Climate response to aerosol injection at different stratospheric locations

Володин, Е. М.; Kostrykin, S. V.; Ryaboshapko, A. G.

doi:10.1002/asl.351

Cited by 11 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is consistent with Volodin et al (2011) who found increased land-sea cooling contrast in annual mean temperature using the INMCM model forced with 4 Mt S/year equatorial stratospheric aerosol injection. The land-sea cooling contrast is larger for TXx than TNn (Fig 4d, e; Table 3), consistent with the stronger relationship of shortwave forcing to TXx.…”

Section: Spatial Response In Extremessupporting

confidence: 92%

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

Ji¹,

Fang²,

Curry³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We examine extreme temperature and precipitation under two potential geoengineering methods forming part of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). The solar 25 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 maximum temperatures at higher latitudes, and on land primarily through feedback effects involving high latitude 30 processes such as snow cover, sea ice and soil moisture. Maximum 5-day precipitation increases over subtropical oceans, whereas warm spells decrease markedly in the tropics, and the number of consecutive dry days decreases in most deserts. The precipitation during the tropical cyclone (hurricane) seasons becomes less intense, whilst the remainder of the year becomes wetter. Aerosol injection is more effective 2 than dimming in moderating extreme precipitation (and flooding), possibly due to stratospheric warming by aerosol injection working in tandem with sea surface temperature reductions to moderate extreme tropical storm cyclogenesis. The differences in the response of temperature extremes between the two types of geoengineering are relatively minor. Despite the magnitude of the radiative forcing applied in G1 being ~6.5 times larger than in G4, and differences in the aerosol chemistry and transport schemes 5 amongst the models, one can discern clear differences in the precipitation extremes between the types of geoengineering probably due to the aerosol direct effect and related energetic changes.

show abstract

Section: Spatial Response In Extremessupporting

confidence: 92%

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

Ji¹,

Fang²,

Curry³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Модель была дополнена блоком, описывающим цикл стратосферного сульфатного аэрозоля (Volodin et al, 2011). Данный блок учитывает процесс химической трансформации предшественников аэрозоля в аэрозольные частицы, а также физические процессы переноса  диффузии, гравитационного оседания и вымывания аэрозольных частиц осадками в тропосфере (Рябошапко, 2011; Володин и др., 2011).…”

Section: математическая модель климатических изменений в арктикеunclassified

On the Possibility of Simultaneous Solution of Problems of the Arctic Climate Protection and Decrease of Air Pollution Level in Norilsk

Ryaboshapko¹,

Kostrykin²,

Bushmelev³

et al. 2017

FAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…H 2 S was injected at the height of 22-24 km in the latitudinal zone of 10 • S-10 • N. It was done homogeneously in the selected volume with constant intensity during calendar year. It was shown previously that injections at such heights and latitudinal zone provide maximum effect (Volodin et al, 2011).…”

Section: Description Of the Model And External Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Total emissions in equivalent of CO 2 for both scenarios (RCP8.5 and A1FI) are almost identical. Thus, we can assume that the results obtained in this study will be consistent with the results of previous studies based on the scenario A1FI (Volodin et al, 2011).…”

Section: Description Of the Model And External Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ability of stratospheric climate engineering in stabilizing global mean temperatures and an assessment of possible side effects

Izraél

Володин

Kostrykin

et al. 2013

Atmospheric Science Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation model is used to assess the ability of stratospheric climate engineering (CE) in stabilizing global mean temperatures at the threshold level +2 • C compared to pre-industrial conditions. CE impact by solar radiation management (SRM) method is applied, when temperature threshold (+2 • C) is reached. Injection intensity is adjusted by the model so that calculated global temperature is remained close to the threshold value. We demonstrate that CE temperature stabilization during the 21st century is possible within the range of +2 ± 0.11 • C. Changes of precipitation intensity as well as effect of sharp termination of CE are investigated.

show abstract

Climate response to aerosol injection at different stratospheric locations

Cited by 11 publications

References 8 publications

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

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

On the Possibility of Simultaneous Solution of Problems of the Arctic Climate Protection and Decrease of Air Pollution Level in Norilsk

The ability of stratospheric climate engineering in stabilizing global mean temperatures and an assessment of possible side effects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About