skip to main content
DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Extreme temperature and precipitation response to solar dimming and stratospheric aerosol geoengineering

Abstract

We examine extreme temperature and precipitation under two potential geoengineering methods forming part of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). The solar dimming experiment G1 is designed to completely offset the global mean radiative forcing due to a CO 2-quadrupling experiment (abrupt4 × CO2), while in GeoMIP experiment G4, the radiative forcing due to the representative concentration pathway 4.5 (RCP4.5) scenario is partly offset by a simulated layer of aerosols in the stratosphere. Both G1 and G4 geoengineering simulations lead to lower minimum temperatures (TNn) at higher latitudes and on land, primarily through feedback effects involving high-latitude processes such as snow cover, sea ice and soil moisture. There is larger cooling of TNn and maximum temperatures (TXx) over land compared with oceans, and the land–sea cooling contrast is larger for TXx than TNn. Maximum 5-day precipitation (Rx5day) increases over subtropical oceans, whereas warm spells (WSDI) decrease markedly in the tropics, and the number of consecutive dry days (CDDs) decreases in most deserts. The precipitation during the tropical cyclone (hurricane) seasons becomes less intense, whilst the remainder of the year becomes wetter. Stratospheric aerosol injection is more effective than solar dimming in moderating extreme precipitation (and flooding). Despite the magnitude ofmore » the radiative forcing applied in G1 being ~7.7 times larger than in G4 and despite differences in the aerosol chemistry and transport schemes amongst the models, the two types of geoengineering show similar spatial patterns in normalized differences in extreme temperatures changes. Large differences mainly occur at northern high latitudes, where stratospheric aerosol injection more effectively reduces TNn and TXx. While the pattern of normalized differences in extreme precipitation is more complex than that of extreme temperatures, generally stratospheric aerosol injection is more effective in reducing tropical Rx5day, while solar dimming is more effective over extra-tropical regions.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [2];  [3];  [4]; ORCiD logo [5];  [6]; ORCiD logo [7]; ORCiD logo [8];  [9]
  1. Beijing Normal Univ. (China)
  2. Univ. of Victoria, BC (Canada)
  3. Kobe Univ. (Japan)
  4. Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, Yokohama (Japan)
  5. Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis, Victoria, BC (Canada)
  6. Oceans and Atmosphere, Hobart, Tasmania (Australia)
  7. Univ. of Oslo (Norway); Norwegian Univ. of Science and Technology, Trondheim (Norway)
  8. Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
  9. Beijing Normal Univ. (China); Univ. of Lapland, Rovaniemi (Finland); CAS Center for Excellence in Tibetan Plateau Earth Sciences, Beijing (China)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1556906
Report Number(s):
PNNL-SA-132309
Journal ID: ISSN 1680-7324
Grant/Contract Number:  
AC05-76RL01830
Resource Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (Online)
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Name: Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (Online); Journal Volume: 18; Journal Issue: 14; Journal ID: ISSN 1680-7324
Publisher:
European Geosciences Union
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
58 GEOSCIENCES

Citation Formats

Ji, Duoying, Fang, Songsong, Curry, Charles L., Kashimura, Hiroki, Watanabe, Shingo, Cole, Jason N. S., Lenton, Andrew, Muri, Helene, Kravitz, Benjamin S., and Moore, John C. Extreme temperature and precipitation response to solar dimming and stratospheric aerosol geoengineering. United States: N. p., 2018. Web. doi:10.5194/acp-18-10133-2018.
Ji, Duoying, Fang, Songsong, Curry, Charles L., Kashimura, Hiroki, Watanabe, Shingo, Cole, Jason N. S., Lenton, Andrew, Muri, Helene, Kravitz, Benjamin S., & Moore, John C. Extreme temperature and precipitation response to solar dimming and stratospheric aerosol geoengineering. United States. doi:10.5194/acp-18-10133-2018.
Ji, Duoying, Fang, Songsong, Curry, Charles L., Kashimura, Hiroki, Watanabe, Shingo, Cole, Jason N. S., Lenton, Andrew, Muri, Helene, Kravitz, Benjamin S., and Moore, John C. Wed . "Extreme temperature and precipitation response to solar dimming and stratospheric aerosol geoengineering". United States. doi:10.5194/acp-18-10133-2018. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1556906.
@article{osti_1556906,
title = {Extreme temperature and precipitation response to solar dimming and stratospheric aerosol geoengineering},
author = {Ji, Duoying and Fang, Songsong and Curry, Charles L. and Kashimura, Hiroki and Watanabe, Shingo and Cole, Jason N. S. and Lenton, Andrew and Muri, Helene and Kravitz, Benjamin S. and Moore, John C.},
abstractNote = {We examine extreme temperature and precipitation under two potential geoengineering methods forming part of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). The solar dimming experiment G1 is designed to completely offset the global mean radiative forcing due to a CO2-quadrupling experiment (abrupt4 × CO2), while in GeoMIP experiment G4, the radiative forcing due to the representative concentration pathway 4.5 (RCP4.5) scenario is partly offset by a simulated layer of aerosols in the stratosphere. Both G1 and G4 geoengineering simulations lead to lower minimum temperatures (TNn) at higher latitudes and on land, primarily through feedback effects involving high-latitude processes such as snow cover, sea ice and soil moisture. There is larger cooling of TNn and maximum temperatures (TXx) over land compared with oceans, and the land–sea cooling contrast is larger for TXx than TNn. Maximum 5-day precipitation (Rx5day) increases over subtropical oceans, whereas warm spells (WSDI) decrease markedly in the tropics, and the number of consecutive dry days (CDDs) decreases in most deserts. The precipitation during the tropical cyclone (hurricane) seasons becomes less intense, whilst the remainder of the year becomes wetter. Stratospheric aerosol injection is more effective than solar dimming in moderating extreme precipitation (and flooding). Despite the magnitude of the radiative forcing applied in G1 being ~7.7 times larger than in G4 and despite differences in the aerosol chemistry and transport schemes amongst the models, the two types of geoengineering show similar spatial patterns in normalized differences in extreme temperatures changes. Large differences mainly occur at northern high latitudes, where stratospheric aerosol injection more effectively reduces TNn and TXx. While the pattern of normalized differences in extreme precipitation is more complex than that of extreme temperatures, generally stratospheric aerosol injection is more effective in reducing tropical Rx5day, while solar dimming is more effective over extra-tropical regions.},
doi = {10.5194/acp-18-10133-2018},
journal = {Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (Online)},
number = 14,
volume = 18,
place = {United States},
year = {2018},
month = {7}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 4 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:

Works referenced in this record:

Carbon emission limits required to satisfy future representative concentration pathways of greenhouse gases: ALLOWABLE FUTURE CARBON EMISSIONS
journal, March 2011

  • Arora, V. K.; Scinocca, J. F.; Boer, G. J.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 38, Issue 5
  • DOI: 10.1029/2010GL046270

Climate extremes in multi-model simulations of stratospheric aerosol and marine cloud brightening climate engineering
journal, January 2015

  • Aswathy, V. N.; Boucher, O.; Quaas, M.
  • Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 15, Issue 16
  • DOI: 10.5194/acp-15-9593-2015

Impact of geoengineering schemes on the global hydrological cycle
journal, May 2008

  • Bala, G.; Duffy, P. B.; Taylor, K. E.
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 105, Issue 22
  • DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0711648105

Arctic cryosphere response in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project G3 and G4 scenarios: ARCTIC RESPONSE TO G3 AND G4 IN GEOMIP
journal, February 2014

  • Berdahl, Mira; Robock, Alan; Ji, Duoying
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 119, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1002/2013JD020627

The Norwegian Earth System Model, NorESM1-M – Part 1: Description and basic evaluation of the physical climate
journal, January 2013

  • Bentsen, M.; Bethke, I.; Debernard, J. B.
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 6, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-6-687-2013

Increase in the range between wet and dry season precipitation
journal, March 2013

  • Chou, Chia; Chiang, John C. H.; Lan, Chia-Wei
  • Nature Geoscience, Vol. 6, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1038/ngeo1744

Development and evaluation of an Earth-System model – HadGEM2
journal, January 2011

  • Collins, W. J.; Bellouin, N.; Doutriaux-Boucher, M.
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 4, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-4-1051-2011

Impacts of warming on tropical lowland rainforests
journal, November 2011


A multimodel examination of climate extremes in an idealized geoengineering experiment
journal, April 2014

  • Curry, Charles L.; Sillmann, Jana; Bronaugh, David
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 119, Issue 7
  • DOI: 10.1002/2013JD020648

Regional Climate Variability Under Model Simulations of Solar Geoengineering: Variability Under Solar Geoengineering
journal, November 2017

  • Dagon, Katherine; Schrag, Daniel P.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 122, Issue 22
  • DOI: 10.1002/2017JD027110

Changes in the width of the tropical belt due to simple radiative forcing changes in the GeoMIP simulations
journal, January 2016

  • Davis, Nicholas A.; Seidel, Dian J.; Birner, Thomas
  • Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 16, Issue 15
  • DOI: 10.5194/acp-16-10083-2016

Heat stress intensification in the Mediterranean climate change hotspot
journal, January 2007

  • Diffenbaugh, Noah S.; Pal, Jeremy S.; Giorgi, Filippo
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34, Issue 11
  • DOI: 10.1029/2007GL030000

Global Land-Based Datasets for Monitoring Climatic Extremes
journal, July 2013

  • Donat, M. G.; Alexander, L. V.; Yang, H.
  • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Vol. 94, Issue 7
  • DOI: 10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00109.1

Downscaling CMIP5 climate models shows increased tropical cyclone activity over the 21st century
journal, July 2013


Atlantic hurricane activity following two major volcanic eruptions: HURRICANES AND VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS
journal, March 2012

  • Evan, Amato T.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 117, Issue D6
  • DOI: 10.1029/2011JD016716

Weakened tropical circulation and reduced precipitation in response to geoengineering
journal, January 2014

  • Ferraro, Angus J.; Highwood, Eleanor J.; Charlton-Perez, Andrew J.
  • Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 9, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/9/1/014001

Stratospheric dynamics and midlatitude jets under geoengineering with space mirrors and sulfate and titania aerosols
journal, January 2015

  • Ferraro, A. J.; Charlton-Perez, A. J.; Highwood, E. J.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 120, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1002/2014JD022734

Observed coherent changes in climatic extremes during the second half of the twentieth century
journal, January 2002

  • Frich, P.; Alexander, Lv; Della-Marta, P.
  • Climate Research, Vol. 19
  • DOI: 10.3354/cr019193

Tropical atmospheric circulation response to the G1 sunshade geoengineering radiative forcing experiment
journal, January 2018

  • Guo, Anboyu; Moore, John C.; Ji, Duoying
  • Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 18, Issue 12
  • DOI: 10.5194/acp-18-8689-2018

Impact of the GeoMIP G1 sunshade geoengineering experiment on the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation
journal, March 2017

  • Hong, Yu; Moore, John C.; Jevrejeva, Svetlana
  • Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 12, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/aa5fb8

Climatic effects of surface albedo geoengineering: SURFACE ALBEDO GEOENGINEERING
journal, December 2011

  • Irvine, Peter J.; Ridgwell, Andy; Lunt, Daniel J.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 116, Issue D24
  • DOI: 10.1029/2011JD016281

Description and basic evaluation of Beijing Normal University Earth System Model (BNU-ESM) version 1
journal, January 2014


A comparison of the climate impacts of geoengineering by stratospheric SO2 injection and by brightening of marine stratocumulus cloud
journal, September 2010

  • Jones, Andy; Haywood, Jim; Boucher, Olivier
  • Atmospheric Science Letters, Vol. 12, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1002/asl.291

The impact of abrupt suspension of solar radiation management (termination effect) in experiment G2 of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP): THE TERMINATION EFFECT IN GEOMIP G2
journal, September 2013

  • Jones, Andy; Haywood, Jim M.; Alterskjaer, Kari
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 17
  • DOI: 10.1002/jgrd.50762

Mechanisms for the land/sea warming contrast exhibited by simulations of climate change
journal, September 2007


Changes in daily temperature and precipitation extremes in central and south Asia
journal, January 2006

  • Klein Tank, A. M. G.; Peterson, T. C.; Quadir, D. A.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 111, Issue D16
  • DOI: 10.1029/2005JD006316

The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP)
journal, January 2011

  • Kravitz, Ben; Robock, Alan; Boucher, Olivier
  • Atmospheric Science Letters, Vol. 12, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1002/asl.316

Climate model response from the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP): GEOMIP MODEL RESPONSE
journal, August 2013

  • Kravitz, Ben; Caldeira, Ken; Boucher, Olivier
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 15
  • DOI: 10.1002/jgrd.50646

Sea spray geoengineering experiments in the geoengineering model intercomparison project (GeoMIP): Experimental design and preliminary results: GEOMIP MARINE CLOUD BRIGHTENING
journal, October 2013

  • Kravitz, Ben; Forster, Piers M.; Jones, Andy
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 19
  • DOI: 10.1002/jgrd.50856

The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (GeoMIP6): simulation design and preliminary results
journal, January 2015

  • Kravitz, B.; Robock, A.; Tilmes, S.
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 8, Issue 10
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-8-3379-2015

A canonical response of precipitation characteristics to global warming from CMIP5 models: PRECIPITATION AND GLOBAL WARMING
journal, June 2013

  • Lau, William K. -M.; Wu, H. -T.; Kim, K. -M.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 40, Issue 12
  • DOI: 10.1002/grl.50420

Global indirect aerosol effects: a review
journal, January 2005


The RCP greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions from 1765 to 2300
journal, August 2011


Arctic sea ice and atmospheric circulation under the GeoMIP G1 scenario
journal, January 2014

  • Moore, John C.; Rinke, Annette; Yu, Xiaoyong
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 119, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1002/2013JD021060

Atlantic hurricane surge response to geoengineering
journal, October 2015

  • Moore, John C.; Grinsted, Aslak; Guo, Xiaoran
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 112, Issue 45
  • DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1510530112

What is the limit of climate engineering by stratospheric injection of SO 2 ?
journal, January 2015


Solar irradiance reduction via climate engineering: Impact of different techniques on the energy balance and the hydrological cycle: CLIMATIC IMPACT OF DIFFERENT SRM METHODS
journal, November 2013

  • Niemeier, U.; Schmidt, H.; Alterskjaer, K.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 21
  • DOI: 10.1002/2013JD020445

Global changes in extreme events: regional and seasonal dimension
journal, July 2011


Testing the Clausius–Clapeyron constraint on changes in extreme precipitation under CO2 warming
journal, August 2006


Efficient formation of stratospheric aerosol for climate engineering by emission of condensible vapor from aircraft: AEROSOL FROM CONDENSIBLE VAPOR
journal, September 2010

  • Pierce, Jeffrey R.; Weisenstein, Debra K.; Heckendorn, Patricia
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 37, Issue 18
  • DOI: 10.1029/2010GL043975

Arctic amplification dominated by temperature feedbacks in contemporary climate models
journal, February 2014

  • Pithan, Felix; Mauritsen, Thorsten
  • Nature Geoscience, Vol. 7, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1038/ngeo2071

Criteria for heat and cold wave duration indexes
journal, August 2011

  • Radinović, Djuro; Ćurić, Mladjen
  • Theoretical and Applied Climatology, Vol. 107, Issue 3-4
  • DOI: 10.1007/s00704-011-0495-8

What would it take to achieve the Paris temperature targets?: ACHIEVING THE PARIS TEMPERATURE TARGETS
journal, July 2016

  • Sanderson, Benjamin M.; O'Neill, Brian C.; Tebaldi, Claudia
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 43, Issue 13
  • DOI: 10.1002/2016GL069563

Configuration and assessment of the GISS ModelE2 contributions to the CMIP5 archive: GISS MODEL-E2 CMIP5 SIMULATIONS
journal, March 2014

  • Schmidt, Gavin A.; Kelley, Max; Nazarenko, Larissa
  • Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, Vol. 6, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1002/2013MS000265

Solar irradiance reduction to counteract radiative forcing from a quadrupling of CO 2 : climate responses simulated by four earth system models
journal, January 2012

  • Schmidt, H.; Alterskjær, K.; Bou Karam, D.
  • Earth System Dynamics, Vol. 3, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.5194/esd-3-63-2012

The central role of diminishing sea ice in recent Arctic temperature amplification
journal, April 2010


Soil Moisture Memory in AGCM Simulations: Analysis of Global Land–Atmosphere Coupling Experiment (GLACE) Data
journal, October 2006

  • Seneviratne, Sonia I.; Koster, Randal D.; Guo, Zhichang
  • Journal of Hydrometeorology, Vol. 7, Issue 5
  • DOI: 10.1175/JHM533.1

Climate extremes indices in the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble: Part 1. Model evaluation in the present climate: CLIMATE EXTREMES INDICES IN CMIP5
journal, February 2013

  • Sillmann, J.; Kharin, V. V.; Zhang, X.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1002/jgrd.50203

Climate extremes indices in the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble: Part 2. Future climate projections: CMIP5 PROJECTIONS OF EXTREMES INDICES
journal, March 2013

  • Sillmann, J.; Kharin, V. V.; Zwiers, F. W.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 6
  • DOI: 10.1002/jgrd.50188

Thermodynamic and dynamic responses of the hydrological cycle to solar dimming
journal, January 2017

  • Smyth, Jane E.; Russotto, Rick D.; Storelvmo, Trude
  • Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 17, Issue 10
  • DOI: 10.5194/acp-17-6439-2017

Land/sea warming ratio in response to climate change: IPCC AR4 model results and comparison with observations
journal, January 2007

  • Sutton, Rowan T.; Dong, Buwen; Gregory, Jonathan M.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1029/2006GL028164

An Overview of CMIP5 and the Experiment Design
journal, April 2012

  • Taylor, Karl E.; Stouffer, Ronald J.; Meehl, Gerald A.
  • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Vol. 93, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1

Going to the Extremes: An Intercomparison of Model-Simulated Historical and Future Changes in Extreme Events
journal, October 2006

  • Tebaldi, Claudia; Hayhoe, Katharinec; Arblaster, Julie M.
  • Climatic Change, Vol. 79, Issue 3-4
  • DOI: 10.1007/s10584-006-9051-4

Impact of geoengineered aerosols on the troposphere and stratosphere
journal, January 2009

  • Tilmes, Simone; Garcia, Rolando R.; Kinnison, Douglas E.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 114, Issue D12
  • DOI: 10.1029/2008JD011420

The hydrological impact of geoengineering in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP): THE HYDROLOGIC IMPACT OF GEOENGINEERING
journal, October 2013

  • Tilmes, Simone; Fasullo, John; Lamarque, Jean-Francois
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 19
  • DOI: 10.1002/jgrd.50868

Can regional climate engineering save the summer Arctic sea ice?: TILMES ET AL.
journal, February 2014

  • Tilmes, S.; Jahn, Alexandra; Kay, Jennifer E.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 41, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1002/2013GL058731

Climate response to aerosol injection at different stratospheric locations
journal, May 2011

  • Volodin, Eugeny M.; Kostrykin, Sergey V.; Ryaboshapko, Alexey G.
  • Atmospheric Science Letters, Vol. 12, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1002/asl.351

MIROC-ESM 2010: model description and basic results of CMIP5-20c3m experiments
journal, January 2011

  • Watanabe, S.; Hajima, T.; Sudo, K.
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 4, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-4-845-2011

Impacts of stratospheric sulfate geoengineering on tropospheric ozone
journal, January 2017

  • Xia, Lili; Nowack, Peer J.; Tilmes, Simone
  • Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 17, Issue 19
  • DOI: 10.5194/acp-17-11913-2017

Impacts, effectiveness and regional inequalities of the GeoMIP G1 to G4 solar radiation management scenarios
journal, June 2015


Indices for monitoring changes in extremes based on daily temperature and precipitation data: Indices for monitoring changes in extremes
journal, October 2011

  • Zhang, Xuebin; Alexander, Lisa; Hegerl, Gabriele C.
  • Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, Vol. 2, Issue 6
  • DOI: 10.1002/wcc.147