technique where a variable scaling factor is determined by fuel consumption, improving correlation in five fire-affected areas. We explore the impact of this change on aerosol radiative effects, during extreme events and on broader space and time scales.
Masaru Yoshioka, Daniel P. Grosvenor, Amy H. Peace, Jim M. Haywood, Ying Chen, and Paul R. Field
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3244, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3244, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We used advanced computer simulations to study how aerosol particles from a volcanic eruption in Iceland affected clouds. The eruption plume increased small droplets, but changes in cloud water and horizontal extent were not clear. Satellite comparisons between plume and non-plume regions can miss volcanic effects due to spatial variability in weather and aerosol, but simulations can isolate the impact by comparing cases with and without the eruption.
George Jordan, Florent Malavelle, Jim Haywood, Ying Chen, Ben Johnson, Daniel Partridge, Amy Peace, Eliza Duncan, Duncan Watson-Parris, David Neubauer, Anton Laakso, Martine Michou, and Pierre Nabat
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-835, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-835, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The 2014–15 Holuhraun eruption created a vast aerosol plume that acted as a natural experiment to assess how well climate models capture changes in cloud properties due to increased aerosol. We find that the models accurately represent the observed shift to smaller, more numerous cloud droplets. However, the models diverge in their aerosol induced changes to large-scale cloud properties, particularly cloud liquid water content. Our study shows that Holuhraun had a cooling effect on the Earth.
Huihui Wu, Fanny Peers, Jonathan W. Taylor, Chenjie Yu, Steven J. Abel, Paul A. Barrett, Jamie Trembath, Keith Bower, Jim M. Haywood, and Hugh Coe
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3975, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3975, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates the transport history of African Biomass-Burning aerosols (BBAs) over the southeast Atlantic (SEA), and the relationship between transported BBAs and clouds around Ascension Island using in-situ airborne measurements. The work provides critical simplified parameterizations of aerosol-cloud interaction for improving the evaluation of radiative forcing over the SEA. It also identifies key entrainment regions for understanding the vertical transport process of African BBAs.
Matthew Henry, Ewa M. Bednarz, and Jim Haywood
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 13253–13268, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13253-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13253-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) refers to a climate intervention by which aerosols are intentionally added to the high atmosphere to increase the amount of reflected sunlight and reduce Earth's temperature. The climate outcomes of SAI depend on the latitude of injection. While injecting aerosols at the Equator has undesirable side effects, injecting away from the Equator has different effects on temperature, rainfall, ozone, and atmospheric circulation, which are analysed in this work.
Ou Wang, Ju Liang, Yuchen Gu, Jim M. Haywood, Ying Chen, Chenwei Fang, and Qin'geng Wang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 12355–12373, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-12355-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-12355-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
As extreme precipitation events increase in China, this study explores the potential of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) to mitigate these effects by the end of the 21st century using the UKESM1 model. Results show that SAI reduces extreme precipitation in eastern China. However, caution is advised due to potential side effects in high-latitude regions, and further optimization is required for future SAI deployment.
Philip J. Rasch, Haruki Hirasawa, Mingxuan Wu, Sarah J. Doherty, Robert Wood, Hailong Wang, Andy Jones, James Haywood, and Hansi Singh
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7963–7994, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7963-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7963-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce a protocol to compare computer climate simulations to better understand a proposed strategy intended to counter warming and climate impacts from greenhouse gas increases. This slightly changes clouds in six ocean regions to reflect more sunlight and cool the Earth. Example changes in clouds and climate are shown for three climate models. Cloud changes differ between the models, but precipitation and surface temperature changes are similar when their cooling effects are made similar.
Amy H. Peace, Ying Chen, George Jordan, Daniel G. Partridge, Florent Malavelle, Eliza Duncan, and Jim M. Haywood
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 9533–9553, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-9533-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-9533-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Natural aerosols from volcanic eruptions can help us understand how anthropogenic aerosols modify climate. We use observations and model simulations of the 2014–2015 Holuhraun eruption plume to examine aerosol–cloud interactions in September 2014. We find a shift to clouds with smaller, more numerous cloud droplets in the first 2 weeks of the eruption. In the third week, the background meteorology and previous conditions experienced by air masses modulate the aerosol perturbation to clouds.
Daniele Visioni, Alan Robock, Jim Haywood, Matthew Henry, Simone Tilmes, Douglas G. MacMartin, Ben Kravitz, Sarah J. Doherty, John Moore, Chris Lennard, Shingo Watanabe, Helene Muri, Ulrike Niemeier, Olivier Boucher, Abu Syed, Temitope S. Egbebiyi, Roland Séférian, and Ilaria Quaglia
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2583–2596, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2583-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2583-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes a new experimental protocol for the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). In it, we describe the details of a new simulation of sunlight reflection using the stratospheric aerosols that climate models are supposed to run, and we explain the reasons behind each choice we made when defining the protocol.
George Jordan, Florent Malavelle, Ying Chen, Amy Peace, Eliza Duncan, Daniel G. Partridge, Paul Kim, Duncan Watson-Parris, Toshihiko Takemura, David Neubauer, Gunnar Myhre, Ragnhild Skeie, Anton Laakso, and James Haywood
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 1939–1960, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1939-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1939-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The 2014–15 Holuhraun eruption caused a huge aerosol plume in an otherwise unpolluted region, providing a chance to study how aerosol alters cloud properties. This two-part study uses observations and models to quantify this relationship’s impact on the Earth’s energy budget. Part 1 suggests the models capture the observed spatial and chemical evolution of the plume, yet no model plume is exact. Understanding these differences is key for Part 2, where changes to cloud properties are explored.
Jim M. Haywood, Andy Jones, Anthony C. Jones, Paul Halloran, and Philip J. Rasch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 15305–15324, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-15305-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-15305-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The difficulties in ameliorating global warming and the associated climate change via conventional mitigation are well documented, with all climate model scenarios exceeding 1.5 °C above the preindustrial level in the near future. There is therefore a growing interest in geoengineering to reflect a greater proportion of sunlight back to space and offset some of the global warming. We use a state-of-the-art Earth-system model to investigate two of the most prominent geoengineering strategies.
Calvin Howes, Pablo E. Saide, Hugh Coe, Amie Dobracki, Steffen Freitag, Jim M. Haywood, Steven G. Howell, Siddhant Gupta, Janek Uin, Mary Kacarab, Chongai Kuang, L. Ruby Leung, Athanasios Nenes, Greg M. McFarquhar, James Podolske, Jens Redemann, Arthur J. Sedlacek, Kenneth L. Thornhill, Jenny P. S. Wong, Robert Wood, Huihui Wu, Yang Zhang, Jianhao Zhang, and Paquita Zuidema
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13911–13940, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13911-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13911-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
To better understand smoke properties and its interactions with clouds, we compare the WRF-CAM5 model with observations from ORACLES, CLARIFY, and LASIC field campaigns in the southeastern Atlantic in August 2017. The model transports and mixes smoke well but does not fully capture some important processes. These include smoke chemical and physical aging over 4–12 days, smoke removal by rain, sulfate particle formation, aerosol activation into cloud droplets, and boundary layer turbulence.
Matthew Henry, Jim Haywood, Andy Jones, Mohit Dalvi, Alice Wells, Daniele Visioni, Ewa M. Bednarz, Douglas G. MacMartin, Walker Lee, and Mari R. Tye
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13369–13385, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13369-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13369-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Solar climate interventions, such as injecting sulfur in the stratosphere, may be used to offset some of the adverse impacts of global warming. We use two independently developed Earth system models to assess the uncertainties around stratospheric sulfur injections. The injection locations and amounts are optimized to maintain the same pattern of surface temperature. While both models show reduced warming, the change in rainfall patterns (even without sulfur injections) is uncertain.
Chenwei Fang, Jim M. Haywood, Ju Liang, Ben T. Johnson, Ying Chen, and Bin Zhu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8341–8368, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8341-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8341-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The responses of Asian summer monsoon duration and intensity to air pollution mitigation are identified given the net-zero future. We show that reducing scattering aerosols makes the rainy season longer and stronger across South Asia and East Asia but that absorbing aerosol reduction has the opposite effect. Our results hint at distinct monsoon responses to emission controls that target different aerosols.
Daniele Visioni, Ben Kravitz, Alan Robock, Simone Tilmes, Jim Haywood, Olivier Boucher, Mark Lawrence, Peter Irvine, Ulrike Niemeier, Lili Xia, Gabriel Chiodo, Chris Lennard, Shingo Watanabe, John C. Moore, and Helene Muri
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 5149–5176, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Geoengineering indicates methods aiming to reduce the temperature of the planet by means of reflecting back a part of the incoming radiation before it reaches the surface or allowing more of the planetary radiation to escape into space. It aims to produce modelling experiments that are easy to reproduce and compare with different climate models, in order to understand the potential impacts of these techniques. Here we assess its past successes and failures and talk about its future.
Alice F. Wells, Andy Jones, Martin Osborne, Lilly Damany-Pearce, Daniel G. Partridge, and James M. Haywood
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 3985–4007, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3985-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3985-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In 2019 the Raikoke volcano erupted explosively, emitting the largest injection of SO2 into the stratosphere since 2011. Observations indicated that a large amount of volcanic ash was also injected. Previous studies have identified that volcanic ash can prolong the lifetime of stratospheric aerosol optical depth, which we explore in UKESM1. Comparisons to observations suggest that including ash in model emission schemes can improve the representation of volcanic plumes in global climate models.
Daniele Visioni, Ewa M. Bednarz, Walker R. Lee, Ben Kravitz, Andy Jones, Jim M. Haywood, and Douglas G. MacMartin
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 663–685, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-663-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-663-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The paper constitutes Part 1 of a study performing a first systematic inter-model comparison of the atmospheric responses to stratospheric sulfate aerosol injections (SAIs) at various latitudes as simulated by three state-of-the-art Earth system models. We identify similarities and differences in the modeled aerosol burden, investigate the differences in the aerosol approaches between the models, and ultimately show the differences produced in surface climate, temperature and precipitation.
Ewa M. Bednarz, Daniele Visioni, Ben Kravitz, Andy Jones, James M. Haywood, Jadwiga Richter, Douglas G. MacMartin, and Peter Braesicke
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 687–709, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-687-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-687-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Building on Part 1 of this two-part study, we demonstrate the role of biases in climatological circulation and specific aspects of model microphysics in driving the differences in simulated sulfate distributions amongst three Earth system models. We then characterize the simulated changes in stratospheric and free-tropospheric temperatures, ozone, water vapor, and large-scale circulation, elucidating the role of the above aspects in the surface responses discussed in Part 1.
Paul A. Barrett, Steven J. Abel, Hugh Coe, Ian Crawford, Amie Dobracki, James Haywood, Steve Howell, Anthony Jones, Justin Langridge, Greg M. McFarquhar, Graeme J. Nott, Hannah Price, Jens Redemann, Yohei Shinozuka, Kate Szpek, Jonathan W. Taylor, Robert Wood, Huihui Wu, Paquita Zuidema, Stéphane Bauguitte, Ryan Bennett, Keith Bower, Hong Chen, Sabrina Cochrane, Michael Cotterell, Nicholas Davies, David Delene, Connor Flynn, Andrew Freedman, Steffen Freitag, Siddhant Gupta, David Noone, Timothy B. Onasch, James Podolske, Michael R. Poellot, Sebastian Schmidt, Stephen Springston, Arthur J. Sedlacek III, Jamie Trembath, Alan Vance, Maria A. Zawadowicz, and Jianhao Zhang
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 6329–6371, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-6329-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-6329-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
To better understand weather and climate, it is vital to go into the field and collect observations. Often measurements take place in isolation, but here we compared data from two aircraft and one ground-based site. This was done in order to understand how well measurements made on one platform compared to those made on another. Whilst this is easy to do in a controlled laboratory setting, it is more challenging in the real world, and so these comparisons are as valuable as they are rare.
