Atlantic hurricane surge response to geoengineering.

PubMed

Moore, John C; Grinsted, Aslak; Guo, Xiaoran; Yu, Xiaoyong; Jevrejeva, Svetlana; Rinke, Annette; Cui, Xuefeng; Kravitz, Ben; Lenton, Andrew; Watanabe, Shingo; Ji, Duoying

2015-11-10

Devastating floods due to Atlantic hurricanes are relatively rare events. However, the frequency of the most intense storms is likely to increase with rises in sea surface temperatures. Geoengineering by stratospheric sulfate aerosol injection cools the tropics relative to the polar regions, including the hurricane Main Development Region in the Atlantic, suggesting that geoengineering may mitigate hurricanes. We examine this hypothesis using eight earth system model simulations of climate under the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) G3 and G4 schemes that use stratospheric aerosols to reduce the radiative forcing under the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5 scenario. Global mean temperature increases are greatly ameliorated by geoengineering, and tropical temperature increases are at most half of those temperature increases in the RCP4.5. However, sulfate injection would have to double (to nearly 10 teragrams of SO2 per year) between 2020 and 2070 to balance the RCP4.5, approximately the equivalent of a 1991 Pinatubo eruption every 2 y, with consequent implications for stratospheric ozone. We project changes in storm frequencies using a temperature-dependent generalized extreme value statistical model calibrated by historical storm surges and observed temperatures since 1923. The number of storm surge events as big as the one caused by the 2005 Katrina hurricane are reduced by about 50% compared with no geoengineering, but this reduction is only marginally statistically significant. Nevertheless, when sea level rise differences in 2070 between the RCP4.5 and geoengineering are factored into coastal flood risk, we find that expected flood levels are reduced by about 40 cm for 5-y events and about halved for 50-y surges.

Towards a comprehensive climate impacts assessment of solar geoengineering

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Irvine, Peter J.; Kravitz, Ben; Lawrence, Mark G.

Despite a growing literature on the climate response to solar geoengineering—proposals to cool the planet by increasing the planetary albedo—there has been little published on the impacts of solar geoengineering on natural and human systems such as agriculture, health, water resources, and ecosystems. An understanding of the impacts of different scenarios of solar geoengineering deployment will be crucial for informing decisions on whether and how to deploy it. Here we review the current state of knowledge about impacts of a solar-geoengineered climate and identify the major research gaps. We suggest that a thorough assessment of the climate impacts of amore » range of scenarios of solar geoengineering deployment is needed and can be built upon existing frameworks. However, solar geoengineering poses a novel challenge for climate impacts research as the manner of deployment could be tailored to pursue different objectives making possible a wide range of climate outcomes. We present a number of ideas for approaches to extend the survey of climate impacts beyond standard scenarios of solar geoengineering deployment to address this challenge. Reducing the impacts of climate change is the fundamental motivator for emissions reductions and for considering whether and how to deploy solar geoengineering. This means that the active engagement of the climate impacts research community will be important for improving the overall understanding of the opportunities, challenges, and risks presented by solar geoengineering.« less

Towards a comprehensive climate impacts assessment of solar geoengineering

DOE PAGES

Irvine, Peter J.; Kravitz, Ben; Lawrence, Mark G.; ...

2016-11-23

Despite a growing literature on the climate response to solar geoengineering—proposals to cool the planet by increasing the planetary albedo—there has been little published on the impacts of solar geoengineering on natural and human systems such as agriculture, health, water resources, and ecosystems. An understanding of the impacts of different scenarios of solar geoengineering deployment will be crucial for informing decisions on whether and how to deploy it. Here we review the current state of knowledge about impacts of a solar-geoengineered climate and identify the major research gaps. We suggest that a thorough assessment of the climate impacts of amore » range of scenarios of solar geoengineering deployment is needed and can be built upon existing frameworks. However, solar geoengineering poses a novel challenge for climate impacts research as the manner of deployment could be tailored to pursue different objectives making possible a wide range of climate outcomes. We present a number of ideas for approaches to extend the survey of climate impacts beyond standard scenarios of solar geoengineering deployment to address this challenge. Reducing the impacts of climate change is the fundamental motivator for emissions reductions and for considering whether and how to deploy solar geoengineering. This means that the active engagement of the climate impacts research community will be important for improving the overall understanding of the opportunities, challenges, and risks presented by solar geoengineering.« less

The risks and efficacy of solar geoengineering

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Keith, David

2012-12-05

Solar geoengineering may enable a significant reduction in climate risks by partially offsetting climate change due to increasing greenhouse gases, however this emerging technology entails novel risks and uncertainties along with serious challenges to global governance. I will attempt a rough summary of the physics of solar geoengineering and present recent findings regarding (a) the climate's response to radiative forcing by stratospheric aerosols, (b) methods of producing appropriate aerosol distributions, and (c) risks. In closing I will discuss the trade-off between solar geoengineering, emissions reductions and adaptation in climate policy.

The Hydrological Impact of Geoengineering in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP)

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Tilmes, S.; Fasullo, John; Lamarque, J.-F.

2013-10-14

Abstract: The hydrologic impact of enhancing Earth’s albedo due to solar radiation management (SRM) is investigated using simulations from 12 models contributing to the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). An artificial experiment is investigated, where global mean temperature is preserved at pre-industrial conditions, while atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations are quadrupled. The associated reduction of downwelling surface solar radiation in a high CO2 environment leads to a reduction of global evaporation of 10% and 4% and precipitation of 6.1% and 6.3% over land and ocean, respectively. An initial reduction of latent heat flux at the surface is largely driven by reducedmore » evapotranspiration over land with instantly increasing CO2 concentrations in both experiments. A warming surface associated with the transient adjustment in the 4xCO2 experiment further generates an increase of global precipitation, with considerable regional changes, such as a significant precipitation reduction of 7% for the North American summer monsoon. Reduced global precipitation persists in the geoengineered experiment where temperatures are stabilized, with considerable regional rainfall deficits. Precipitation reductions that are consistent in sign across models are identified in the geoengineered experiment over monsoonal land regions of East Asia (6%), North America (7%), South America (6%) and South Africa (5%). In contrast to the 4xCO2 experiment, where the frequency of months with heavy precipitation intensity is increased by over 50%, it is reduced by up to 20% in the geoengineering scenario . The reduction in heavy precipitation is more pronounced over land than over the ocean, and accompanies a stronger reduction in evaporation over land. For northern mid-latitudes, maximum precipitation reduction over land ranges from 1 to 16% for individual models. For 45-65°N, the frequency of median to high intensity precipitation in summer is strongly

Impact of sulphate geoengineering on rice yield in China

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Zhan, Pei; Zhu, Wenquan; Zheng, Zhoutao; Zhang, Donghai; Li, Nan

2017-04-01

Sulphate geoengineering is one of the mostly discussed mitigation methods against global warming for its feasibility and inexpensiveness. With SO2 consistently injected into the stratosphere to balance the radiative force caused by anthropogenic emission, sulphate engineering will significantly influence the climate over the planet and moreover, affect agriculture productivity. In our study, BNU-ESM model was used to simulate the impact of sulphate engineering on climate and ORYZA(v3) model was used to simulate the impact of climate change on rice yield/production in China. Firstly, the ORYZA(v3) model was evaluated and calibrated using daily climate data, management data and county-level yield record during 1981-2010 in 19 provinces in China. Then climate anomalies of sulphate geoengineering simulated by BNU-ESM model was used to perturb the observed climate data over 318 stations evenly distribute in China during 1981-2010. In our study, a 30-year climate record of anomalies were extracted from BNU-ESM model to match the observed climate data, which consisted of a 15-year geoengineering record and a 15-year post-geoengineering record. Lastly, the perturbed climate data was used in calibrated-ORYZA(v3) model to simulate the rice yield over the 318 stations, which were later averaged into corresponding provincial yield. The results showed that (1) geoengineering would balance solar radiation for approximate 140 W ṡ m-2 per year (about 0.9 K per year in temperature), which would meet the pre-concerted goal of geoengineering but it would take only about 3 years for temperature to recover after the termination of geoengineering. In spite of this, there would be a declining of vapour pressure for about 0.12 KPa per year during geoengineering period, and it would take about 15 years to recover during post-geoengineering period. The simulation showed that geoengineering would have a little declining impact on average precipitation and would not have much impact on wind

Ethics as an Integral Component of Geoengineering Analysis

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Haqq-Misra, J.; Tuana, N.; Keller, K.; Sriver, R. L.; Svoboda, T.; Tonkonojenkov, R.; Irvine, P. J.

2011-12-01

Concerns about the risks of unmitigated greenhouse gas emissions are growing. At the same time, confidence is declining that international policy agreements will succeed in considerably lowering anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Perhaps as a result, various geoengineering solutions are gaining attention and credibility as a way to manage climate change. Serious consideration is currently being given to proposals to cool the planet through solar-radiation management (SRM). Here we analyze how the unique and nontrivial risks of geoengineering strategies pose fundamental questions at the interface between science and ethics. We define key open questions to analyze SRM geoengineering proposals, which include whether SRM can be tested, how quickly learning could occur, normative decisions embedded in how different climate trajectories are valued, and justice issues regarding distribution of the harms and benefits of geoengineering. To ensure that ethical analyses are coupled with scientific analyses of this form of geoengineering, we advocate that funding agencies recognize the essential nature of this coupled research by establishing an Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) program for SRM.

Towards legitimacy of the solar geoengineering research enterprise

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Frumhoff, Peter C.; Stephens, Jennie C.

2018-05-01

Mounting evidence that even aggressive reductions in net emissions of greenhouse gases will be insufficient to limit global climate risks is increasing calls for atmospheric experiments to better understand the risks and implications of also deploying solar geoengineering technologies to reflect sunlight and rapidly lower surface temperatures. But solar geoengineering research itself poses significant environmental and geopolitical risks. Given limited societal awareness and public dialogue about this climate response option, conducting such experiments without meaningful societal engagement could galvanize opposition to solar geoengineering research from civil society, including the most climate vulnerable communities who are among its intended beneficiaries. Here, we explore whether and how a solar geoengineering research enterprise might be developed in a way that promotes legitimacy as well as scientific credibility and policy relevance. We highlight the distinctive responsibilities of researchers and research funders to ensure that solar geoengineering research proposals are subject to legitimate societal review and scrutiny, recommend steps they can take to strive towards legitimacy and call on them to be explicitly open to multiple potential outcomes, including the societal rejection or considerable alteration of the solar geoengineering research enterprise. This article is part of the theme issue `The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'.

Towards legitimacy of the solar geoengineering research enterprise

PubMed Central

Stephens, Jennie C.

2018-01-01

Mounting evidence that even aggressive reductions in net emissions of greenhouse gases will be insufficient to limit global climate risks is increasing calls for atmospheric experiments to better understand the risks and implications of also deploying solar geoengineering technologies to reflect sunlight and rapidly lower surface temperatures. But solar geoengineering research itself poses significant environmental and geopolitical risks. Given limited societal awareness and public dialogue about this climate response option, conducting such experiments without meaningful societal engagement could galvanize opposition to solar geoengineering research from civil society, including the most climate vulnerable communities who are among its intended beneficiaries. Here, we explore whether and how a solar geoengineering research enterprise might be developed in a way that promotes legitimacy as well as scientific credibility and policy relevance. We highlight the distinctive responsibilities of researchers and research funders to ensure that solar geoengineering research proposals are subject to legitimate societal review and scrutiny, recommend steps they can take to strive towards legitimacy and call on them to be explicitly open to multiple potential outcomes, including the societal rejection or considerable alteration of the solar geoengineering research enterprise. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'. PMID:29610369

Towards legitimacy of the solar geoengineering research enterprise.

PubMed

Frumhoff, Peter C; Stephens, Jennie C

2018-05-13

Mounting evidence that even aggressive reductions in net emissions of greenhouse gases will be insufficient to limit global climate risks is increasing calls for atmospheric experiments to better understand the risks and implications of also deploying solar geoengineering technologies to reflect sunlight and rapidly lower surface temperatures. But solar geoengineering research itself poses significant environmental and geopolitical risks. Given limited societal awareness and public dialogue about this climate response option, conducting such experiments without meaningful societal engagement could galvanize opposition to solar geoengineering research from civil society, including the most climate vulnerable communities who are among its intended beneficiaries. Here, we explore whether and how a solar geoengineering research enterprise might be developed in a way that promotes legitimacy as well as scientific credibility and policy relevance. We highlight the distinctive responsibilities of researchers and research funders to ensure that solar geoengineering research proposals are subject to legitimate societal review and scrutiny, recommend steps they can take to strive towards legitimacy and call on them to be explicitly open to multiple potential outcomes, including the societal rejection or considerable alteration of the solar geoengineering research enterprise.This article is part of the theme issue 'The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'. © 2018 The Authors.

The economics and ethics of aerosol geoengineering strategies

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Goes, Marlos; Keller, Klaus; Tuana, Nancy

2010-05-01

Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are changing the Earth's climate and impose substantial risks for current and future generations. What are scientifically sound, economically viable, and ethically defendable strategies to manage these climate risks? Ratified international agreements call for a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Recent proposals, however, call for a different approach: geoengineering climate by injecting aerosol precursors into the stratosphere. Published economic studies typically neglect the risks of aerosol geoengineering due to (i) a potential failure to sustain the aerosol forcing and (ii) due to potential negative impacts associated with aerosol forcings. Here we use a simple integrated assessment model of climate change to analyze potential economic impacts of aerosol geoengineering strategies over a wide range of uncertain parameters such as climate sensitivity, the economic damages due to climate change, and the economic damages due to aerosol geoengineering forcings. The simplicity of the model provides the advantages of parsimony and transparency, but it also imposes considerable caveats. For example, the analysis is based on a globally aggregated model and is hence silent on intragenerational distribution of costs and benefits. In addition, the analysis neglects the effects of future learning and is based on a simple representation of climate change impacts. We use this integrated assessment model to show three main points. First, substituting aerosol geoengineering for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions can fail the test of economic efficiency. One key to this finding is that a failure to sustain the aerosol forcing can lead to sizeable and abrupt climatic changes. The monetary damages due to such a discontinuous aerosol geoengineering can dominate the cost-benefit analysis because the monetary damages of climate change are expected to increase with

Solar geoengineering to limit the rate of temperature change.

PubMed

MacMartin, Douglas G; Caldeira, Ken; Keith, David W

2014-12-28

Solar geoengineering has been suggested as a tool that might reduce damage from anthropogenic climate change. Analysis often assumes that geoengineering would be used to maintain a constant global mean temperature. Under this scenario, geoengineering would be required either indefinitely (on societal time scales) or until atmospheric CO2 concentrations were sufficiently reduced. Impacts of climate change, however, are related to the rate of change as well as its magnitude. We thus describe an alternative scenario in which solar geoengineering is used only to constrain the rate of change of global mean temperature; this leads to a finite deployment period for any emissions pathway that stabilizes global mean temperature. The length of deployment and amount of geoengineering required depends on the emissions pathway and allowable rate of change, e.g. in our simulations, reducing the maximum approximately 0.3°C per decade rate of change in an RCP 4.5 pathway to 0.1°C per decade would require geoengineering for 160 years; under RCP 6.0, the required time nearly doubles. We demonstrate that feedback control can limit rates of change in a climate model. Finally, we note that a decision to terminate use of solar geoengineering does not automatically imply rapid temperature increases: feedback could be used to limit rates of change in a gradual phase-out. © 2014 The Author(s) Published by the Royal Society. All rights reserved.

Geoengineering to Avoid Overshoot: An Analysis of Uncertainty

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Tanaka, Katsumasa; Cho, Cheolhung; Krey, Volker; Patt, Anthony; Rafaj, Peter; Rao-Skirbekk, Shilpa; Wagner, Fabian

2010-05-01

Even if a drastic 50% CO2-equivalent emissions reduction is achieved by year 2050, the chances of exceeding a 2°C warming are still substantial due to the uncertainty in the climate system (Meinshausen et al., 2009). Moreover, a strong mitigation is accompanied by overshoot, in which the global-mean temperature temporarily exceeds the target before arriving there. We are motivated by the question as to how much geoengineering would be considered if it were to be used to avoid overshoot even combined with a strong mitigation? How serious would the side effects be expected? This study focuses on stratospheric sulfur injections among other geoengineering proposals, the idea of which has been put forward by Crutzen (2006) and reviewed by Rasch et al. (2008). There are a number of concerns over geoengineering (e.g. Robock, 2008). But the concept of geoengineering requires further research (AMS, 2009). Studying geoengineering may be instructive to revisit the importance of mainstream mitigation strategies. The motivations above led to the following two closely linked studies: 1) Mitigation and Geoengineering The first study investigates the magnitude and start year of geoengineering intervention with the intent to avoid overshoot. This study explores the sensitivity of geoengineering profile to associated uncertainties in the climate system (climate sensitivity, tropospheric aerosol forcing, and ocean diffusivity) and in mitigation scenarios (target uncertainty (450ppm CO2-eq and 400ppm CO2-eq) and baseline uncertainty (A2, B1, and B2)). This study builds on Wigley's premise that demonstrated a basic potential of such a combined mitigation/geoengineering approach (Wigley, 2006) - however it did not examine the sensitivity of the climate response to any underlying uncertainties. This study uses a set of GGI low mitigation scenarios generated from the MESSAGE model (Riahi et al., 2007). The reduced-complexity climate and carbon cycle model ACC2 (Tanaka, 2008; Tanaka et al

Geoengineering: re-making climate for profit or humanitarian intervention?

