Cited by 51Climate Change and GeoengineeringAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols

Radiative and climate impacts of a large volcanic eruption during stratospheric sulfur geoengineering

Open access
Laakso, A., Kokkola, H., Partanen, A.-I., Niemeier, U., Timmreck, C., Lehtinen, K. E. J., Hakkarainen, H., Korhonen, H.·2016·Atmospheric chemistry and physics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Abstract. Both explosive volcanic eruptions, which emit sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, and stratospheric geoengineering via sulfur injections can potentially cool the climate by increasing the amount of scattering particles in the atmosphere. Here we employ a global aerosol-climate model and an earth system model to study the radiative and climate impacts of an erupting volcano during solar radiation management (SRM). According to our simulations, the radiative impacts of an eruption and SRM are not additive: in the simulated case of concurrent eruption and SRM, the peak increase in global forcing is about 40 % lower compared to a corresponding eruption into a clean background atmosphere. In addition, the recovery of the stratospheric sulfate burden and forcing was significantly faster in the concurrent case since the sulfate particles grew larger and thus sedimented faster from the stratosphere. In our simulation where we assumed that SRM would be stopped immediately after a volcano eruption, stopping SRM decreased the overall stratospheric aerosol load. For the same reasons, a volcanic eruption during SRM lead to only about 1/3 of the peak global ensemble-mean cooling compared to an eruption under unperturbed atmospheric conditions. Furthermore, the global cooling signal was seen only for 12 months after the eruption in the former scenario compared to over 40 months in the latter. In terms of the global precipitation rate, we obtain a 36 % smaller decrease in the first year after the eruption and again a clearly faster recovery in the concurrent eruption and SRM scenario. We also found that an explosive eruption could lead to significantly different regional climate responses depending on whether it takes place during geoengineering or into an unperturbed background atmosphere. Our results imply that observations from previous large eruptions, such as Mt Pinatubo in 1991, are not directly applicable when estimating the potential consequences of a volcanic eruption during stratospheric geoengineering.

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-16-305-2016

Cites

56 of 56 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

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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Laakso, A., Kokkola, H., Partanen, A.-I., Niemeier, U., Timmreck, C., Lehtinen, K. E. J., Hakkarainen, H., & Korhonen, H.
Affiliations
  • Finnish Meteorological Institute (FI)
  • Max Planck Institute for Meteorology (DE)
  • University of Eastern Finland (FI)
Corresponding author
Laakso, A.
Venue
Atmospheric chemistry and physics
Published
2016-01-18
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
305-323
ISSN
  • 1680-7316 (ISSN-L)
  • 1680-7324
OpenAlex
W2268046997
Cited by
51
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
3.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Atmospheric chemistry and physics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • UEF eRepo (University of Eastern Finland) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Luonnontieteiden ja Tekniikan Tutkimuksen Toimikunta (140867, 272041)
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
volcanic eruptions, solar radiation management, sulfur dioxide insertion, stratospheric sulfate aerosols, radiative forcing, global mean precipitation, global cooling, Mount Pinatubo, regional climate response

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