*WEEKLY SUMMARY (01 APRIL - 07 APRIL 2024)*

*Subscribe to our newsletter to receive monthly updates on Solar
Geoengineering:*
Solar Geoengineering Updates
<https://solargeoengineeringupdates.substack.com/?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=publication_embed&utm_medium=email>
Monthly news summaries about solar geoengineering. Links to scientific
papers, news articles, jobs, podcasts, and videos.
<https://solargeoengineeringupdates.substack.com/?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=publication_embed&utm_medium=email>
By Andrew Lockley
<https://solargeoengineeringupdates.substack.com/?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=publication_embed&utm_medium=email>
------------------------------
RESEARCH PAPERSRadiative forcing geoengineering causes higher risk of
wildfires and permafrost thawing over the Arctic regions
<https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01329-3>

Müller, R. C., Kim, J. S., Lee, H., Muri, H., Tjiputra, J., Yoon, J. H., &
Schaepman-Strub, G. (2024). Radiative forcing geoengineering causes higher
risk of wildfires and permafrost thawing over the Arctic regions.
*Communications
Earth & Environment*, *5*(1), 180.

*Abstract*

Radiative forcing geoengineering is discussed as an intermediate solution
to partially offset greenhouse gas-driven warming by altering the Earth’s
energy budget. Here we use an Earth System Model to analyse the response in
Arctic temperatures to radiative geoengineering applied under the
representative concentration pathway 8.5 to decrease the radiative forcing
to that achieved under the representative concentration pathway 4.5. The
three methods Stratospheric Aerosol Injection, Marine Cloud Brightening,
and Cirrus Cloud Thinning, mitigate the global mean temperature rise,
however, under our experimental designs, the projected Arctic temperatures
are higher than if the same temperature was achieved under emission
mitigation. The maximum temperature increase under Cirrus Cloud Thinning
and Marine Cloud Brightening is linked to carbon dioxide plant
physiological forcing, shifting the system into climatic conditions
favouring the development of fires. Under Stratospheric Aerosol Injection,
the Arctic land with temperatures permanently below freezing decreased by
7.8% compared to the representative concentration pathway 4.5. This study
concludes that these specific radiative forcing geoengineering designs
induce less efficient cooling of the Arctic than the global mean and worsen
extreme conditions compared to the representative concentration pathway 4.5.

Ecohydrological responses to solar radiation changes
<https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-768/>

Wang, Y., Meili, N., & Fatichi, S. (2024). Ecohydrological responses to
solar radiation changes. *EGUsphere*, *2024*, 1-24.

*Abstract*

The potential implementation of future geoengineering projects alters solar
radiation to counteract global warming trends. These changes could have
effects on ecohydrological systems with impacts which are still poorly
quantified. Here, we compute how changes in solar radiation affect global
and local near surface meteorological variables by using CMIP6 scenario
results and we compute climate sensitivities to solar radiation. These
sensitivities are used to construct two sets of numerical experiments: the
first focuses on solar radiation changes only, and the second
systematically modifies precipitation, air temperature, specific humidity,
and wind speed using the CMIP6 derived sensitivities to radiation changes,
i.e., including its climate feedback. We use those scenarios as input to a
mechanistic ecohydrological model to quantify the responses of the energy
and water budget as well as vegetation productivity spanning different
biomes and climates.

In the absence of climate feedback, changes in solar radiation tend to
reflect mostly in sensible heat changes, with minor effects on the
hydrological cycle and vegetation productivity correlates linearly with
changes in solar radiation. When climate feedback is included, changes in
latent heat and hydrological variables are much more pronounced, mostly
because of the temperature and vapor pressure deficit changes associated
with solar radiation changes. Vegetation productivity tends to have an
asymmetric response with a considerable decrease in gross primary
production to a radiation reduction not accompanied by a similar increase
with a radiation increase. These results provide important insights on how
ecosystems could respond to potential future solar geoengineering programs.

Recent reductions in aerosol emissions have increased Earth’s energy
imbalance <https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01324-8>

Hodnebrog, Ø., Myhre, G., Jouan, C., Andrews, T., Forster, P. M., Jia, H.,
... & Schulz, M. (2024). Recent reductions in aerosol emissions have
increased Earth’s energy imbalance. *Communications Earth & Environment*,
*5*(1), 166.

*Abstract*

The Earth’s energy imbalance is the net radiative flux at the
top-of-atmosphere. Climate model simulations suggest that the observed
positive imbalance trend in the previous two decades is inconsistent with
internal variability alone and caused by anthropogenic forcing and the
resulting climate system response. Here, we investigate anthropogenic
contributions to the imbalance trend using climate models forced with
observed sea-surface temperatures. We find that the effective radiative
forcing due to anthropogenic aerosol emission reductions has led to a 0.2 ±
0.1 W m−2 decade−1 strengthening of the 2001–2019 imbalance trend. The
multi-model ensemble reproduces the observed imbalance trend of 0.47 ± 0.17
W m−2 decade−1 but with 10-40% underestimation. With most future scenarios
showing further rapid reductions of aerosol emissions due to air quality
legislation, such emission reductions may continue to strengthen Earth’s
energy imbalance, on top of the greenhouse gas contribution. Consequently,
we may expect an accelerated surface temperature warming in this decade.

Public opinion about solar radiation management: A cross-cultural study in
20 countries around the world
<https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-024-03708-3>

Contzen, N., Perlaviciute, G., Steg, L., Reckels, S. C., Alves, S.,
Bidwell, D., ... & Sütterlin, B. (2024). Public opinion about solar
radiation management: A cross-cultural study in 20 countries around the
world. *Climatic Change*, *177*(4), 1-25.

*Abstract*

Some argue that complementing climate change mitigation measures with solar
radiation management (SRM) might prove a last resort to limit global
warming to 1.5 °C. To make a socially responsible decision on whether to
use SRM, it is important to consider also public opinion, across the globe
and particularly in the Global South, which would face the greatest risks
from both global warming and SRM. However, most research on public opinion
about SRM stems from the Global North. We report findings from the first
large-scale, cross-cultural study on the public opinion about SRM among the
general public (N = 2,248) and students (N = 4,583) in 20 countries
covering all inhabited continents, including five countries from the Global
South and five ‘non-WEIRD’ (i.e. not Western, Educated, Industrialised,
Rich, and Democratic) countries from the Global North. As public awareness
of SRM is usually low, we provided participants with information on SRM,
including key arguments in favour of and against SRM that appear in the
scientific debate. On average, acceptability of SRM was significantly
higher in the Global South than in the ‘non-WEIRD’ Global North, while
acceptability in the ‘WEIRD’ Global North was in between. However, we found
substantial variation within these clusters, especially in the ‘non-WEIRD’
Global North, suggesting that countries do not form homogenous clusters and
should thus be considered individually. Moreover, the average participants’
views, while generally neither strong nor polarised, differed from some
expert views in important ways, including that participants perceived SRM
as only slightly effective in limiting global warming. Still, our data
suggests overall a conditional, reluctant acceptance. That is, while on
average, people think SRM would have mostly negative consequences, they may
still be willing to tolerate it as a potential last resort to fight global
warming, particularly if they think SRM has only minor negative (or even
positive) impacts on humans and nature.

Solar radiation modification challenges decarbonization with renewable
solar energy <https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/15/307/2024/>

Baur, S., Sanderson, B. M., Séférian, R., & Terray, L. (2023). Solar
Radiation Modification challenges decarbonization with renewable solar
energy. *EGUsphere*, *2023*, 1-22.

*Abstract*

Solar radiation modification (SRM) is increasingly being discussed as a
potential tool to reduce global and regional temperatures to buy time for
conventional carbon mitigation measures to take effect. However, most
simulations to date assume SRM to be an additive component to the climate
change toolbox, without any physical coupling between mitigation and SRM.
In this study we analyze one aspect of this coupling: how renewable energy
(RE) capacity, and therefore decarbonization rates, may be affected under
SRM deployment by modification of photovoltaic (PV) and concentrated solar
power (CSP) production potential. Simulated 1 h output from the Earth
system model CNRM-ESM2-1 for scenario-based experiments is used for the
assessment. The SRM scenario uses stratospheric aerosol injections (SAIs)
to approximately lower global mean temperature from the high-emission
scenario SSP585 baseline to the moderate-emission scenario SSP245. We find
that by the end of the century, most regions experience an increased number
of low PV and CSP energy weeks per year under SAI compared to SSP245.
Compared to SSP585, while the increase in low energy weeks under SAI is
still dominant on a global scale, certain areas may benefit from SAI and
see fewer low PV or CSP energy weeks. A substantial part of the decrease in
potential with SAI compared to the SSP scenarios is compensated for by
optically thinner upper-tropospheric clouds under SAI, which allow more
radiation to penetrate towards the surface. The largest relative reductions
in PV potential are seen in the Northern and Southern Hemisphere
midlatitudes. Our study suggests that using SAI to reduce high-end global
warming to moderate global warming could pose increased challenges for
meeting energy demand with solar renewable resources.

[image: figure 4] <https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01329-3> Müller,
R. C., Kim, J. S., Lee, H., Muri, H., Tjiputra, J., Yoon, J. H., &
Schaepman-Strub, G. (2024). Radiative forcing geoengineering causes higher
risk of wildfires and permafrost thawing over the Arctic regions.
<https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01329-3>*Communications Earth &
Environment <https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01329-3>*,
<https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01329-3>*5
<https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01329-3>*(1), 180.
<https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01329-3>
[image: figure 1] <https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01324-8>
Hodnebrog,
Ø., Myhre, G., Jouan, C., Andrews, T., Forster, P. M., Jia, H., ... &
Schulz, M. (2024). Recent reductions in aerosol emissions have increased
Earth’s energy imbalance.
<https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01324-8>*Communications Earth &
Environment <https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01324-8>*,
<https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01324-8>*5
<https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01324-8>*(1), 166.
<https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01324-8>
------------------------------
CONFERENCE PAPERSTargeted Climate Modification on land – A matter of scale
<https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU24/EGU24-4740.html>

Dekker, S. C., de Boer, H. J., Koren, G. B., Staal, A., Theeuwen, J. J., &
van Woesik, F. M. (2024). *Targeted Climate Modification on land–A matter
of scale* (No. EGU24-4740). Copernicus Meetings.

*Abstract*

Geoengineering strategies can be classified into two primary categories: i)
Solar Radiation Management (SRM), which aims to mitigate the absorption of
sunlight by the Earth, and ii) Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR), involving the
active extraction of carbon from the atmosphere for storage in terrestrial
or marine environments. The ongoing discourse on geoengineering,
particularly SRM on a global scale, is marked by polarization, primarily
due to the challenging nature of predicting remote consequences.

This presentation endeavors to demonstrate two key points. Firstly, it will
present a range of evidence indicating that local mitigation and
adaptation, employing ecohydrological processes in regional models, yield
more pronounced effects on regional temperatures and moisture compared to
studies that use global climate models. Secondly, it will highlight that
various bottom-up interventions in the energy-carbon-water nexus
significantly impact maximum temperatures and moisture availability. For
instance, a recent review (van Woesik et al., 2024) identifies over 50 of
such interventions for East Africa.

While advocating for the efficacy of local solutions, this presentation
acknowledges that such interventions, including reforestation and
afforestation (e.g. Staal et al. 2024), can lead to remote consequences due
to the interconnected energy-carbon-water dynamics, affecting for instance
shifts in local precipitation patterns (e.g. van Theeuwen et al. 2024).
Consequently, local-scale CDR solutions influence both local and remote
energy balances, blurring the distinction from SRM. This challenges the
applicability of conventional IPCC terminologies for climate mitigation and
adaptation at the local scale. The prevalent global focus of IPCC research,
derived from global models, has impeded the analysis of local
ecohydrological interventions.

The central proposition of our research is that Targeted Climate
Modification should be approached and analyzed from a bottom-up perspective
rather than a top-down one. Therefore, we propose terminology shifts from
mitigation and adaptation to Targeted Climate Modification. We hypothesize
that such locally targeted interventions can benefit humanity and
biodiversity by inducing cooling, enhancing agricultural productivity, and
mitigating extremes in droughts and floods.

However, our research also calls for ethical and governance discussions.
Acknowledging that local Targeted Climate Modification may yield negative
remote consequences and substantial impacts on biodiversity loss, it
advocates for the development of a new framework to analyze ethical,
social, and environmental issues associated with Targeted Climate
Modification.

------------------------------
WEB POSTSThe Solar Geoengineering Updates Newsletter (March'2024)
Solar Geoengineering Updates
The Solar Geoengineering Updates Newsletter (March'2024)
<https://solargeoengineeringupdates.substack.com/p/the-solar-geoengineering-updates-018?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=email>


Read more
<https://solargeoengineeringupdates.substack.com/p/the-solar-geoengineering-updates-018?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=email>
5 days ago · Andrew Lockley
Warming Is Getting Worse. So They Just Tested a Way to Deflect the Sun
<https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/climate/global-warming-clouds-solar-geoengineering.html>
(The
New York Times)The hard lessons of Harvard’s failed geoengineering
experiment
<https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/04/04/1090626/the-hard-lessons-of-harvards-failed-geoengineering-experiment/>
(MIT
Technology Review)New Climate Studies and Public Engagement Center Launch
in the San Francisco Bay Area
<https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/new-climate-studies-and-public-engagement-center-launch-in-the-san-francisco-bay-area-302107585.html>
(PR
Newswire)Climate engineering carries serious national security risks −
countries facing extreme heat may try it anyway, and the world needs to be
prepared
<https://theconversation.com/climate-engineering-carries-serious-national-security-risks-countries-facing-extreme-heat-may-try-it-anyway-and-the-world-needs-to-be-prepared-222120>
(The
Conversation)Climate engineering carries serious national security
risks—countries facing extreme heat may try it anyway
<https://phys.org/news/2024-04-climate-national-countries-extreme.html>
 (Phys.Org)Why artificial submarine curtains won't save West Antarctica's
retreating glaciers
<https://phys.org/news/2024-04-artificial-submarine-curtains-wont-west.html>
 (Phys.Org)Geoengineering Techniques Assessment: Arctic, Antarctic and
Amazonian Regions
<https://groups.google.com/g/geoengineering/c/HEpFDuxBxSs> (Arctic
and North Atlantic Oceans)Tennessee outlaws release of airborne chemicals
<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68716894> (BBC)
[image: A view of the spraying machine, looking something like a short
cannon. The barrel is royal blue. A United States flag waves on a short
mast just behind, at the edge of the carrier’s flight deck.]
<https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/climate/global-warming-clouds-solar-geoengineering.html>
Warming
Is Getting Worse. So They Just Tested a Way to Deflect the Sun
<https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/climate/global-warming-clouds-solar-geoengineering.html>
------------------------------
REPORTSField Study of Controlled-Release Sea Salt Aerosol Plume
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iJWCk5wGhAWbFPFcVftBojoO3_kqBA-o/view?usp=sharing>
<https://faculty.washington.edu/robwood2/wordpress/?page_id=1578>
------------------------------
*UPCOMING EVENTS*(NEW) Solar Climate Intervention Virtual Symposia#10
<https://sites.google.com/view/solargeo-symposium/home> | 12 April 2024
(NEW) Energy Policy Seminar: "Frosted Tips: An Alternative Rationale for
Solar Geoengineering" by Harvard Kennedy School
<https://www.hks.harvard.edu/events/energy-policy-seminar-frosted-tips-alternative-rationale-solar-geoengineering>
|
15 April 2024(NEW) Active Conservation of Ice-Sheets to Mitigate Sea-Level
Rise: Research Needs and Approaches at EGU Meeting in Vienna, Austria
<https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU24/session/50997> | 15 April
2024*(NEW) Simulating ice sheet interventions: research methods and needs
<https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU24/session/50896>*at EGU
Meeting in Vienna, Austria
<https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU24/session/50896> | 15 April
2024*Solar Radiation Modification, Clouds, Aerosols, and their Impacts on
the Biosphere and Earth System | EGU General Assembly
<https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU24/session/49142> | 18 April
2024**Fourteenth GeoMIP Workshop | Ithaca, USA
<https://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/GeoMIP/2024.html> | 10-12 July 2024*

Solar Geoengineering Events Calendar <https://teamup.com/ks64mmvtit583eitxx>

*GUIDELINES:**Sync selected events to your default calendar in these simple
steps:**1) Click on the event you want to sync.**2) Tap the menu icon
(three vertical lines) at the top left.**3) Choose 'Share.'**4) Pick your
default calendar.**5) Save the event.*

*Sync the entire Teamup Calendar to your default calendar with these simple
steps:**1) Tap the menu icon (three vertical lines) at the top right.**2)
Choose 'Preferences.'**3) Click 'iCalendar Feeds.'**4) Copy the URL shown
for 'Solar Geoengineering Events / SRM Deadlines.'’**5) Paste the URL into
your default calendar settings (Open Google Calendar in your web browser if
you are using Gcal).**6) Click 'Subscribe' or 'Add Calendar.'*

*For more detailed instructions,
visit: https://calendar.teamup.com/kb/subscribe-to-teamup-icalendar-feeds/
<https://calendar.teamup.com/kb/subscribe-to-teamup-icalendar-feeds/>*

*You can directly sync all Solar Geoengineering events to your default
calendars by pressing the link below:*

Sync SG Events to your Default Calendar
<https://ics.teamup.com/feed/ks64mmvtit583eitxx/0.ics>
<https://teamup.com/ks64mmvtit583eitxx> Solar Geoengineering Events Calendar
<https://teamup.com/ks64mmvtit583eitxx>
------------------------------
*JOB OPPORTUNITY*Researcher on the scientific and technical definition of
solar geoengineering field trials for the development of a governance
framework (M/F) at CNRS
<https://emploi.cnrs.fr/Offres/CDD/FR636-ALERUB-046/Default.aspx> |
Deadline: 23 April 2024

"The postdoctoral fellow will participate in the EU-funded Co-CREATE
(Conditions for Responsible Research of SRM - Analysis, Co-Creation, and
Ethos) project on the governance of solar geoengineering (SRM) research,
and will work in particular on the scientific and technical definition of
potential field trials.

As part of this project, IPSL is leading a working group (WP) on the
scientific evaluation of potential solar radiation management trials in
selected study cases, particularly in terms of scientific merit,
monitoring, of detectability, safety limits and possible shutdown
procedures, and on the boundary between an experiment and a real
deployment. The working group analyzes potential future field trials from a
physical science perspective and proposes quantitative estimates of
identified key parameters (including ranges and uncertainties, where
possible). The analyzes examine (if necessary specifically for each SRM
technique): i) the boundary (physical demarcation) between research and
deployment, ii) the main unknowns and the contributions that field trials
can make to answer them (scientific merit), iii) environmental consequences
of field trials (including their reversibility and uncertainties), iv)
monitoring capabilities (to detect and attribute observed changes). In
addition to conducting research on the above topics, the postdoctoral
fellow will lead and co-author literature reviews on SRM field trials and
participate in an international workshop. As the project is
interdisciplinary, this position offers an excellent opportunity to
interact with researchers in the social sciences and humanities, in
particular through a WP which brings together all the contributions from
the different fields. Dissemination and awareness activities are also
planned."

------------------------------
PODCASTSAn Engineering Experiment to Cool the Earth | The Daily
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/an-engineering-experiment-to-cool-the-earth/id1200361736?i=1000651525859

"Decades of efforts to cut carbon emissions have failed to significantly
slow the rate of global warming, so scientists are now turning to bolder
approaches.

Christopher Flavelle, who writes about climate change for The Times,
discusses efforts to engineer our way out of the climate crisis.”

Ulrike Lohmann on clouds, aerosols and solar radiation modification |
Challenging Climate  <https://www.challengingclimate.org/1873533/14809266>

"Today’s guest is Ulrike Lohmann, Professor of Experimental Atmospheric
Physics in the Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science at ETH Zurich.
Lohmann is also the Principal Investigator of the CLOUDLAB project, a
multi-year project to investigate aerosol-cloud interactions in wintertime
stratus clouds over the Alps.

In this episode, we discuss the role of clouds and aerosols in our climate.
We dive deep into aerosol-cloud interactions to uncover the science behind
solar radiation modification (SRM) techniques like marine cloud
brightening, and discuss a novel proposed SRM technique - Mixed Phase Cloud
Thinning."

________________________________________

-- 
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/CAHJsh9-%2BMwz7QhN%3DzfuH6LrdkBJOw--_kJwKc-FpNxUFgdjg%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to