Dear Olivier, Stephen and Douglas,

I highly appreciate your responses. Olivier’s point 1/, that the sulfate 
aerosol geoengineering forcing depends on the preexisting radiation, made me 
realise that the there should be a latitude-dependence of the green house 
forcing too. I believe Stephen’s comment relates to this. However, I do better 
appreciate now, as Douglas emphasized, that rather different forcing 
distributions can result in similar response in terms of e.g. the temperature 
field. This is quite a surprising fact. 

Best wishes,

Tamas

> On 18 Feb 2020, at 12:07 AM, Douglas MacMartin <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Agreed that the pattern of response isn’t as inhomogeneous as the forcing is, 
> though it is still true that a uniform aerosol layer will overcool the 
> tropics and undercool the poles, and that choosing your injection locations 
> so that the aerosol layer is not perfectly uniform does actually maintain 
> temperature gradients better.   (But the undercooling of the poles of course 
> is still small compared to the warming that would be there without 
> geoengineering.)
>  
> doug
>  
> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On 
> Behalf Of Olivier Boucher
> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2020 4:19 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [geo] sulfate aerosol geoengineering modelled by solar dimming
>  
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> you're correct and I'd think the negative SW RF is more offset by the 
> positive LW RF in the tropics than in the high latitudes (alike the pattern 
> of RF by WMGHG). But again, the pattern of a not-too-inhomogeneous forcing is 
> only moderately important.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Olivier 
> 
> Hi All
> 
> But you also have to consider outgoing long wave radiation especially in 
> winter.
> 
> Stephen
> 
> Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design. School of Engineering, University 
> of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, Scotland [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>, Tel +44 (0)131 662 1180 
> WWW.homepages.ed.ac.uk/shs <http://www.homepages.ed.ac.uk/shs>, YouTube Jamie 
> Taylor Power for Change
> On 17/02/2020 08:35, Olivier Boucher wrote:
> Dear Tamas,
> 
> there are typically 3 effects that govern RF by stratospheric aerosols as a 
> function of latitude for a given aerosol burden. Let's think in terms of 
> solar zenith angle (one has then to integrate over SZA which is a function of 
> latitude and season)
> 
> 1/ insolation decreases with SZA as cos(theta) where theta is the SZA 
> 
> 2/ air mass increases with  SZA as 1/cos(theta), of course the effect this 
> has breaks down at some point because of multiple scattering
> 
> 3/ upscattering function also increases with SZA (because more forward 
> scattering contributes to upscattering).
> 
> You could assume 1/ and 2/ cancel each other at first approximation, so 
> because of 3/ there is indeed more RF at larger SZA. In fact there is an 
> optimum around SZA=60° but that depends on the AOD and how much multiple 
> scattering there is.
> 
> Now life is a bit more complicated, as transport and aerosol size varies also.
> 
> In any case, the climate response is not a copy-paste of the spatial 
> distribution of the RF. It matters but not too much. And it matters more for 
> rapid adjustments than for feedbacks. See eg 
> https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2013JD021110 
> <https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2013JD021110>
> Regards,
> 
> Olivier 
> 
>  
> Dear All,
>  
> I would like to ask for some useful references about sulfate aerosol 
> geoengineering. Assuming some uniform aerosol coverage around the globe, at 
> some height, with a certain vertical layer thickness, i would imagine that at 
> higher latitudes the radiative forcing exerted by the aerosols is larger due 
> to the longer distance of travel of sun rays through the aerosol "cloud". As 
> a consequence, the latitude-dependence of the downward-directed radiative 
> forcing should have an even larger gradient than solar irradiance. Therefore, 
> I’m wondering how big mistake it is to model such a geoengineering scenario 
> by dimming the sun.
>  
> Any feedback or reference would be much appreciated.
>  
> Thank you,
>  
> Tamas
>  
> -- 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "geoengineering" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/47fba577-d1ff-de51-6636-f87c391fc1bb%40lmd.jussieu.fr
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/47fba577-d1ff-de51-6636-f87c391fc1bb%40lmd.jussieu.fr?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "geoengineering" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/2ecbd308-7da2-acab-e310-f4fff1932114%40ed.ac.uk
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/2ecbd308-7da2-acab-e310-f4fff1932114%40ed.ac.uk?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> 
> 
> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
>  
> -- 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "geoengineering" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/dca880ff-00b6-ac6e-1315-36440bbd4971%40lmd.jussieu.fr
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/dca880ff-00b6-ac6e-1315-36440bbd4971%40lmd.jussieu.fr?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "geoengineering" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/BL0PR04MB47073A2914A7AE638E8A4B8C8F160%40BL0PR04MB4707.namprd04.prod.outlook.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/BL0PR04MB47073A2914A7AE638E8A4B8C8F160%40BL0PR04MB4707.namprd04.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/B5111500-422A-44A3-8A8D-415C40988ED9%40googlemail.com.

Reply via email to