Articles | Volume 23, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023
Opinion
 | Highlight paper
 | 
05 May 2023
Opinion | Highlight paper |  | 05 May 2023

Opinion: The scientific and community-building roles of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) – past, present, and future

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

Related authors

Dependency of the impacts of geoengineering on the stratospheric sulfur injection strategy – Part 2: How changes in the hydrological cycle depend on the injection rate and model used
Anton Laakso, Daniele Visioni, Ulrike Niemeier, Simone Tilmes, and Harri Kokkola
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 405–427, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-405-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-405-2024, 2024
Short summary
G6-1.5K-SAI: a new Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) experiment integrating recent advances in solar radiation modification studies
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
Hemispherically symmetric strategies for stratospheric aerosol injection
Yan Zhang, Douglas G. MacMartin, Daniele Visioni, Ewa M. Bednarz, and Ben Kravitz
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 191–213, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-191-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-191-2024, 2024
Short summary
Injection strategy – a driver of atmospheric circulation and ozone response to stratospheric aerosol geoengineering
Ewa M. Bednarz, Amy H. Butler, Daniele Visioni, Yan Zhang, Ben Kravitz, and Douglas G. MacMartin
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13665–13684, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13665-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13665-2023, 2023
Short summary
Comparison of UKESM1 and CESM2 simulations using the same multi-target stratospheric aerosol injection strategy
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

Related subject area

Subject: Radiation | Research Activity: Atmospheric Modelling and Data Analysis | Altitude Range: Troposphere | Science Focus: Physics (physical properties and processes)
Uncertainties in cloud-radiative heating within an idealized extratropical cyclone
Behrooz Keshtgar, Aiko Voigt, Bernhard Mayer, and Corinna Hoose
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 4751–4769, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-4751-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-4751-2024, 2024
Short summary
Evaluation of downward and upward solar irradiances simulated by the Integrated Forecasting System of ECMWF using airborne observations above Arctic low-level clouds
Hanno Müller, André Ehrlich, Evelyn Jäkel, Johannes Röttenbacher, Benjamin Kirbus, Michael Schäfer, Robin J. Hogan, and Manfred Wendisch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 4157–4175, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-4157-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-4157-2024, 2024
Short summary
A colorful look at climate sensitivity
Bjorn Stevens and Lukas Kluft
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 14673–14689, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14673-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14673-2023, 2023
Short summary
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, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14003-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14003-2023, 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, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13523-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13523-2023, 2023
Short summary

Cited articles

Abiodun, B. J., Odoulami, R. C., Sawadogo, W., Oloniyo, O. A., Abatan, A. 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, 31, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03268-w, 2021. a
Ahlm, L., Jones, A., Stjern, C. W., Muri, H., Kravitz, B., and Kristjánsson, J. E.: Marine cloud brightening – as effective without clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 13071–13087, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-13071-2017, 2017. a
Alterskjaer, K., Kristjánsson, J. E., Boucher, O., Muri, H., Niemeier, U., Schmidt, H., Schulz, M., and Timmreck, C.: Sea-salt injections into the low-latitude marine boundary layer: The transient response in three Earth system models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 12195–12206, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020432, 2013. a, b
Angel, R.: Feasibility of cooling the Earth with a cloud of small spacecraft near the inner Lagrange point (L1), P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 103, 17184–17189, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0608163103, 2006. a
Aswathy, V. N., Boucher, O., Quaas, M., Niemeier, U., Muri, H., Mülmenstädt, J., and Quaas, J.: Climate extremes in multi-model simulations of stratospheric aerosol and marine cloud brightening climate engineering, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9593–9610, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9593-2015, 2015. a
Download
Executive editor
Climate is changing, and the evidence for this fact increases every day. Therefore, research is addressing the question of how the impact of climate change could be alleviated by influencing the climate of the Earth through geoengineering. Research on such issues has increased tremendously since the seminal paper on this topic by Paul Crutzen in 2006. An entire project, the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP), was started in 2010 aimed at understanding the physical processes and projected impacts of solar geoengineering. The paper by Visioni et al. discusses the successes and missed opportunities of the GeoMIP project and gives recommendations regarding both future model experiments and more general activities. The paper will be without doubt a focus and a nucleation point of future discussions on the aspect of geoengineering.
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.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint