Articles | Volume 13, issue 1
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 201–217, 2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-201-2022

Special issue: Resolving uncertainties in solar geoengineering through multi-model...

Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 201–217, 2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-201-2022
Research article
25 Jan 2022
Research article | 25 Jan 2022

How large is the design space for stratospheric aerosol geoengineering?

Yan Zhang et al.

Related authors

Interactive Stratospheric Aerosol models response to different amount and altitude of SO2 injections during the 1991 Pinatubo eruption
Ilaria Quaglia, Claudia Timmreck, Ulrike Niemeier, Daniele Visioni, Giovanni Pitari, Christoph Brühl, Sandip Dhomse, Henning Franke, Anton Laakso, Graham Mann, Eugene Rozanov, and Timofei Sukhodolov
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-514,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-514, 2022
Preprint under review for ACP
Short summary
Climate response to off-equatorial stratospheric sulfur injections in three Earth System Models – Part 2: stratospheric and free-tropospheric response
Ewa M. Bednarz, Daniele Visioni, Ben Kravitz, Andy Jones, James M. Haywood, Jadwiga Richter, Douglas G. MacMartin, and Peter Braesicke
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-372,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-372, 2022
Preprint under review for ACP
Short summary
Climate response to off-equatorial stratospheric sulfur injections in three Earth System Models – Part 1: experimental protocols and surface changes
Daniele Visioni, Ewa M. Bednarz, Walker R. Lee, Ben Kravitz, Andy Jones, Jim M. Haywood, and Douglas G. MacMartin
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-401,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-401, 2022
Short summary
An approach to sulfate geoengineering with surface emissions of carbonyl sulfide
Ilaria Quaglia, Daniele Visioni, Giovanni Pitari, and Ben Kravitz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 5757–5773, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5757-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5757-2022, 2022
Short summary
Assessing Responses and Impacts of Solar climate intervention on the Earth system with stratospheric aerosol injection (ARISE-SAI)
Jadwiga Richter, Daniele Visioni, Douglas MacMartin, David Bailey, Nan Rosenbloom, Walker Lee, Mari Tye, and Jean-Francois Lamarque
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-125,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-125, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Management of the Earth system: engineering responses to climate change
Exploration of a novel geoengineering solution: lighting up tropical forests at night
Xueyuan Gao, Shunlin Liang, Dongdong Wang, Yan Li, Bin He, and Aolin Jia
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 219–230, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-219-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-219-2022, 2022
Short summary
The response of terrestrial ecosystem carbon cycling under different aerosol-based radiation management geoengineering
Hanna Lee, Helene Muri, Altug Ekici, Jerry Tjiputra, and Jörg Schwinger
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 313–326, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-313-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-313-2021, 2021
Short summary
Expanding the design space of stratospheric aerosol geoengineering to include precipitation-based objectives and explore trade-offs
Walker Lee, Douglas MacMartin, Daniele Visioni, and Ben Kravitz
Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 1051–1072, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-1051-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-1051-2020, 2020
Short summary
Climate engineering to mitigate the projected 21st-century terrestrial drying of the Americas: a direct comparison of carbon capture and sulfur injection
Yangyang Xu, Lei Lin, Simone Tilmes, Katherine Dagon, Lili Xia, Chenrui Diao, Wei Cheng, Zhili Wang, Isla Simpson, and Lorna Burnell
Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 673–695, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-673-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-673-2020, 2020
Short summary
Complementing CO2 emission reduction by solar radiation management might strongly enhance future welfare
Koen G. Helwegen, Claudia E. Wieners, Jason E. Frank, and Henk A. Dijkstra
Earth Syst. Dynam., 10, 453–472, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-453-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-453-2019, 2019
Short summary

Cited articles

Aksamit, N. O., Kravitz, B., MacMartin, D. G., and Haller, G.: Harnessing Stratospheric Diffusion Barriers for Enhanced Climate Geoengineering, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 8845–8861, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8845-2021, 2021. a, b
Bala, G., Duffy, P. B., and Taylor, K. E.: Impact of geoengineering schemes on the global hydrological cycle, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 105, 7664–7669, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0711648105, 2008. a
Ban-Weiss, G. A. and Caldeira, K.: Geoengineering as an optimization problem, Environ. Res. Lett., 5, 034009, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/5/3/034009, 2010. a
Bernstein, D. N., Neelin, J. D., Li, Q. B., and Chen, D.: Could aerosol emissions be used for regional heat wave mitigation?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 6373–6390, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-6373-2013, 2013. a
Dai, Z., Weisenstein, D., and Keith, D. W.: Tailoring meridional and seasonal radiative forcing by sulfate aerosol solar geoengineering, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 1030–1039, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076472, 2018. a, b
Download
Short summary
Adding SO2 to the stratosphere could temporarily cool the planet by reflecting more sunlight back to space. However, adding SO2 at different latitude(s) and season(s) leads to significant differences in regional surface climate. This study shows that, to cool the planet by 1–1.5 °C, there are likely six to eight choices of injection latitude(s) and season(s) that lead to meaningfully different distributions of climate impacts.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint