An official website of the United States government
Abstract Marine cloud brightening (MCB) is proposed to offset global warming by emitting sea salt aerosols to the tropical marine boundary layer, which increases aerosol and cloud albedo. Sea salt aerosol is the main source of tropospheric reactive chlorine (Cly) and bromine (Bry). The effects of additional sea salt on atmospheric chemistry have not been explored. We simulate sea salt aerosol injections for MCB under two scenarios (212–569 Tg/a) in the GEOS‐Chem global chemical transport model, only considering their impacts as a halogen source. Globally, tropospheric Clyand Bryincrease (20–40%), leading to decreased ozone (−3 to −6%). Consequently, OH decreases (−3 to −5%), which increases the methane lifetime (3–6%). Our results suggest that the chemistry of the additional sea salt leads to minor total radiative forcing compared to that of the sea salt aerosol itself (~2%) but may have potential implications for surface ozone pollution in tropical coastal regions.
more »
« less
Physical science research needed to evaluate the viability and risks of marine cloud brightening
Marine cloud brightening (MCB) is the deliberate injection of aerosol particles into shallow marine clouds to increase their reflection of solar radiation and reduce the amount of energy absorbed by the climate system. From the physical science perspective, the consensus of a broad international group of scientists is that the viability of MCB will ultimately depend on whether observations and models can robustly assess the scale-up of local-to-global brightening in today’s climate and identify strategies that will ensure an equitable geographical distribution of the benefits and risks associated with projected regional changes in temperature and precipitation. To address the physical science knowledge gaps required to assess the societal implications of MCB, we propose a substantial and targeted program of research—field and laboratory experiments, monitoring, and numerical modeling across a range of scales.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2133229
- PAR ID:
- 10523948
- Author(s) / Creator(s):
- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; more »
- Publisher / Repository:
- Science Advances
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Science Advances
- Volume:
- 10
- Issue:
- 12
- ISSN:
- 2375-2548
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
While reducing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions remains the most essential element of any strategy to manage climate change risk, it is also in principle possible to directly cool the climate by reflecting some sunlight back to space. Such climate engineering approaches include adding aerosols to the stratosphere and marine cloud brightening. Assessing whether these ideas could reduce risk requires a broad, multidisciplinary research effort spanning climate science, social sciences, and governance. However, if such strategies were ever used, the effort would also constitute one of the most critical engineering design and control challenges ever considered: making real-time decisions for a highly uncertain and nonlinear dynamic system with many input variables, many measurements, and a vast number of internal degrees of freedom, the dynamics of which span a wide range of timescales. Here, we review the engineering design aspects of climate engineering, discussing both progress to date and remaining challenges that will need to be addressed.more » « less
-
Abstract. The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) is a coordinating framework, started in 2010, that includes a series of standardized climate model experiments aimed at understanding the physical processes and projected impacts of solar geoengineering. Numerous experiments have been conducted, and numerous more have been proposed as “test-bed” experiments, spanning a variety of geoengineering techniques aimed at modifying the planetary radiation budget: stratospheric aerosol injection, marine cloud brightening, surface albedo modification, cirrus cloud thinning, and sunshade mirrors. To date, more than 100 studies have been published that used results from GeoMIP simulations. Here we provide a critical assessment of GeoMIP and its experiments. We discuss its successes and missed opportunities, for instance in terms of which experiments elicited more interest from the scientific community and which did not, and the potential reasons why that happened. We also discuss the knowledge that GeoMIP has contributed to the field of geoengineering research and climate science as a whole: what have we learned in terms of intermodel differences, robustness of the projected outcomes for specific geoengineering methods, and future areas of model development that would be necessary in the future? We also offer multiple examples of cases where GeoMIP experiments were fundamental for international assessments of climate change. Finally, we provide a series of recommendations, regarding both future experiments and more general activities, with the goal of continuously deepening our understanding of the effects of potential geoengineering approaches and reducing uncertainties in climate outcomes, important for assessing wider impacts on societies and ecosystems. In doing so, we refine the purpose of GeoMIP and outline a series of criteria whereby GeoMIP can best serve its participants, stakeholders, and the broader science community.more » « less
-
Since its publication, the authors of Wang et al. (2021) have brought to our attention an error in their article. A grant awarded by the National Science Foundation (grant no. MCB 1817985) to author Elizabeth Vierling was omitted from the Acknowledgements section. The correct Acknowledgements section is shown below. Acknowledgements We thank Suiwen Hou (Lanzhou University) and Zhaojun Ding (Shandong University) for providing the seeds used in this study. We thank Xiaoping Gou (Lanzhou University) and Ravishankar Palanivelu (University of Arizona) for critically reading the manuscript and for suggestions regarding the article. This work was supported by grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (31870298) to SX, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA-CSREES-NRI-001030) and the National Science Foundation (MCB 1817985) to EV, and the Youth 1000-Talent Program of China (A279021801) to LY.more » « less
-
Abstract There is about to be an abrupt step-change in the use of coastal seas around the globe, specifically by the addition of large-scale offshore renewable energy (ORE) developments to combat climate change. Developing this sustainable energy supply will require trade-offs between both direct and indirect environmental effects, as well as spatial conflicts with marine uses like shipping, fishing, and recreation. However, the nexus between drivers, such as changes in the bio-physical environment from the introduction of structures and extraction of energy, and the consequent impacts on ecosystem services delivery and natural capital assets is poorly understood and rarely considered through a whole ecosystem perspective. Future marine planning needs to assess these changes as part of national policy level assessments but also to inform practitioners about the benefits and trade-offs between different uses of natural resources when making decisions to balance environmental and energy sustainability and socio-economic impacts. To address this shortfall, we propose an ecosystem-based natural capital evaluation framework that builds on a dynamic Bayesian modelling approach which accounts for the multiplicity of interactions between physical (e.g. bottom temperature), biological (e.g. net primary production) indicators and anthropogenic marine use (i.e. fishing) and their changes across space and over time. The proposed assessment framework measures ecosystem change, changes in ecosystem goods and services and changes in socio-economic value in response to ORE deployment scenarios as well as climate change, to provide objective information for decision processes seeking to integrate new uses into our marine ecosystems. Such a framework has the potential of exploring the likely outcomes in the same metrics (both ecological and socio-economic) from alternative management and climate scenarios, such that objective judgements and decisions can be made, as to how to balance the benefits and trade-offs between a range of marine uses to deliver long-term environmental sustainability, economic benefits, and social welfare.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adi8594
