https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-4990/

*Authors: *Thomas Jacques Aubry, Matthew Toohey, Sujan Khanal, Man Mei
Chim, Magali Verkerk, Ben Johnson, Anja Schmidt, Mahesh Kovilakam, Michael
Sigl, Zebedee Nicholls, Larry Thomason, Vaishali Naik, Landon Rieger,
Dominik Stiller, Elisa Ziegler, and Isabel Smith

*Received: 09 Oct 2025 – Discussion started: 16 Oct 2025*

*Abstract*
Stratospheric aerosols, most of which originate from explosive volcanic
sulfur emissions into the stratosphere, are a key natural driver of climate
variability. They are thus a forcing provided by the Coupled Model
Intercomparison Project (CMIP) Climate Forcings Task Team to climate
modelling groups participating in phase 7 of CMIP. For the historical
period, we provide two datasets covering 1750–2023: i) a volcanic upper
tropospheric-stratospheric sulfur emission dataset, documented in a
companion paper; and ii) a stratospheric sulfate aerosol optical property
dataset, which we document here at version 2.2.1. For the satellite era
(from 1979 onwards), stratospheric aerosol optical properties are derived
from the Global Space-based Stratospheric Aerosol Climatology (GloSSAC)
dataset. For the pre-satellite era (1750–1978), optical properties are
derived from our volcanic SO2 emission dataset using a new version of the
reduced-complexity volcanic aerosol model Easy Volcanic Aerosol (Height)
(EVA_H). A background, non-volcanic stratospheric aerosol climatology is
derived from the 1998–2001 period with a trend over 1850–1978 accounting
for increasing anthropogenic aerosols. A monthly stratospheric aerosol
climatology is derived from the 1850–2021 average for both pre-industrial
and Scenario (future) simulations, with a 9-year ramp over 2022–2030 for
scenario simulations to ensure a smooth transition from the historical
period. Our methodology to produce historical aerosol optical properties
significantly differs from CMIP6 for the pre-satellite era, and the
resulting forcings in turn largely differ. In particular, the CMIP6 dataset
was mostly based on the sparse and uncertain pyrheliometer record, which
resulted in strongly underrepresented emissions from small-to-moderate
magnitude eruptions. The resulting bias is addressed in CMIP7, which is
entirely emission-derived in the pre-satellite era and uses more recent
ice-core-based volcanic sulfur emission inventories than CMIP6. Our
approach results in an overall larger volcanic aerosol forcing for CMIP7,
with the 1850–2014 mean mid-visible global mean stratospheric aerosol
optical depth (SAOD) in CMIP7 (0.0138) being 29 % higher than in CMIP6
(0.0107). The pre-industrial mean of the same variable is 26 % higher in
CMIP7 (0.0135, derived from the historical 1850–2021) than CMIP6 (0.0107,
derived from the historical 1850–2014 mean). Using a reduced-complexity
climate model, we simulate a global mean surface temperature that is 0.07
°C colder for 1850–1900 when using the CMIP7 dataset instead of CMIP6,
whereas 2000–2014 is 0.03 °C warmer in CMIP7. Our dataset also exhibits
lower forcing for 1960–1980, resulting in temperatures 0.06 °C warmer when
averaged over 1960–1990, a period for which CMIP6 climate models exhibit a
cold bias. Given the large uncertainties characterizing the dataset, in
particular for the pre-satellite era, we advise against treating the CMIP7
or CMIP6 dataset as uniquely superior for any specific year and highlight
the need for further evaluation. We conclude the study by discussing
sources of uncertainty for the dataset, future research avenues to improve
it, as well as requirements to operationalize the production of the
dataset, i.e. extend it and update it on an annual basis instead of every
5–7 years following CMIP cycles.

*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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHJsh98EaKi4QB%3DapNAy8MQ-iheDFhYHt7MSuOh4H0GZJ1Jk7Q%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to