PubMed

Buck, Holly Jean

2012-01-01

Climate engineering, or geoengineering, refers to large-scale climate interventions to lower the earth's temperature, either by blocking incoming sunlight or removing carbon dioxide from the biosphere. Regarded as ‘technofixes’ by critics, these strategies have evoked concern that they would extend the shelf life of fossil-fuel driven socio-ecological systems for far longer than they otherwise would, or should, endure. A critical reading views geoengineering as a class project that is designed to keep the climate system stable enough for existing production systems to continue operating. This article first examines these concerns, and then goes on to envision a regime driven by humanitarian agendas and concern for vulnerable populations, implemented through international development and aid institutions. The motivations of those who fund research and implement geoengineering techniques are important, as the rationale for developing geoengineering strategies will determine which techniques are pursued, and hence which ecologies are produced. The logic that shapes the geoengineering research process could potentially influence social ecologies centuries from now.

Friday Forums.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hudson, Jill S.

2002-01-01

Describes the use of Friday Forums (school assemblies and special classes) for students at Kellogg Middle School in Shoreline, Washington, to provide release time for teachers to engage in professional-development activities through the Critical Friends Groups. (PKP)

Geoengineering with stratospheric aerosols: What do we not know after a decade of research?: GEOENGINEERING: WHAT DO WE NOT KNOW?

DOE PAGES

MacMartin, Douglas G.; Kravitz, Ben; Long, Jane C. S.; ...

2016-11-17

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. In spite of the 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 then articulate key unknowns associated with SAG, including both climate-science and design questions, as an essential step toward developing a future strategic research program that could address outstanding uncertainties.

Atlantic hurricane surge response to geoengineering

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Moore, John C.; Grinsted, Aslak; Guo, Xiaoran

Devastating Atlantic hurricanes are relatively rare events. However their intensity and frequency in a warming world may rapidly increase by a factor of 2-7 for each degree of increase in mean global temperature. Geoengineering by stratospheric sulphate aerosol injection cools the tropics relative to the polar regions, including the hurricane main development region in the Atlantic, suggesting that geoengineering may be an effective method of controlling hurricanes. We examine this hypothesis using 8 Earth System Model simulations of climate under the GeoMIP G3 and G4 schemes that use stratospheric aerosols to reduce the radiative forcing under the RCP4.5 scenario. Globalmore » mean temperature increases are greatly ameliorated by geoengineering, and tropical temperature increases are at most half of those in RCP4.5, but sulphate injection would have to double between 2020 and 2070 to balance RCP 4.5 to nearly 10 Tg SO2 yr-1, with consequent implications for damage to stratospheric ozone. We project changes in storm frequencies using a temperature-dependent Generalized Extreme Value statistical model calibrated by historical storm surges from 1923 and observed temperatures. The numbers of storm surge events as big as the one that caused the 2005 Katrina hurricane are reduced by about 50% compared with no geoengineering, but this is only marginally statistically significant. Furthermore, when sea level rise differences at 2070 between RCP4.5 and geoengineering are factored in to coastal flood risk, we find that expected flood levels are reduced by about 40 cm for 5 year events and perhaps halved for 50 year surges.« less

Atlantic hurricane surge response to geoengineering

DOE PAGES

Moore, John C.; Grinsted, Aslak; Guo, Xiaoran; ...

2015-10-26

Devastating Atlantic hurricanes are relatively rare events. However their intensity and frequency in a warming world may rapidly increase by a factor of 2-7 for each degree of increase in mean global temperature. Geoengineering by stratospheric sulphate aerosol injection cools the tropics relative to the polar regions, including the hurricane main development region in the Atlantic, suggesting that geoengineering may be an effective method of controlling hurricanes. We examine this hypothesis using 8 Earth System Model simulations of climate under the GeoMIP G3 and G4 schemes that use stratospheric aerosols to reduce the radiative forcing under the RCP4.5 scenario. Globalmore » mean temperature increases are greatly ameliorated by geoengineering, and tropical temperature increases are at most half of those in RCP4.5, but sulphate injection would have to double between 2020 and 2070 to balance RCP 4.5 to nearly 10 Tg SO2 yr-1, with consequent implications for damage to stratospheric ozone. We project changes in storm frequencies using a temperature-dependent Generalized Extreme Value statistical model calibrated by historical storm surges from 1923 and observed temperatures. The numbers of storm surge events as big as the one that caused the 2005 Katrina hurricane are reduced by about 50% compared with no geoengineering, but this is only marginally statistically significant. Furthermore, when sea level rise differences at 2070 between RCP4.5 and geoengineering are factored in to coastal flood risk, we find that expected flood levels are reduced by about 40 cm for 5 year events and perhaps halved for 50 year surges.« less

Atlantic hurricane surge response to geoengineering

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Moore, John C.; Grinsted, Aslak; Guo, Xiaoran

2015-10-26

Devastating Atlantic hurricanes are relatively rare events. However their intensity and frequency in a warming world may rapidly increase by a factor of 2-7 for each degree of increase in mean global temperature. Geoengineering by stratospheric sulphate aerosol injection cools the tropics relative to the polar regions, including the hurricane main development region in the Atlantic, suggesting that geoengineering may be an effective method of controlling hurricanes. We examine this hypothesis using 8 Earth System Model simulations of climate under the GeoMIP G3 and G4 schemes that use stratospheric aerosols to reduce the radiative forcing under the RCP4.5 scenario. Globalmore » mean temperature increases are greatly ameliorated by geoengineering, and tropical temperature increases are at most half of those in RCP4.5, but sulphate injection would have to double between 2020 and 2070 to balance RCP 4.5 to nearly 10 Tg SO2 yr-1, with consequent implications for damage to stratospheric ozone. We project changes in storm frequencies using a temperature-dependent Generalized Extreme Value statistical model calibrated by historical storm surges from 1923 and observed temperatures. The numbers of storm surge events as big as the one that caused the 2005 Katrina hurricane are reduced by about 50% compared with no geoengineering, but this is only marginally statistically significant. However, when sea level rise differences at 2070 between RCP4.5 and geoengineering are factored in to coastal flood risk, we find that expected flood levels are reduced by about 40 cm for 5 year events and perhaps halved for 50 year surges.« less

Does Aerosol Geoengineering the Earth's Climate Pass a Cost-Benefit Test?

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Keller, K.; Urban, N.; Tuana, N.

2007-12-01

Anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are changing the Earth's climate with potentially dangerous consequences. Ratified international agreements call for a reduction of CO2 emissions to avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Recent studies have, however, proposed an alternative strategy: to geoengineer Earth's climate by injecting aerosol precursors into the stratosphere. It is often claimed that aerosol geoengineering would provide net economic benefits because geoengineering requires far lower near-term investments compared to deep cuts in CO2 emissions. However, aerosol geoengineering projects can also cause nontrivial economic costs. This is because aerosol geoengineering hinges on successfully counterbalancing the forcing effects of CO2 emissions (which decay over centuries) with the forcing effects of aerosol emissions (which decay within years). A failure to maintain this delicate balance can lead to abrupt climatic changes, with potentially substantial economic damages. Deferring cuts in CO2 emissions in favor of aerosol geoengineering is hence a deeply uncertain gamble, as it requires so far unknown institutions to reliably control aerosol forcings over centuries. Here we use a simple economic model to evaluate potential costs and benefits of aerosol geoengineering for a wide range of the deeply uncertain parameters. We show that aerosol geoengineering projects may cause economic damages that can far exceed the benefits and may hence fail a cost-benefit test.

Solar Geoengineering: Questioning the 'Winners and Losers' Paradigm (Invited)

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Ricke, K.

2013-12-01

Concerns that greenhouse gas emissions reductions could be 'too little, too late' have led to increased dialogue within the scientific community regarding potential strategies for counteracting global warming through solar geoengineering - approaches which aim to counteract the effects of global warning by deflecting sunlight to space. Such approaches seek to reduce the amount of climate damage by intentional intervention in the climate system rather than by eliminating the inadvertent intervention causing the damage in the first place. Counteracting greenhouse gas-driven warming by blocking sunlight inevitably results in heterogeneous regional effects and one critique of solar geoengineering technologies is the supposed production of 'winners and losers.' It has become something of a meme to assert that any solar geoengineering deployment would result in 'winners' and 'losers'. However, the evidence underlying this assertion is weak. If Earth's climate system functions as represented in the current generation of climate models, at some level of solar geoengineering, everybody could be a 'winner'. If the models systematically fail to predict highly adverse, yet unanticipated, outcomes, then everybody could be a 'loser' In this talk, I will examine modeling studies analyzing the heterogeneous regional effects of solar geoengineering, presenting data from previously published studies reanalyzed in the context of what it means to 'win' or 'lose' when solar geoengineering is implemented. In particular, I will examine question of appropriate baselines for analysis and the importance of strategic versus absolute gains from implementation. I will conclude by proposing some more critical shortcomings of solar geoengineering than the 'winners and losers' problem and suggest how these shortcomings tie into other 'cutting-edge challenges in climate change science.'

Effects of Arctic geoengineering on precipitation in the tropical monsoon regions

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Nalam, Aditya; Bala, Govindasamy; Modak, Angshuman

2017-07-01

Arctic geoengineering wherein sunlight absorption is reduced only in the Arctic has been suggested as a remedial measure to counteract the on-going rapid climate change in the Arctic. Several modeling studies have shown that Arctic geoengineering can minimize Arctic warming but will shift the Inter-tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) southward, unless offset by comparable geoengineering in the Southern Hemisphere. In this study, we investigate and quantify the implications of this ITCZ shift due to Arctic geoengineering for the global monsoon regions using the Community Atmosphere Model version 4 coupled to a slab ocean model. A doubling of CO2 from pre-industrial levels leads to a warming of 6 K in the Arctic region and precipitation in the monsoon regions increases by up to 15%. In our Arctic geoengineering simulation which illustrates a plausible latitudinal distribution of the reduction in sunlight, an addition of sulfate aerosols (11 Mt) in the Arctic stratosphere nearly offsets the Arctic warming due to CO2 doubling but this shifts the ITCZ southward by 1.5° relative to the pre-industrial climate. The combined effect from this shift and the residual CO2-induced climate change in the tropics is a decrease/increase in annual mean precipitation in the Northern Hemisphere/Southern Hemisphere monsoon regions by up to -12/+17%. Polar geoengineering where sulfate aerosols are prescribed in both the Arctic (10 Mt) and Antarctic (8 Mt) nearly offsets the ITCZ shift due to Arctic geoengineering, but there is still a residual precipitation increase (up to 7%) in most monsoon regions associated with the residual CO2 induced warming in the tropics. The ITCZ shift due to our Global geoengineering simulation, where aerosols (20 Mt) are prescribed uniformly around the globe, is much smaller and the precipitation changes in most monsoon regions are within ±2% as the residual CO2-induced warming in the tropics is also much less than in Arctic and Polar geoengineering. Further

Regional Climate Variability Under Model Simulations of Solar Geoengineering

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Dagon, Katherine; Schrag, Daniel P.

2017-11-01

Solar geoengineering has been shown in modeling studies to successfully mitigate global mean surface temperature changes from greenhouse warming. Changes in land surface hydrology are complicated by the direct effect of carbon dioxide (CO2) on vegetation, which alters the flux of water from the land surface to the atmosphere. Here we investigate changes in boreal summer climate variability under solar geoengineering using multiple ensembles of model simulations. We find that spatially uniform solar geoengineering creates a strong meridional gradient in the Northern Hemisphere temperature response, with less consistent patterns in precipitation, evapotranspiration, and soil moisture. Using regional summertime temperature and precipitation results across 31-member ensembles, we show a decrease in the frequency of heat waves and consecutive dry days under solar geoengineering relative to a high-CO2 world. However in some regions solar geoengineering of this amount does not completely reduce summer heat extremes relative to present day climate. In western Russia and Siberia, an increase in heat waves is connected to a decrease in surface soil moisture that favors persistent high temperatures. Heat waves decrease in the central United States and the Sahel, while the hydrologic response increases terrestrial water storage. Regional changes in soil moisture exhibit trends over time as the model adjusts to solar geoengineering, particularly in Siberia and the Sahel, leading to robust shifts in climate variance. These results suggest potential benefits and complications of large-scale uniform climate intervention schemes.

Solar geoengineering, atmospheric water vapor transport, and land plants

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Caldeira, Ken; Cao, Long

2015-04-01

This work, using the GeoMIP database supplemented by additional simulations, discusses how solar geoengineering, as projected by the climate models, affects temperature and the hydrological cycle, and how this in turn is related to projected changes in net primary productivity (NPP). Solar geoengineering simulations typically exhibit reduced precipitation. Solar geoengineering reduces precipitation because solar geoengineering reduces evaporation. Evaporation precedes precipitation, and, globally, evaporation equals precipitation. CO2 tends to reduce evaporation through two main mechanisms: (1) CO2 tends to stabilize the atmosphere especially over the ocean, leading to a moister atmospheric boundary layer over the ocean. This moistening of the boundary layer suppresses evaporation. (2) CO2 tends to diminish evapotranspiration, at least in most land-surface models, because higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations allow leaves to close their stomata and avoid water loss. In most high-CO2 simulations, these effects of CO2 which tend to suppress evaporation are masked by the tendency of CO2-warming effect to increase evaporation. In a geoengineering simulation, with the warming effect of CO2 largely offset by the solar geoengineering, the evaporation suppressing characteristics of CO2 are no longer masked and are clearly exhibited. Decreased precipitation in solar geoengineering simulations is a bit like ocean acidification - an effect of high CO2 concentrations that is not offset by solar geoengineering. Locally, precipitation ultimately either evaporates (much of that through the leaves of plants) or runs off through groundwater to streams and rivers. On long time scales, runoff equals precipitation minus evaporation, and thus, water runoff generated at a location is equal to the net atmospheric transport of water to that location. Runoff typically occurs where there is substantial soil moisture, at least seasonally. Locations where there is enough water to maintain

Stratospheric solar geoengineering without ozone loss.

PubMed

Keith, David W; Weisenstein, Debra K; Dykema, John A; Keutsch, Frank N

2016-12-27

Injecting sulfate aerosol into the stratosphere, the most frequently analyzed proposal for solar geoengineering, may reduce some climate risks, but it would also entail new risks, including ozone loss and heating of the lower tropical stratosphere, which, in turn, would increase water vapor concentration causing additional ozone loss and surface warming. We propose a method for stratospheric aerosol climate modification that uses a solid aerosol composed of alkaline metal salts that will convert hydrogen halides and nitric and sulfuric acids into stable salts to enable stratospheric geoengineering while reducing or reversing ozone depletion. Rather than minimizing reactive effects by reducing surface area using high refractive index materials, this method tailors the chemical reactivity. Specifically, we calculate that injection of calcite (CaCO 3 ) aerosol particles might reduce net radiative forcing while simultaneously increasing column ozone toward its preanthropogenic baseline. A radiative forcing of -1 W⋅m -2 , for example, might be achieved with a simultaneous 3.8% increase in column ozone using 2.1 Tg⋅y -1 of 275-nm radius calcite aerosol. Moreover, the radiative heating of the lower stratosphere would be roughly 10-fold less than if that same radiative forcing had been produced using sulfate aerosol. Although solar geoengineering cannot substitute for emissions cuts, it may supplement them by reducing some of the risks of climate change. Further research on this and similar methods could lead to reductions in risks and improved efficacy of solar geoengineering methods.

Dangerous Climate Velocities from Geoengineering Termination: Potential Biodiversity Impacts

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Trisos, C.; Gurevitch, J.; Zambri, B.; Xia, L.; Amatulli, G.; Robock, A.

2016-12-01

Geoengineering has been suggested as a potential societal response to the impacts of ongoing global warming. If ongoing mitigation and adaptation measures do not prevent the most dangerous consequences of climate change, it is important to study whether solar radiation management would make the world less dangerous. While impacts of albedo modification on temperature, precipitation, and agriculture have been studied before, here for the first time we investigate its potential ecological impacts. We estimate the speeds marine and terrestrial ecosystems will need to move to remain in their current climate conditions (i.e., climate velocities) in response to the implementation and subsequent termination of geoengineering. We take advantage of climate model simulations conducted using the G4 scenario of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project, in which increased radiative forcing from the RCP4.5 scenario is balanced by a stratospheric aerosol cloud produced by an injection of 5 Tg of SO2 per year into the lower stratosphere for 50 years, and then stopped. The termination of geoengineering is projected to produce a very rapid warming of the climate, resulting in climate velocities much faster than those that will be produced from anthropogenic global warming. Should ongoing geoengineering be terminated abruptly due to society losing the means or will to continue, the resulting ecological impacts, as measured by climate velocities, could be severe for many terrestrial and marine biodiversity hotspots. Thus, the implementation of solar geoengineering represents a potential danger not just to humans, but also to biodiversity globally.

Simultaneous stabilization of global temperature and precipitation through cocktail geoengineering

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Cao, Long; Duan, Lei; Bala, Govindasamy; Caldeira, Ken

2017-07-01

Solar geoengineering has been proposed as a backup plan to offset some aspects of anthropogenic climate change if timely CO2 emission reductions fail to materialize. Modeling studies have shown that there are trade-offs between changes in temperature and hydrological cycle in response to solar geoengineering. Here we investigate the possibility of stabilizing both global mean temperature and precipitation simultaneously by combining two geoengineering approaches: stratospheric sulfate aerosol increase (SAI) that deflects sunlight to space and cirrus cloud thinning (CCT) that enables more longwave radiation to escape to space. Using the slab ocean configuration of National Center for Atmospheric Research Community Earth System Model, we simulate SAI by uniformly adding sulfate aerosol in the upper stratosphere and CCT by uniformly increasing cirrus cloud ice particle falling speed. Under an idealized warming scenario of abrupt quadrupling of atmospheric CO2, we show that by combining appropriate amounts of SAI and CCT geoengineering, global mean (or land mean) temperature and precipitation can be restored simultaneously to preindustrial levels. However, compared to SAI, cocktail geoengineering by mixing SAI and CCT does not markedly improve the overall similarity between geoengineered climate and preindustrial climate on regional scales. Some optimal spatially nonuniform mixture of SAI with CCT might have the potential to better mitigate climate change at both the global and regional scales.

Geoengineering to Avoid Overshoot: An Uncertainty Analysis

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Tanaka, K.

2009-04-01

Geoengineering (or climate engineering) using stratospheric sulfur injections (Crutzen, 2006) has been called for research in case of an urgent need for stopping global warming when other mitigation efforts were exhausted. Although there are a number of concerns over this idea (e.g. Robock, 2008), it is still useful to consider geoengineering as a possible method to limit warming caused by overshoot. Overshoot is a feature accompanied by low stabilizations scenarios aiming for a stringent target (Rao et al., 2008) in which total radiative forcing temporarily exceeds the target before reaching there. Scenarios achieving a 50% emission reduction by 2050 produces overshoot. Overshoot could cause sustained warming for decades due to the inertia of the climate system. If stratospheric sulfur injections were to be used as a "last resort" to avoid overshoot, what would be the suitable start-year and injection profile of such an intervention? Wigley (2006) examined climate response to combined mitigation/geoengineering scenarios with the intent to avert overshoot. Wigley's analysis demonstrated a basic potential of such a combined mitigation/geoengineering approach to avoid temperature overshoot - however it considered only simplistic sulfur injection profiles (all started in 2010), just one mitigation scenario, and did not examine the sensitivity of the climate response to any underlying uncertainties. This study builds upon Wigley's premise of the combined mitigation/geoengineering approach and brings associated uncertainty into the analysis. First, this study addresses the question as to how much geoengineering intervention would be needed to avoid overshoot by considering associated uncertainty? Then, would a geoengineering intervention of such a magnitude including uncertainty be permissible in considering all the other side effects? This study begins from the supposition that geoengineering could be employed to cap warming at 2.0°C since preindustrial. A few

We Don't Need a "Geoengineering" Research Program

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Caldeira, K.

2011-12-01

Most approaches commonly labeled as 'geoengineering' can be divided into two categories: approaches that attempt to reduce the change in atmospheric composition caused by anthropogenic emissions (commonly labeled CDR, for Carbon Dioxide Removal), and approaches that attempt to reduce the change in climate caused by changes in atmospheric composition (commonly labeled SRM, for Sunlight Reflection Methods or Solar Radiation Management). CDR is relatively uncontroversial (apart from ocean fertilization), and the primary issues are typically cost, effectiveness, local environmental consequences, and verification. In contrast, SRM has provoked much controversy, because large-scale SRM deployments necessarily would affect everyone on this planet. Several proposals have been tabled for SRM-specific or geoengineering-specific research and governance structures, treating SRM or geoengineering research as a thing apart. We should instead view CDR and SRM research as part of a broader continuum of activities aimed at understanding Earth system dynamics and reducing risks associated with climate change. The scope of existing research efforts should be broadened so that CDR and SRM approaches are, at this stage in development, treated as an extension of what we are already doing. What is 'geoengineering research'? A primary need at this time is for expansion of scope of and funding for existing climate-related research efforts. For examples: Scientists studying the role of aerosols in clouds or stratospheric processes can expand the domain of concern to consider effects of intentionally introduced aerosols (and not just natural aerosols and aerosols we introduce as a byproduct of civilization's normal functioning). Scientists studying effects of land-surface change on global and regional climates can expand the domain of concern beyond inadvertent effects to consider effects of land-surface changes undertaken with the intent to affect these climates. Research programs aimed at

Effects of Solar Geoengineering on Vegetation: Implications for Biodiversity and Conservation

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Dagon, K.; Schrag, D. P.

2017-12-01

Climate change will have significant impacts on vegetation and biodiversity. Solar geoengineering has potential to reduce the climate effects of greenhouse gas emissions through albedo modification, yet more research is needed to better understand how these techniques might impact terrestrial ecosystems. Here we utilize the fully coupled version of the Community Earth System Model to run transient solar geoengineering simulations designed to stabilize radiative forcing starting mid-century, relative to the Representative Concentration Pathway 6 (RCP6) scenario. Using results from 100-year simulations, we analyze model output through the lens of ecosystem-relevant metrics. We find that solar geoengineering improves the conservation outlook under climate change, but there are still potential impacts on biodiversity. Two commonly used climate classification systems show shifts in vegetation under solar geoengineering relative to RCP6, though we acknowledge the associated uncertainties with these systems. We also show that rates of warming and the climate velocity are minimized globally under solar geoengineering by the end of the century, while trends persist over land in the Northern Hemisphere. Shifts in the amplitude of temperature and precipitation seasonal cycles are observed in the results, and have implications for vegetation phenology. Different metrics for vegetation productivity also show decreases under solar geoengineering relative to RCP6, but could be related to the model parameterization of nutrient cycling. Vegetation water cycling is found to be an important mechanism for understanding changes in ecosystems under solar geoengineering.

Towards a comprehensive climate impacts assessment of solar geoengineering

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Irvine, Peter J.; Kravitz, Ben; Lawrence, Mark G.

Here, despite a growing literature on the projected physical climate responses to solar geoengineering — i.e. proposals to cool the planet by increasing the planetary albedo — there is no clear picture of the subsequent impacts of such a modified climate on natural and human systems such as agriculture, health, water resources, and ecosystems. Here we argue that engaging the climate impacts research community is necessary to evaluate and communicate how solar geoengineering might reduce some risks, exacerbate others, and give rise to novel risks. We review the current state of knowledge on consequences of solar geoengineering and conclude thatmore » a thorough assessment of its impacts can proceed by building upon the frameworks developed for assessing impacts of climate change. However, the climate response to solar geoengineering will depend on the form under consideration and the manner in which it is deployed, presenting a novel challenge for the climate impacts research community.« less

Towards a comprehensive climate impacts assessment of solar geoengineering

DOE PAGES

Irvine, Peter J.; Kravitz, Ben; Lawrence, Mark G.; ...

2016-11-23

Here, despite a growing literature on the projected physical climate responses to solar geoengineering — i.e. proposals to cool the planet by increasing the planetary albedo — there is no clear picture of the subsequent impacts of such a modified climate on natural and human systems such as agriculture, health, water resources, and ecosystems. Here we argue that engaging the climate impacts research community is necessary to evaluate and communicate how solar geoengineering might reduce some risks, exacerbate others, and give rise to novel risks. We review the current state of knowledge on consequences of solar geoengineering and conclude thatmore » a thorough assessment of its impacts can proceed by building upon the frameworks developed for assessing impacts of climate change. However, the climate response to solar geoengineering will depend on the form under consideration and the manner in which it is deployed, presenting a novel challenge for the climate impacts research community.« less

Additional risk of end-of-the-pipe geoengineering technologies

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Bohle, Martin

2014-05-01

Humans are engineers, even the artists who engineer the surface of the globe. Should humans endeavour to engineer the Earth to counter climate change hazards? Striving towards 'global sustainability' will require to adjust the current production and consumption patterns. Contrary to an approach of global sustainability, 'geoengineering' deploys a 'technology fix' for the same purpose. Humans are much inclined to look for technological fixes for problems because well engineered technological methods have created modern societies. Thus, it seems obvious to apply an engineering solution to climate change issues too. In particular, as air pollution causing acid rains has been reduced by cleaner combustion processes or ozone destructing chemical coolants have been replaced by other substances. Common to these approaches was to reduce inputs into global or regional systems by withholding emission, replacing substances or limiting use cases for certain substances. Thus, the selected approach was a technological fix or regulatory measure targeting the 'start of the pipe'. However applying a 'start of the pipe' approach to climate change faces the issue that mankind should reduce inputs were its hurts, namely reducing radically energy that is produced from burning fossil fuels. Capping burning of fossil fuels would be disruptive for the economic structures or the consumption pattern of the developed and developing industrialised societies. Facing that dilemma, affordable geoengineering looks tempting for some. However geoengineering technologies, which counter climate change by other means than carbon capture at combustion, are of a different nature than the technological fixes and negotiated regulatory actions, which so far have been applied to limit threats to regional and global systems. Most of the proposed technologies target other parts of the climate system but the carbon-dioxide input into the atmosphere. Therefore, many geoengineering technologies differ

Potential negative consequences of geoengineering on crop production: A study of Indian groundnut.

PubMed

Yang, Huiyi; Dobbie, Steven; Ramirez-Villegas, Julian; Feng, Kuishuang; Challinor, Andrew J; Chen, Bing; Gao, Yao; Lee, Lindsay; Yin, Yan; Sun, Laixiang; Watson, James; Koehler, Ann-Kristin; Fan, Tingting; Ghosh, Sat

2016-11-28

Geoengineering has been proposed to stabilize global temperature, but its impacts on crop production and stability are not fully understood. A few case studies suggest that certain crops are likely to benefit from solar dimming geoengineering, yet we show that geoengineering is projected to have detrimental effects for groundnut. Using an ensemble of crop-climate model simulations, we illustrate that groundnut yields in India undergo a statistically significant decrease of up to 20% as a result of solar dimming geoengineering relative to RCP4.5. It is somewhat reassuring, however, to find that after a sustained period of 50 years of geoengineering crop yields return to the nongeoengineered values within a few years once the intervention is ceased.

Potential negative consequences of geoengineering on crop production: A study of Indian groundnut

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Yang, Huiyi; Dobbie, Steven; Ramirez-Villegas, Julian; Feng, Kuishuang; Challinor, Andrew J.; Chen, Bing; Gao, Yao; Lee, Lindsay; Yin, Yan; Sun, Laixiang; Watson, James; Koehler, Ann-Kristin; Fan, Tingting; Ghosh, Sat

2016-11-01

Geoengineering has been proposed to stabilize global temperature, but its impacts on crop production and stability are not fully understood. A few case studies suggest that certain crops are likely to benefit from solar dimming geoengineering, yet we show that geoengineering is projected to have detrimental effects for groundnut. Using an ensemble of crop-climate model simulations, we illustrate that groundnut yields in India undergo a statistically significant decrease of up to 20% as a result of solar dimming geoengineering relative to RCP4.5. It is somewhat reassuring, however, to find that after a sustained period of 50 years of geoengineering crop yields return to the nongeoengineered values within a few years once the intervention is ceased.

Detecting sulphate aerosol geoengineering with different methods

DOE PAGES

Lo, Y. T. Eunice; Charlton-Perez, Andrew J.; Lott, Fraser C.; ...

2016-12-15

Sulphate aerosol injection has been widely discussed as a possible way to engineer future climate. Monitoring it would require detecting its effects amidst internal variability and in the presence of other external forcings. Here, we investigate how the use of different detection methods and filtering techniques affects the detectability of sulphate aerosol geoengineering in annual-mean global-mean near-surface air temperature. This is done by assuming a future scenario that injects 5 Tg yr -1 of sulphur dioxide into the stratosphere and cross-comparing simulations from 5 climate models. 64% of the studied comparisons would require 25 years or more for detection whenmore » no filter and the multi-variate method that has been extensively used for attributing climate change are used, while 66% of the same comparisons would require fewer than 10 years for detection using a trend-based filter. This then highlights the high sensitivity of sulphate aerosol geoengineering detectability to the choice of filter. With the same trend-based filter but a non-stationary method, 80% of the comparisons would require fewer than 10 years for detection. This does not imply sulphate aerosol geoengineering should be deployed, but suggests that both detection methods could be used for monitoring geoengineering in global, annual mean temperature should it be needed.« less

No fudging on geoengineering

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Parker, Andy; Geden, Oliver

2016-12-01

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is preparing a report on keeping global warming below 1.5 °C. How the panel chooses to deal with the option of solar geoengineering will test the integrity of scientific climate policy advice.

Stratospheric sulfate geoengineering could enhance the terrestrial photosynthesis rate

DOE PAGES

Xia, L.; Robock, A.; Tilmes, S.; ...

2016-02-10

Stratospheric sulfate geoengineering could impact the terrestrial carbon cycle by enhancing the carbon sink. With an 8 Tg yr -1 injection of SO 2 to produce a stratospheric aerosol cloud to balance anthropogenic radiative forcing from the Representative Concentration Pathway 6.0 (RCP6.0) scenario, we conducted climate model simulations with the Community Earth System Model – the Community Atmospheric Model 4 fully coupled to tropospheric and stratospheric chemistry (CAM4–chem). During the geoengineering period, as compared to RCP6.0, land-averaged downward visible (300–700 nm) diffuse radiation increased 3.2 W m -2 (11%). The enhanced diffuse radiation combined with the cooling increased plant photosynthesismore » by 0.07±0.02 µmol C m -2 s -1, which could contribute to an additional 3.8±1.1 Gt C yr -1 global gross primary productivity without explicit nutrient limitation. This increase could potentially increase the land carbon sink. Suppressed plant and soil respiration due to the cooling would reduce natural land carbon emission and therefore further enhance the terrestrial carbon sink during the geoengineering period. In conclusion, this potentially beneficial impact of stratospheric sulfate geoengineering would need to be balanced by a large number of potential risks in any future decisions about the implementation of geoengineering.« less

A Knack for Numbers: Paquita Friday

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Yates, Eleanor Lee

2005-01-01

Back in middle school Dr. Paquita Friday began helping keep books at her grandmother's pharmacy during inventory. It was no chore, she recalls. It was fun. By then, of course, she already knew she had a knack for numbers. Today Friday is gaining recognition for her research in accounting stock market disclosures and winning awards for her teaching…

Potential negative consequences of geoengineering on crop production: A study of Indian groundnut

PubMed Central

Dobbie, Steven; Ramirez‐Villegas, Julian; Feng, Kuishuang; Challinor, Andrew J.; Chen, Bing; Gao, Yao; Lee, Lindsay; Yin, Yan; Sun, Laixiang; Watson, James; Koehler, Ann‐Kristin; Fan, Tingting; Ghosh, Sat

2016-01-01

Abstract Geoengineering has been proposed to stabilize global temperature, but its impacts on crop production and stability are not fully understood. A few case studies suggest that certain crops are likely to benefit from solar dimming geoengineering, yet we show that geoengineering is projected to have detrimental effects for groundnut. Using an ensemble of crop‐climate model simulations, we illustrate that groundnut yields in India undergo a statistically significant decrease of up to 20% as a result of solar dimming geoengineering relative to RCP4.5. It is somewhat reassuring, however, to find that after a sustained period of 50 years of geoengineering crop yields return to the nongeoengineered values within a few years once the intervention is ceased. PMID:28190903

The radiative forcing potential of different climate geoengineering options

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Lenton, T. M.; Vaughan, N. E.

2009-01-01

Climate geoengineering proposals seek to rectify the Earth's current radiative imbalance, either by reducing the absorption of incoming solar (shortwave) radiation, or by removing CO2 from the atmosphere and transferring it to long-lived reservoirs, thus increasing outgoing longwave radiation. A fundamental criterion for evaluating geoengineering options is their climate cooling effectiveness, which we quantify here in terms of radiative forcing potential. We use a simple analytical approach, based on the global energy balance and pulse response functions for the decay of CO2 perturbations. This aids transparency compared to calculations with complex numerical models, but is not intended to be definitive. Already it reveals some significant errors in existing calculations, and it allows us to compare the relative effectiveness of a range of proposals. By 2050, only stratospheric aerosol injections or sunshades in space have the potential to cool the climate back toward its pre-industrial state, but some land carbon cycle geoengineering options are of comparable magnitude to mitigation "wedges". Strong mitigation, i.e. large reductions in CO2 emissions, combined with global-scale air capture and storage, afforestation, and bio-char production, i.e. enhanced CO2 sinks, might be able to bring CO2 back to its pre-industrial level by 2100, thus removing the need for other geoengineering. Alternatively, strong mitigation stabilising CO2 at 500 ppm, combined with geoengineered increases in the albedo of marine stratiform clouds, grasslands, croplands and human settlements might achieve a patchy cancellation of radiative forcing. Ocean fertilisation options are only worthwhile if sustained on a millennial timescale and phosphorus addition probably has greater long-term potential than iron or nitrogen fertilisation. Enhancing ocean upwelling or downwelling have trivial effects on any meaningful timescale. Our approach provides a common framework for the evaluation of

Impacts of Stratospheric Sulfate Geoengineering on Chinese Agricultural Production

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Xia, L.; Robock, A.

2012-12-01

Possible food supply change is one of the most important concerns in the discussion of stratospheric sulfate geoengineering. In China, the high population density and strong summer monsoon influence on agriculture make this region sensitive to climate changes, such as reductions of precipitation, temperature, and solar radiation spurred by stratospheric sulfate injection. We used results from the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project G2 scenario to force the Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT) crop model to predict crop yield changes from rice, maize, and winter wheat. We first evaluated the DSSAT model by forcing it with daily observed weather data and management practices for the period 1978-2008 for all the provinces in China, and compared the results to observations of the yields of the three major crops in China. We then created two 50-year sets of climate anomalies using the results from eight climate models, for 1%/year increase of CO2 and for G2 (1%/year increase of CO2 balanced by insolation reduction), and compared the resulting agricultural responses. Considering that geoengineering could happen in the future, we used two geoengineering starting years, 2020 and 2060. For 2020, we increased the mean temperature by 1°C and started the CO2 concentration at 410 ppm. For 2060, we increased temperature by 2°C and started the CO2 concentration at 550 ppm. Without changing agriculture technology, we find that compared to the control run, geoengineering with the G2 scenario starting in 2020 or 2060 would both moderately increase rice and winter wheat production due to the CO2 fertilization effect, but the increasing rates are different. However, as a C4 crop, without a significant CO2 fertilization effect, maize production would decrease slightly because of regional drought. Compared to the reference run, the three crops all have less heat stress in southern China and their yields increase, but in northern China cooler

Simulated Effect of Carbon Cycle Feedback on Climate Response to Solar Geoengineering

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Cao, Long; Jiang, Jiu

2017-12-01

Most modeling studies investigate climate effects of solar geoengineering under prescribed atmospheric CO2, thereby neglecting potential climate feedbacks from the carbon cycle. Here we use an Earth system model to investigate interactive feedbacks between solar geoengineering, global carbon cycle, and climate change. We design idealized sunshade geoengineering simulations to prevent global warming from exceeding 2°C above preindustrial under a CO2 emission scenario with emission mitigation starting from middle of century. By year 2100, solar geoengineering reduces the burden of atmospheric CO2 by 47 PgC with enhanced carbon storage in the terrestrial biosphere. As a result of reduced atmospheric CO2, consideration of the carbon cycle feedback reduces required insolation reduction in 2100 from 2.0 to 1.7 W m-2. With higher climate sensitivity the effect from carbon cycle feedback becomes more important. Our study demonstrates the importance of carbon cycle feedback in climate response to solar geoengineering.

A Risk-Based Framework for Assessing the Effectiveness of Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering

PubMed Central

Ferraro, Angus J.; Charlton-Perez, Andrew J.; Highwood, Eleanor J.

2014-01-01

Geoengineering by stratospheric aerosol injection has been proposed as a policy response to warming from human emissions of greenhouse gases, but it may produce unequal regional impacts. We present a simple, intuitive risk-based framework for classifying these impacts according to whether geoengineering increases or decreases the risk of substantial climate change, with further classification by the level of existing risk from climate change from increasing carbon dioxide concentrations. This framework is applied to two climate model simulations of geoengineering counterbalancing the surface warming produced by a quadrupling of carbon dioxide concentrations, with one using a layer of sulphate aerosol in the lower stratosphere, and the other a reduction in total solar irradiance. The solar dimming model simulation shows less regional inequality of impacts compared with the aerosol geoengineering simulation. In the solar dimming simulation, 10% of the Earth's surface area, containing 10% of its population and 11% of its gross domestic product, experiences greater risk of substantial precipitation changes under geoengineering than under enhanced carbon dioxide concentrations. In the aerosol geoengineering simulation the increased risk of substantial precipitation change is experienced by 42% of Earth's surface area, containing 36% of its population and 60% of its gross domestic product. PMID:24533155

Impacts of Geoengineering and Nuclear War on Chinese Agriculture

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Xia, L.; Robock, A.

2011-12-01

Climate is one of the most important factors determining crop yields and world food supplies. To be well prepared for possible futures, it is necessary to study yield changes of major crops under different climate scenarios. Here we consider two situations: stratospheric sulfate geoengineering and nuclear war. Although we certainly do not advocate either scenario, we cannot exclude the possibilities: if global warming is getting worse, we might have to deliberately manipulate global temperature; if nuclear weapons still exist, we might face a nuclear war catastrophe. Since in both scenarios there would be reductions of temperature, precipitation, and insolation, which are three controlling factors on crop growth, it is important to study food supply changes under the two cases. We conducted our simulations for China, because it has the highest population and crop production in the world and it is under the strong influence of the summer monsoon, which would be altered in geoengineering and nuclear war scenarios. To examine the effects of climate changes induced by geoengineering and nuclear war on Chinese agriculture, we use the DSSAT crop model. We first evaluate the model by forcing it with daily weather data and management practices for the period 1978-2008 for all the provinces in China, and compare the results to observations of the yields of major crops in China (middle season rice, winter wheat, and maize). Then we perturbed observed weather data using climate anomalies for geoengineering and nuclear war simulations using NASA GISS ModelE. For stratospheric geoengineering, we consider the injection of 5 Tg SO2 per year into the tropical lower stratosphere. For the nuclear war scenario, we consider the effects of 5 Tg of soot that could be injected into the upper troposphere by a war between India and Pakistan using only 100 Hiroshima-size atomic bombs dropped on cities. We perturbed each year of the 31-year climate record with anomalies from each year of

The Risk of Termination Shock From Solar Geoengineering

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Parker, Andy; Irvine, Peter J.

2018-03-01

If solar geoengineering were to be deployed so as to mask a high level of global warming, and then stopped suddenly, there would be a rapid and damaging rise in temperatures. This effect is often referred to as termination shock, and it is an influential concept. Based on studies of its potential impacts, commentators often cite termination shock as one of the greatest risks of solar geoengineering. However, there has been little consideration of the likelihood of termination shock, so that conclusions about its risk are premature. This paper explores the physical characteristics of termination shock, then uses simple scenario analysis to plot out the pathways by which different driver events (such as terrorist attacks, natural disasters, or political action) could lead to termination. It then considers where timely policies could intervene to avert termination shock. We conclude that some relatively simple policies could protect a solar geoengineering system against most of the plausible drivers. If backup deployment hardware were maintained and if solar geoengineering were implemented by agreement among just a few powerful countries, then the system should be resilient against all but the most extreme catastrophes. If this analysis is correct, then termination shock should be much less likely, and therefore much less of a risk, than has previously been assumed. Much more sophisticated scenario analysis—going beyond simulations purely of worst-case scenarios—will be needed to allow for more insightful policy conclusions.

Geoengineering, climate change scepticism and the 'moral hazard' argument: an experimental study of UK public perceptions.

PubMed

Corner, Adam; Pidgeon, Nick

2014-12-28

Many commentators have expressed concerns that researching and/or developing geoengineering technologies may undermine support for existing climate policies-the so-called moral hazard argument. This argument plays a central role in policy debates about geoengineering. However, there has not yet been a systematic investigation of how members of the public view the moral hazard argument, or whether it impacts on people's beliefs about geoengineering and climate change. In this paper, we describe an online experiment with a representative sample of the UK public, in which participants read one of two arguments (either endorsing or rejecting the idea that geoengineering poses a moral hazard). The argument endorsing the idea of geoengineering as a moral hazard was perceived as more convincing overall. However, people with more sceptical views and those who endorsed 'self-enhancing' values were more likely to agree that the prospect of geoengineering would reduce their motivation to make changes in their own behaviour in response to climate change. The findings suggest that geoengineering is likely to pose a moral hazard for some people more than others, and the implications for engaging the public are discussed.

10. Freiburger Symposium 2011 der SCG-Division Industrielle Chemie Technology Progress, Success Key for our Production Sites.

PubMed

Naef, Olivier

2012-01-01

This short paper presents the abstracts of the different presentations during 10. Freiburger Symposium 2011 der SCG-Division Industrielle Chemie: Technology Progress, Success key for our production sites held Thursday and Friday, September 29 and 30, 2011 at the Ecole d'ingénieurs et d'architectes de Fribourg (Switzerland).

Modeling the Climatic Consequences of Geoengineering

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Somerville, R. C.

2005-12-01

The last half-century has seen the development of physically comprehensive computer models of the climate system. These models are the primary tool for making predictions of climate change due to human activities, such as emitting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Because scientific understanding of the climate system is incomplete, however, any climate model will necessarily have imperfections. The inevitable uncertainties associated with these models have sometimes been cited as reasons for not taking action to reduce such emissions. Climate models could certainly be employed to predict the results of various attempts at geoengineering, but many questions would arise. For example, in considering proposals to increase the planetary reflectivity by brightening parts of the land surface or by orbiting mirrors, can models be used to bound the results and to warm of unintended consequences? How could confidence limits be placed on such model results? How can climate changes due to proposed geoengineering be distinguished from natural variability? There are historical parallels on smaller scales, in which models have been employed to predict the results of attempts to alter the weather, such as the use of cloud seeding for precipitation enhancement, hail suppression and hurricane modification. However, there are also many lessons to be learned from the recent record of using models to simulate the effects of the great unintended geoengineering experiment involving greenhouse gases, now in progress. In this major research effort, the same types of questions have been studied at length. The best modern models have demonstrated an impressive ability to predict some aspects of climate change. A large body of evidence has already accumulated through comparing model predictions to many observed aspects of recent climate change, ranging from increases in ocean heat content to changes in atmospheric water vapor to reductions in glacier extent. The preponderance of expert

The Many Problems with Geoengineering Using Stratospheric Aerosols

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Robock, Alan

2009-05-01

In response to the global warming problem, there has been a recent renewed call for geoengineering ``solutions'' involving injecting particles into the stratosphere or blocking sunlight with satellites between the Sun and Earth. While volcanic eruptions have been suggested as innocuous examples of stratospheric aerosols cooling the planet, the volcano analog actually argues against geoengineering because of ozone depletion and regional hydrologic and temperature responses. In this talk, I consider the suggestion to create an artificial stratospheric aerosol layer. No systems to conduct geoengineering now exist, but a comparison of different proposed stratospheric injection schemes, airplanes, balloons, artillery, and a space elevator, shows that using airplanes would not be that expensive. We simulated the climate response to both tropical and Arctic stratospheric injection of sulfate aerosol precursors using a comprehensive atmosphere-ocean general circulation model, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE. We simulated the injection of SO2 and the model converts it to sulfate aerosols, transports them and removes them through dry and wet deposition, and calculates the climate response to the radiative forcing from the aerosols. We conducted simulations of future climate with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change A1B business-as-usual scenario both with and without geoengineering, and compare the results. We found that if there were a way to continuously inject SO2 into the lower stratosphere, it would produce global cooling. Acid deposition from the sulfate would not be enough to disturb most ecosystems. Tropical SO2 injection would produce sustained cooling over most of the world, with more cooling over continents. Arctic SO2 injection would not just cool the Arctic. But both tropical and Arctic SO2 injection would disrupt the Asian and African summer monsoons, reducing precipitation to the food supply

Geoengineering, climate change scepticism and the ‘moral hazard’ argument: an experimental study of UK public perceptions

PubMed Central

Corner, Adam; Pidgeon, Nick

2014-01-01

Many commentators have expressed concerns that researching and/or developing geoengineering technologies may undermine support for existing climate policies—the so-called moral hazard argument. This argument plays a central role in policy debates about geoengineering. However, there has not yet been a systematic investigation of how members of the public view the moral hazard argument, or whether it impacts on people's beliefs about geoengineering and climate change. In this paper, we describe an online experiment with a representative sample of the UK public, in which participants read one of two arguments (either endorsing or rejecting the idea that geoengineering poses a moral hazard). The argument endorsing the idea of geoengineering as a moral hazard was perceived as more convincing overall. However, people with more sceptical views and those who endorsed ‘self-enhancing’ values were more likely to agree that the prospect of geoengineering would reduce their motivation to make changes in their own behaviour in response to climate change. The findings suggest that geoengineering is likely to pose a moral hazard for some people more than others, and the implications for engaging the public are discussed. PMID:25404680

Geoengineering the climate

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

MacCracken, M.C.

1991-06-18

Although much can be done to limit greenhouse gas emissions by conservation, improvements in efficiency, and use of alternative technologies, the use of fossil fuels at rates even sharply reduced from US per capita values will lead to rapidly increasing global concentrations of greenhouse gases. The available alternatives then become adapting to the changes, switching to alternative energy sources (e.g., solar, nuclear), or actively taking control of atmospheric composition and/or the climate. This note reviews options for geoengineering the climate. 18 refs., 1 tab.

Impact of geoengineered aerosols on the troposphere and stratosphere

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Tilmes, S.; Garcia, Rolando R.; Kinnison, Douglas E.

2009-06-27

A coupled chemistry climate model, the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model was used to perform a transient climate simulation to quantify the impact of geoengineered aerosols on atmospheric processes. In contrast to previous model studies, the impact on stratospheric chemistry, including heterogeneous chemistry in the polar regions, is considered in this simulation. In the geoengineering simulation, a constant stratospheric distribution of volcanic-sized, liquid sulfate aerosols is imposed in the period 2020–2050, corresponding to an injection of 2 Tg S/a. The aerosol cools the troposphere compared to a baseline simulation. Assuming an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change A1B emission scenario, globalmore » warming is delayed by about 40 years in the troposphere with respect to the baseline scenario. Large local changes of precipitation and temperatures may occur as a result of geoengineering. Comparison with simulations carried out with the Community Atmosphere Model indicates the importance of stratospheric processes for estimating the impact of stratospheric aerosols on the Earth’s climate. Changes in stratospheric dynamics and chemistry, especially faster heterogeneous reactions, reduce the recovery of the ozone layer in middle and high latitudes for the Southern Hemisphere. In the geoengineering case, the recovery of the Antarctic ozone hole is delayed by about 30 years on the basis of this model simulation. For the Northern Hemisphere, a onefold to twofold increase of the chemical ozone depletion occurs owing to a simulated stronger polar vortex and colder temperatures compared to the baseline simulation, in agreement with observational estimates.« less

Effect of Sulfate Aerosol Geoengineering on Tropical cyclones

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Wang, Q.; Moore, J.; Ji, D.

2017-12-01

Variation in tropical cyclone (TC) number and intensity is driven in part by changes in the thermodynamics that can be defined by ocean and atmospheric variables. Genesis Potential Index (GPI) and ventilation index (VI) are combinations of potential intensity, vertical wind shear, relative humidity, midlevel entropy deficit, and absolute vorticity that quantify thermodynamic forcing of TC activity under changed climates, and can be calculated from climate model output. Here we use five CMIP5 models running the RCP45 experiment the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) stratospheric aerosol injection G4 experiment to calculate the two indices over the 2020 to 2069 period. Globally, GPI under G4 is lower than under RCP45, though both have a slight increasing trend. Spatial patterns in the relative effectiveness of geoengineering show reductions in TC in all models in the North Atlantic basin, and northern Indian Ocean in all except NorESM1-M. In the North Pacific, most models also show relative reductions under G4. VI generally coincide with the GPI patterns. Most models project Potential intensity and Relative Humidity to be the dominant variable to affect genesis potential. Changes in vertical wind shear and vorticity are small with scatter across different models and ocean basins. We find that tropopause temperature maybe as important as sea surface temperature in effecting TC genesis. Thus stratospheric aerosol geoengineering impacts on potential intensity and hence TC intensity are reasonably consistent, but probably underestimated by statistical forecasts of Tropical North Atlantic hurricane activity driven by sea surface temperatures alone. However the impacts of geoengineering on other ocean basins are more difficult to assess, and require more complete understanding of their driving parameters under present day climates. Furthermore, the possible effects of stratospheric injection on chemical reactions in the stratosphere, such as ozone, are

Solar Geoengineering as part of an overall strategy for meeting the 1.5C Paris target

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Ricke, K.; MacMartin, D. G.; Keith, D.

2017-12-01

If future mitigation proves insufficient to limit the rise in global mean temperature to less than 1.5C above preindustrial, it is plausible that some additional and limited deployment of solar geoengineering could reduce climate damages. That is, these approaches could eventually be considered as part of an overall strategy to manage the risks of climate change, combining emissions reduction, net-negative emissions technologies, and solar geoengineering to meet climate goals. Since few climate model simulations have considered these limited deployment scenarios, we use a climate emulator trained from GeoMIP output to assess the projected response if solar geoengineering were used to limit global mean temperature to 1.5C above preindustrial in an overshoot scenario that would otherwise peak near 3C. The resulting climate is much closer in many respects to a climate where the 1.5C target is achieved through mitigation alone than either is to the 3C climate with no geoengineering, although there are some important differences. In this limited deployment scenario, there is no "over-compensation" of global-mean precipitation changes, nor are there any regions where a majority of models project that the use of geoengineering would lead to a statistically-significant change in precipitation further away from preindustrial than would have occurred without using geoengineering. This highlights the importance of evaluating geoengineering impacts in the context of specific policy-relevant scenarios.

Biogeochemical carbon coupling influences global precipitation in geoengineering experiments

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Fyfe, J. C.; Cole, J. N. S.; Arora, V. K.; Scinocca, J. F.

2013-02-01