Cited by 67Climate Change and GeoengineeringAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols

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

Open access
Jones, Anthony C., Haywood, James M., Jones, Andy·2016·Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Published version of a preprint

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.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5194/acp-16-2843-2016

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Collins, M., Knutti, R., Arblaster, J., Dufresne, J.-L., Fichefet, T., Friedlingstein, P., Gao, X., Gutowski, W. J., Johns, T., Krinner, G., Shongwe, M., Tebaldi, C., Weaver, A. J., and Wehner, M.: Long-term Climate Change: Projections, Commitments and Irre- versibility, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Ba- sis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Re- port of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S. K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P. M., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2013.
  2. Dankovic, D., Kuempel, E., Geraci, C., Gilbert, S., Rice, F., Schulte, P., Smith, R., Sofge, C., Wheeler, M., Lentz, T. J., Zumwalde, R., Maynard, A., Attfield, M., Pinheiro, G., Ruder, A., Hubbs, A., Ahlers, H., Lynch, D., Toraason, M., and Vallyathan, V.: Current intelligence bulletin 63: occupational exposure to tita- nium dioxide, Cincinnati, OH: US Department of Health and Hu- man Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Con- trol and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2011-160, 1-119, 2011.
  3. Deepak, A. and Gerber, H. E. (Eds.): Report of the experts meeting on aerosols and their climatic effects (Williamsburg, Virginia, March 1983), Rep. WCP-55, World Clim. Programme, World Meteorol. Organ., Geneva, 1983.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jones, A. C., Haywood, J. M., & Jones, A.
Affiliations
Met Office (GB)
Venue
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Published
2016-03-04
Volume
16
Issue
5
Pages
2843-2862
ISSN
  • 1680-7316 (ISSN-L)
  • 1680-7324
OpenAlex
W1959297709
Cited by
67
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6
FWCI
6.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Atmospheric chemistry and physics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Natural Environment Research Council (580009183)
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 › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Keywords
solar geoengineering, radiative forcing, global mean temperature, precipitation change, volcanic eruptions, RCP8.5, climate change mitigation

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