Journal cover Journal topic
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 5.509 IF 5.509
  • IF 5-year value: 5.689 IF 5-year 5.689
  • CiteScore value: 5.44 CiteScore 5.44
  • SNIP value: 1.519 SNIP 1.519
  • SJR value: 3.032 SJR 3.032
  • IPP value: 5.37 IPP 5.37
  • h5-index value: 86 h5-index 86
  • Scimago H index value: 161 Scimago H index 161
Volume 16, issue 5 | Copyright

Special issue: The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP):...

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2843-2862, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2843-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Research article 04 Mar 2016

Research article | 04 Mar 2016

Climatic impacts of stratospheric geoengineering with sulfate, black carbon and titania injection

Anthony C. Jones1, James M. Haywood1,2, and Andy Jones2 Anthony C. Jones et al.
  • 1College of Engineering Maths and Physical Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
  • 2Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK

Abstract. In this paper, we examine the potential climatic effects of geoengineering by sulfate, black carbon and titania injection against a baseline RCP8.5 scenario. We use the HadGEM2-CCS model to simulate scenarios in which the top-of-the-atmosphere radiative imbalance due to rising greenhouse gas concentrations is offset by sufficient aerosol injection throughout the 2020–2100 period. We find that the global-mean temperature is effectively maintained at historical levels for the entirety of the period for all three aerosol-injection scenarios, though there is a wide range of side-effects which are discussed in detail. The most prominent conclusion is that although the BC injection rate necessary to produce an equivalent global mean temperature response is much lower, the severity of stratospheric temperature changes (>+70°C) and precipitation impacts effectively exclude BC from being a viable option for geoengineering. Additionally, while it has been suggested that titania would be an effective particle because of its high scattering efficiency, it also efficiently absorbs solar ultraviolet radiation producing a significant stratospheric warming (>+20°C). As injection rates and climatic impacts for titania are close to those for sulfate, there appears to be little benefit in terms of climatic influence of using titania when compared to the injection of sulfur dioxide, which has the added benefit of being well-modeled through extensive research that has been carried out on naturally occurring explosive volcanic eruptions.

Download & links
Publications Copernicus
Special issue
Download
Short summary
In this paper we assess the potential climatic impacts of geoengineering with sulfate, black carbon and titania injection strategies. We find that black carbon injection results in severe stratospheric warming and precipitation impacts, and therefore black carbon is unsuitable for geoengineering purposes. As the injection rates and climatic impacts for titania are close to those for sulfate, there appears little benefit of using titania when compared to injection of sulfur dioxide.
In this paper we assess the potential climatic impacts of geoengineering with sulfate, black...
Citation
Share