Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Geophysical Research...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Geophysical Research Letters
Article . 2024 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Geophysical Research Letters
Article . 2024
Data sources: DOAJ
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Assessing GFDL‐ESM4.1 Climate Responses to a Stratospheric Aerosol Injection Strategy Intended to Avoid Overshoot 2.0°C Warming

Authors: Shipeng Zhang; Vaishali Naik; David Paynter; Simone Tilmes; Jasmin John;

Assessing GFDL‐ESM4.1 Climate Responses to a Stratospheric Aerosol Injection Strategy Intended to Avoid Overshoot 2.0°C Warming

Abstract

AbstractIn this work, we apply the GFDL Earth System Model (GFDL‐ESM4.1) to explore the climate responses to a stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) scenario that aims to restrict global warming to 2.0°C above pre‐industrial levels (1850–1900) under the CMIP6 overshoot scenario (SSP5‐34‐OS). Simulations of this SAI scenario with the CESM Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (CESM2‐WACCM6) showed nearly unchanged interhemispheric and pole‐to‐Equator surface temperature gradients relative to present‐day conditions around 2020, and reduced global impacts, such as heatwaves, sea ice melting, and shifting precipitation patterns (Tilmes et al., 2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd‐11‐579‐2020). However, model structural uncertainties can lead to varying climate projections under the same forcing. Implementing identical stratospheric aerosol radiative properties in GFDL‐ESM4.1, which has a much lower Effective Climate Sensitivity compared to CESM2‐WACCM6, resulted in a decrease in global‐mean surface temperature by more than 1.5°C and a corresponding reduction in precipitation responses. Two major reasons contribute to the different temperature response between the two models: first, GFDL‐ESM4.1 has less warming in the SSP534‐OS scenario; second, GFDL‐ESM4.1 has shown more pronounced cooling in response to the same stratospheric AOD perturbation. Notably, the Southern Hemisphere experiences substantial cooling compared to the Northern Hemisphere, accompanied by a northward shift of the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ). Furthermore, our analysis reveals that spatially heterogeneous forcing within the SAI scenario results in diverse climate feedback parameters in the GFDL‐ESM4.1 model, through varying surface warming/cooling patterns. This research highlights the importance of considering model structural uncertainties and forcing spatial patterns for a comprehensive evaluation of future scenarios and geoengineering strategies.

Related Organizations
Keywords

aerosol climate effect, climate change, stratospheric aerosol injection, QC801-809, Geophysics. Cosmic physics

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
gold
Related to Research communities
Energy Research