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

The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) contribution to CMIP7 – description of new experimental protocols and preliminary results
Daniele Visioni, Alan Robock, Alistair Duffey, Matthew Henry, Haruki Hirasawa, Walker R. Lee, Cindy Wang, Kelsey Roberts, Shingo Watanabe, Michelle S. Reboita, Masahiro Sugiyama, Ben Kravitz, Jim Haywood, Simone Tilmes, Frederic Bonou, Jack Chen, Timofei Sukodolov, Sandro Vattioni, Andrin Jörimann, Diego Villanueva, Ryan Vella, Paul Farron, Ewa M. Bednarz, Ulrike Niemeier, Colleen Golja, and Juan A. Anel
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2417,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2417, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Stratospheric aerosol injection geoengineering has the potential to increase land carbon storage and to protect the Amazon rainforest
Isobel M. Parry, Paul D. L. Ritchie, Olivier Boucher, Peter M. Cox, James M. Haywood, Ulrike Niemeier, Roland Séférian, Simone Tilmes, and Daniele Visioni
Earth Syst. Dynam., 17, 387–414, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-17-387-2026,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-17-387-2026, 2026
Short summary
The enhanced capabilities of mid-infrared limb emission sounding to observe stratospheric aerosol injection geoengineering interventions
Pasquale Sellitto, Mona Kosary, Michael Höpfner, Bernd Funke, Alex Hoffmann, Jörn Ungermann, Quentin Errera, Simone Tilmes, and Björn-Martin Sinnhuber
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-919,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-919, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Measurement Techniques (AMT).
Short summary
CESM2/CARMA Cloud and CARMA Aerosol Model Descriptions
Yunqian Zhu, Cheng-Cheng Liu, Charles Bardeen, Lu Wang, Simone Tilmes, Ilaria Quaglia, Christopher M. Maloney, Francis Vitt, and Owen Brian Toon
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.22541/essoar.177135577.71771059/v1,https://doi.org/10.22541/essoar.177135577.71771059/v1, 2026
Short summary
Exploring divergent long-term stratospheric aerosol injection scenarios with the G2-SAI and ARISE-hybrid experiments
Walker Raymond Lee, Simone Tilmes, and Ewa M. Bednarz
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1004,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1004, 2026
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