First Simulations of Designing Stratospheric Sulfate Aerosol Geoengineering to Meet Multiple Simultaneous Climate Objectives

Kravitz, Ben; MacMartin, Douglas G.; Mills, Michael J.; Richter, Jadwiga H.; Tilmes, Simone; Lamarque, Jean‐Francois; Tribbia, Joseph J.; Vitt, Francis

doi:10.1002/2017JD026874

Title: First Simulations of Designing Stratospheric Sulfate Aerosol Geoengineering to Meet Multiple Simultaneous Climate Objectives

Journal Article · Thu Dec 07 00:00:00 EST 2017 · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026874· OSTI ID:1430438

^[1];

^[2];

^[3];

^[3]

Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States). Atmospheric Science and Global Change Div. (ASGC)
Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY (United States); California Inst. of Technology (CalTech), Pasadena, CA (United States)
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO (United States)

In this work, we describe the first simulations of stratospheric sulfate aerosol geoengineering using multiple injection locations to meet multiple simultaneous surface temperature objectives. Simulations were performed using CESM1(WACCM), a coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation model with fully interactive stratospheric chemistry, dynamics (including an internally generated quasi-biennial oscillation), and a sophisticated treatment of sulfate aerosol formation, microphysical growth, and deposition. The objectives are defined as maintaining three temperature features at their 2020 levels against a background of the RCP8.5 scenario over the period 2020-2099. These objectives are met using a feedback mechanism in which the rate of sulfur dioxide injection at each of the four locations is adjusted independently every year of simulation. Even in the presence of uncertainties, nonlinearities, and variability, the objectives are met, predominantly by SO2 injection at 30°N and 30°S. By the last year of simulation, the feedback algorithm calls for a total injection rate of 51 Tg SO2 per year. The injections are not in the tropics, which results in a greater degree of linearity of the surface climate response with injection amount than has been found in many previous studies using injection at the equator. Because the objectives are defined in terms of annual mean temperature, the required geeongineering results in "overcooling" during summer and "undercooling" during winter. The hydrological cycle is also suppressed as compared to the reference values corresponding to the year 2020. The demonstration we describe in this study is an important step toward understanding what geoengineering can do and what it cannot do.

View Accepted Manuscript (DOE)

Cite

Export

Save

Research Organization:: Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)

Sponsoring Organization:: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA); National Science Foundation (NSF); USDOE Office of Science (SC), Biological and Environmental Research (BER)

Grant/Contract Number:: AC05-76RL01830

OSTI ID:: 1430438

Report Number(s):: PNNL-SA-124386; 453040135

Journal Information:: Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 122, Issue 23; ISSN 2169-897X

Publisher:: American Geophysical UnionCopyright Statement

Country of Publication:: United States

Language:: English

Citation Metrics:

Cited by: 84 works

Citation information provided by
Web of Science

References (63)

