Cirrus cloud susceptibility to the injection of ice nuclei in the upper troposphere
Open accessAbstract
Due to their net warming effect, cirrus clouds play a crucial role in the climate system. A recently proposed climate engineering mechanism (CEM) intends to reduce high cloud cover by seeding cirrus clouds with efficient ice nuclei (IN) and therefore cool climate. Here, the susceptibility of cirrus clouds to the injection of ice nuclei in the upper troposphere is investigated in the extended Community Atmospheric Model version 5 (CAM5). Due to large uncertainties associated with the dominant ice nucleation mechanism in cirrus clouds, different control cases were simulated. In addition to pure homogeneous and heterogeneous nucleation, cases with competition between homogeneous and heterogeneous nucleation and different fractions of mineral dust active as IN were considered. Whereas seeding in the pure heterogeneous case leads to a strong warming due to overseeding, an optimal seeding IN concentration of approximately 18 l−1 was found for the other cases. For the optimal seeding concentration, a reduction in the net cloud forcing (NCF) of up to 2 W m−2 was simulated, corresponding to a strong cooling effect. To optimize the cooling and minimize the amount of seeding material, globally nonuniform seeding strategies were tested, with minimal seeding in the summer hemisphere and in the tropics. With seeding applied to less than half the globe, an even stronger reduction in the NCF was achieved. This suggests that the CEM could work for an atmosphere even with considerable heteroge…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Field experiments can help in evaluating the feasibility of CCT and MCT proposals, providing empirical validation of theoretical cirrus and mixed-phase cloud microphysical responses and potential side effects.
“Field experiments can help in evaluating the feasibility of CCT and MCT proposals, providing empirical validation of theoretical cirrus and mixed-phase cloud microphysical responses and potential side effects (NASEM, 2021; Storelvmo & Herger, 2014)”
From Past Field Experiments of Solar Radiation Modification: A Review of the Scientific and Technical Aspects for Governance (2026) · cites this paper as Storelvmo & Herger, 2014
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 30 · Cited by 69
- Authors
- Storelvmo, T., & Herger, N.
- Affiliations
- Yale University (US)
- ETH Zurich (CH)
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2014-03
- Volume
- 119
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2375-2389
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- 2169-897X
- 2169-8996
- OpenAlex
- W1975406695
- Cited by
- 69
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4
- FWCI
- 5.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres (publishedVersion)
- Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- ETH Zürich Research Collection
- Funders
- Yale University
- Faculty of Arts and Sciences
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Geoengineering
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
- Keywords
- cirrus clouds, geoengineering, cloud seeding, ice nucleation, homogeneous nucleation, heterogeneous nucleation, mineral dust, overseeding, upper troposphere, global cooling
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review