Abstract. Despite offsetting global mean surface temperature, various studies demonstrated that stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) could influence the recovery of stratospheric ozone and have important impacts on stratospheric and tropospheric circulation, thereby potentially playing an important role in modulating regional and seasonal climate variability. However, so far, most of the assessments of such an approach have come from climate model simulations in which SO2 is injected only in a single location or a set of locations. Here we use CESM2-WACCM6 SAI simulations under a comprehensive set of SAI strategies achieving the same global mean surface temperature with different locations and/or timing of injections, namely an equatorial injection, an annual injection of equal amounts of SO2 at 15∘ N and 15∘ S, an annual injection of equal amounts of SO2 at 30∘ N and 30∘ S, and a polar strategy injecting SO2 at 60∘ N and 60∘ S only in spring in each hemisphere. We demonstrate that despite achieving the same global mean surface temperature, the different strategies result in contrastingly different magnitudes of the aerosol-induced lower stratospheric warming, stratospheric moistening, strengthening of stratospheric polar jets in both hemispheres, and changes in the speed of the residual circulation. These impacts tend to maximise under the equatorial injection strategy and become smaller as the aerosols are injected away from the Equator into the subtropics and higher latitudes. In conjunction with the differences in direct radiative impacts at the surface, these different stratospheric changes drive different impacts on the extratropical modes of variability (Northern and Southern Annular modes), including important consequences on the northern winter surface climate, and on the intensity of tropical tropospheric Walker and Hadley circulations, which drive tropical precipitation patterns. Finally, we demonstrate that the choice of injection strategy also plays a first-order role in the future evolution of stratospheric ozone under SAI throughout the globe. Overall, our results contribute to an increased understanding of the fine interplay of various radiative, dynamical, and chemical processes driving the atmospheric circulation and ozone response to SAI and lay the foundation for designing an optimal SAI strategy that could form a basis of future multi-model intercomparisons.
The impacts of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) strategies on the Southern Annular Mode (SAM) are analyzed with the Community Earth System Model. Using a set of simulations with fixed single‐point SO2injections we demonstrate the first‐order dependence of the SAM response on the latitude of injection, with the northern hemispheric and equatorial injections driving a response corresponding to a positive phase of SAM and the southern hemispheric injections driving a negative phase of SAM. We further demonstrate that the results can to first order explain the differences in the SAM responses diagnosed from the two recent large ensembles of geoengineering simulations utilizing more complex injection strategies – Geoengineering Large Ensemble and Assessing Responses and Impacts of Solar climate intervention on the Earth system with Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (GLENS and ARISE‐SAI) – as driven by the differences in the simulated sulfate aerosol distributions. Our results point to the meridional extent of aerosol‐induced lower stratospheric heating as an important driver of the sensitivity of the SAM response to the injection location.
more » « less- PAR ID:
- 10443895
- Publisher / Repository:
- DOI PREFIX: 10.1029
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Geophysical Research Letters
- Volume:
- 49
- Issue:
- 19
- ISSN:
- 0094-8276
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Simulations of stratospheric aerosol geoengineering have typically considered injections at a constant rate over the entire year. However, the seasonal variability of both sunlight and the stratospheric circulation suggests seasonally dependent injection strategies. We simulated single‐point injections of the same amount of SO2in each of the four seasons and at five different latitudes (30°S, 15°S, equator, 15°N, and 30°N), 5 km above the tropopause. Our findings suggest that injecting only during one season reduces the amount of SO2needed to achieve a certain aerosol optical depth, thus potentially reducing some of the side effects of geoengineering. We find, in particular, that injections at 15°N or 15°S in spring of the corresponding hemisphere results in the largest reductions in incoming solar radiation. Compared to annual injections, by injecting in the different seasons we identify additional distinct spatiotemporal aerosol optical depth patterns, thanks to seasonal differences in the stratospheric circulation.
-
more » « less
Abstract Earth system models are powerful tools to simulate the climate response to hypothetical climate intervention strategies, such as stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI). Recent simulations of SAI implement a tool from control theory, called a controller, to determine the quantity of aerosol to inject into the stratosphere to reach or maintain specified global temperature targets, such as limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre‐industrial temperatures. This work explores how internal (unforced) climate variability can impact controller‐determined injection amounts using the Assessing Responses and Impacts of Solar climate intervention on the Earth system with Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (ARISE‐SAI) simulations. Since the ARISE‐SAI controller determines injection amounts by comparing global annual‐mean surface temperature to predetermined temperature targets, internal variability that impacts temperature can impact the total injection amount as well. Using an offline version of the ARISE‐SAI controller and data from Earth system model simulations, we quantify how internal climate variability and volcanic eruptions impact injection amounts. While idealized, this approach allows for the investigation of a large variety of climate states without additional simulations and can be used to attribute controller sensitivities to specific modes of internal variability.
-
more » « less
Abstract. Solar climate intervention using stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) has been proposed as a method which could offset some of the adverse effects of global warming. The Assessing Responses and Impacts of Solar climate intervention on the Earth system with Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (ARISE-SAI) set of simulations is based on a moderate-greenhouse-gas-emission scenario and employs injection of sulfur dioxide at four off-equatorial locations using a control algorithm which maintains the global-mean surface temperature at 1.5 K above pre-industrial conditions (ARISE-SAI-1.5), as well as the latitudinal gradient and inter-hemispheric difference in surface temperature. This is the first comparison between two models (CESM2 and UKESM1) applying the same multi-target SAI strategy. CESM2 is successful in reaching its temperature targets, but UKESM1 has considerable residual Arctic warming. This occurs because the pattern of temperature change in a climate with SAI is determined by both the structure of the climate forcing (mainly greenhouse gases and stratospheric aerosols) and the climate models' feedbacks, the latter of which favour a strong Arctic amplification of warming in UKESM1. Therefore, research constraining the level of future Arctic warming would also inform any hypothetical SAI deployment strategy which aims to maintain the inter-hemispheric and Equator-to-pole near-surface temperature differences. Furthermore, despite broad agreement in the precipitation response in the extratropics, precipitation changes over tropical land show important inter-model differences, even under greenhouse gas forcing only. In general, this ensemble comparison is the first step in comparing policy-relevant scenarios of SAI and will help in the design of an experimental protocol which both reduces some known negative side effects of SAI and is simple enough to encourage more climate models to participate.
-
Abstract Stratospheric aerosol geoengineering has been proposed as a potential solution to reduce climate change and its impacts. Here, we explore the responses of the Hadley circulation (HC) intensity and the intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ) using the strategic stratospheric aerosol geoengineering, in which sulfur dioxide was injected into the stratosphere at four different locations to maintain the global-mean surface temperature and the interhemispheric and equator-to-pole temperature gradients at present-day values (baseline). Simulations show that, relative to the baseline, strategic stratospheric aerosol geoengineering generally maintains northern winter December–January–February (DJF) HC intensity under RCP8.5, while it overcompensates for the greenhouse gas (GHG)-forced southern winter June–July–August (JJA) HC intensity increase, producing a 3.5 ± 0.4% weakening. The residual change of southern HC intensity in JJA is mainly associated with stratospheric heating and tropospheric temperature response due to enhanced stratospheric aerosol concentrations. Geoengineering overcompensates for the GHG-driven northward ITCZ shifts, producing 0.7° ± 0.1° and 0.2° ± 0.1° latitude southward migrations in JJA and DJF, respectively relative to the baseline. These migrations are affected by tropical interhemispheric temperature differences both at the surface and in the free troposphere. Further strategies for reducing the residual change of HC intensity and ITCZ shifts under stratospheric aerosol geoengineering could involve minimizing stratospheric heating and restoring and preserving the present-day tropical tropospheric interhemispheric temperature differences.more » « less
