Articles | Volume 23, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-687-2023
© 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-23-687-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
16 Jan 2023
Research article |
| 16 Jan 2023
| 16 Jan 2023
Climate response to off-equatorial stratospheric sulfur injections in three Earth system models – Part 2: Stratospheric and free-tropospheric response
Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, USA
now at: Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
now at: NOAA Chemical Sciences
Laboratory, Boulder, CO, USA
Daniele Visioni
Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Ben Kravitz
Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Indiana University,
Bloomington, IN, USA
Atmospheric Sciences and Global Change Division, Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA
Andy Jones
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
James M. Haywood
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
College of Engineering, Maths and Physical Science, University of Exeter,
Exeter, UK
Jadwiga Richter
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Climate and Global Dynamics Laboratory, Boulder, CO, USA
Douglas G. MacMartin
Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Peter Braesicke
IMK-ASF, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Eggenstein–Leopoldshafen,
Germany
Viewed
Total article views: 3,382 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 13 Jun 2022)
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2,552 | 772 | 58 | 3,382 | 347 | 45 | 52 |
- HTML: 2,552
- PDF: 772
- XML: 58
- Total: 3,382
- Supplement: 347
- BibTeX: 45
- EndNote: 52
Total article views: 2,340 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 16 Jan 2023)
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,767 | 530 | 43 | 2,340 | 211 | 39 | 48 |
- HTML: 1,767
- PDF: 530
- XML: 43
- Total: 2,340
- Supplement: 211
- BibTeX: 39
- EndNote: 48
Total article views: 1,042 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 13 Jun 2022)
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 785 | 242 | 15 | 1,042 | 136 | 6 | 4 |
- HTML: 785
- PDF: 242
- XML: 15
- Total: 1,042
- Supplement: 136
- BibTeX: 6
- EndNote: 4
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Total article views: 3,382 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 3,314 with geography defined
and 68 with unknown origin.
Total article views: 2,340 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 2,292 with geography defined
and 48 with unknown origin.
Total article views: 1,042 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 1,022 with geography defined
and 20 with unknown origin.
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
1
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
1
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
1
Cited
15 citations as recorded by crossref.
- Quantifying the Efficiency of Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering at Different Altitudes W. Lee et al. 10.1029/2023GL104417
- Uncertainties and confidence in stratospheric aerosol injection modelling: a systematic literature review A. Määttänen et al. 10.1093/oxfclm/kgae007
- Stratospheric Aerosol Injection Can Reduce Risks to Antarctic Ice Loss Depending on Injection Location and Amount P. Goddard et al. 10.1029/2023JD039434
- Potential Non‐Linearities in the High Latitude Circulation and Ozone Response to Stratospheric Aerosol Injection E. Bednarz et al. 10.1029/2023GL104726
- Climate response to off-equatorial stratospheric sulfur injections in three Earth system models – Part 1: Experimental protocols and surface changes D. Visioni et al. 10.5194/acp-23-663-2023
- Stratospheric transport and tropospheric sink of solar geoengineering aerosol: a Lagrangian analysis H. Sun et al. 10.1038/s41612-024-00664-8
- Opinion: The scientific and community-building roles of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) – past, present, and future D. Visioni et al. 10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023
- Injection strategy – a driver of atmospheric circulation and ozone response to stratospheric aerosol geoengineering E. Bednarz et al. 10.5194/acp-23-13665-2023
- Including ash in UKESM1 model simulations of the Raikoke volcanic eruption reveals improved agreement with observations A. Wells et al. 10.5194/acp-23-3985-2023
- Comparison of UKESM1 and CESM2 simulations using the same multi-target stratospheric aerosol injection strategy M. Henry et al. 10.5194/acp-23-13369-2023
- Strategic logic of unilateral climate intervention C. Bell & P. Keys 10.1088/1748-9326/acf94b
- Hemispherically symmetric strategies for stratospheric aerosol injection Y. Zhang et al. 10.5194/esd-15-191-2024
- Climate intervention using marine cloud brightening (MCB) compared with stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) in the UKESM1 climate model J. Haywood et al. 10.5194/acp-23-15305-2023
- Kicking the can down the road: understanding the effects of delaying the deployment of stratospheric aerosol injection E. Brody et al. 10.1088/2752-5295/ad53f3
- Impact of the Latitude of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection on the Southern Annular Mode E. Bednarz et al. 10.1029/2022GL100353
14 citations as recorded by crossref.
- Quantifying the Efficiency of Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering at Different Altitudes W. Lee et al. 10.1029/2023GL104417
- Uncertainties and confidence in stratospheric aerosol injection modelling: a systematic literature review A. Määttänen et al. 10.1093/oxfclm/kgae007
- Stratospheric Aerosol Injection Can Reduce Risks to Antarctic Ice Loss Depending on Injection Location and Amount P. Goddard et al. 10.1029/2023JD039434
- Potential Non‐Linearities in the High Latitude Circulation and Ozone Response to Stratospheric Aerosol Injection E. Bednarz et al. 10.1029/2023GL104726
- Climate response to off-equatorial stratospheric sulfur injections in three Earth system models – Part 1: Experimental protocols and surface changes D. Visioni et al. 10.5194/acp-23-663-2023
- Stratospheric transport and tropospheric sink of solar geoengineering aerosol: a Lagrangian analysis H. Sun et al. 10.1038/s41612-024-00664-8
- Opinion: The scientific and community-building roles of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) – past, present, and future D. Visioni et al. 10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023
- Injection strategy – a driver of atmospheric circulation and ozone response to stratospheric aerosol geoengineering E. Bednarz et al. 10.5194/acp-23-13665-2023
- Including ash in UKESM1 model simulations of the Raikoke volcanic eruption reveals improved agreement with observations A. Wells et al. 10.5194/acp-23-3985-2023
- Comparison of UKESM1 and CESM2 simulations using the same multi-target stratospheric aerosol injection strategy M. Henry et al. 10.5194/acp-23-13369-2023
- Strategic logic of unilateral climate intervention C. Bell & P. Keys 10.1088/1748-9326/acf94b
- Hemispherically symmetric strategies for stratospheric aerosol injection Y. Zhang et al. 10.5194/esd-15-191-2024
- Climate intervention using marine cloud brightening (MCB) compared with stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) in the UKESM1 climate model J. Haywood et al. 10.5194/acp-23-15305-2023
- Kicking the can down the road: understanding the effects of delaying the deployment of stratospheric aerosol injection E. Brody et al. 10.1088/2752-5295/ad53f3
1 citations as recorded by crossref.
Latest update: 26 Jul 2024
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.
Building on Part 1 of this two-part study, we demonstrate the role of biases in climatological...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint