Articles | Volume 26, issue 4
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-2649-2026
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-2649-2026
Research article
 | 
19 Feb 2026
Research article |  | 19 Feb 2026

Uncertainties of SAI efficiency and impacts depending on the complexity of the aerosol microphysical model

Simone Tilmes, Daniele Visioni, Ilaria Quaglia, Yunqian Zhu, Charles G. Bardeen, Francis Vitt, and Pengfei Yu

Related authors

Middle atmosphere chemical and dynamical effects in the CCMI-2022 stratospheric aerosol injection scenario
Andrin Jörimann, Timofei Sukhodolov, Simone Tilmes, David Plummer, Shingo Watanabe, Hideharu Akiyoshi, Gabriel Chiodo, Daniele Visioni, Sandro Vattioni, Eugene Rozanov, Ewa M. Bednarz, Béatrice Jossé, Yousuke Yamashita, and Thomas Peter
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-444,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-444, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Indirect climate forcing from ozone depleting substances
William J. Collins, John S. Daniel, Martyn P. Chipperfield, Martin Cussac, Makoto Deushi, Gregory Faluvegi, Paul Griffiths, Øivind Hodnebrog, Larry W. Horowitz, James Keeble, Douglas Kinnison, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Drew Shindell, Simone Tilmes, Kostas Tsigaridis, Zihao Wang, and James Weber
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-6033,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-6033, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Injection near the stratopause mitigates the stratospheric side effects of sulfur-based climate intervention
Pengfei Yu, Yifeng Peng, Karen H. Rosenlof, Ru-Shan Gao, Robert W. Portmann, Martin Ross, Eric Ray, Jianchun Bian, Simone Tilmes, and Owen B. Toon
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 18449–18460, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-18449-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-18449-2025, 2025
Short summary
Assessing the stratospheric temperature response to volcanic sulfate injections by Mt. Pinatubo: insights from the Interactive Stratospheric Aerosol Model Intercomparison Project
Katharina Perny, Timofei Sukhodolov, Ales Kuchar, Pavle Arsenovic, Bernadette Rosati, Christoph Brühl, Sandip S. Dhomse, Andrin Jörimann, Anton Laakso, Graham Mann, Ulrike Niemeier, Giovanni Pitari, Ilaria Quaglia, Takashi Sekiya, Kengo Sudo, Claudia Timmreck, Simone Tilmes, Daniele Visioni, and Harald E. Rieder
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-5915,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-5915, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Multi-model assessment of impacts of the 2022 Hunga eruption on stratospheric ozone and its chemical and dynamical drivers
Ewa M. Bednarz, Valentina Aquila, Amy H. Butler, Peter Colarco, Eric Fleming, Freja F. Østerstrøm, David Plummer, Ilaria Quaglia, William Randel, Michelle L. Santee, Takashi Sekiya, Simone Tilmes, Xinyue Wang, Shingo Watanabe, Wandi Yu, Jun Zhang, Yunqian Zhu, and Zhihong Zhuo
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4609,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4609, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Bednarz, E. M., Butler, A. H., Visioni, D., Zhang, Y., Kravitz, B., and MacMartin, D. G.: Injection strategy – a driver of atmospheric circulation and ozone response to stratospheric aerosol geoengineering, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13665–13684, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13665-2023, 2023. a
Benduhn, F., Schallock, J., and Lawrence, M. G.: Early growth dynamical implications for the steerability of stratospheric solar radiation management via sulfur aerosol particles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 9956–9963, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070701, 2016. a, b
Brodowsky, C. V., Sukhodolov, T., Chiodo, G., Aquila, V., Bekki, S., Dhomse, S. S., Höpfner, M., Laakso, A., Mann, G. W., Niemeier, U., Pitari, G., Quaglia, I., Rozanov, E., Schmidt, A., Sekiya, T., Tilmes, S., Timmreck, C., Vattioni, S., Visioni, D., Yu, P., Zhu, Y., and Peter, T.: Analysis of the global atmospheric background sulfur budget in a multi-model framework, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 5513–5548, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5513-2024, 2024. a
Computational and Information Systems Laboratory (CISL): Cheyenne Supercomputer), National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), https://doi.org/10.5065/D6RX99HX, 2021. a
Crutzen, P.: Albedo Enhancement by Stratospheric Sulfur Injections: A Contribution to Resolve a Policy Dilemma?, Clim. Change, 77, 211–220, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9101-y, 2006. a
Download
Short summary
This study compares two sets of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) experiments using the same modeling framework, differing only in their aerosol microphysical schemes. Results show that these two schemes can yield substantially different aerosol burdens, radiative changes, and impacts when simulating the same injection scenarios. These findings suggest that more sophisticated aerosol models may be necessary to accurately assess the efficacy, side effects, and climate impacts of SAI.
Share
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint