Articles | Volume 23, issue 12
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-6691-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Special issue:
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-6691-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Opinion: How fear of nuclear winter has helped save the world, so far
Department of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University, 14 College Farm Road, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901, USA
Department of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University, 14 College Farm Road, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901, USA
Cheryl S. Harrison
Department of Ocean and Coastal Science and Center for Computation
and Technology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803,
USA
Joshua Coupe
Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA
Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA
Owen B. Toon
Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Laboratory for
Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado
80303, USA
Charles G. Bardeen
Atmospheric Chemistry Observations and Modeling Laboratory, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado 80307, USA
Related authors
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.
Sam S. Rabin, William J. Sacks, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Lili Xia, and Alan Robock
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7253–7273, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7253-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7253-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Climate models can help us simulate how the agricultural system will be affected by and respond to environmental change, but to be trustworthy they must realistically reproduce historical patterns. When farmers plant their crops and what varieties they choose will be important aspects of future adaptation. Here, we improve the crop component of a global model to better simulate observed growing seasons and examine the impacts on simulated crop yields and irrigation demand.
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.
Davide Zanchettin, Claudia Timmreck, Myriam Khodri, Anja Schmidt, Matthew Toohey, Manabu Abe, Slimane Bekki, Jason Cole, Shih-Wei Fang, Wuhu Feng, Gabriele Hegerl, Ben Johnson, Nicolas Lebas, Allegra N. LeGrande, Graham W. Mann, Lauren Marshall, Landon Rieger, Alan Robock, Sara Rubinetti, Kostas Tsigaridis, and Helen Weierbach
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2265–2292, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2265-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2265-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper provides metadata and first analyses of the volc-pinatubo-full experiment of CMIP6-VolMIP. Results from six Earth system models reveal significant differences in radiative flux anomalies that trace back to different implementations of volcanic forcing. Surface responses are in contrast overall consistent across models, reflecting the large spread due to internal variability. A second phase of VolMIP shall consider both aspects toward improved protocol for volc-pinatubo-full.
Wouter Dorigo, Irene Himmelbauer, Daniel Aberer, Lukas Schremmer, Ivana Petrakovic, Luca Zappa, Wolfgang Preimesberger, Angelika Xaver, Frank Annor, Jonas Ardö, Dennis Baldocchi, Marco Bitelli, Günter Blöschl, Heye Bogena, Luca Brocca, Jean-Christophe Calvet, J. Julio Camarero, Giorgio Capello, Minha Choi, Michael C. Cosh, Nick van de Giesen, Istvan Hajdu, Jaakko Ikonen, Karsten H. Jensen, Kasturi Devi Kanniah, Ileen de Kat, Gottfried Kirchengast, Pankaj Kumar Rai, Jenni Kyrouac, Kristine Larson, Suxia Liu, Alexander Loew, Mahta Moghaddam, José Martínez Fernández, Cristian Mattar Bader, Renato Morbidelli, Jan P. Musial, Elise Osenga, Michael A. Palecki, Thierry Pellarin, George P. Petropoulos, Isabella Pfeil, Jarrett Powers, Alan Robock, Christoph Rüdiger, Udo Rummel, Michael Strobel, Zhongbo Su, Ryan Sullivan, Torbern Tagesson, Andrej Varlagin, Mariette Vreugdenhil, Jeffrey Walker, Jun Wen, Fred Wenger, Jean Pierre Wigneron, Mel Woods, Kun Yang, Yijian Zeng, Xiang Zhang, Marek Zreda, Stephan Dietrich, Alexander Gruber, Peter van Oevelen, Wolfgang Wagner, Klaus Scipal, Matthias Drusch, and Roberto Sabia
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5749–5804, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5749-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5749-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The International Soil Moisture Network (ISMN) is a community-based open-access data portal for soil water measurements taken at the ground and is accessible at https://ismn.earth. Over 1000 scientific publications and thousands of users have made use of the ISMN. The scope of this paper is to inform readers about the data and functionality of the ISMN and to provide a review of the scientific progress facilitated through the ISMN with the scope to shape future research and operations.
Antara Banerjee, Amy H. Butler, Lorenzo M. Polvani, Alan Robock, Isla R. Simpson, and Lantao Sun
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6985–6997, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6985-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6985-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We find that simulated stratospheric sulfate geoengineering could lead to warmer Eurasian winters alongside a drier Mediterranean and wetting to the north. These effects occur due to the strengthening of the Northern Hemisphere stratospheric polar vortex, which shifts the North Atlantic Oscillation to a more positive phase. We find the effects in our simulations to be much more significant than the wintertime effects of large tropical volcanic eruptions which inject much less sulfate aerosol.
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.
Margot Clyne, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Michael J. Mills, Myriam Khodri, William Ball, Slimane Bekki, Sandip S. Dhomse, Nicolas Lebas, Graham Mann, Lauren Marshall, Ulrike Niemeier, Virginie Poulain, Alan Robock, Eugene Rozanov, Anja Schmidt, Andrea Stenke, Timofei Sukhodolov, Claudia Timmreck, Matthew Toohey, Fiona Tummon, Davide Zanchettin, Yunqian Zhu, and Owen B. Toon
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 3317–3343, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3317-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3317-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study finds how and why five state-of-the-art global climate models with interactive stratospheric aerosols differ when simulating the aftermath of large volcanic injections as part of the Model Intercomparison Project on the climatic response to Volcanic forcing (VolMIP). We identify and explain the consequences of significant disparities in the underlying physics and chemistry currently in some of the models, which are problems likely not unique to the models participating in this study.
Andy Jones, Jim M. Haywood, Anthony C. Jones, Simone Tilmes, Ben Kravitz, and Alan Robock
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1287–1304, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1287-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1287-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Two different methods of simulating a geoengineering scenario are compared using data from two different Earth system models. One method is very idealised while the other includes details of a plausible mechanism. The results from both models agree that the idealised approach does not capture an impact found when detailed modelling is included, namely that geoengineering induces a positive phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation which leads to warmer, wetter winters in northern Europe.
Florian Ulrich Jehn, Łukasz G. Gajewski, Johanna Hedlund, Constantin W. Arnscheidt, Lili Xia, Nico Wunderling, and David Denkenberger
Earth Syst. Dynam., 16, 1585–1603, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-1585-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-1585-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The global food trade system can handle small disturbances, but large disasters could cause major disruptions. We looked at how nuclear war or severe infrastructure loss would affect global trade in key crops. Both would be catastrophic, but a nuclear war would cause more severe disruptions, with many countries losing most of their food imports. Both scenarios highlight the need for better preparation to protect global food security.
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.
Katja Frieler, Jan Volkholz, Stefan Lange, Jacob Schewe, Matthias Mengel, María del Rocío Rivas López, Christian Otto, Christopher P. O. Reyer, Dirk Nikolaus Karger, Johanna T. Malle, Simon Treu, Christoph Menz, Julia L. Blanchard, Cheryl S. Harrison, Colleen M. Petrik, Tyler D. Eddy, Kelly Ortega-Cisneros, Camilla Novaglio, Yannick Rousseau, Reg A. Watson, Charles Stock, Xiao Liu, Ryan Heneghan, Derek Tittensor, Olivier Maury, Matthias Büchner, Thomas Vogt, Tingting Wang, Fubao Sun, Inga J. Sauer, Johannes Koch, Inne Vanderkelen, Jonas Jägermeyr, Christoph Müller, Sam Rabin, Jochen Klar, Iliusi D. Vega del Valle, Gitta Lasslop, Sarah Chadburn, Eleanor Burke, Angela Gallego-Sala, Noah Smith, Jinfeng Chang, Stijn Hantson, Chantelle Burton, Anne Gädeke, Fang Li, Simon N. Gosling, Hannes Müller Schmied, Fred Hattermann, Jida Wang, Fangfang Yao, Thomas Hickler, Rafael Marcé, Don Pierson, Wim Thiery, Daniel Mercado-Bettín, Robert Ladwig, Ana Isabel Ayala-Zamora, Matthew Forrest, and Michel Bechtold
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1–51, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Our paper provides an overview of all observational climate-related and socioeconomic forcing data used as input for the impact model evaluation and impact attribution experiments within the third round of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project. The experiments are designed to test our understanding of observed changes in natural and human systems and to quantify to what degree these changes have already been induced by climate change.