Flossie Brown, Gerd A. Folberth, Stephen Sitch, Susanne Bauer, Marijn Bauters, Pascal Boeckx, Alexander W. Cheesman, Makoto Deushi, Inês Dos Santos Vieira, Corinne Galy-Lacaux, James Haywood, James Keeble, Lina M. Mercado, Fiona M. O'Connor, Naga Oshima, Kostas Tsigaridis, and Hans Verbeeck
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12331–12352, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12331-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12331-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Surface ozone can decrease plant productivity and impair human health. In this study, we evaluate the change in surface ozone due to climate change over South America and Africa using Earth system models. We find that if the climate were to change according to the worst-case scenario used here, models predict that forested areas in biomass burning locations and urban populations will be at increasing risk of ozone exposure, but other areas will experience a climate benefit.
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
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.
Simone Tilmes, Daniele Visioni, Andy Jones, James Haywood, Roland Séférian, Pierre Nabat, Olivier Boucher, Ewa Monica Bednarz, and Ulrike Niemeier
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 4557–4579, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-4557-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-4557-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This study assesses the impacts of climate interventions, using stratospheric sulfate aerosol and solar dimming on stratospheric ozone, based on three Earth system models with interactive stratospheric chemistry. The climate interventions have been applied to a high emission (baseline) scenario in order to reach global surface temperatures of a medium emission scenario. We find significant increases and decreases in total column ozone, depending on regions and seasons.
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
Short summary
Simulations by six Earth-system models of geoengineering by introducing sulfuric acid aerosols into the tropical stratosphere are compared. A robust impact on the northern wintertime North Atlantic Oscillation is found, exacerbating precipitation reduction over parts of southern Europe. In contrast, the models show no consistency with regard to impacts on the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation, although results do indicate a risk that the oscillation could become locked into a permanent westerly phase.
Zixia Liu, Martin Osborne, Karen Anderson, Jamie D. Shutler, Andy Wilson, Justin Langridge, Steve H. L. Yim, Hugh Coe, Suresh Babu, Sreedharan K. Satheesh, Paquita Zuidema, Tao Huang, Jack C. H. Cheng, and James Haywood
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 6101–6118, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6101-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6101-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper first validates the performance of an advanced aerosol observation instrument POPS against a reference instrument and examines any biases introduced by operating it on a quadcopter drone. The results show the POPS performs relatively well on the ground. The impact of the UAV rotors on the POPS is small at low wind speeds, but when operating under higher wind speeds, larger discrepancies occur. It appears that the POPS measures sub-micron aerosol particles more accurately on the UAV.
Ben Kravitz, Douglas G. MacMartin, Daniele Visioni, Olivier Boucher, Jason N. S. Cole, Jim Haywood, Andy Jones, Thibaut Lurton, Pierre Nabat, Ulrike Niemeier, Alan Robock, Roland Séférian, and Simone Tilmes
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 4231–4247, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4231-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4231-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates multi-model response to idealized geoengineering (high CO2 with solar reduction) across two different generations of climate models. We find that, with the exception of a few cases, the results are unchanged between the different generations. This gives us confidence that broad conclusions about the response to idealized geoengineering are robust.
Fanny Peers, Peter Francis, Steven J. Abel, Paul A. Barrett, Keith N. Bower, Michael I. Cotterell, Ian Crawford, Nicholas W. Davies, Cathryn Fox, Stuart Fox, Justin M. Langridge, Kerry G. Meyer, Steven E. Platnick, Kate Szpek, and Jim M. Haywood
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 3235–3254, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3235-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3235-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite observations at high temporal resolution are a valuable asset to monitor the transport of biomass burning plumes and the cloud diurnal cycle in the South Atlantic, but they need to be validated. Cloud and above-cloud aerosol properties retrieved from SEVIRI are compared against MODIS and measurements from the CLARIFY-2017 campaign. While some systematic differences are observed between SEVIRI and MODIS, the overall agreement in the cloud and aerosol properties is very satisfactory.
Jim M. Haywood, Steven J. Abel, Paul A. Barrett, Nicolas Bellouin, Alan Blyth, Keith N. Bower, Melissa Brooks, Ken Carslaw, Haochi Che, Hugh Coe, Michael I. Cotterell, Ian Crawford, Zhiqiang Cui, Nicholas Davies, Beth Dingley, Paul Field, Paola Formenti, Hamish Gordon, Martin de Graaf, Ross Herbert, Ben Johnson, Anthony C. Jones, Justin M. Langridge, Florent Malavelle, Daniel G. Partridge, Fanny Peers, Jens Redemann, Philip Stier, Kate Szpek, Jonathan W. Taylor, Duncan Watson-Parris, Robert Wood, Huihui Wu, and Paquita Zuidema
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1049–1084, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1049-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1049-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Every year, the seasonal cycle of biomass burning from agricultural practices in Africa creates a huge plume of smoke that travels many thousands of kilometres over the Atlantic Ocean. This study provides an overview of a measurement campaign called the cloud–aerosol–radiation interaction and forcing for year 2017 (CLARIFY-2017) and documents the rationale, deployment strategy, observations, and key results from the campaign which utilized the heavily equipped FAAM atmospheric research aircraft.
Jonathan W. Taylor, Huihui Wu, Kate Szpek, Keith Bower, Ian Crawford, Michael J. Flynn, Paul I. Williams, James Dorsey, Justin M. Langridge, Michael I. Cotterell, Cathryn Fox, Nicholas W. Davies, Jim M. Haywood, and Hugh Coe
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11201–11221, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11201-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11201-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Every year, huge plumes of smoke hundreds of miles wide travel over the south Atlantic Ocean from fires in central and southern Africa. These plumes absorb the sun’s energy and warm the climate. We used airborne optical instrumentation to determine how absorbing the smoke was as well as the relative importance of black and brown carbon. We also tested different ways of simulating these properties that could be used in a climate model.
Cited articles
Archibald, A. T., O'Connor, F. M., Abraham, N. L., Archer-Nicholls, S., Chipperfield, M. P., Dalvi, M., Folberth, G. A., Dennison, F., Dhomse, S. S., Griffiths, P. T., Hardacre, C., Hewitt, A. J., Hill, R. S., Johnson, C. E., Keeble, J., Köhler, M. O., Morgenstern, O., Mulcahy, J. P., Ordóñez, C., Pope, R. J., Rumbold, S. T., Russo, M. R., Savage, N. H., Sellar, A., Stringer, M., Turnock, S. T., Wild, O., and Zeng, G.: Description and evaluation of the UKCA stratosphere–troposphere chemistry scheme (StratTrop vn 1.0) implemented in UKESM1, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1223–1266, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1223-2020, 2020.
Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Clark, D. B., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Ménard, C. B., Edwards, J. M., Hendry, M. A., Porson, A., Gedney, N., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Cox, P. M., Grimmond, C. S. B., and Harding, R. J.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 1: Energy and water fluxes, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 677–699, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-677-2011, 2011.
Chen, X., Leung, L. R., Wigmosta, M., and Richmond, M.: Impact of atmospheric rivers on surface hydrological processes in western U.S. watersheds, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 8896–8916, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030468, 2019.
Collow, A. B. M., Shields, C. A., Guan, B., Kim, S., Lora, J. M., McClenny, E. E., Nardi, K., Payne, A., Reid, K., Shearer, E. J., Tomé, R., Wille, J. D., Ramos, A. M., Gorodetskaya, I. V., Leung, L. R., O'Brien, T. A., Ralph, F. M., Rutz, J., Ullrich, P. A., and Wehner, M.: An Overview of ARTMIP’s Tier 2 Reanalysis Intercomparison: Uncertainty in the Detection of Atmospheric Rivers and Their Associated Precipitation, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 127, e2021JD036155, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD036155, 2022.
Copernicus: ERA5 hourly data on pressure levels from 1959 to present, Climate Data Store [data set], https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/cdsapp#!/dataset/reanalysis-era5-pressure-levels?tab=overview/, last access: 5 January 2023.
Corringham, T. W., Martin Ralph, F., Gershunov, A., Cayan, D. R., and Talbot, C. A.: Atmospheric rivers drive flood damages in the western United States, Sci. Adv., 5, 1–7, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aax4631, 2019.
Dettinger, M. D., Ralph, F. M., Das, T., Neiman, P. J., and Cayan, D. R.:
Atmospheric rivers, floods and the water resources of California, Water, 3, 445–478, https://doi.org/10.3390/w3020445, 2011.
DIAS – Data Integration and Analysis System: APHRODITE monsoon Asia Precipitation data, DIAS Dataset Search and Discovery [data set], https://search.diasjp.net/en/dataset/APHRO_MA (last access: 23 January 2023), 2022.
Dominguez, F., Dall'erba, S., Huang, S., Avelino, A., Mehran, A., Hu, H., Schmidt, A., Schick, L., and Lettenmaier, D.: Tracking an atmospheric river in a warmer climate: from water vapor to economic impacts, Earth Syst. Dynam., 9, 249–266, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-249-2018, 2018.
Endo, H., Kitoh, A., and Ueda, H.: A unique feature of the Asian summer monsoon response to global warming: The role of different land-sea thermal
contrast change between the lower and upper troposphere, Sci. Online Lett.
Atmos., 14, 57–63, https://doi.org/10.2151/SOLA.2018-010, 2018.
Espinoza, V., Waliser, D. E., Guan, B., Lavers, D. A., and Ralph, F. M.:
Global analysis of climate change projection effects on atmospheric rivers,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 4299–4308, https://doi.org/10.1029/2017GL076968, 2018.
Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., Stevens, B., Stouffer, R.
J., and Taylor, K. E.: Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization, Geosci. Model Dev., 9,
1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016.
Fu, G., Liu, S., Li, X., Li, P., and Chen, L.: Characteristics of atmospheric rivers over the East Asia in middle summers from 2001 to 2016, J. Ocean Univ. China, 20, 235–243, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11802-021-4513-x, 2021.
Gertler, C. G., O'Gorman, P. A., Kravitz, B., Moore, J. C., Phipps, S. J., and Watanabe, S.: Weakening of the Extratropical Storm Tracks in Solar
Geoengineering Scenarios, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL087348,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087348, 2020.
Gimeno, L., Dominguez, F., Nieto, R., Trigo, R., Drumond, A., Reason, C. J.
C., Taschetto, A. S., Ramos, A. M., Kumar, R., and Marengo, J.: Major mechanisms of atmospheric moisture transport and their role in extreme
precipitation events, Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour., 41, 117–141,
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085558, 2016.
Guan, B., Waliser, D. E., Ralph, F. M., Fetzer, E. J., and Neiman, P. J.:
Hydrometeorological characteristics of rain-on-snow events associated with
atmospheric rivers, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 2964–2973, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL067978, 2016.
Hamada, A., Arakawa, O., and Yatagai, A.: An automated quality control
method for daily rain-gauge data, Global Environ. Res., 15, 183–192, 2011.
Harvey, B. J., Cook, P., Shaffrey, L. C., and Schiemann, R.: The response of
the northern hemisphere storm tracks and jet streams to climate change in
the CMIP3, CMIP5, and CMIP6 Climate Models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125,
e2020JD032701, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD032701, 2020.
Heckendorn, P., Weisenstein, D., Fueglistaler, S., Luo, B. P., Rozanov, E.,
Schraner, M., Thomason, L. W., and Peter, T.: The impact of geoengineering
aerosols on stratospheric temperature and ozone, Environ. Res. Lett., 4,
045108, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/045108, 2009.
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A.,
Muñoz-Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Schepers, D.,
Simmons, A., Soci, C., Abdalla, S., Abellan, X., Balsamo, G., Bechtold, P.,
Biavati, G., Bidlot, J., Bonavita, M., De Chiara, G., Dahlgren, P., Dee, D.,
Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer,
A., Haimberger, L., Healy, S., Hogan, R. J., Hólm, E., Janisková,
M., Keeley, S., Laloyaux, P., Lopez, P., Lupu, C., Radnoti, G., de Rosnay,
P., Rozum, I., Vamborg, F., Villaume, S., and Thépaut, J. N.: The ERA5
global reanalysis, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 146, 1999–2049,
https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803, 2020.
IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Global warming of 1.5 ∘C, in: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 ∘C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to
the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to
eradicate poverty, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.
O., Roberts, D., Skea, J., Shukla, P. R., Pirani, A., Moufouma-Okia, W.,
Péan, C., Pidcock, R., Connors, S., Matthews, J. B. R., Chen, Y., Zhou,
X., Gomis, M. I., Lonnoy, E., Maycock, T., Tignor, M., and Waterfield, T.,
https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ (last access: 22 September 2022), 2018.
Jones, A., Haywood, J. M., Alterskjær, K., Boucher, O., Cole, J. N. S.,
Curry, C. L., Irvine, P. J., Ji, D., Kravitz, B., Egill Kristjánsson,
J., Moore, J. C., Niemeier, U., Robock, A., Schmidt, H., Singh, B., Tilmes,
S., Watanabe, S., and Yoon, J. H.: The impact of abrupt suspension of solar
radiation management (termination effect) in experiment G2 of the
Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP), J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 9743–9752, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50762, 2013.
Jones, A., Haywood, J. M., Jones, A. C., Tilmes, S., Kravitz, B., and
Robock, A.: North Atlantic Oscillation response in GeoMIP experiments
G6solar and G6sulfur: Why detailed modelling is needed for understanding
regional implications of solar radiation management, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21,
1287–1304, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1287-2021, 2021.
Jones, A., Haywood, J. M., Scaife, A. A., Boucher, O., Henry, M., Kravitz, B., Lurton, T., Nabat, P., Niemeier, U., Séférian, R., Tilmes, S., and Visioni, D.: The impact of stratospheric aerosol intervention on the North Atlantic and Quasi-Biennial Oscillations in the Geoengineering Model
Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) G6sulfur experiment, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2999–3016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2999-2022, 2022.
Jones, A. C., Haywood, J. M., and Jones, A.: Climatic impacts of stratospheric geoengineering with sulfate, black carbon and titania
injection, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2843–2862,
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2843-2016, 2016.
Jones, A. C., Haywood, J. M., Dunstone, N., Emanuel, K., Hawcroft, M. K., Hodges, K. I., and Jones, A.: Impacts of hemispheric solar geoengineering on
tropical cyclone frequency, Nat. Commun., 81, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01606-0, 2017.
Jones, A. C., Hawcroft, M. K., Haywood, J. M., Jones, A., Guo, X., and Moore, J. C.: Regional Climate Impacts of Stabilizing Global Warming at 1.5 K Using Solar Geoengineering, Earth's Future, 6, 230–251, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000720, 2018.
Kamae, Y., Watanabe, M., Kimoto, M., and Shiogama, H.: Summertime land–sea
thermal contrast and atmospheric circulation over East Asia in a warming
climate – Part II: Importance of CO2-induced continental warming, Clim. Dynam., 43, 2569–2583, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-014-2146-0, 2014.
Kamae, Y., Mei, W., and Xie, S. P.: Climatological relationship between warm
season atmospheric rivers and heavy rainfall over east asia, J. Meteorol.
Soc. Jpn., 95, 411–431, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2017-027, 2017a.
Kamae, Y., Mei, W., Xie, S. P., Naoi, M., and Ueda, H.: Atmospheric rivers
over the Northwestern Pacific: Climatology and interannual variability, J.
Climate, 30, 5605–5619, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0875.1, 2017b.
Kamae, Y., Imada, Y., Kawase, H., and Mei, W.: Atmospheric rivers bring more
frequent and intense extreme rainfall events over East Asia under global
warming, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL096030, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL096030, 2021.
Kim, J., Moon, H., Guan, B., Waliser, D. E., Choi, J., Gu, T. Y., and Byun,
Y. H.: Precipitation characteristics related to atmospheric rivers in East
Asia, Int. J. Climatol., 41, E2244–E2257, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.6843, 2021.
Kim, J. S., Li, R. C. Y., and Zhou, W.: Effects of the Pacific-Japan
teleconnection pattern on tropical cyclone activity and extreme precipitation events over the Korean peninsula, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, 18109, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017677, 2012.
Kravitz, B., Robock, A., Boucher, O., Schmidt, H., Taylor, K. E., Stenchikov, G., and Schulz, M.: The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP), Atmos. Sci. Lett., 12, 162–167, https://doi.org/10.1002/asl.316, 2011.
Kravitz, B., Robock, A., Tilmes, S., Boucher, O., English, J. M., Irvine, P.
J., Jones, A., Lawrence, M. G., MacCracken, M., Muri, H., Moore, J. C.,
Niemeier, U., Phipps, S. J., Sillmann, J., Storelvmo, T., Wang, H., and
Watanabe, S.: The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (GeoMIP6): Simulation design and preliminary results, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3379–3392, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3379-2015, 2015.
Lawrence, M. G., Schäfer, S., Muri, H., Scott, V., Oschlies, A.,
Vaughan, N. E., Boucher, O., Schmidt, H., Haywood, J., and Scheffran, J.:
Evaluating climate geoengineering proposals in the context of the Paris
Agreement temperature goals, Nat. Commun., 91, 1–19,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05938-3, 2018.
Liang, J. and Sushama, L.: Freezing rain events related to atmospheric rivers and associated mechanisms for western North America, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 10541–10550, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL084647, 2019.
Liang, J. and Yong, Y.: Climatology of atmospheric rivers in the Asian monsoon region, Int. J. Climatol., 41, E801–E818, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.6729, 2021.
Liang, J. and Yong, Y.: Sensitivity of the simulated atmospheric rivers over
East Asia to horizontal resolution in the HadGEM3-GC3.1 general circulation
model, Atmos. Res., 275, 106244, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2022.106244, 2022.
Liang, J., Yong, Y., and Hawcroft, M. K.: Long-term trends in atmospheric
rivers over East Asia, Clim. Dynam., https://doi.org/10.1007/S00382-022-06339-5, in press, 2022.
Liang, P., Dong, G., Zhang, H., Zhao, M., Ma, Y., Liang, P., Dong, G., Zhang, H., Zhao, M., and Ma, Y.: Atmospheric rivers associated with summer heavy rainfall over the Yangtze Plain, J. South. Hemisph. Earth Syst. Sci., 70, 54–69, https://doi.org/10.1071/ES19028, 2020.
Liu, Z., Lang, X., and Jiang, D.: Impact of stratospheric aerosol injection
geoengineering on the summer climate over East Asia, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2021JD035049, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035049, 2021.
Lu, R., Ye, H., and Jhun, J. G.: Weakening of interannual variability in the
summer East Asian upper-tropospheric westerly jet since the mid-1990s, Adv.
Atmos. Sci., 28, 1246–1258, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-011-0222-5, 2011.
MacMartin, D. G., Ricke, K. L., and Keith, D. W.: Solar geoengineering as
part of an overall strategy for meeting the 1.5 ∘C Paris target, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 376, 1–19, https://doi.org/10.1098/RSTA.2016.0454, 2018.
Mann, G. W., Carslaw, K. S., Spracklen, D. V., Ridley, D. A., Manktelow, P.
T., Chipperfield, M. P., Pickering, S. J., and Johnson, C. E.: Description
and evaluation of GLOMAP-mode: A modal global aerosol microphysics model for
the UKCA composition-climate model, Geosci. Model Dev., 3, 519–551,
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-3-519-2010, 2010.
Millar, R. J., Fuglestvedt, J. S., Friedlingstein, P., Rogelj, J., Grubb, M.
J., Matthews, H. D., Skeie, R. B., Forster, P. M., Frame, D. J., and Allen,
M. R.: Emission budgets and pathways consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 ∘C, Nat. Geosci., 10, 741–747, https://doi.org/10.1038/NGEO3031, 2017.
Miller, D. K., Hotz, D., Winton, J., and Stewart, L.: Investigation of
atmospheric rivers impacting the Pigeon River basin of the southern Appalachian Mountains, Weather Forecast., 33, 283–299,
https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-17-0060.1, 2018.
Morgenstern, O., Braesicke, P., O'Connor, F. M., Bushell, A. C., Johnson, C.
E., Osprey, S. M., and Pyle, J. A.: Evaluation of the new UKCA
climate-composition model – Part 1: The stratosphere, Geosci. Model Dev., 2,
43–57, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2-43-2009, 2009.
Mulcahy, J. P., Jones, C., Sellar, A., Johnson, B., Boutle, I. A., Jones, A., Andrews, T., Rumbold, S. T., Mollard, J., Bellouin, N., Johnson, C. E., Williams, K. D., Grosvenor, D. P., and McCoy, D. T.: Improved aerosol processes and effective radiative forcing in HadGEM3 and UKESM1, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 10, 2786–2805, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001464, 2018.
Mullen, S. L.: Model Experiments on the Impact of Pacific Sea Surface
Temperature Anomalies on Blocking Frequency, J. Climate, 2, 997–1013,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1989)002<0997:meotio>2.0.co;2, 1989.
Myhre, G., Alterskjær, K., Stjern, C. W., Hodnebrog, Marelle, L., Samset, B. H., Sillmann, J., Schaller, N., Fischer, E., Schulz, M., and Stohl, A.: Frequency of extreme precipitation increases extensively with event rareness under global warming, Sci. Rep., 9, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-52277-4, 2019.
Neff, W.: Atmospheric rivers melt Greenland, Nat. Clim. Change, 8, 857–858, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0297-4, 2018.
O'Brien, T. A., Wehner, M. F., Payne, A. E., Shields, C. A., Rutz, J. J.,
Leung, L. R., Ralph, F. M., Collow, A., Gorodetskaya, I., Guan, B., Lora, J.
M., McClenny, E., Nardi, K. M., Ramos, A. M., Tomé, R., Sarangi, C.,
Shearer, E. J., Ullrich, P. A., Zarzycki, C., Loring, B., Huang, H.,
Inda-Díaz, H. A., Rhoades, A. M., and Zhou, Y.: Increases in future AR
count and size: Overview of the ARTMIP Tier 2 CMIP5/6 experiment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 127, e2021JD036013, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD036013, 2022.
O'Neill, B. C., Tebaldi, C., Van Vuuren, D. P., Eyring, V., Friedlingstein,
P., Hurtt, G., Knutti, R., Kriegler, E., Lamarque, J. F., Lowe, J., Meehl, G. A., Moss, R., Riahi, K., and Sanderson, B. M.: The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9,
3461–3482, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016, 2016.
Pan, M. and Lu, M.: A novel atmospheric river identification algorithm, Water Resour. Res., 55, 6069–6087, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018wr024407, 2019.
Pan, M. and Lu, M.: East Asia atmospheric river catalog: Annual cycle,
transition mechanism, and precipitation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, 1–10,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089477, 2020.
Park, C., Son, S. W., and Kim, H.: Distinct features of atmospheric rivers
in the early versus late East Asian summer monsoon and their impacts on monsoon rainfall, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2020JD033537,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033537, 2021.
Payne, A. E. and Magnusdottir, G.: An evaluation of atmospheric rivers over
the North Pacific in CMIP5 and their response to warming under RCP 8.5, J.
Geophys. Res., 120, 11173–11190, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023586, 2015.
Payne, A. E., Demory, M. E., Leung, L. R., Ramos, A. M., Shields, C. A., Rutz, J. J., Siler, N., Villarini, G., Hall, A., and Ralph, F. M.: Responses
and impacts of atmospheric rivers to climate change, Nat. Rev. Earth Environ., 13, 143–157, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0030-5, 2020.
Pohl, B., Favier, V., Wille, J., Udy, D. G., Vance, T. R., Pergaud, J.,
Dutrievoz, N., Blanchet, J., Kittel, C., Amory, C., Krinner, G., and Codron,
F.: Relationship between weather regimes and atmospheric rivers in east
antarctica, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2021JD035294,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035294, 2021.
Rutz, J. J., Shields, C. A., Lora, J. M., Payne, A. E., Guan, B., Ullrich,
P., O'Brien, T., Leung, L. R., Ralph, F. M., Wehner, M., Brands, S., Collow,
A., Goldenson, N., Gorodetskaya, I., Griffith, H., Kashinath, K., Kawzenuk,
B., Krishnan, H., Kurlin, V., Lavers, D., Magnusdottir, G., Mahoney, K.,
McClenny, E., Muszynski, G., Nguyen, P. D., Prabhat, M., Qian, Y., Ramos, A.
M., Sarangi, C., Sellars, S., Shulgina, T., Tome, R., Waliser, D., Walton,
D., Wick, G., Wilson, A. M., and Viale, M.: The Atmospheric River Tracking
Method Intercomparison Project (ARTMIP): Quantifying uncertainties in
atmospheric river climatology, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 13777–13802,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030936, 2019.
Ryu, Y., Moon, H., Kim, J., Kim, T. J., Boo, K. O., Guan, B., Kamae, Y., Mei, W., Park, C., Son, S. W., and Byun, Y. H.: A Multi-Inventory Ensemble Analysis of the Effects of Atmospheric Rivers on Precipitation and Streamflow in the Namgang-Dam Basin in Korea, Water Resour. Res., 57, e2021WR030058, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR030058, 2021.
Sellar, A. A., Jones, C. G., Mulcahy, J. P., Tang, Y., Yool, A., Wiltshire,
A., O'Connor, F. M., Stringer, M., Hill, R., Palmieri, J., Woodward, S., de
Mora, L., Kuhlbrodt, T., Rumbold, S. T., Kelley, D. I., Ellis, R., Johnson,
C. E., Walton, J., Abraham, N. L., Andrews, M. B., Andrews, T., Archibald,
A. T., Berthou, S., Burke, E., Blockley, E., Carslaw, K., Dalvi, M., Edwards, J., Folberth, G. A., Gedney, N., Griffiths, P. T., Harper, A. B., Hendry, M. A., Hewitt, A. J., Johnson, B., Jones, A., Jones, C. D., Keeble, J., Liddicoat, S., Morgenstern, O., Parker, R. J., Predoi, V., Robertson, E., Siahaan, A., Smith, R. S., Swaminathan, R., Woodhouse, M. T., Zeng, G., and Zerroukat, M.: UKESM1: Description and Evaluation of the U.K. Earth System Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 11, 4513–4558, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001739, 2019.
Shields, C. A., Rutz, J. J., Leung, L. Y., Martin Ralph, F., Wehner, M.,
Kawzenuk, B., Lora, J. M., McClenny, E., Osborne, T., Payne, A. E., Ullrich,
P., Gershunov, A., Goldenson, N., Guan, B., Qian, Y., Ramos, A. M., Sarangi,
C., Sellars, S., Gorodetskaya, I., Kashinath, K., Kurlin, V., Mahoney, K.,
Muszynski, G., Pierce, R., Subramanian, A. C., Tome, R., Waliser, D., Walton, D., Wick, G., Wilson, A., Lavers, D., Prabhat, Collow, A., Krishnan, H., Magnusdottir, G., and Nguyen, P.: Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project (ARTMIP): Project goals and experimental design,
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2455–2474, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2455-2018, 2018.
Shields, C. A., Rosenbloom, N., Bates, S., Hannay, C., Hu, A., Payne, A. E.,
Rutz, J. J., and Truesdale, J.: Meridional heat transport during atmospheric
rivers in high-resolution CESM climate projections, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46,
14702–14712, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085565, 2019.
Shields, C. A., Richter, J. H., Pendergrass, A., and Tilmes, S.: Atmospheric
rivers impacting western North America in a world with climate intervention,
npj Clim. Atmos. Sci., 51, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-022-00260-8, 2022.
Storkey, D., Blaker, A. T., Mathiot, P., Megann, A., Aksenov, Y., Blockley,
E. W., Calvert, D., Graham, T., Hewitt, H. T., Hyder, P., Kuhlbrodt, T., Rae, J. G. L., and Sinha, B.: UK Global Ocean GO6 and GO7: A traceable hierarchy of model resolutions, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3187–3213,
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3187-2018, 2018.
Sun, W., Wang, B., Chen, D., Gao, C., Lu, G., and Liu, J.: Global monsoon
response to tropical and Arctic stratospheric aerosol injection, Clim. Dynam., 55, 2107–2121, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-020-05371-7, 2020.
Tilmes, S., Müller, R., and Salawitch, R.: The sensitivity of polar ozone depletion to proposed geoengineering schemes, Science, 320, 1201–1204, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1153966, 2008.
Tilmes, S., Richter, J. H., Kravitz, B., Macmartin, D. G., Mills, M. J.,
Simpson, I. R., Glanville, A. S., Fasullo, J. T., Phillips, A. S., Lamarque,
J. F., Tribbia, J., Edwards, J., Mickelson, S., and Ghosh, S.: CESM1(WACCM)
Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering Large Ensemble Project, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 99, 2361–2371, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0267.1, 2018.
