skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Quantifying the Impact of Internal Variability on the CESM2 Control Algorithm for Stratospheric Aerosol Injection
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
Award ID(s):
1749261
PAR ID:
10553240
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Earth's Future
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Earth's Future
Volume:
12
Issue:
6
ISSN:
2328-4277
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics)
    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. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; (, Earth's Future)
    Abstract Climate change poses significant threats to global agriculture, impacting food quantity, quality, and safety. The world is far from meeting crucial climate targets, prompting the exploration of alternative strategies such as stratospheric aerosol intervention (SAI) to reduce the impacts. This study investigates the potential impacts of SAI on rice and wheat production in India, a nation highly vulnerable to climate change given its substantial dependence on agriculture. We compare the results from the Assessing Responses and Impacts of Solar climate intervention on the Earth system with Stratospheric Aerosol Injection‐1.5°C (ARISE‐SAI‐1.5) experiment, which aims to keep global average surface air temperatures at 1.5°C above preindustrial in the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 2‐4.5 (SSP2‐4.5) global warming scenario. Yield results show ARISE‐SAI‐1.5 leads to higher production for rainfed rice and wheat. We use 10 agroclimatic indices during the vegetative, reproductive, and ripening stages to evaluate these yield changes. ARISE‐SAI‐1.5 benefits rainfed wheat yields the most, compared to rice, due to its ability to prevent rising winter and spring temperatures while increasing wheat season precipitation. For rice, SSP2‐4.5 leads to many more warm extremes than the control period during all three growth stages and may cause a delay in the monsoon. ARISE‐SAI‐1.5 largely preserves monsoon rainfall, improving yields for rainfed rice in most regions. Even without the use of SAI, adaptation strategies such as adjusting planting dates could offer partial relief under SSP2‐4.5 if it is feasible to adjust established rice‐wheat cropping systems. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; (, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics)
    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. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; (, Geophysical Research Letters)
    Abstract The impacts of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) on the atmosphere and surface climate depend on when and where the sulfate aerosol precursors are injected, as well as on how much surface cooling is to be achieved. We use a set of CESM2(WACCM6) SAI simulations achieving three different levels of global mean surface cooling and demonstrate that unlike some direct surface climate impacts driven by the reflection of solar radiation by sulfate aerosols, the SAI‐induced changes in the high latitude circulation and ozone are more complex and could be non‐linear. This manifests in our simulations by disproportionally larger Antarctic springtime ozone loss, significantly larger intra‐ensemble spread of the Arctic stratospheric jet and ozone responses, and non‐linear impacts on the extratropical modes of surface climate variability under the strongest‐cooling SAI scenario compared to the weakest one. These potential non‐linearities may add to uncertainties in projections of regional surface impacts under SAI. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Earth's Future)
    Abstract Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) has been shown in climate models to reduce some impacts of global warming in the Arctic, including the loss of sea ice, permafrost thaw, and reduction of Greenland Ice Sheet (GrIS) mass; SAI at high latitudes could preferentially target these impacts. In this study, we use the Community Earth System Model to simulate two Arctic‐focused SAI strategies, which inject at 60°N latitude each spring with injection rates adjusted to either maintain September Arctic sea ice at 2030 levels (“Arctic Low”) or restore it to 2010 levels (“Arctic High”). Both simulations maintain or restore September sea ice to within 10% of their respective targets, reduce permafrost thaw, and increase GrIS surface mass balance by reducing runoff. Arctic High reduces these impacts more effectively than a globally focused SAI strategy that injects similar quantities of SO2at lower latitudes. However, Arctic‐focused SAI is not merely a “reset button” for the Arctic climate, but brings about a novel climate state, including changes to the seasonal cycles of Northern Hemisphere temperature and sea ice and less high‐latitude carbon uptake relative to SSP2‐4.5. Additionally, while Arctic‐focused SAI produces the most cooling near the pole, its effects are not confined to the Arctic, including detectable cooling throughout most of the northern hemisphere for both simulations, increased mid‐latitude sulfur deposition, and a southward shift of the location of the Intertropical Convergence Zone. For these reasons, it would be incorrect to consider Arctic‐focused SAI as “local” geoengineering, even when compared to a globally focused strategy. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email