Articles | Volume 25, issue 20
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-13199-2025
© Author(s) 2025. 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-25-13199-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
21 Oct 2025
Research article |
| 21 Oct 2025
| 21 Oct 2025
Dust radiative forcing in CMIP6 Earth System models: insights from the AerChemMIP piClim-2xdust experiment
The Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway
University of Oslo, Department of Geoscience, Oslo, Norway
Dirk Olivié
The Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway
Trude Storelvmo
University of Oslo, Department of Geoscience, Oslo, Norway
Michael Schulz
The Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway
University of Oslo, Department of Geoscience, Oslo, Norway
Related authors
Marta Luffarelli, Nicolas Misk, Analy Baltodano, Thomas Popp, Stefan Kinne, Ulrike Stöffelmair, Michael Schulz, Jan Griesfeller, Ove W. Haugvalstad, Martin Stengel, Sarah Brüning, Gareth Thomas, Elisa Carboni, Daniel Robbins, and Michael Eisinger
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-327, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-327, 2026
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding how aerosol particles affect clouds is essential for improving climate predictions, yet current satellite data are not always reliable or suitable for this purpose. This study evaluates major datasets for analysing aerosol effects on liquid clouds, dust-driven cloud glaciation, and a potential climate indicator to monitor aerosol-cloud interactions.
Marta Luffarelli, Nicolas Misk, Analy Baltodano, Thomas Popp, Stefan Kinne, Ulrike Stöffelmair, Michael Schulz, Jan Griesfeller, Ove W. Haugvalstad, Martin Stengel, Sarah Brüning, Gareth Thomas, Elisa Carboni, Daniel Robbins, and Michael Eisinger
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-327, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-327, 2026
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding how aerosol particles affect clouds is essential for improving climate predictions, yet current satellite data are not always reliable or suitable for this purpose. This study evaluates major datasets for analysing aerosol effects on liquid clouds, dust-driven cloud glaciation, and a potential climate indicator to monitor aerosol-cloud interactions.
Nina Elisabeth Larsgård, Tim Carlsen, Robert Oscar David, Filip Severin von der Lippe, Alfons Schwarzenboek, Harald Sodemann, and Trude Storelvmo
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1650, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1650, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
In-situ data from multiple research flights are combined to investigate the cloud evolution of Arctic marine cold air outbreaks during the ISLAS2022 campaign. We observe a cloud development similar to what other studies have shown: More liquid at cloud top close to the sea ice, and increased glaciation as clouds mature and deepen. This composite approach can be used by the community to further understand mCAO cloud evolution with increased confidence compared to single-flight analysis.
Gunnar Myhre, Øivind Hodnebrog, Srinath Krishnan, Maria Sand, Marit Sandstad, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Lieven Clarisse, Bruno Franco, Dylan B. Millet, Kelley C. Wells, Alexander Archibald, Hannah N. Bryant, Alex T. Chaudhri, David S. Stevenson, Didier Hauglustaine, Michael Prather, J. Christopher Kaiser, Dirk J. L. Olivie, Michael Schulz, Oliver Wild, Ye Wang, Thérèse Salameh, Jason E. Williams, Philippe Le Sager, Fabien Paulot, Kostas Tsigaridis, and Haley E. Plaas
Geosci. Model Dev., 19, 2577–2591, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-2577-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-2577-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) affect air quality and climate, but their behavior in the atmosphere is still uncertain. We launched a global research effort to compare how different models represent these compounds and to improve their accuracy. By analyzing model results alongside observations and satellite data, we aim to better understand the atmospheric composition of these compounds.
Jenny Bjordal, Anthony A. Smith Jr., Henri Cornec, and Trude Storelvmo
Geosci. Model Dev., 19, 1337–1365, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-1337-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-1337-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce NorESM2-DIAM (Norwegian Earth System Model version 2-Disaggregated Integrated Assessment Model), a first-of-its-kind tool linking a climate model with a high-resolution economic model to study how climate change, internal variability, and economic activity interact across the world. The model reveals strong regional differences and large annual swings in economic impacts, offers insights for climate policy discussions, and provides a strong foundation for future model development.
Filip Severin von der Lippe, Tim Carlsen, Trude Storelvmo, and Robert Oscar David
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 26, 1565–1585, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-1565-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-1565-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
This paper investigates how clouds associated with Arctic marine cold air outbreaks (CAOs) respond to climate change. By utilizing machine learning methods and remote sensing data from the past 25 years, the study identifies trends indicating a shortening of the CAO season. This has implications for the Arctic energy balance, underscoring the importance of further investigating these clouds to understand the trajectory of future Arctic climate.
Lise Seland Graff, Jerry Tjiputra, Ada Gjermundsen, Andreas Born, Jens Boldingh Debernard, Heiko Goelzer, Yan-Chun He, Petra Margaretha Langebroek, Aleksi Nummelin, Dirk Olivié, Øyvind Seland, Trude Storelvmo, Mats Bentsen, Chuncheng Guo, Andrea Rosendahl, Dandan Tao, Thomas Toniazzo, Camille Li, Stephen Outten, and Michael Schulz
Earth Syst. Dynam., 16, 1671–1698, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-1671-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-1671-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The magnitude of future Arctic amplification is highly uncertain. Using the Norwegian Earth System Model, we explore the effect of improving the representation of clouds, ocean eddies, the Greenland ice sheet, sea ice, and ozone on the projected Arctic winter warming in a coordinated experiment set. These improvements all lead to enhanced projected Arctic warming, with the largest changes found in the sea ice retreat regions and the largest uncertainty found on the Atlantic side.
Mingxuan Wu, Hailong Wang, Zheng Lu, Xiaohong Liu, Huisheng Bian, David D. Cohen, Yan Feng, Mian Chin, Didier A. Hauglustaine, Vlassis A. Karydis, Marianne T. Lund, Gunnar Myhre, Andrea Pozzer, Michael Schulz, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Alexandra P. Tsimpidi, Svetlana G. Tsyro, and Shaocheng Xie
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 10049–10074, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-10049-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-10049-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
A key challenge in simulating the life cycle of nitrate aerosol in global models is accurately representing the mass size distribution of nitrate aerosol, which lacks sufficient observational constraints. We found that most global models underestimate the mass fraction of fine-mode nitrate at the surface in all regions. Our study highlights the importance of gas–aerosol partitioning parameterization and the simulation of dust and sea salt in correctly simulating the mass size distribution of nitrate.
William J. Collins, Fiona M. O'Connor, Rachael E. Byrom, Øivind Hodnebrog, Patrick Jöckel, Mariano Mertens, Gunnar Myhre, Matthias Nützel, Dirk Olivié, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Laura Stecher, Larry W. Horowitz, Vaishali Naik, Gregory Faluvegi, Ulas Im, Lee T. Murray, Drew Shindell, Kostas Tsigaridis, Nathan Luke Abraham, and James Keeble
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 9031–9060, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-9031-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-9031-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We used 7 climate models that include atmospheric chemistry and find that in a scenario with weak controls on air quality, the warming effects (over 2015 to 2050) of decreases in ozone-depleting substances and increases in air quality pollutants are approximately equal and would make ozone the second highest contributor to warming over this period. We find that for stratospheric ozone recovery, the standard measure of climate effects underestimates a more comprehensive measure.
Rachael E. Byrom, Gunnar Myhre, Øivind Hodnebrog, Dirk Olivié, and Michael Schulz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 5683–5693, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-5683-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-5683-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Addressing the cause of model spread in CO2 effective radiative forcing (ERF) is important for reducing uncertainty in climate change. We investigate stratospheric O3 as a driver of this spread by altering its concentration by 50 % and analysing the impact on CO2 forcing. Our experiments show a significant effect on stratospheric temperature that impacts instantaneous radiative forcing, primarily due to the influence on longwave emission. However, the impact on ERF is minimal.
Tómas Zoëga, Trude Storelvmo, and Kirstin Krüger
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2989–3010, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2989-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2989-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We use an Earth system model to systematically investigate the climate response to high-latitude effusive volcanic eruptions as a function of eruption season and size, with a focus on the Arctic. We find that different seasons strongly modulate the climate response, with Arctic surface warming observed in winter and cooling in summer. Additionally, as eruptions increase in terms of sulfur dioxide emissions, the climate response becomes increasingly insensitive to variations in emission strength.
Astrid B. Gjelsvik, Robert O. David, Tim Carlsen, Franziska Hellmuth, Stefan Hofer, Zachary McGraw, Harald Sodemann, and Trude Storelvmo
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1617–1637, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1617-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1617-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Ice formation in clouds has a substantial impact on radiation and precipitation and must be realistically simulated in order to understand present and future Arctic climate. Rare aerosols known as ice-nucleating particles can play an important role in cloud ice formation, but their representation in global climate models is not well suited for the Arctic. In this study, the simulation of cloud phase is improved when the representation of these particles is constrained by Arctic observations.
Franziska Hellmuth, Tim Carlsen, Anne Sophie Daloz, Robert Oscar David, Haochi Che, and Trude Storelvmo
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1353–1383, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1353-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1353-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This article compares the occurrence of supercooled liquid-containing clouds (sLCCs) and their link to surface snowfall in CloudSat–CALIPSO, ERA5, and the CMIP6 models. Significant discrepancies were found, with ERA5 and CMIP6 consistently overestimating sLCC and snowfall frequency. This bias is likely due to cloud microphysics parameterization. This conclusion has implications for accurately representing cloud phase and snowfall in future climate projections.
Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Magne Aldrin, Terje K. Berntsen, Marit Holden, Ragnar Bang Huseby, Gunnar Myhre, and Trude Storelvmo
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1435–1458, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1435-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1435-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate sensitivity and aerosol forcing are central quantities in climate science that are uncertain and contribute to the spread in climate projections. To constrain them, we use observations of temperature and ocean heat content as well as prior knowledge of radiative forcings over the industrialized period. The estimates are sensitive to how aerosol cooling evolved over the latter part of the 20th century, and a strong aerosol forcing trend in the 1960s–1970s is not supported by our analysis.
Colin G. Jones, Fanny Adloff, Ben B. B. Booth, Peter M. Cox, Veronika Eyring, Pierre Friedlingstein, Katja Frieler, Helene T. Hewitt, Hazel A. Jeffery, Sylvie Joussaume, Torben Koenigk, Bryan N. Lawrence, Eleanor O'Rourke, Malcolm J. Roberts, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Samuel Somot, Pier Luigi Vidale, Detlef van Vuuren, Mario Acosta, Mats Bentsen, Raffaele Bernardello, Richard Betts, Ed Blockley, Julien Boé, Tom Bracegirdle, Pascale Braconnot, Victor Brovkin, Carlo Buontempo, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Markus Donat, Italo Epicoco, Pete Falloon, Sandro Fiore, Thomas Frölicher, Neven S. Fučkar, Matthew J. Gidden, Helge F. Goessling, Rune Grand Graversen, Silvio Gualdi, José M. Gutiérrez, Tatiana Ilyina, Daniela Jacob, Chris D. Jones, Martin Juckes, Elizabeth Kendon, Erik Kjellström, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Matthew Mizielinski, Paola Nassisi, Michael Obersteiner, Pierre Regnier, Romain Roehrig, David Salas y Mélia, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Michael Schulz, Enrico Scoccimarro, Laurent Terray, Hannes Thiemann, Richard A. Wood, Shuting Yang, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1319–1351, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1319-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1319-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a number of priority areas for the international climate research community to address over the coming decade. Advances in these areas will both increase our understanding of past and future Earth system change, including the societal and environmental impacts of this change, and deliver significantly improved scientific support to international climate policy, such as future IPCC assessments and the UNFCCC Global Stocktake.
Henk Eskes, Athanasios Tsikerdekis, Melanie Ades, Mihai Alexe, Anna Carlin Benedictow, Yasmine Bennouna, Lewis Blake, Idir Bouarar, Simon Chabrillat, Richard Engelen, Quentin Errera, Johannes Flemming, Sebastien Garrigues, Jan Griesfeller, Vincent Huijnen, Luka Ilić, Antje Inness, John Kapsomenakis, Zak Kipling, Bavo Langerock, Augustin Mortier, Mark Parrington, Isabelle Pison, Mikko Pitkänen, Samuel Remy, Andreas Richter, Anja Schoenhardt, Michael Schulz, Valerie Thouret, Thorsten Warneke, Christos Zerefos, and Vincent-Henri Peuch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 9475–9514, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-9475-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-9475-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS) provides global analyses and forecasts of aerosols and trace gases in the atmosphere. On 27 June 2023 a major upgrade, Cy48R1, became operational. Comparisons with in situ, surface remote sensing, aircraft, and balloon and satellite observations show that the new CAMS system is a significant improvement. The results quantify the skill of CAMS to forecast impactful events, such as wildfires, dust storms and air pollution peaks.
Alkiviadis Kalisoras, Aristeidis K. Georgoulias, Dimitris Akritidis, Robert J. Allen, Vaishali Naik, Chaincy Kuo, Sophie Szopa, Pierre Nabat, Dirk Olivié, Twan van Noije, Philippe Le Sager, David Neubauer, Naga Oshima, Jane Mulcahy, Larry W. Horowitz, and Prodromos Zanis
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 7837–7872, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7837-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7837-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Effective radiative forcing (ERF) is a metric for estimating how human activities and natural agents change the energy flow into and out of the Earth’s climate system. We investigate the anthropogenic aerosol ERF, and we estimate the contribution of individual processes to the total ERF using simulations from Earth system models within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). Our findings highlight that aerosol–cloud interactions drive ERF variability during the last 150 years.
Britta Schäfer, Robert Oscar David, Paraskevi Georgakaki, Julie Thérèse Pasquier, Georgia Sotiropoulou, and Trude Storelvmo
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 7179–7202, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7179-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7179-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Mixed-phase clouds, i.e., clouds consisting of ice and supercooled water, are very common in the Arctic. However, how these clouds form is often not correctly represented in standard weather models. We show that both ice crystal concentrations in the cloud and precipitation from the cloud can be improved in the model when aerosol concentrations are prescribed from observations and when more processes for ice multiplication, i.e., the production of new ice particles from existing ice, are added.
Dennis Booge, Jerry F. Tjiputra, Dirk J. L. Olivié, Birgit Quack, and Kirstin Krüger
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 801–816, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-801-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-801-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Oceanic bromoform, produced by algae, is an important precursor of atmospheric bromine, highlighting the importance of implementing these emissions in climate models. The simulated mean oceanic concentrations align well with observations, while the mean atmospheric values are lower than the observed ones. Modelled annual mean emissions mostly occur from the sea to the air and are driven by oceanic concentrations, sea surface temperature, and wind speed, which depend on season and location.
Stephanie Fiedler, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Christopher J. Smith, Paul Griffiths, Ryan J. Kramer, Toshihiko Takemura, Robert J. Allen, Ulas Im, Matthew Kasoar, Angshuman Modak, Steven Turnock, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Duncan Watson-Parris, Daniel M. Westervelt, Laura J. Wilcox, Alcide Zhao, William J. Collins, Michael Schulz, Gunnar Myhre, and Piers M. Forster
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2387–2417, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2387-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2387-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate scientists want to better understand modern climate change. Thus, climate model experiments are performed and compared. The results of climate model experiments differ, as assessed in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report. This article gives insights into the challenges and outlines opportunities for further improving the understanding of climate change. It is based on views of a group of experts in atmospheric composition–climate interactions.
Idunn Aamnes Mostue, Stefan Hofer, Trude Storelvmo, and Xavier Fettweis
The Cryosphere, 18, 475–488, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-475-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-475-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The latest generation of climate models (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 – CMIP6) warm more over Greenland and the Arctic and thus also project a larger mass loss from the Greenland Ice Sheet (GrIS) compared to the previous generation of climate models (CMIP5). Our work suggests for the first time that part of the greater mass loss in CMIP6 over the GrIS is driven by a difference in the surface mass balance sensitivity from a change in cloud representation in the CMIP6 models.
Hamza Ahsan, Hailong Wang, Jingbo Wu, Mingxuan Wu, Steven J. Smith, Susanne Bauer, Harrison Suchyta, Dirk Olivié, Gunnar Myhre, Hitoshi Matsui, Huisheng Bian, Jean-François Lamarque, Ken Carslaw, Larry Horowitz, Leighton Regayre, Mian Chin, Michael Schulz, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Toshihiko Takemura, and Vaishali Naik
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 14779–14799, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14779-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14779-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We examine the impact of the assumed effective height of SO2 injection, SO2 and BC emission seasonality, and the assumed fraction of SO2 emissions injected as SO4 on climate and chemistry model results. We find that the SO2 injection height has a large impact on surface SO2 concentrations and, in some models, radiative flux. These assumptions are a
hiddensource of inter-model variability and may be leading to bias in some climate model results.
Casey J. Wall, Trude Storelvmo, and Anna Possner
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13125–13141, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13125-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13125-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Interactions between aerosol pollution and liquid clouds are one of the largest sources of uncertainty in the effective radiative forcing of climate over the industrial era. We use global satellite observations to decompose the forcing into components from changes in cloud-droplet number concentration, cloud water content, and cloud amount. Our results reduce uncertainty in these forcing components and clarify their relative importance.
Andrew Gettelman, Hugh Morrison, Trude Eidhammer, Katherine Thayer-Calder, Jian Sun, Richard Forbes, Zachary McGraw, Jiang Zhu, Trude Storelvmo, and John Dennis
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1735–1754, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1735-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1735-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Clouds are a critical part of weather and climate prediction. In this work, we document updates and corrections to the description of clouds used in several Earth system models. These updates include the ability to run the scheme on graphics processing units (GPUs), changes to the numerical description of precipitation, and a correction to the ice number. There are big improvements in the computational performance that can be achieved with GPU acceleration.
Ville Leinonen, Harri Kokkola, Taina Yli-Juuti, Tero Mielonen, Thomas Kühn, Tuomo Nieminen, Simo Heikkinen, Tuuli Miinalainen, Tommi Bergman, Ken Carslaw, Stefano Decesari, Markus Fiebig, Tareq Hussein, Niku Kivekäs, Radovan Krejci, Markku Kulmala, Ari Leskinen, Andreas Massling, Nikos Mihalopoulos, Jane P. Mulcahy, Steffen M. Noe, Twan van Noije, Fiona M. O'Connor, Colin O'Dowd, Dirk Olivie, Jakob B. Pernov, Tuukka Petäjä, Øyvind Seland, Michael Schulz, Catherine E. Scott, Henrik Skov, Erik Swietlicki, Thomas Tuch, Alfred Wiedensohler, Annele Virtanen, and Santtu Mikkonen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12873–12905, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12873-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12873-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We provide the first extensive comparison of detailed aerosol size distribution trends between in situ observations from Europe and five different earth system models. We investigated aerosol modes (nucleation, Aitken, and accumulation) separately and were able to show the differences between measured and modeled trends and especially their seasonal patterns. The differences in model results are likely due to complex effects of several processes instead of certain specific model features.
Johannes Quaas, Hailing Jia, Chris Smith, Anna Lea Albright, Wenche Aas, Nicolas Bellouin, Olivier Boucher, Marie Doutriaux-Boucher, Piers M. Forster, Daniel Grosvenor, Stuart Jenkins, Zbigniew Klimont, Norman G. Loeb, Xiaoyan Ma, Vaishali Naik, Fabien Paulot, Philip Stier, Martin Wild, Gunnar Myhre, and Michael Schulz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12221–12239, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12221-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12221-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Pollution particles cool climate and offset part of the global warming. However, they are washed out by rain and thus their effect responds quickly to changes in emissions. We show multiple datasets to demonstrate that aerosol emissions and their concentrations declined in many regions influenced by human emissions, as did the effects on clouds. Consequently, the cooling impact on the Earth energy budget became smaller. This change in trend implies a relative warming.
Britta Schäfer, Tim Carlsen, Ingrid Hanssen, Michael Gausa, and Trude Storelvmo
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9537–9551, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9537-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9537-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Cloud properties are important for the surface radiation budget. This study presents cold-cloud observations based on lidar measurements from the Norwegian Arctic between 2011 and 2017. Using statistical assessments and case studies, we give an overview of the macro- and microphysical properties of these clouds and demonstrate the capabilities of long-term cloud observations in the Norwegian Arctic from the ground-based lidar at Andenes.
Cynthia H. Whaley, Rashed Mahmood, Knut von Salzen, Barbara Winter, Sabine Eckhardt, Stephen Arnold, Stephen Beagley, Silvia Becagli, Rong-You Chien, Jesper Christensen, Sujay Manish Damani, Xinyi Dong, Konstantinos Eleftheriadis, Nikolaos Evangeliou, Gregory Faluvegi, Mark Flanner, Joshua S. Fu, Michael Gauss, Fabio Giardi, Wanmin Gong, Jens Liengaard Hjorth, Lin Huang, Ulas Im, Yugo Kanaya, Srinath Krishnan, Zbigniew Klimont, Thomas Kühn, Joakim Langner, Kathy S. Law, Louis Marelle, Andreas Massling, Dirk Olivié, Tatsuo Onishi, Naga Oshima, Yiran Peng, David A. Plummer, Olga Popovicheva, Luca Pozzoli, Jean-Christophe Raut, Maria Sand, Laura N. Saunders, Julia Schmale, Sangeeta Sharma, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Henrik Skov, Fumikazu Taketani, Manu A. Thomas, Rita Traversi, Kostas Tsigaridis, Svetlana Tsyro, Steven Turnock, Vito Vitale, Kaley A. Walker, Minqi Wang, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Tahya Weiss-Gibbons
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 5775–5828, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5775-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5775-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Air pollutants, like ozone and soot, play a role in both global warming and air quality. Atmospheric models are often used to provide information to policy makers about current and future conditions under different emissions scenarios. In order to have confidence in those simulations, in this study we compare simulated air pollution from 18 state-of-the-art atmospheric models to measured air pollution in order to assess how well the models perform.
Ingo Bethke, Yiguo Wang, François Counillon, Noel Keenlyside, Madlen Kimmritz, Filippa Fransner, Annette Samuelsen, Helene Langehaug, Lea Svendsen, Ping-Gin Chiu, Leilane Passos, Mats Bentsen, Chuncheng Guo, Alok Gupta, Jerry Tjiputra, Alf Kirkevåg, Dirk Olivié, Øyvind Seland, Julie Solsvik Vågane, Yuanchao Fan, and Tor Eldevik
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 7073–7116, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7073-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7073-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The Norwegian Climate Prediction Model version 1 (NorCPM1) is a new research tool for performing climate reanalyses and seasonal-to-decadal climate predictions. It adds data assimilation capability to the Norwegian Earth System Model version 1 (NorESM1) and has contributed output to the Decadal Climate Prediction Project (DCPP) as part of the sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). We describe the system and evaluate its baseline, reanalysis and prediction performance.
Maria Sand, Bjørn H. Samset, Gunnar Myhre, Jonas Gliß, Susanne E. Bauer, Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Paul Ginoux, Zak Kipling, Alf Kirkevåg, Harri Kokkola, Philippe Le Sager, Marianne T. Lund, Hitoshi Matsui, Twan van Noije, Dirk J. L. Olivié, Samuel Remy, Michael Schulz, Philip Stier, Camilla W. Stjern, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, Svetlana G. Tsyro, and Duncan Watson-Parris
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 15929–15947, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15929-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15929-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Absorption of shortwave radiation by aerosols can modify precipitation and clouds but is poorly constrained in models. A total of 15 different aerosol models from AeroCom phase III have reported total aerosol absorption, and for the first time, 11 of these models have reported in a consistent experiment the contributions to absorption from black carbon, dust, and organic aerosol. Here, we document the model diversity in aerosol absorption.
Sorin Nicolae Vâjâiac, Andreea Calcan, Robert Oscar David, Denisa-Elena Moacă, Gabriela Iorga, Trude Storelvmo, Viorel Vulturescu, and Valeriu Filip
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 6777–6794, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6777-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6777-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Warm clouds (with liquid droplets) play an important role in modulating the amount of incoming solar radiation to Earth’s surface and thus the climate. The most efficient way to study them is by in situ optical measurements. This paper proposes a new methodology for providing more detailed and reliable structural analyses of warm clouds through post-flight processing of collected data. The impact fine aerosol incorporation in water droplets might have on such measurements is also discussed.
Tao Tang, Drew Shindell, Yuqiang Zhang, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Gunnar Myhre, Gregory Faluvegi, Bjørn H. Samset, Timothy Andrews, Dirk Olivié, Toshihiko Takemura, and Xuhui Lee
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 13797–13809, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-13797-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-13797-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Previous studies showed that black carbon (BC) could warm the surface with decreased incoming radiation. With climate models, we found that the surface energy redistribution plays a more crucial role in surface temperature compared with other forcing agents. Though BC could reduce the surface heating, the energy dissipates less efficiently, which is manifested by reduced convective and evaporative cooling, thereby warming the surface.
Cited articles
Adebiyi, A., Kok, J. F., Murray, B. J., Ryder, C. L., Stuut, J.-B. W., Kahn, R. A., Knippertz, P., Formenti, P., Mahowald, N. M., Pérez García-Pando, C., Klose, M., Ansmann, A., Samset, B. H., Ito, A., Balkanski, Y., Di Biagio, C., Romanias, M. N., Huang, Y., and Meng, J.: A review of coarse mineral dust in the Earth system, Aeolian Research, 60, 100849, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeolia.2022.100849, 2023a. a, b, c
Adebiyi, A. A. and Kok, J. F.: Climate models miss most of the coarse dust in the atmosphere, Science Advances, 6, eaaz9507, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz9507, 2020. a, b
Adebiyi, A. A., Huang, Y., Samset, B. H., and Kok, J. F.: Observations suggest that North African dust absorbs less solar radiation than models estimate, Communications Earth & Environment, 4, 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-00825-2, 2023b. a
Balkanski, Y., Schulz, M., Claquin, T., and Guibert, S.: Reevaluation of Mineral aerosol radiative forcings suggests a better agreement with satellite and AERONET data, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 81–95, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-81-2007, 2007. a, b
Bauer, S. E., Mishchenko, M. I., Lacis, A. A., Zhang, S., Perlwitz, J., and Metzger, S. M.: Do sulfate and nitrate coatings on mineral dust have important effects on radiative properties and climate modeling?, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 112, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006977, 2007. a, b
Bauer, S. E., Tsigaridis, K., Faluvegi, G., Kelley, M., Lo, K. K., Miller, R. L., Nazarenko, L., Schmidt, G. A., and Wu, J.: Historical (1850–2014) Aerosol Evolution and Role on Climate Forcing Using the GISS ModelE2.1 Contribution to CMIP6, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12, e2019MS001978, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001978, 2020. a
Burrows, S. M., McCluskey, C. S., Cornwell, G., Steinke, I., Zhang, K., Zhao, B., Zawadowicz, M., Raman, A., Kulkarni, G., China, S., Zelenyuk, A., and DeMott, P. J.: Ice-Nucleating Particles That Impact Clouds and Climate: Observational and Modeling Research Needs, Reviews of Geophysics, 60, e2021RG000745, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021RG000745, 2022. a, b, c
Castellanos, P., Colarco, P., Espinosa, W. R., Guzewich, S. D., Levy, R. C., Miller, R. L., Chin, M., Kahn, R. A., Kemppinen, O., Moosmüller, H., Nowottnick, E. P., Rocha-Lima, A., Smith, M. D., Yorks, J. E., and Yu, H.: Mineral dust optical properties for remote sensing and global modeling: A review, Remote Sensing of Environment, 303, 113982, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2023.113982, 2024. a
Checa-Garcia, R., Balkanski, Y., Albani, S., Bergman, T., Carslaw, K., Cozic, A., Dearden, C., Marticorena, B., Michou, M., van Noije, T., Nabat, P., O'Connor, F. M., Olivié, D., Prospero, J. M., Le Sager, P., Schulz, M., and Scott, C.: Evaluation of natural aerosols in CRESCENDO Earth system models (ESMs): mineral dust, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10295–10335, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10295-2021, 2021. a
Claquin, T., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., and Boucher, O.: Uncertainties in assessing radiative forcing by mineral dust, Tellus B, 50, 491–505, https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.1998.t01-2-00007.x, 1998. a, b
Collins, W. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Schulz, M., Boucher, O., Eyring, V., Hegglin, M. I., Maycock, A., Myhre, G., Prather, M., Shindell, D., and Smith, S. J.: AerChemMIP: quantifying the effects of chemistry and aerosols in CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 585–607, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-585-2017, 2017. a, b
Cwiertny, D. M., Young, M. A., and Grassian, V. H.: Chemistry and Photochemistry of Mineral Dust Aerosol, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry, 59, 27–51, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.physchem.59.032607.093630, 2008. a
Di Biagio, C., Formenti, P., Balkanski, Y., Caponi, L., Cazaunau, M., Pangui, E., Journet, E., Nowak, S., Caquineau, S., Andreae, M. O., Kandler, K., Saeed, T., Piketh, S., Seibert, D., Williams, E., and Doussin, J.-F.: Global scale variability of the mineral dust long-wave refractive index: a new dataset of in situ measurements for climate modeling and remote sensing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 1901–1929, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-1901-2017, 2017. a
Di Biagio, C., Formenti, P., Balkanski, Y., Caponi, L., Cazaunau, M., Pangui, E., Journet, E., Nowak, S., Andreae, M. O., Kandler, K., Saeed, T., Piketh, S., Seibert, D., Williams, E., and Doussin, J.-F.: Complex refractive indices and single-scattering albedo of global dust aerosols in the shortwave spectrum and relationship to size and iron content, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 15503–15531, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15503-2019, 2019. a, b, c
Di Biagio, C., Balkanski, Y., Albani, S., Boucher, O., and Formenti, P.: Direct Radiative Effect by Mineral Dust Aerosols Constrained by New Microphysical and Spectral Optical Data, Geophysical Research Letters, 47, e2019GL086186, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086186, 2020. a
Dietlicher, R., Neubauer, D., and Lohmann, U.: Elucidating ice formation pathways in the aerosol–climate model ECHAM6-HAM2, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 9061–9080, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9061-2019, 2019. a
Dufresne, J.-L., Gautier, C., Ricchiazzi, P., and Fouquart, Y.: Longwave Scattering Effects of Mineral Aerosols, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 1959–1966, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059<1959:LSEOMA>2.0.CO;2, 2002. a, b, c
Döscher, R., Acosta, M., Alessandri, A., Anthoni, P., Arsouze, T., Bergman, T., Bernardello, R., Boussetta, S., Caron, L.-P., Carver, G., Castrillo, M., Catalano, F., Cvijanovic, I., Davini, P., Dekker, E., Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Docquier, D., Echevarria, P., Fladrich, U., Fuentes-Franco, R., Gröger, M., v. Hardenberg, J., Hieronymus, J., Karami, M. P., Keskinen, J.-P., Koenigk, T., Makkonen, R., Massonnet, F., Ménégoz, M., Miller, P. A., Moreno-Chamarro, E., Nieradzik, L., van Noije, T., Nolan, P., O'Donnell, D., Ollinaho, P., van den Oord, G., Ortega, P., Prims, O. T., Ramos, A., Reerink, T., Rousset, C., Ruprich-Robert, Y., Le Sager, P., Schmith, T., Schrödner, R., Serva, F., Sicardi, V., Sloth Madsen, M., Smith, B., Tian, T., Tourigny, E., Uotila, P., Vancoppenolle, M., Wang, S., Wårlind, D., Willén, U., Wyser, K., Yang, S., Yepes-Arbós, X., and Zhang, Q.: The EC-Earth3 Earth system model for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2973–3020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022, 2022. a
Evans, S., Dawson, E., and Ginoux, P.: Linear Relation Between Shifting ITCZ and Dust Hemispheric Asymmetry, Geophysical Research Letters, 47, e2020GL090499, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090499, 2020. a
Formenti, P. and Di Biagio, C.: Large synthesis of in situ field measurements of the size distribution of mineral dust aerosols across their life cycles, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 4995–5007, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-4995-2024, 2024. a
Forster, P., Storelvmo, T., Armour, K., Collins, W., Dufresne, J.-L., Frame, D., Lunt, D., Mauritsen, T., Palmer, M., Watanabe, M., Wild, M., and Zhang, H.: The Earth’s Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks, and Climate Sensitivity, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J., Maycock, T., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 923–1054, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.009, 2021. a
Froyd, K. D., Yu, P., Schill, G. P., Brock, C. A., Kupc, A., Williamson, C. J., Jensen, E. J., Ray, E., Rosenlof, K. H., Bian, H., Darmenov, A. S., Colarco, P. R., Diskin, G. S., Bui, T., and Murphy, D. M.: Dominant role of mineral dust in cirrus cloud formation revealed by global-scale measurements, Nature Geoscience, 15, 177–183, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-022-00901-w, 2022. a, b, c
Ghan, S. J.: Technical Note: Estimating aerosol effects on cloud radiative forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 9971–9974, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9971-2013, 2013. a, b, c, d
Ginoux, P.: Effects of nonsphericity on mineral dust modeling, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 108, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002516, 2003. a
Ginoux, P., Chin, M., Tegen, I., Prospero, J. M., Holben, B., Dubovik, O., and Lin, S.-J.: Sources and distributions of dust aerosols simulated with the GOCART model, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 106, 20255–20273, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000053, 2001. a
Gliß, J., Mortier, A., Schulz, M., Andrews, E., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Benedictow, A. M. K., Bian, H., Checa-Garcia, R., Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Griesfeller, J. J., Heckel, A., Kipling, Z., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H., Laj, P., Le Sager, P., Lund, M. T., Lund Myhre, C., Matsui, H., Myhre, G., Neubauer, D., van Noije, T., North, P., Olivié, D. J. L., Rémy, S., Sogacheva, L., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Tsyro, S. G.: AeroCom phase III multi-model evaluation of the aerosol life cycle and optical properties using ground- and space-based remote sensing as well as surface in situ observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 87–128, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-87-2021, 2021. a, b
Hauglustaine, D. A., Balkanski, Y., and Schulz, M.: A global model simulation of present and future nitrate aerosols and their direct radiative forcing of climate, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 11031–11063, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11031-2014, 2014. a
Haugvaldstad, O.: Code availability: Dust radiative forcing in CMIP6 Earth System models: insights from the AerChemMIP piClim-2xdust experiment, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16944626, 2025a. a
Haugvaldstad, O. W.: Software enviroment: Dust radiative forcing in CMIP6 Earth System models: insights from the AerChemMIP piClim-2xdust experiment, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16942900, 2025b. a
Heinold, B., Helmert, J., Hellmuth, O., Wolke, R., Ansmann, A., Marticorena, B., Laurent, B., and Tegen, I.: Regional modeling of Saharan dust events using LM-MUSCAT: Model description and case studies, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 112, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007443, 2007. a
Hess, M., Koepke, P., and Schult, I.: Optical Properties of Aerosols and Clouds: The Software Package OPAC, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 831–844, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1998)079<0831:OPOAAC>2.0.CO;2, 1998. a
Hooper, J. and Marx, S.: A global doubling of dust emissions during the Anthropocene?, Global and Planetary Change, 169, 70–91, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2018.07.003, 2018. a
Hoose, C., Kristjánsson, J. E., Chen, J.-P., and Hazra, A.: A Classical-Theory-Based Parameterization of Heterogeneous Ice Nucleation by Mineral Dust, Soot, and Biological Particles in a Global Climate Model, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JAS3425.1, 2010. a, b
Hourdin, F., Rio, C., Grandpeix, J.-Y., Madeleine, J.-B., Cheruy, F., Rochetin, N., Jam, A., Musat, I., Idelkadi, A., Fairhead, L., Foujols, M.-A., Mellul, L., Traore, A.-K., Dufresne, J.-L., Boucher, O., Lefebvre, M.-P., Millour, E., Vignon, E., Jouhaud, J., Diallo, F. B., Lott, F., Gastineau, G., Caubel, A., Meurdesoif, Y., and Ghattas, J.: LMDZ6A: The Atmospheric Component of the IPSL Climate Model With Improved and Better Tuned Physics, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12, e2019MS001892, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001892, 2020. a
Huneeus, N., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Griesfeller, J., Prospero, J., Kinne, S., Bauer, S., Boucher, O., Chin, M., Dentener, F., Diehl, T., Easter, R., Fillmore, D., Ghan, S., Ginoux, P., Grini, A., Horowitz, L., Koch, D., Krol, M. C., Landing, W., Liu, X., Mahowald, N., Miller, R., Morcrette, J.-J., Myhre, G., Penner, J., Perlwitz, J., Stier, P., Takemura, T., and Zender, C. S.: Global dust model intercomparison in AeroCom phase I, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 7781–7816, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-7781-2011, 2011. a, b
Ito, A., Adebiyi, A. A., Huang, Y., and Kok, J. F.: Less atmospheric radiative heating by dust due to the synergy of coarser size and aspherical shape, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 16869–16891, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16869-2021, 2021. a, b, c
Jiang, J. H., Su, H., Huang, L., Wang, Y., Massie, S., Zhao, B., Omar, A., and Wang, Z.: Contrasting effects on deep convective clouds by different types of aerosols, Nature Communications, 9, 3874, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06280-4, 2018. a
Kalisoras, A., Georgoulias, A. K., Akritidis, D., Allen, R. J., Naik, V., Kuo, C., Szopa, S., Nabat, P., Olivié, D., van Noije, T., Le Sager, P., Neubauer, D., Oshima, N., Mulcahy, J., Horowitz, L. W., and Zanis, P.: Decomposing the effective radiative forcing of anthropogenic aerosols based on CMIP6 Earth system models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 7837–7872, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7837-2024, 2024. a
Karydis, V. A., Tsimpidi, A. P., Bacer, S., Pozzer, A., Nenes, A., and Lelieveld, J.: Global impact of mineral dust on cloud droplet number concentration, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 5601–5621, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-5601-2017, 2017. a
Kim, D., Chin, M., Schuster, G., Yu, H., Takemura, T., Tuccella, P., Ginoux, P., Liu, X., Shi, Y., Matsui, H., Tsigaridis, K., Bauer, S. E., Kok, J. F., and Schulz, M.: Where Dust Comes From: Global Assessment of Dust Source Attributions With AeroCom Models, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 129, e2024JD041377, https://doi.org/10.1029/2024JD041377, 2024. a
Kirkevåg, A., Iversen, T., Seland, Ø., Hoose, C., Kristjánsson, J. E., Struthers, H., Ekman, A. M. L., Ghan, S., Griesfeller, J., Nilsson, E. D., and Schulz, M.: Aerosol–climate interactions in the Norwegian Earth System Model – NorESM1-M, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 207–244, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-207-2013, 2013. a
Kirkevåg, A., Grini, A., Olivié, D., Seland, Ø., Alterskjær, K., Hummel, M., Karset, I. H. H., Lewinschal, A., Liu, X., Makkonen, R., Bethke, I., Griesfeller, J., Schulz, M., and Iversen, T.: A production-tagged aerosol module for Earth system models, OsloAero5.3 – extensions and updates for CAM5.3-Oslo, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3945–3982, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3945-2018, 2018. a, b, c, d
Klingmüller, K., Lelieveld, J., Karydis, V. A., and Stenchikov, G. L.: Direct radiative effect of dust–pollution interactions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 7397–7408, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-7397-2019, 2019. a
Koehler, K. A., Kreidenweis, S. M., DeMott, P. J., Petters, M. D., Prenni, A. J., and Carrico, C. M.: Hygroscopicity and cloud droplet activation of mineral dust aerosol, Geophysical Research Letters, 36, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL037348, 2009. a
Kok, J. F.: A scaling theory for the size distribution of emitted dust aerosols suggests climate models underestimate the size of the global dust cycle, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 1016–1021, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1014798108, 2011. a
Kok, J. F., Adebiyi, A. A., Albani, S., Balkanski, Y., Checa-Garcia, R., Chin, M., Colarco, P. R., Hamilton, D. S., Huang, Y., Ito, A., Klose, M., Leung, D. M., Li, L., Mahowald, N. M., Miller, R. L., Obiso, V., Pérez García-Pando, C., Rocha-Lima, A., Wan, J. S., and Whicker, C. A.: Improved representation of the global dust cycle using observational constraints on dust properties and abundance, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 8127–8167, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8127-2021, 2021. a, b
Kok, J. F., Storelvmo, T., Karydis, V. A., Adebiyi, A. A., Mahowald, N. M., Evan, A. T., He, C., and Leung, D. M.: Mineral dust aerosol impacts on global climate and climate change, Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-022-00379-5, 2023. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j
Leung, D. M., Kok, J. F., Li, L., Lawrence, D. M., Mahowald, N. M., Tilmes, S., and Kluzek, E.: A global dust emission dataset for estimating dust radiative forcings in climate models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2311–2331, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2311-2025, 2025. a, b, c, d
Li, L., Mahowald, N. M., Miller, R. L., Pérez García-Pando, C., Klose, M., Hamilton, D. S., Gonçalves Ageitos, M., Ginoux, P., Balkanski, Y., Green, R. O., Kalashnikova, O., Kok, J. F., Obiso, V., Paynter, D., and Thompson, D. R.: Quantifying the range of the dust direct radiative effect due to source mineralogy uncertainty, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 3973–4005, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3973-2021, 2021. a
Li, L., Mahowald, N. M., Gonçalves Ageitos, M., Obiso, V., Miller, R. L., Pérez García-Pando, C., Di Biagio, C., Formenti, P., Brodrick, P. G., Clark, R. N., Green, R. O., Kokaly, R., Swayze, G., and Thompson, D. R.: Improved constraints on hematite refractive index for estimating climatic effects of dust aerosols, Communications Earth & Environment, 5, 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-024-01441-4, 2024. a, b
Liu, X., Penner, J. E., Ghan, S. J., and Wang, M.: Inclusion of Ice Microphysics in the NCAR Community Atmospheric Model Version 3 (CAM3), Journal of Climate, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI4264.1, 2007. a
Lohmann, U. and Diehl, K.: Sensitivity Studies of the Importance of Dust Ice Nuclei for the Indirect Aerosol Effect on Stratiform Mixed-Phase Clouds, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 63, 968–982, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS3662.1, 2006. a
Lohmann, U., Stier, P., Hoose, C., Ferrachat, S., Kloster, S., Roeckner, E., and Zhang, J.: Cloud microphysics and aerosol indirect effects in the global climate model ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 3425–3446, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3425-2007, 2007. a
Lurton, T., Balkanski, Y., Bastrikov, V., Bekki, S., Bopp, L., Braconnot, P., Brockmann, P., Cadule, P., Contoux, C., Cozic, A., Cugnet, D., Dufresne, J.-L., Éthé, C., Foujols, M.-A., Ghattas, J., Hauglustaine, D., Hu, R.-M., Kageyama, M., Khodri, M., Lebas, N., Levavasseur, G., Marchand, M., Ottlé, C., Peylin, P., Sima, A., Szopa, S., Thiéblemont, R., Vuichard, N., and Boucher, O.: Implementation of the CMIP6 Forcing Data in the IPSL-CM6A-LR Model, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12, e2019MS001940, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001940, 2020. a, b
Marshall, L., Johnson, J. S., Mann, G. W., Lee, L., Dhomse, S. S., Regayre, L., Yoshioka, M., Carslaw, K. S., and Schmidt, A.: Exploring How Eruption Source Parameters Affect Volcanic Radiative Forcing Using Statistical Emulation, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 124, 964–985, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD028675, 2019. a
Marx, S. K., Hooper, J., Irino, T., Stromsoe, N., Saunders, K. M., Seki, O., Dosseto, A., Johansen, A., Hua, Q., Dux, F., Jacobsen, G., and Zawadzki, A.: Atmospheric particulates over the northwestern Pacific during the late Holocene: Volcanism, dust, and human perturbation, Science Advances, 10, eadn3311, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adn3311, 2024. a
McGraw, Z., Storelvmo, T., David, R. O., and Sagoo, N.: Global Radiative Impacts of Mineral Dust Perturbations Through Stratiform Clouds, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 125, e2019JD031807, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031807, 2020. a, b
McGraw, Z., Storelvmo, T., Polvani, L. M., Hofer, S., Shaw, J. K., and Gettelman, A.: On the Links Between Ice Nucleation, Cloud Phase, and Climate Sensitivity in CESM2, Geophysical Research Letters, 50, e2023GL105053, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023GL105053, 2023. a, b
Meyers, M. P., DeMott, P. J., and Cotton, W. R.: New Primary Ice-Nucleation Parameterizations in an Explicit Cloud Model, Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, 708–721, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1992)031<0708:NPINPI>2.0.CO;2, 1992. a
Michou, M., Nabat, P., and Saint-Martin, D.: Development and basic evaluation of a prognostic aerosol scheme (v1) in the CNRM Climate Model CNRM-CM6, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 501–531, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-501-2015, 2015. a
Michou, M., Nabat, P., Saint-Martin, D., Bock, J., Decharme, B., Mallet, M., Roehrig, R., Séférian, R., Sénési, S., and Voldoire, A.: Present-Day and Historical Aerosol and Ozone Characteristics in CNRM CMIP6 Simulations, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12, e2019MS001816, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001816, 2020. a
Miller, R. L., Perlwitz, J., and Tegen, I.: Feedback upon dust emission by dust radiative forcing through the planetary boundary layer, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 109, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004912, 2004. a
Miller, R. L., Cakmur, R. V., Perlwitz, J., Geogdzhayev, I. V., Ginoux, P., Koch, D., Kohfeld, K. E., Prigent, C., Ruedy, R., Schmidt, G. A., and Tegen, I.: Mineral dust aerosols in the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Sciences ModelE atmospheric general circulation model, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 111, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005796, 2006. a
Mulcahy, J. P., Johnson, C., Jones, C. G., Povey, A. C., Scott, C. E., Sellar, A., Turnock, S. T., Woodhouse, M. T., Abraham, N. L., Andrews, M. B., Bellouin, N., Browse, J., Carslaw, K. S., Dalvi, M., Folberth, G. A., Glover, M., Grosvenor, D. P., Hardacre, C., Hill, R., Johnson, B., Jones, A., Kipling, Z., Mann, G., Mollard, J., O'Connor, F. M., Palmiéri, J., Reddington, C., Rumbold, S. T., Richardson, M., Schutgens, N. A. J., Stier, P., Stringer, M., Tang, Y., Walton, J., Woodward, S., and Yool, A.: Description and evaluation of aerosol in UKESM1 and HadGEM3-GC3.1 CMIP6 historical simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 6383–6423, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6383-2020, 2020. a, b
Mulitza, S., Heslop, D., Pittauerova, D., Fischer, H. W., Meyer, I., Stuut, J.-B., Zabel, M., Mollenhauer, G., Collins, J. A., Kuhnert, H., and Schulz, M.: Increase in African dust flux at the onset of commercial agriculture in the Sahel region, Nature, 466, 226–228, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09213, 2010. a
Myhre, G. and Stordal, F.: Global sensitivity experiments of the radiative forcing due to mineral aerosols, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 106, 18193–18204, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900536, 2001. a, b
Nabat, P., Somot, S., Cassou, C., Mallet, M., Michou, M., Bouniol, D., Decharme, B., Drugé, T., Roehrig, R., and Saint-Martin, D.: Modulation of radiative aerosols effects by atmospheric circulation over the Euro-Mediterranean region, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 8315–8349, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8315-2020, 2020. a
Naik, V., Horowitz, L. W., Fiore, A. M., Ginoux, P., Mao, J., Aghedo, A. M., and Levy II, H.: Impact of preindustrial to present-day changes in short-lived pollutant emissions on atmospheric composition and climate forcing, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 118, 8086–8110, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50608, 2013. a
Neubauer, D., Ferrachat, S., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Stier, P., Partridge, D. G., Tegen, I., Bey, I., Stanelle, T., Kokkola, H., and Lohmann, U.: The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 – Part 2: Cloud evaluation, aerosol radiative forcing, and climate sensitivity, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3609–3639, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3609-2019, 2019. a
Patadia, F., Yang, E.-S., and Christopher, S. A.: Does dust change the clear sky top of atmosphere shortwave flux over high surface reflectance regions?, Geophysical Research Letters, 36, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039092, 2009. a
Pausata, F. S., Messori, G., and Zhang, Q.: Impacts of dust reduction on the northward expansion of the African monsoon during the Green Sahara period, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 434, 298–307, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2015.11.049, 2016. a, b
Pendergrass, A. G. and Hartmann, D. L.: The Atmospheric Energy Constraint on Global-Mean Precipitation Change, Journal of Climate, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00163.1, 2014. a
Proske, U., Ferrachat, S., Klampt, S., Abeling, M., and Lohmann, U.: Addressing Complexity in Global Aerosol Climate Model Cloud Microphysics, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 15, e2022MS003571, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022MS003571, 2023. a
Ridley, D. A., Heald, C. L., Kok, J. F., and Zhao, C.: An observationally constrained estimate of global dust aerosol optical depth, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 15097–15117, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-15097-2016, 2016. a
Ryder, C. L., Marenco, F., Brooke, J. K., Estelles, V., Cotton, R., Formenti, P., McQuaid, J. B., Price, H. C., Liu, D., Ausset, P., Rosenberg, P. D., Taylor, J. W., Choularton, T., Bower, K., Coe, H., Gallagher, M., Crosier, J., Lloyd, G., Highwood, E. J., and Murray, B. J.: Coarse-mode mineral dust size distributions, composition and optical properties from AER-D aircraft measurements over the tropical eastern Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 17225–17257, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17225-2018, 2018. a
Samset, B. H.: Aerosol absorption has an underappreciated role in historical precipitation change, Communications Earth & Environment, 3, 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-022-00576-6, 2022. a
Schmidt, G. A., Kelley, M., Nazarenko, L., Ruedy, R., Russell, G. L., Aleinov, I., Bauer, M., Bauer, S. E., Bhat, M. K., Bleck, R., Canuto, V., Chen, Y.-H., Cheng, Y., Clune, T. L., Del Genio, A., de Fainchtein, R., Faluvegi, G., Hansen, J. E., Healy, R. J., Kiang, N. Y., Koch, D., Lacis, A. A., LeGrande, A. N., Lerner, J., Lo, K. K., Matthews, E. E., Menon, S., Miller, R. L., Oinas, V., Oloso, A. O., Perlwitz, J. P., Puma, M. J., Putman, W. M., Rind, D., Romanou, A., Sato, M., Shindell, D. T., Sun, S., Syed, R. A., Tausnev, N., Tsigaridis, K., Unger, N., Voulgarakis, A., Yao, M.-S., and Zhang, J.: Configuration and assessment of the GISS ModelE2 contributions to the CMIP5 archive, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 6, 141–184, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013MS000265, 2014. a
Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y. J., Guelle, W., and Dulac, F.: Role of aerosol size distribution and source location in a three-dimensional simulation of a Saharan dust episode tested against satellite-derived optical thickness, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 103, 10579–10592, https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD02779, 1998. a
Seland, Ø., Bentsen, M., Olivié, D., Toniazzo, T., Gjermundsen, A., Graff, L. S., Debernard, J. B., Gupta, A. K., He, Y.-C., Kirkevåg, A., Schwinger, J., Tjiputra, J., Aas, K. S., Bethke, I., Fan, Y., Griesfeller, J., Grini, A., Guo, C., Ilicak, M., Karset, I. H. H., Landgren, O., Liakka, J., Moseid, K. O., Nummelin, A., Spensberger, C., Tang, H., Zhang, Z., Heinze, C., Iversen, T., and Schulz, M.: Overview of the Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM2) and key climate response of CMIP6 DECK, historical, and scenario simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 6165–6200, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6165-2020, 2020. a, b
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, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 11, 4513–4558, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001739, 2019. a
Sexton, D. M. H., McSweeney, C. F., Rostron, J. W., Yamazaki, K., Booth, B. B. B., Murphy, J. M., Regayre, L., Johnson, J. S., and Karmalkar, A. V.: A perturbed parameter ensemble of HadGEM3-GC3.05 coupled model projections: part 1: selecting the parameter combinations, Climate Dynamics, 56, 3395–3436, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-021-05709-9, 2021. a
Shi, T., Cui, J., Chen, Y., Zhou, Y., Pu, W., Xu, X., Chen, Q., Zhang, X., and Wang, X.: Enhanced light absorption and reduced snow albedo due to internally mixed mineral dust in grains of snow, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6035–6051, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6035-2021, 2021. a
Soussé Villa, R., Jorba, O., Gonçalves Ageitos, M., Bowdalo, D., Guevara, M., and Pérez García-Pando, C.: A comprehensive global modeling assessment of nitrate heterogeneous formation on desert dust, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 4719–4753, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4719-2025, 2025. a
Stephens, G. L., Li, J., Wild, M., Clayson, C. A., Loeb, N., Kato, S., L'Ecuyer, T., Stackhouse, P. W., Lebsock, M., and Andrews, T.: An update on Earth's energy balance in light of the latest global observations, Nature Geoscience, 5, 691–696, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1580, 2012. a
Storelvmo, T.: Aerosol Effects on Climate via Mixed-Phase and Ice Clouds, Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 45, 199–222, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-060115-012240, 2017. a, b, c
Séférian, R., Nabat, P., Michou, M., Saint-Martin, D., Voldoire, A., Colin, J., Decharme, B., Delire, C., Berthet, S., Chevallier, M., Sénési, S., Franchisteguy, L., Vial, J., Mallet, M., Joetzjer, E., Geoffroy, O., Guérémy, J.-F., Moine, M.-P., Msadek, R., Ribes, A., Rocher, M., Roehrig, R., Salas-y Mélia, D., Sanchez, E., Terray, L., Valcke, S., Waldman, R., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Deshayes, J., Éthé, C., and Madec, G.: Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM-ESM2-1: Role of Earth System Processes in Present-Day and Future Climate, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 11, 4182–4227, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001791, 2019. a, b, c
Takemura, T., Egashira, M., Matsuzawa, K., Ichijo, H., O'ishi, R., and Abe-Ouchi, A.: A simulation of the global distribution and radiative forcing of soil dust aerosols at the Last Glacial Maximum, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 3061–3073, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-3061-2009, 2009. a, b
Tatebe, H., Ogura, T., Nitta, T., Komuro, Y., Ogochi, K., Takemura, T., Sudo, K., Sekiguchi, M., Abe, M., Saito, F., Chikira, M., Watanabe, S., Mori, M., Hirota, N., Kawatani, Y., Mochizuki, T., Yoshimura, K., Takata, K., O'ishi, R., Yamazaki, D., Suzuki, T., Kurogi, M., Kataoka, T., Watanabe, M., and Kimoto, M.: Description and basic evaluation of simulated mean state, internal variability, and climate sensitivity in MIROC6, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2727–2765, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2727-2019, 2019. a, b
Tegen, I., Harrison, S. P., Kohfeld, K., Prentice, I. C., Coe, M., and Heimann, M.: Impact of vegetation and preferential source areas on global dust aerosol: Results from a model study, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 107, AAC 14–1–AAC 14–27, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000963, 2002. a, b
Tegen, I., Neubauer, D., Ferrachat, S., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Bey, I., Schutgens, N., Stier, P., Watson-Parris, D., Stanelle, T., Schmidt, H., Rast, S., Kokkola, H., Schultz, M., Schroeder, S., Daskalakis, N., Barthel, S., Heinold, B., and Lohmann, U.: The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 – Part 1: Aerosol evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1643–1677, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1643-2019, 2019. a, b, c
Thornhill, G., Collins, W., Olivié, D., Skeie, R. B., Archibald, A., Bauer, S., Checa-Garcia, R., Fiedler, S., Folberth, G., Gjermundsen, A., Horowitz, L., Lamarque, J.-F., Michou, M., Mulcahy, J., Nabat, P., Naik, V., O'Connor, F. M., Paulot, F., Schulz, M., Scott, C. E., Séférian, R., Smith, C., Takemura, T., Tilmes, S., Tsigaridis, K., and Weber, J.: Climate-driven chemistry and aerosol feedbacks in CMIP6 Earth system models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1105–1126, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1105-2021, 2021. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i
Tuccella, P., Pitari, G., Colaiuda, V., Raparelli, E., and Curci, G.: Present-day radiative effect from radiation-absorbing aerosols in snow, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6875–6893, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6875-2021, 2021. a
van Noije, T., Bergman, T., Le Sager, P., O'Donnell, D., Makkonen, R., Gonçalves-Ageitos, M., Döscher, R., Fladrich, U., von Hardenberg, J., Keskinen, J.-P., Korhonen, H., Laakso, A., Myriokefalitakis, S., Ollinaho, P., Pérez García-Pando, C., Reerink, T., Schrödner, R., Wyser, K., and Yang, S.: EC-Earth3-AerChem: a global climate model with interactive aerosols and atmospheric chemistry participating in CMIP6 , Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5637–5668, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5637-2021, 2021. a, b
Vignati, E., Wilson, J., and Stier, P.: M7: An efficient size-resolved aerosol microphysics module for large-scale aerosol transport models, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 109, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004485, 2004. a, b
Wang, H., Liu, X., Wu, C., Lin, G., Dai, T., Goto, D., Bao, Q., Takemura, T., and Shi, G.: Larger Dust Cooling Effect Estimated From Regionally Dependent Refractive Indices, Geophysical Research Letters, 51, e2023GL107647, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023GL107647, 2024. a, b
Watson-Parris, D., Williams, A., Deaconu, L., and Stier, P.: Model calibration using ESEm v1.1.0 – an open, scalable Earth system emulator, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 7659–7672, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7659-2021, 2021. a
Wilcox, E. M., Lau, K. M., and Kim, K.-M.: A northward shift of the North Atlantic Ocean Intertropical Convergence Zone in response to summertime Saharan dust outbreaks, Geophysical Research Letters, 37, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL041774, 2010. a
Williams, K. D., Copsey, D., Blockley, E. W., Bodas-Salcedo, A., Calvert, D., Comer, R., Davis, P., Graham, T., Hewitt, H. T., Hill, R., Hyder, P., Ineson, S., Johns, T. C., Keen, A. B., Lee, R. W., Megann, A., Milton, S. F., Rae, J. G. L., Roberts, M. J., Scaife, A. A., Schiemann, R., Storkey, D., Thorpe, L., Watterson, I. G., Walters, D. N., West, A., Wood, R. A., Woollings, T., and Xavier, P. K.: The Met Office Global Coupled Model 3.0 and 3.1 (GC3.0 and GC3.1) Configurations, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 10, 357–380, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001115, 2018. a, b
Woodward, S., Sellar, A. A., Tang, Y., Stringer, M., Yool, A., Robertson, E., and Wiltshire, A.: The simulation of mineral dust in the United Kingdom Earth System Model UKESM1, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 14503–14528, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-14503-2022, 2022. a
Zender, C. S., Bian, H., and Newman, D.: Mineral Dust Entrainment and Deposition (DEAD) model: Description and 1990s dust climatology, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 108, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002775, 2003. a
Zhang, S., Stier, P., and Watson-Parris, D.: On the contribution of fast and slow responses to precipitation changes caused by aerosol perturbations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10179–10197, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10179-2021, 2021. a, b
Zhao, A., Ryder, C. L., and Wilcox, L. J.: How well do the CMIP6 models simulate dust aerosols?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2095–2119, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2095-2022, 2022. a
Zhao, A., Wilcox, L. J., and Ryder, C. L.: The key role of atmospheric absorption in the Asian summer monsoon response to dust emissions in CMIP6 models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 13385–13402, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13385-2024, 2024. a
Zhao, M., Golaz, J.-C., Held, I. M., Guo, H., Balaji, V., Benson, R., Chen, J.-H., Chen, X., Donner, L. J., Dunne, J. P., Dunne, K., Durachta, J., Fan, S.-M., Freidenreich, S. M., Garner, S. T., Ginoux, P., Harris, L. M., Horowitz, L. W., Krasting, J. P., Langenhorst, A. R., Liang, Z., Lin, P., Lin, S.-J., Malyshev, S. L., Mason, E., Milly, P. C. D., Ming, Y., Naik, V., Paulot, F., Paynter, D., Phillipps, P., Radhakrishnan, A., Ramaswamy, V., Robinson, T., Schwarzkopf, D., Seman, C. J., Shevliakova, E., Shen, Z., Shin, H., Silvers, L. G., Wilson, J. R., Winton, M., Wittenberg, A. T., Wyman, B., and Xiang, B.: The GFDL Global Atmosphere and Land Model AM4.0/LM4.0: 2. Model Description, Sensitivity Studies, and Tuning Strategies, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 10, 735–769, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001209, 2018. a
Short summary
Our study examines what would happen if desert dust in the atmosphere doubled, motivated by dust sedimentation records showing a large increase in dust levels since industrialization began. Using climate model simulations, we assess how more dust affects Earth's energy balance and rainfall. We found that models disagree on whether more dust overall cools or warms the planet. Additionally, more dust tends to reduce rainfall because it absorbs radiation and encourages the formation of ice clouds.
Our study examines what would happen if desert dust in the atmosphere doubled, motivated by dust...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint