https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU23/EGU23-15821.html

*Authors*
Elia Wunderlin1, Gabriel Chiodo
<https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU23/0000-0002-8079-6314>1,2, Timofei
Sukhodolov3,4,5, Sandro Vattioni1, Daniele Visioni
<https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU23/0000-0002-7342-2189>6, and
Simone Tilmes
<https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU23/0000-0002-6557-3569>7

How to cite: Wunderlin, E., Chiodo, G., Sukhodolov, T., Vattioni, S.,
Visioni, D., and Tilmes, S.: Analysis of the GeoMIP G6sulfur experiment
with SOCOLv4, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 24–28 Apr 2023,
EGU23-15821, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-15821, 2023.

*Abstract*

Climate change and its associated risks are becoming more and more
prominent. Stratospheric solar geoengineering with sulfuric acid aerosols
has been put forward as a way to temporarily mitigate some of the risks of
climate change and is inspired by the cooling effect of large eruptions of
tropical volcanoes. *To learn more about the opportunities and dangers
associated with stratospheric solar geoengineering, it is important to
investigate the strategy beforehand, e.g., by means of climate modelling. *To
better understand the sources of model uncertainties, the Geoengineering
Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) introduced stratospheric solar
geoengineering scenarios for an easier comparison of different models. Most
models participating in GeoMIP either have no interactive chemistry or
simplified aerosol micro-physics. In this study we perform the G6sulfur
experiment with SOCOLv4, an atmosphere-ocean-aerosol-chemistry climate
model. In the G6 sulfur experiment the aim is to bring the global average
temperature of the SSP5-8.5 to the levels of the SSP2-4.5 sceanrio.

For the calibration we ran three different tests in order to analyse the
sensitivity of the aerosol burden to the order in which the microphysical
processes are simulated at each timestep - nucleation of new particles from
H2SO4 vapours and condensation of H2SO4 on pre-existing particles. One
experiment had nucleation first, one had condensation first and finally one
had nucleation first but with an added subsubstep where coagulation is
called again. For all these runs we used an injection of 5 TgS/year. In the
run with nucleation first the global stratospheric aerosol burden is 25%
bigger than in the run where condensation is called first and 10% bigger
than in the run with 2 subsubsteps. This leads to a cooling effect over
2032-2047 which is 1.02 K for nucleation first, 0.95 K for the run with the
additional substep and 0.65 K for condensation first. Based on the cooling
efficiency of the 5 TgS/year injection, we then derive a time-dependent
emission, to keep global mean surface temperatures close to the SSP2-4.5
scenario.

For the G6sulfur experiment we chose the setup of the run with 2
subsubsteps and performed three ensemble members to get a better
understanding of the uncertainties within the model. We will discuss the
effects on stratospheric aerosol burden, radiative forcing, temperature,
ozone and precipitation changes and compare our results to other GeoMIP
models. This will work provides useful insights concerning the radiative
and climatic impacts of stratospheric aerosols on climate, elucidating the
impact of uncertainties in the modelling of microphysical processes.

*Source: EGUSphere*

-- 
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/CAHJsh98_pHa-WuCzsWxEOMknjexHjU%3DTCm-WLOCmEHJd5J2Bzg%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to