Climate impacts of geoengineering marine stratocumulus clouds
Abstract
Theoretical potential geoengineering solutions to the global warming problem have recently been proposed. Here, we present an idealized study of the climate response to deliberately seeding large‐scale stratocumulus cloud decks in the North Pacific, South Pacific, and South Atlantic, thereby inducing cooling via aerosol indirect effects. Atmosphere‐only, atmosphere/mixed‐layer ocean, and fully coupled atmosphere/ocean versions of the Met Office Hadley Centre model are used to investigate the radiative forcing, climate efficacy, and regional response of temperature, precipitation, and net primary productivity to such geoengineering. The radiative forcing simulations indicate that, for our parameterization of aerosol indirect effects, up to 35% of the radiative forcing due to current levels of greenhouse gases could be offset by stratocumulus modification. Equilibrium simulations with the atmosphere/mixed‐layer ocean model, wherein each of the three stratocumulus sheets is modified in turn, reveal that the most efficient cooling per unit radiative forcing occurs when the South Pacific stratocumulus sheet is modified. Transient coupled model simulations suggest that geoengineering all three stratocumulus areas delays the simulated global warming by about 25 years. These simulations also indicate that, while some areas experience increases in precipitation and net primary productivity, sharp decreases are simulated in South America, with particularly detrimental impacts on the Amazon rain forest. These results show that, while some areas benefit from geoengineering, there are significant areas where the response could be very detrimental with implications for the practical applicability of such a scheme.
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?
The interhemispheric forcing contrast from IMO2020 has important implications for deliberate geoengineering schemes because interhemispheric forcing contrast can create significant perturbations in precipitation patterns.
“This creates interhemispheric contrast in the resulting radiative forcing, which has important implications for deliberate geoengineering schemes because interhemispheric forcing contrast can create significant perturbations in precipitation patterns6.”
From Abrupt reduction in shipping emission as an inadvertent geoengineering termination shock produces substantial radiative warming (2024) · cites this paper as [6]
Modes of ocean variability such as PDO and El-Nino Southern Oscillation may contribute to variations in these quantities.
“It is worth noting that in addition to modes of ocean variability such as PDO and El-Nino Southern Oscillation may contribute to variations in these quantities6.”
From Abrupt reduction in shipping emission as an inadvertent geoengineering termination shock produces substantial radiative warming (2024) · cites this paper as [6]
Because of the large spatial extent of shortwave-absorbing aerosols, they are capable of influencing the interhemispheric energy balance, the location of the ITCZ, and regional precipitation patterns.
“Because of the large spatial extent of the shortwave-absorbing aerosols, they are capable of influencing the interhemispheric energy balance, the location of the ITCZ, and regional precipitation patterns (Jones et al., 2009;Randles and Ramaswamy, 2010;Sakaeda et al., 2011).”
From The tropical atlantic observing system (2019) · cites this paper as Jones et al., 2009
The primary candidate methods for geoengineering are marine cloud brightening, cirrus thinning, and stratospheric aerosol injection.
“The primary candidate methods for geoengineering are marine cloud brightening [396] (making low-lying clouds more reflective), cirrus thinning [759] (making high-flying clouds trap less heat), and stratospheric aerosol injection [668] (which we discuss below).”
From Tackling climate change with machine learning (2023) · cites this paper as [396]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 32 · Cited by 191
- Authors
- Jones, A., Haywood, J., & Boucher, O.
- Affiliations
- Met Office (GB)
- Met Office Hadley Centre Exeter UK
- Corresponding author
- Jones, Andy
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2009-05-27
- Volume
- 114
- Issue
- D10
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1981402659
- Cited by
- 191
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 17
- FWCI
- 9.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres (publishedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK Government
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Geoengineering
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
- Keywords
- solar geoengineering, marine stratocumulus clouds, cloud seeding, aerosol indirect effect, radiative forcing, climate change mitigation, precipitation response, net primary productivity, Amazon rainforest, regional climate impacts, North Pacific, South Pacific, South Atlantic
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