Dynamics of the coupled human–climate system resulting from closed-loop control of solar geoengineering MacMartin, Douglas G.; Kravitz, Ben; Keith, David W. Climate Dynamics, Vol. 43, Issue 1-2 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-013-1822-9	journal	June 2013
The RCP greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions from 1765 to 2300 Meinshausen, Malte; Smith, S. J.; Calvin, K. Climatic Change, Vol. 109, Issue 1-2 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0156-z	journal	August 2011
Radiative forcing and climate response Hansen, J.; Sato, M.; Ruedy, R. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 102, Issue D6 https://doi.org/10.1029/96JD03436	journal	March 1997
Climate impacts of geoengineering in a delayed mitigation scenario: GEOENGINEERING AND DELAYED MITIGATION Tilmes, S.; Sanderson, B. M.; O'Neill, B. C. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 43, Issue 15 https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070122	journal	August 2016
Solar geoengineering using solid aerosol in the stratosphere Weisenstein, D. K.; Keith, D. W.; Dykema, J. A. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 15, Issue 20 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11835-2015	journal	January 2015
Geoengineering as an optimization problem Ban-Weiss, George A.; Caldeira, Ken Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 5, Issue 3 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/5/3/034009	journal	July 2010
Polar amplification of climate change in coupled models Holland, M. M.; Bitz, C. M. Climate Dynamics, Vol. 21, Issue 3-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-003-0332-6	journal	September 2003
Stratospheric solar geoengineering without ozone loss Keith, David W.; Weisenstein, Debra K.; Dykema, John A. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 113, Issue 52 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1615572113	journal	December 2016
Toward a minimal representation of aerosols in climate models: description and evaluation in the Community Atmosphere Model CAM5 Liu, X.; Easter, R. C.; Ghan, S. J. Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 5, Issue 3 https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-709-2012	journal	January 2012
Detecting sulphate aerosol geoengineering with different methods Lo, Y. T. Eunice; Charlton-Perez, Andrew J.; Lott, Fraser C. Scientific Reports, Vol. 6, Issue 1 https://doi.org/10.1038/srep39169	journal	December 2016
Modeling of solar radiation management: a comparison of simulations using reduced solar constant and stratospheric sulphate aerosols Kalidindi, Sirisha; Bala, Govindasamy; Modak, Angshuman Climate Dynamics, Vol. 44, Issue 9-10 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-014-2240-3	journal	July 2014
Solar radiation management impacts on agriculture in China: A case study in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) Xia, Lili; Robock, Alan; Cole, Jason Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 119, Issue 14 https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020630	journal	July 2014
Sensitivity of Simulated Climate to Horizontal and Vertical Resolution in the ECHAM5 Atmosphere Model Roeckner, E.; Brokopf, R.; Esch, M. Journal of Climate, Vol. 19, Issue 16 https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3824.1	journal	August 2006
Control of global warming? Latham, John Nature, Vol. 347, Issue 6291 https://doi.org/10.1038/347339b0	journal	September 1990
Geoengineering with stratospheric aerosols: What do we not know after a decade of research?: GEOENGINEERING: WHAT DO WE NOT KNOW? MacMartin, Douglas G.; Kravitz, Ben; Long, Jane C. S. Earth's Future, Vol. 4, Issue 11 https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000418	journal	November 2016
Can we test geoengineering? MacMynowski, Douglas G.; Keith, David W.; Caldeira, Ken Energy & Environmental Science, Vol. 4, Issue 12 https://doi.org/10.1039/c1ee01256h	journal	January 2011
Management of trade-offs in geoengineering through optimal choice of non-uniform radiative forcing MacMartin, Douglas G.; Keith, David W.; Kravitz, Ben Nature Climate Change, Vol. 3, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1722	journal	October 2012
The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment Moss, Richard H.; Edmonds, Jae A.; Hibbard, Kathy A. Nature, Vol. 463, Issue 7282 https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08823	journal	February 2010
The hydrological impact of geoengineering in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP): THE HYDROLOGIC IMPACT OF GEOENGINEERING Tilmes, Simone; Fasullo, John; Lamarque, Jean-Francois Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 19 https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50868	journal	October 2013
Sensitivity of Aerosol Distribution and Climate Response to Stratospheric SO ₂ Injection Locations Tilmes, Simone; Richter, Jadwiga H.; Mills, Michael J. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 122, Issue 23 https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026888	journal	December 2017
Albedo Enhancement by Stratospheric Sulfur Injections: A Contribution to Resolve a Policy Dilemma? Crutzen, Paul J. Climatic Change, Vol. 77, Issue 3-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9101-y	journal	July 2006
Climate Change from 1850 to 2005 Simulated in CESM1(WACCM) Marsh, Daniel R.; Mills, Michael J.; Kinnison, Douglas E. Journal of Climate, Vol. 26, Issue 19 https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00558.1	journal	October 2013
The aerosol-climate model ECHAM5-HAM Stier, P.; Feichter, J.; Kinne, S. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 5, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-1125-2005	journal	January 2005
Microphysical simulations of sulfur burdens from stratospheric sulfur geoengineering English, J. M.; Toon, O. B.; Mills, M. J. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 12, Issue 10 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-4775-2012	journal	January 2012
The Community Earth System Model (CESM) Large Ensemble Project: A Community Resource for Studying Climate Change in the Presence of Internal Climate Variability Kay, J. E.; Deser, C.; Phillips, A. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Vol. 96, Issue 8 https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00255.1	journal	August 2015
The global extent of the mid stratospheric CN layer: A three-dimensional modeling study: The Global Stratospheric CN Layer Campbell, Patrick; Mills, Michael; Deshler, Terry Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 119, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020503	journal	January 2014
The impact of equilibrating hemispheric albedos on tropical performance in the HadGEM2‐ES coupled climate model Haywood, Jim M.; Jones, Andy; Dunstone, Nick Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 43, Issue 1 https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL066903	journal	January 2016
A Multidimensional Model for Aerosols: Description of Computational Analogs Toon, O. B.; Turco, R. P.; Westphal, D. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, Vol. 45, Issue 15 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1988)045<2123:AMMFAD>2.0.CO;2	journal	August 1988
Microphysical simulations of new particle formation in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere English, J. M.; Toon, O. B.; Mills, M. J. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 11, Issue 17 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-9303-2011	journal	January 2011
Arctic cryosphere response in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project G3 and G4 scenarios: ARCTIC RESPONSE TO G3 AND G4 IN GEOMIP Berdahl, Mira; Robock, Alan; Ji, Duoying Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 119, Issue 3 https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020627	journal	February 2014
The Community Earth System Model: A Framework for Collaborative Research Hurrell, James W.; Holland, M. M.; Gent, P. R. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Vol. 94, Issue 9 https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00121.1	journal	September 2013
Regional climate responses to geoengineering with tropical and Arctic SO ₂ injections Robock, Alan; Oman, Luke; Stenchikov, Georgiy L. Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 113, Issue D16 https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010050	journal	January 2008
Arctic sea ice and atmospheric circulation under the GeoMIP G1 scenario Moore, John C.; Rinke, Annette; Yu, Xiaoyong Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 119, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD021060	journal	January 2014
Explicit feedback and the management of uncertainty in meeting climate objectives with solar geoengineering Kravitz, Ben; MacMartin, Douglas G.; Leedal, David T. Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 9, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/4/044006	journal	April 2014
Impact of geoengineered aerosols on the troposphere and stratosphere Tilmes, Simone; Garcia, Rolando R.; Kinnison, Douglas E. Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 114, Issue D12 https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011420	journal	January 2009
Cost analysis of stratospheric albedo modification delivery systems McClellan, Justin; Keith, David W.; Apt, Jay Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 7, Issue 3 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/3/034019	journal	August 2012
Radiative and Chemical Response to Interactive Stratospheric Sulfate Aerosols in Fully Coupled CESM1(WACCM) Mills, Michael J.; Richter, Jadwiga H.; Tilmes, Simone Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 122, Issue 23 https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027006	journal	December 2017
The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP): a control perspective Jarvis, Andrew; Leedal, David Atmospheric Science Letters, Vol. 13, Issue 3 https://doi.org/10.1002/asl.387	journal	June 2012
Assessing the controllability of Arctic sea ice extent by sulfate aerosol geoengineering: Arctic sea ice geoengineering Jackson, L. S.; Crook, J. A.; Jarvis, A. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 42, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL062240	journal	February 2015
Global volcanic aerosol properties derived from emissions, 1990-2014, using CESM1(WACCM): VOLCANIC AEROSOLS DERIVED FROM EMISSIONS Mills, Michael J.; Schmidt, Anja; Easter, Richard Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 121, Issue 5 https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024290	journal	March 2016
Extratropical Influence on ITCZ Shifts in Slab Ocean Simulations of Global Warming Frierson, Dargan M. W.; Hwang, Yen-Ting Journal of Climate, Vol. 25, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00116.1	journal	January 2012
Stratospheric Dynamical Response and Ozone Feedbacks in the Presence of SO ₂ Injections Richter, Jadwiga H.; Tilmes, Simone; Mills, Michael J. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 122, Issue 23 https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026912	journal	December 2017
The impact of geoengineering aerosols on stratospheric temperature and ozone Heckendorn, P.; Weisenstein, D.; Fueglistaler, S. Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 4, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/045108	journal	October 2009
What is the limit of climate engineering by stratospheric injection of SO ₂ ? Niemeier, U.; Timmreck, C. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 15, Issue 16 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9129-2015	journal	January 2015
Stratospheric dynamics and midlatitude jets under geoengineering with space mirrors and sulfate and titania aerosols Ferraro, A. J.; Charlton-Perez, A. J.; Highwood, E. J. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 120, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022734	journal	January 2015
A Risk-Based Framework for Assessing the Effectiveness of Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering Ferraro, Angus J.; Charlton-Perez, Andrew J.; Highwood, Eleanor J. PLoS ONE, Vol. 9, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0088849	journal	February 2014
The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) Kravitz, Ben; Robock, Alan; Boucher, Olivier Atmospheric Science Letters, Vol. 12, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.1002/asl.316	journal	January 2011
The Response of the ITCZ to Extratropical Thermal Forcing: Idealized Slab-Ocean Experiments with a GCM Kang, Sarah M.; Held, Isaac M.; Frierson, Dargan M. W. Journal of Climate, Vol. 21, Issue 14 https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI2146.1	journal	July 2008
Climate model response from the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP): GEOMIP MODEL RESPONSE Kravitz, Ben; Caldeira, Ken; Boucher, Olivier Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 15 https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50646	journal	August 2013
Solar geoengineering to limit the rate of temperature change MacMartin, Douglas G.; Caldeira, Ken; Keith, David W. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Vol. 372, Issue 2031 https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2014.0134	journal	December 2014
Geoengineering as a design problem Kravitz, Ben; MacMartin, Douglas G.; Wang, Hailong Earth System Dynamics, Vol. 7, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-469-2016	journal	January 2016
Volcanic eruptions and climate Robock, Alan Reviews of Geophysics, Vol. 38, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.1029/1998RG000054	journal	May 2000
The Climate Response to Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering Can Be Tailored Using Multiple Injection Locations MacMartin, Douglas G.; Kravitz, Ben; Tilmes, Simone Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 122, Issue 23 https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026868	journal	December 2017
Solar irradiance reduction via climate engineering: Impact of different techniques on the energy balance and the hydrological cycle: CLIMATIC IMPACT OF DIFFERENT SRM METHODS Niemeier, U.; Schmidt, H.; Alterskjaer, K. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 21 https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020445	journal	November 2013
Stratospheric ozone response to sulfate geoengineering: Results from the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP): GeoMIP ozone response Pitari, Giovanni; Aquila, Valentina; Kravitz, Ben Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 119, Issue 5 https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020566	journal	March 2014
The detectability of climate engineering: THE DETECTABILITY OF CLIMATE ENGINEERING Bürger, Gerd; Cubasch, Ulrich Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 120, Issue 22 https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023954	journal	November 2015
Stratospheric heating by potential geoengineering aerosols: HEATING BY GEOENGINEERING AEROSOLS Ferraro, A. J.; Highwood, E. J.; Charlton-Perez, A. J. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 38, Issue 24 https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL049761	journal	December 2011
A multimodel examination of climate extremes in an idealized geoengineering experiment Curry, Charles L.; Sillmann, Jana; Bronaugh, David Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 119, Issue 7 https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020648	journal	April 2014
Climatology and Forcing of the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation in the MAECHAM5 Model Giorgetta, M. A.; Manzini, E.; Roeckner, E. Journal of Climate, Vol. 19, Issue 16 https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3830.1	journal	August 2006
The impact of geoengineering on vegetation in experiment G1 of the GeoMIP Glienke, Susanne; Irvine, Peter J.; Lawrence, Mark G. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 120, Issue 19 https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024202	journal	October 2015
Geoengineering as a design problem Kravitz, B.; MacMartin, D. G.; Wang, H. Earth System Dynamics Discussions, Vol. 6, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.5194/esdd-6-1635-2015	journal	January 2015
The Paris Climate Agreement and future sea-level rise from Antarctica DeConto, Robert M.; Pollard, David; Alley, Richard B. Nature, Vol. 593, Issue 7857 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03427-0	journal	May 2021
Climate Change from 1850 to 2005 Simulated in CESM1(WACCM) Marsh, Daniel R.; Mills, Michael J.; Kinnison, Douglas E. Columbia University https://doi.org/10.7916/d8df6wzt	text	January 2013

Cited By (17)

A continuous latitudinal energy balance model to explore non-uniform climate engineering strategies Bonetti, Federica; McInnes, Colin Climate Dynamics, Vol. 52, Issue 9-10 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4474-y	journal	October 2018
Best Scale for Detecting the Effects of Stratospheric Sulfate Aerosol Geoengineering on Surface Temperature Lo, Y. T. E.; Charlton‐Perez, Andrew J.; Highwood, Eleanor J. Earth's Future https://doi.org/10.1029/2018ef000933	journal	December 2018
Comparison of the Fast and Slow Climate Response to Three Radiation Management Geoengineering Schemes Duan, Lei; Cao, Long; Bala, Govindasamy Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 123, Issue 21 https://doi.org/10.1029/2018jd029034	journal	November 2018
Holistic Assessment of SO ₂ Injections Using CESM1(WACCM): Introduction to the Special Issue Kravitz, Ben; MacMartin, Douglas G.; Tilmes, Simone Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 124, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.1029/2018jd029293	journal	January 2019
Climate Response to Pulse Versus Sustained Stratospheric Aerosol Forcing Duan, Lei; Cao, Long; Bala, Govindasamy Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 46, Issue 15 https://doi.org/10.1029/2019gl083701	journal	August 2019
Halving warming with idealized solar geoengineering moderates key climate hazards Irvine, Peter; Emanuel, Kerry; He, Jie Nature Climate Change, Vol. 9, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0398-8	journal	March 2019
Persistent polar ocean warming in a strategically geoengineered climate Fasullo, John T.; Tilmes, Simone; Richter, Jadwiga H. Nature Geoscience, Vol. 11, Issue 12 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0249-7	journal	October 2018
Can we use linear response theory to assess geoengineering strategies? Bódai, Tamás; Lucarini, Valerio; Lunkeit, Frank Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, Vol. 30, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5122255	journal	February 2020
Technical characteristics of a solar geoengineering deployment and implications for governance MacMartin, Douglas G.; Irvine, Peter J.; Kravitz, Ben Climate Policy, Vol. 19, Issue 10 https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1668347	journal	September 2019
Stratospheric aerosol injection tactics and costs in the first 15 years of deployment Smith, Wake; Wagner, Gernot Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 13, Issue 12 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aae98d	journal	November 2018
Multiple input control strategies for robust and adaptive climate engineering in a low-order 3-box model Bonetti, F.; McInnes, C. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Vol. 474, Issue 2217 https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2018.0447	journal	September 2018
Upper tropospheric ice sensitivity to sulfate geoengineering Visioni, Daniele; Pitari, Giovanni; di Genova, Glauco Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 18, Issue 20 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14867-2018	journal	January 2018
Global streamflow and flood response to stratospheric aerosol geoengineering Wei, Liren; Ji, Duoying; Miao, Chiyuan Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 18, Issue 21 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-16033-2018	journal	January 2018
Sensitivity of the radiative forcing by stratospheric sulfur geoengineering to the amount and strategy of the SO ₂ injection studied with the LMDZ-S3A model Kleinschmitt, Christoph; Boucher, Olivier; Platt, Ulrich Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 18, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2769-2018	journal	January 2018
Exploring accumulation-mode H ₂ SO ₄ versus SO ₂ stratospheric sulfate geoengineering in a sectional aerosol–chemistry–climate model Vattioni, Sandro; Weisenstein, Debra; Keith, David Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 19, Issue 7 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-4877-2019	journal	January 2019
Climate system response to stratospheric sulfate aerosols: sensitivity to altitude of aerosol layer Krishnamohan, Krishna-Pillai Sukumara-Pillai; Bala, Govindasamy; Cao, Long Earth System Dynamics, Vol. 10, Issue 4 https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-885-2019	journal	January 2019
Can we use linear response theory to assess geoengineering strategies? Bodai, Tamas; Lucarini, Valerio; Lunkeit, Frank arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.1803.09606	text	January 2018

Similar Records

Comparing surface and stratospheric impacts of geoengineering with different SO2 injection strategies

Journal Article · Sat Jul 27 00:00:00 EDT 2019 · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · OSTI ID:1430438

Kravitz, Benjamin S.; MacMartin, Douglas; Tilmes, S; +9 more

Expanding the design space of stratospheric aerosol geoengineering to include precipitation-based objectives and explore trade-offs

Journal Article · Mon Nov 23 00:00:00 EST 2020 · Earth System Dynamics (Online) · OSTI ID:1430438

Lee, Walker; MacMartin, Douglas; Visioni, Daniele; +1 more

Soil moisture and other hydrological changes in a stratospheric aerosol geoengineering large ensemble

Journal Article · Mon Dec 16 00:00:00 EST 2019 · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · OSTI ID:1430438

Cheng, Wei; MacMartin, Douglas; Dagon, Katherine; +5 more

Related Subjects

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
geoengineering
feedback
stratospheric aerosols
climate modeling

Title: First Simulations of Designing Stratospheric Sulfate Aerosol Geoengineering to Meet Multiple Simultaneous Climate Objectives

Citation Formats

References (63)

Cited By (17)

Similar Records

Related Subjects