Tilmes, S., Richter, J. H., Kravitz, B., MacMartin, D. G., Glanville, A. S.,
Visioni, D., Kinnison, D. E., and Müller, R.: Sensitivity of total column ozone to stratospheric sulfur injection strategies, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL094058, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL094058, 2021.
Tilmes, S., Visioni, D., Jones, A., Haywood, J., Séférian, R., Nabat, P., Boucher, O., Bednarz, E. M., and Niemeier, U.: Stratospheric ozone response to sulfate aerosol and solar dimming climate interventions based on the G6 Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 4557–4579, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-4557-2022, 2022.
Uccellini, L. W. and Johnson, D. R.: The coupling of upper and lower
tropospheric jet streaks and implications for the development of severe
convective storms, Mon. Weather Rev., 107, 682–703,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1979)107<0682:TCOUAL>2.0.CO;2, 1979.
Visioni, D., Macmartin, D. G., Kravitz, B., Boucher, O., Jones, A., Lurton,
T., Martine, M., Mills, M. J., Nabat, P., Niemeier, U., Séférian, R., and Tilmes, S.: Identifying the sources of uncertainty in climate model
simulations of solar radiation modification with the G6sulfur and G6solar
Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) simulations, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 21, 10039–10063, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10039-2021, 2021.
Voigt, A. and Shaw, T. A.: Circulation response to warming shaped by radiative changes of clouds and water vapour, Nat. Geosci., 8, 102–106,
https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2345, 2015.
Walters, D., Baran, A. J., Boutle, I., Brooks, M., Earnshaw, P., Edwards, J., Furtado, K., Hill, P., Lock, A., Manners, J., Morcrette, C., Mulcahy, J., Sanchez, C., Smith, C., Stratton, R., Tennant, W., Tomassini, L., Van Weverberg, K., Vosper, S., Willett, M., Browse, J., Bushell, A., Carslaw,
K., Dalvi, M., Essery, R., Gedney, N., Hardiman, S., Johnson, B., Johnson, C., Jones, A., Jones, C., Mann, G., Milton, S., Rumbold, H., Sellar, A., Ujiie, M., Whitall, M., Williams, K., and Zerroukat, M.: The Met Office
Unified Model Global Atmosphere 7.0/7.1 and JULES Global Land 7.0
configurations, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1909–1963,
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1909-2019, 2019.
Wang, L., Yang, Z., Gu, X., and Li, J.: Linkages Between Tropical Cyclones and Extreme Precipitation over China and the Role of ENSO, Int. J. Disast.
Risk Sci., 11, 538–553, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-020-00285-8, 2020.
Wang, Q., Moore, J. C., and Ji, D.: A statistical examination of the effects
of stratospheric sulfate geoengineering on tropical storm genesis, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 18, 9173–9188, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-9173-2018, 2018.
WCRP – World Climate Research Programme: CMIP6 project data, ESGF [data set], https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/projects/cmip6/, last access: 28 July 2022.
Wick, G. A., Neiman, P. J., and Ralph, F. M.: Description and validation of
an automated objective technique for identification and characterization of
the integrated water vapor signature of atmospheric rivers, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 51, 2166–2176, https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2012.2211024, 2013.
Wille, J. D., Favier, V., Jourdain, N. C., Kittel, C., Turton, J. V., Agosta, C., Gorodetskaya, I. V., Picard, G., Codron, F., Dos Santos, C. L., Amory, C., Fettweis, X., Blanchet, J., Jomelli, V., and Berchet, A.: Intense
atmospheric rivers can weaken ice shelf stability at the Antarctic Peninsula, Commun. Earth Environ., 3, 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-022-00422-9, 2022.
Williamson, P. and Turley, C.: Ocean acidification in a geoengineering context, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 370, 4317–4342, https://doi.org/10.1098/RSTA.2012.0167, 2012.
Wood, N., Staniforth, A., White, A., Allen, T., Diamantakis, M., Gross, M.,
Melvin, T., Smith, C., Vosper, S., Zerroukat, M., and Thuburn, J.: An
inherently mass-conserving semi-implicit semi-Lagrangian discretization of
the deep-atmosphere global non-hydrostatic equations, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol.
Soc., 140, 1505–1520, https://doi.org/10.1002/QJ.2235, 2014.
Xia, L., Nowack, J. P., Tilmes, S., and Robock, A.: Impacts of stratospheric
sulfate geoengineering on tropospheric ozone, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17,
11913–11928, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-11913-2017, 2017.
Yatagai, A., Krishnamurti, T. N., Kumar, V., Mishra, A. K., and Simon, A.:
Use of APHRODITE rain gauge-based precipitation and TRMM 3B43 products for
improving asian monsoon seasonal precipitation forecasts by the
superensemble method, J. Climate, 27, 1062–1069,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00332.1, 2014.
Yool, A., Popova, E. E., and Anderson, T. R.: MEDUSA-2.0: An intermediate
complexity biogeochemical model of the marine carbon cycle for climate change and ocean acidification studies, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 1767–1811,
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-1767-2013, 2013.
Zhang, W. and Villarini, G.: Uncovering the role of the East Asian jet stream and heterogeneities in atmospheric rivers affecting the western United States, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 115, 891–896, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717883115, 2018.
Zhao, M.: Simulations of atmospheric rivers, their variability, and response
to global warming using GFDL's new high-resolution general circulation model, J. Climate, 33, 10287–10303, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0241.1, 2020.
Short summary
The recent record-breaking flood events in China during the summer of 2021 highlight the importance of mitigating the risks from future changes in high-impact weather systems under global warming. Based on a state-of-the-art Earth system model, we demonstrate a pilot study on the responses of atmospheric rivers and extreme precipitation over East Asia to anthropogenically induced climate warming and an unconventional mitigation strategy – stratospheric aerosol injection.
The recent record-breaking flood events in China during the summer of 2021 highlight the...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint