2016
DOI: 10.1002/2016ef000418
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Geoengineering with stratospheric aerosols: What do we not know after a decade of research?

Abstract: Any well-informed future decision on whether and how to deploy solar geoengineering requires balancing the impacts (both intended and unintended) of intervening in the climate against the impacts of not doing so. Despite tremendous progress in the last decade, the current state of knowledge remains insufficient to support an assessment of this balance, even for stratospheric aerosol geoengineering (SAG), arguably the best understood (practical) geoengineering method. We articulate key unknowns associated with … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
44
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
1
44
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This aims at mimicking the aerosol layer created by large volcanic eruptions, which is known to cause global cooling (e.g., Robock, ). If geoengineering is to be considered as a potential response to addressing climate change, its effects, potentials, and limitations need to be quantified, particularly in comparison to other methods of addressing climate change, including mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, adaptation to climate change, or carbon dioxide removal (e.g., MacMartin et al, ; Tilmes et al, ). Put simply, society needs to know what geoengineering can do and what it cannot do.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This aims at mimicking the aerosol layer created by large volcanic eruptions, which is known to cause global cooling (e.g., Robock, ). If geoengineering is to be considered as a potential response to addressing climate change, its effects, potentials, and limitations need to be quantified, particularly in comparison to other methods of addressing climate change, including mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, adaptation to climate change, or carbon dioxide removal (e.g., MacMartin et al, ; Tilmes et al, ). Put simply, society needs to know what geoengineering can do and what it cannot do.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here we consider, for the first time, whether simultaneous injection of stratospheric SO 2 at multiple different latitudes can be used to obtain multiple independent degrees of freedom of the spatial pattern of AOD, and in turn if these lead to multiple independent degrees of freedom of the spatial pattern of surface air temperature. The amplitude and spatial pattern of AOD that results from injection at any given latitude depends on a complex interplay of factors (MacMartin et al, ; Pitari et al, ), and thus, it is not immediately clear what spatial patterns of AOD are actually achievable given the constraints imposed by stratospheric circulation, nor whether the (nonlinear) interactions between injections at different latitudes preclude useful design. Injecting SO 2 leads to sulfate aerosols through oxidation, followed by nucleation, condensation, and coagulation; these microphysical processes affect the resulting size distribution (English et al, ; Heckendorn et al, ; Pierce et al, ), which affects both lifetime (through sedimentation) and AOD for a given sulfate mass.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent reviews of scientific studies and open questions regarding solar geoengineering (e.g. Irvine et al, 2016;MacMartin et al, 2016) highlighted again the need for accurate stratospheric aerosol models. These research interests motivate the introduction of a versatile stratospheric aerosol model within the IPSL Climate Model (IPSL-CM) and its atmospheric component LMDZ.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%