Sam S. Rabin, William J. Sacks, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Lili Xia, and Alan Robock
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7253–7273, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7253-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7253-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Climate models can help us simulate how the agricultural system will be affected by and respond to environmental change, but to be trustworthy they must realistically reproduce historical patterns. When farmers plant their crops and what varieties they choose will be important aspects of future adaptation. Here, we improve the crop component of a global model to better simulate observed growing seasons and examine the impacts on simulated crop yields and irrigation demand.
Simone Tilmes, Michael J. Mills, Yunqian Zhu, Charles G. Bardeen, Francis Vitt, Pengfei Yu, David Fillmore, Xiaohong Liu, Brian Toon, and Terry Deshler
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6087–6125, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6087-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6087-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We implemented an alternative aerosol scheme in the high- and low-top model versions of the Community Earth System Model Version 2 (CESM2) with a more detailed description of tropospheric and stratospheric aerosol size distributions than the existing aerosol model. This development enables the comparison of different aerosol schemes with different complexity in the same model framework. It identifies improvements compared to a range of observations in both the troposphere and stratosphere.
Yunqian Zhu, Robert W. Portmann, Douglas Kinnison, Owen Brian Toon, Luis Millán, Jun Zhang, Holger Vömel, Simone Tilmes, Charles G. Bardeen, Xinyue Wang, Stephanie Evan, William J. Randel, and Karen H. Rosenlof
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13355–13367, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13355-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13355-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The 2022 Hunga Tonga eruption injected a large amount of water into the stratosphere. Ozone depletion was observed inside the volcanic plume. Chlorine and water vapor injected by this eruption exceeded the normal range, which made the ozone chemistry during this event occur at a higher temperature than polar ozone depletion. Unlike polar ozone chemistry where chlorine nitrate is more important, hypochlorous acid plays a large role in the in-plume chlorine balance and heterogeneous processes.
Seyed Vahid Mousavi, Khalil Karami, Simone Tilmes, Helene Muri, Lili Xia, and Abolfazl Rezaei
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 10677–10695, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-10677-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-10677-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding atmospheric dust changes in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region under future climate scenarios is essential. By injecting sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) geoengineering reflects some of the incoming sunlight back to space. This study shows that the MENA region would experience lower dust concentration under both SAI and RCP8.5 scenarios compared to the current climate (CTL) by the end of the century.
Wenfu Tang, Simone Tilmes, David M. Lawrence, Fang Li, Cenlin He, Louisa K. Emmons, Rebecca R. Buchholz, and Lili Xia
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 5467–5486, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5467-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5467-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Globally, total wildfire burned area is projected to increase over the 21st century under scenarios without geoengineering and decrease under the two geoengineering scenarios. Geoengineering reduces fire by decreasing surface temperature and wind speed and increasing relative humidity and soil water. However, geoengineering also yields reductions in precipitation, which offset some of the fire reduction.
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.
Lucien Froidevaux, Douglas E. Kinnison, Michelle L. Santee, Luis F. Millán, Nathaniel J. Livesey, William G. Read, Charles G. Bardeen, John J. Orlando, and Ryan A. Fuller
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 4779–4799, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-4779-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-4779-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We analyze satellite-derived distributions of chlorine monoxide (ClO) and hypochlorous acid (HOCl) in the upper atmosphere. For 2005–2020, from 50°S to 50°N and over ~30 to 45 km, ClO and HOCl decreased by −0.7 % and −0.4 % per year, respectively. A detailed model of chemistry and dynamics agrees with the results. These decreases confirm the effectiveness of the 1987 Montreal Protocol, which limited emissions of chlorine- and bromine-containing source gases, in order to protect the ozone layer.
Davide Zanchettin, Claudia Timmreck, Myriam Khodri, Anja Schmidt, Matthew Toohey, Manabu Abe, Slimane Bekki, Jason Cole, Shih-Wei Fang, Wuhu Feng, Gabriele Hegerl, Ben Johnson, Nicolas Lebas, Allegra N. LeGrande, Graham W. Mann, Lauren Marshall, Landon Rieger, Alan Robock, Sara Rubinetti, Kostas Tsigaridis, and Helen Weierbach
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2265–2292, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2265-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2265-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper provides metadata and first analyses of the volc-pinatubo-full experiment of CMIP6-VolMIP. Results from six Earth system models reveal significant differences in radiative flux anomalies that trace back to different implementations of volcanic forcing. Surface responses are in contrast overall consistent across models, reflecting the large spread due to internal variability. A second phase of VolMIP shall consider both aspects toward improved protocol for volc-pinatubo-full.
Daniele Visioni, Simone Tilmes, Charles Bardeen, Michael Mills, Douglas G. MacMartin, Ben Kravitz, and Jadwiga H. Richter
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 1739–1756, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1739-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-1739-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosols are simulated in a simplified way in climate models: in the model analyzed here, they are represented in every grid as described by three simple logarithmic distributions, mixing all different species together. The size can evolve when new particles are formed, particles merge together to create a larger one or particles are deposited to the surface. This approximation normally works fairly well. Here we show however that when large amounts of sulfate are simulated, there are problems.
Wouter Dorigo, Irene Himmelbauer, Daniel Aberer, Lukas Schremmer, Ivana Petrakovic, Luca Zappa, Wolfgang Preimesberger, Angelika Xaver, Frank Annor, Jonas Ardö, Dennis Baldocchi, Marco Bitelli, Günter Blöschl, Heye Bogena, Luca Brocca, Jean-Christophe Calvet, J. Julio Camarero, Giorgio Capello, Minha Choi, Michael C. Cosh, Nick van de Giesen, Istvan Hajdu, Jaakko Ikonen, Karsten H. Jensen, Kasturi Devi Kanniah, Ileen de Kat, Gottfried Kirchengast, Pankaj Kumar Rai, Jenni Kyrouac, Kristine Larson, Suxia Liu, Alexander Loew, Mahta Moghaddam, José Martínez Fernández, Cristian Mattar Bader, Renato Morbidelli, Jan P. Musial, Elise Osenga, Michael A. Palecki, Thierry Pellarin, George P. Petropoulos, Isabella Pfeil, Jarrett Powers, Alan Robock, Christoph Rüdiger, Udo Rummel, Michael Strobel, Zhongbo Su, Ryan Sullivan, Torbern Tagesson, Andrej Varlagin, Mariette Vreugdenhil, Jeffrey Walker, Jun Wen, Fred Wenger, Jean Pierre Wigneron, Mel Woods, Kun Yang, Yijian Zeng, Xiang Zhang, Marek Zreda, Stephan Dietrich, Alexander Gruber, Peter van Oevelen, Wolfgang Wagner, Klaus Scipal, Matthias Drusch, and Roberto Sabia
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5749–5804, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5749-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5749-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The International Soil Moisture Network (ISMN) is a community-based open-access data portal for soil water measurements taken at the ground and is accessible at https://ismn.earth. Over 1000 scientific publications and thousands of users have made use of the ISMN. The scope of this paper is to inform readers about the data and functionality of the ISMN and to provide a review of the scientific progress facilitated through the ISMN with the scope to shape future research and operations.
Andrew Gettelman, Chieh-Chieh Chen, and Charles G. Bardeen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9405–9416, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9405-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9405-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant economic disruption in 2020 and severely impacted air traffic. We use a climate model to evaluate the effect of the reductions in aviation on climate in 2020. Contrails, in general, warm the planet, and COVID-19-related reductions in contrails cooled the land surface in 2020. The timing of reductions in aviation was important, and this may change how we think about the future effects of contrails.
Antara Banerjee, Amy H. Butler, Lorenzo M. Polvani, Alan Robock, Isla R. Simpson, and Lantao Sun
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6985–6997, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6985-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6985-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We find that simulated stratospheric sulfate geoengineering could lead to warmer Eurasian winters alongside a drier Mediterranean and wetting to the north. These effects occur due to the strengthening of the Northern Hemisphere stratospheric polar vortex, which shifts the North Atlantic Oscillation to a more positive phase. We find the effects in our simulations to be much more significant than the wintertime effects of large tropical volcanic eruptions which inject much less sulfate aerosol.
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.
Margot Clyne, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Michael J. Mills, Myriam Khodri, William Ball, Slimane Bekki, Sandip S. Dhomse, Nicolas Lebas, Graham Mann, Lauren Marshall, Ulrike Niemeier, Virginie Poulain, Alan Robock, Eugene Rozanov, Anja Schmidt, Andrea Stenke, Timofei Sukhodolov, Claudia Timmreck, Matthew Toohey, Fiona Tummon, Davide Zanchettin, Yunqian Zhu, and Owen B. Toon
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 3317–3343, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3317-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3317-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study finds how and why five state-of-the-art global climate models with interactive stratospheric aerosols differ when simulating the aftermath of large volcanic injections as part of the Model Intercomparison Project on the climatic response to Volcanic forcing (VolMIP). We identify and explain the consequences of significant disparities in the underlying physics and chemistry currently in some of the models, which are problems likely not unique to the models participating in this study.
Andy Jones, Jim M. Haywood, Anthony C. Jones, Simone Tilmes, Ben Kravitz, and Alan Robock
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1287–1304, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1287-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1287-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Two different methods of simulating a geoengineering scenario are compared using data from two different Earth system models. One method is very idealised while the other includes details of a plausible mechanism. The results from both models agree that the idealised approach does not capture an impact found when detailed modelling is included, namely that geoengineering induces a positive phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation which leads to warmer, wetter winters in northern Europe.
Cited articles
Aleksandrov, V. V. and Stenchikov, G. L.: On the modeling of the climatic
consequences of the nuclear war, Proc. Applied Math., (Computing Centre, USSR
Academy of Sciences, Moscow), 21 pp., 1983.
Bardeen, C. G., Toon, O. B., Jensen, E. J., Marsh, D. R., and Harvey, V. L.:
Numerical simulations of the three-dimensional distribution of meteoric dust
in the mesosphere and upper stratosphere. J. Geophys. Res., 113, D17202,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009515, 2008.
Bardeen, C. G., Garcia, R. R., Toon, O. B., and Conley, A. J.: On transient
climate change at the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary due to atmospheric soot
injections, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 114, 36–45, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708980114,
2017.
Bardeen, C. G., Kinnison, D. E., Toon, O. B., Mills, M. J., Vitt, F., Xia,
L., Jägermeyr, J., Lovenduski, N. S., Scherrer, K. J. N., Clyne, M., and
Robock, A.: Extreme ozone loss following nuclear war resulting in enhanced
surface ultraviolet radiation. J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2021JD035079,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035079, 2021.
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: Nuclear Notebook, Rising, then Pulling Back from a Peak, https://thebulletin.org/nuclear-notebook/ (last access: 12 June 2023), 2023.
Coupe, J., Bardeen, C. G., Robock, A., and Toon, O. B.: Nuclear winter
responses to global nuclear war in the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate
Model Version 4 and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE. J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 8522–8543, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030509, 2019.
Covey, C., Thompson, S., and Schneider, S. H.: Global atmospheric effects of
massive smoke injections from a nuclear war: Results from general
circulation model simulations, Nature, 308, 21–25, 1984.
Crutzen, P. J. and Birks, J. W.: The atmosphere after a nuclear war: Twilight at noon, Ambio, 11, 114–125, 1982.
Ghan, S. J.: Chronic climatic effects of nuclear war, Atmos. Environ., 25A,
2615–2625, 1991.
Ghan, S. J., MacCracken, M. C., and Walton, J. J.: Climatic response to
large atmospheric smoke injections: Sensitivity studies with a tropospheric
general circulation model, J. Geophys. Res., 93, 8315–8337, 1988.
Harrison, C. S., Rohr, T., DuVivier, A., Maroon, E. A., Bachman, S.,
Bardeen, C. G., Coupe, J., Garza, V., Heneghan, R., Lovenduski, N. S.,
Neubauer, P., Rangel, V., Robock, A., Scherrer, K., Stevenson, S., and Toon,
O. B.: A new ocean state after nuclear war. AGU Advances, 3, e2021AV000610,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021AV000610, 2022.
Hertsgaard, M.: Mikhail Gorbachev explains what's rotten in Russia,
Salon.com, https://www.salon.com/2000/09/07/gorbachev/ (last access: 12 June 2023), 2023.
Jägermeyr, J., Robock, A., Elliott, J., Müller, C., Xia, L.,
Khabarov, N., Folberth, C., Schmid, E., Liu, W., Zabel, F., Rabin, S. S.,
Puma, M. J., Heslin, A., C., Franke, J., Foster, I., Asseng, S., Bardeen, C.
G., Toon, O. B., and Rosenzweig, C.: A regional nuclear conflict would
compromise global food security, P. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, 117, 7071–7081,
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1919049117, 2020.
Koch, D., Schmidt, G. A., and Field, C. V.: Sulfur, sea salt, and
radionuclide aerosols in GISS ModelE, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D06206,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005550, 2006.
Kristensen, H. M. and Norris, R. S.: Global nuclear weapons inventories,
1945–2013, Bull. Atom. Scientists, 69:5, 75–81, https://doi.org/10.1177/0096340213501363, 2015.
Lovenduski, N. S., Harrison, C. S., Olivarez, H., Bardeen, C. G., Toon, O.
B., Coupe, J., Robock, A., Rohr, T., and Stevenson, S.: The potential impact
of nuclear conflict on ocean acidification, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47,
e2019GL086246, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086246, 2020.
MacCracken, M. C.: Nuclear war: Preliminary estimates of the climatic effects of a nuclear exchange. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Nuclear War, 161–183, Erice, Sicily, 19–23 August, (Also Lawrence Livermore National Report UCRL-89770), 1983.
Marsh D. R., Mills, M. J., Kinnison, D. E., Lamarque, J.-F., Calvo, N., and
Polvani, L. M.: Climate change from 1850 to 2005 simulated in CESM1(WACCM),
J. Climate, 26, 7372–7391, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00558.1, 2013.
Mills, M. J., Toon, O. B., Lee-Taylor, J., and Robock, A.: Multidecadal
global cooling and unprecedented ozone loss following a regional nuclear
conflict, Earth's Future, 2, 161–176, 2014.
O'Connor, T.: Pakistan Envoy Warns Nuclear Risk Looms in Kashmir 75 Years
After India War, Newsweek, https://www.newsweek.com/pakistan-envoy-warns-nuclear (last access:
12 June 2023), 2022.
Özdoğan, M., Robock, A., and Kucharik, C.: Impacts of a nuclear war
in South Asia on soybean and maize production in the Midwest United States,
Clim. Change, 116, 373–387, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0518-1, 2013.
Pausata, F. S. R., Lindvall, J., Ekman, A. M. L., and Svensson, G.: Climate
effects of a hypothetical regional nuclear war: Sensitivity to emission
duration and particle composition, Earth's Future, 4, 498–511,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000415, 2016.
Pittock, A. B., Ackerman, T. P., Crutzen, P. J., MacCracken, M. C., Shapiro,
C. S., and Turco, R. P. (Eds.): Environmental Consequences of Nuclear War,
SCOPE 28, Volume I, Physical and Atmospheric Effects, John Wiley & Sons,
New York, 348 pp., ISBN 0471909181, 1986.
Pittock, A. B., Walsh, K., and Frederiksen, J. S.: General circulation model
simulation of mild nuclear winter effects, Clim. Dynam., 3, 191–206, 1989.
Reagan, R.: Transcript of interview with President on a range of issues, New
York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/1985/02/12/world/transcript-of-interview-with-president-on-a-range-of-issues.html?pagewanted=all (last access: 12 June 2023), 1985.
Redfern, S., Lundquist, J. K., Toon, O. B., Muñoz-Esparza, D., Bardeen,
C. G., and Kosović, B.: Upper troposphere smoke injection from large
areal fires. J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2020JD034332, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD034332, 2021.
Robock, A.: Snow and ice feedbacks prolong effects of nuclear winter,
Nature, 310, 667–670, 1984.
Robock, A., Oman, L., and Stenchikov, G. L.: Nuclear winter revisited with a
modern climate model and current nuclear arsenals: Still catastrophic
consequences, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D13107, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD008235, 2007a.
Robock, A., Oman, L., Stenchikov, G. L., Toon, O. B., Bardeen, C., and Turco, R. P.: Climatic consequences of regional nuclear conflicts, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 2003–2012, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-2003-2007, 2007b.
Russell, G. L., Miller, J. R., and Rind, D.: A coupled atmosphere-ocean
model for transient climate change, Atmos.-Ocean, 33, 683–7305, 1995.
Sagan, C. and Turco R.: A Path Where No Man Thought - Nuclear Winter and
the End of the Arms Race, Random House, New York, 499 pp., ISBN 13 978-0394583075, 1990.
Scherrer, K. J. N., Harrison, C. S., Heneghan, R. F., Galbraith, E.,
Bardeen, C. G., Coupe, J., Jägermeyr, J., Lovenduski, N. S., Luna, A.,
Robock, A., Stevens, J., Stevenson, S., Toon, O. B., and Xia, L.: Marine
wild-capture fisheries after nuclear war, P. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, 117,
29748–29758, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2008256117, 2020.
Schmidt, G. A., Ruedy, R., Hansen, J. E., Aleinov, I., Bell, N., Bauer, M., Bauer, S., Cairns, B., Canuto, V., Cheng, Y., Del Genio, A., Faluvegi, G., Friend, A. D., Hall, T. M., Hu, Y., Kelley, M., Kiang, N. Y., Koch, D., Lacis, A. A., Lerner, J., Lo, K. K., Miller, R. L., Nazarenko, L., Oinas, V., Perlwitz, J., Perlwitz, J., Rind, D., Romanou, A., Russell, G. L., Sato, M., Shindell, D. T., Stone, P. H., Sun, S., Tausnev, N., Thresher, D., and Yao, M.-S.: Present-day atmospheric simulations using GISS
ModelE: Comparison to in situ, satellite, and reanalysis data, J. Climate,
19, 153–192, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3612.1, 2006.
Schneider, S. H. and Thompson, S. L.: Simulating the climatic effects of
nuclear war, Nature, 333, 221–227, 1988.
Stenke, A., Hoyle, C. R., Luo, B., Rozanov, E., Gröbner, J., Maag, L., Brönnimann, S., and Peter, T.: Climate and chemistry effects of a regional scale nuclear conflict, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 9713–9729, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9713-2013, 2013.
Thompson, S. L.: Global interactive transport simulations of nuclear war
smoke, Nature, 317, 35–39, 1985.
Toon, O. B., Turco, R. P., Westphal, D., Malone, R., and Liu, M. S.: A
multidimensional model for aerosols - description of computational analogs,
J. Atmos. Sci., 45, 2123–2143, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1988)045<2123:AMMFAD>2.0.CO;2, 1988.
Toon, O. B., Turco, R. P., Robock, A., Bardeen, C., Oman, L., and Stenchikov, G. L.: Atmospheric effects and societal consequences of regional scale nuclear conflicts and acts of individual nuclear terrorism, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 1973–2002, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-1973-2007, 2007.
Toon, O. B., Robock, A., and Turco, R. P.: Environmental consequences of
nuclear war, Phys. Today, 61, 37–42, 2008.
Toon, O. B., Bardeen, C. G., Robock, A., Xia, L., Kristensen, H., McKinzie,
M., Peterson, R. J., Harrison, C., Lovenduski, N. S., and Turco, R. P.:
Rapid expansion of nuclear arsenals by Pakistan and India portends regional
and global catastrophe, Sci. Adv., 5, eaay5478,
https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aay5478, 2019.
Turco, R. P., Toon, O. B., Ackerman, T. P., Pollack, J. B., and Sagan, C:
Nuclear winter: Global consequences of multiple nuclear explosions, Science,
222, 1283–1292, 1983.
Turco, R. P., Toon, O. B., Ackerman, T. P., Pollack, J. B., and Sagan, C.:
Climate and smoke: An appraisal of nuclear winter, Science, 247, 166–176,
1990.
Wagman, B. M., Lundquist, K. A., Tang, Q., Glascoe, L. G., and Bader, D. C.:
Examining the climate effects of a regional nuclear weapons exchange using a
multiscale atmospheric modeling approach. J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125,
e2020JD033056, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033056, 2020.
Xia, L. and Robock, A.: Impacts of a nuclear war in South Asia on rice
production in mainland China, Clim. Change, 116, 357–372,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0475-8, 2013.
Xia, L., Robock, A., Mills, M., Stenke, A., and Helfand, I.: Decadal
reduction of Chinese agriculture after a regional nuclear war, Earth's
Future, 3, 37–48, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014EF000283, 2015.
Xia, L., Robock, A., Scherrer, K., Harrison, C. S., Bodirsky, B. L., Weindl,
I., Jägermeyr, J., Bardeen, C. G., Toon, O. B., and Heneghan, R.: Global
food insecurity and famine from reduced crop, marine fishery and livestock
production due to climate disruption from nuclear war soot injection, Nature
Food, 3, 586–596, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-022-00573-0, 2022.
Yu, P., Toon, O. B., Bardeen, C. G., Zhu, Y., Rosenlof, K. H., Portmann, R. W., Thornberry, T. D., Gao, R.-S., Davis, S. M., Wolf, E. T., de Gouw, J., Peterson, D. A., Fromm, M. D., and Robock, A.: Black carbon lofts wildfire smoke high into the stratosphere
to form a persistent plume, Science, 365, 587–590,
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax1748, 2019.
Executive editor
The term "nuclear winter" was commonly used in the 1980s and represented a scenario where a nuclear war could profoundly alter the earth's climate through injection of aerosols into the stratosphere, which could be considered a highly extreme example of human activity altering the earth system. Paul Crutzen, in his Nobel Prize speech, said that this concept is politically important as it "magnifies and highlights the dangers of a nuclear war and convinces me that in the long run mankind can only escape such horrific consequences if nuclear weapons are totally abolished by international agreement". While nuclear war is hopefully something that we will never experience, it is highly interesting to return to this topic four decades later, after the major advancements in the science of aerosol-climate interactions that have occurred in the meantime (partly motivated by an exploration of geoengineering concepts), and improvements in our abilities to model the agricultural and economic impacts of climate change. The conclusions of the paper by Robock et al. offer a sobering reminder of the manifold dangers of this type of warfare to the earth system and society.
The term "nuclear winter" was commonly used in the 1980s and represented a scenario where a...
Short summary
A nuclear war could produce a nuclear winter, with catastrophic consequences for global food supplies. Nuclear winter theory helped to end the nuclear arms race in the 1980s, but more than 10 000 nuclear weapons still exist. This means they can be used, by unstable leaders, accidently from technical malfunctions or human error, or by terrorists. Therefore, it is urgent for scientists to study these issues, broadly communicate their results, and work for the elimination of nuclear weapons.
A nuclear war could produce a nuclear winter, with catastrophic consequences for global food...
Special issue
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint