Geoengineering as a design problem
Understanding the climate impacts of solar geoengineering is essential for evaluating its benefits and risks. Most previous simulations have prescribed a particular strategy and evaluated its modeled effects. Here we turn this approach around by first choosing example climate objectives and then des...
Published in: | Earth System Dynamics |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | unknown |
Published: |
European Geosciences Union
2016
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-469-2016 |
id |
ftcaltechauth:oai:authors.library.caltech.edu:md0zr-97q47 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
ftcaltechauth:oai:authors.library.caltech.edu:md0zr-97q47 2024-09-09T19:27:19+00:00 Geoengineering as a design problem Kravitz, Ben MacMartin, Douglas G. Wang, Hailong Rasch, Philip J. 2016-05-24 https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-469-2016 unknown European Geosciences Union https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-469-2016 oai:authors.library.caltech.edu:md0zr-97q47 eprintid:69449 resolverid:CaltechAUTHORS:20160804-132109803 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Other Earth System Dynamics, 7(2), 469-497, (2016-05-24) info:eu-repo/semantics/article 2016 ftcaltechauth https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-469-2016 2024-08-06T15:35:00Z Understanding the climate impacts of solar geoengineering is essential for evaluating its benefits and risks. Most previous simulations have prescribed a particular strategy and evaluated its modeled effects. Here we turn this approach around by first choosing example climate objectives and then designing a strategy to meet those objectives in climate models. There are four essential criteria for designing a strategy: (i) an explicit specification of the objectives, (ii) defining what climate forcing agents to modify so the objectives are met, (iii) a method for managing uncertainties, and (iv) independent verification of the strategy in an evaluation model. We demonstrate this design perspective through two multi-objective examples. First, changes in Arctic temperature and the position of tropical precipitation due to CO_2 increases are offset by adjusting high-latitude insolation in each hemisphere independently. Second, three different latitude-dependent patterns of insolation are modified to offset CO_2-induced changes in global mean temperature, interhemispheric temperature asymmetry, and the Equator-to-pole temperature gradient. In both examples, the "design" and "evaluation" models are state-of-the-art fully coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation models. © 2016 Author(s). This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Received: 06 Aug 2015 – Published in Earth Syst. Dynam. Discuss.: 08 Sep 2015; Revised: 18 Mar 2016 – Accepted: 10 May 2016 – Published: 24 May 2016. We thank the reviewers and the editor for thorough comments that greatly improved the manuscript. The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory is operated for the US Department of Energy by Battelle Memorial Institute under contract DE-AC05-76RL01830. CESM simulations were performed using PNNL institutional computing resources. GISS ModelE2 simulations were supported by the NASA High-End Computing (HEC) Program through the NASA Center for Climate Simulation (NCCS) at Goddard Space Flight Center. ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Caltech Authors (California Institute of Technology) Arctic Pacific Earth System Dynamics 7 2 469 497 |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Caltech Authors (California Institute of Technology) |
op_collection_id |
ftcaltechauth |
language |
unknown |
description |
Understanding the climate impacts of solar geoengineering is essential for evaluating its benefits and risks. Most previous simulations have prescribed a particular strategy and evaluated its modeled effects. Here we turn this approach around by first choosing example climate objectives and then designing a strategy to meet those objectives in climate models. There are four essential criteria for designing a strategy: (i) an explicit specification of the objectives, (ii) defining what climate forcing agents to modify so the objectives are met, (iii) a method for managing uncertainties, and (iv) independent verification of the strategy in an evaluation model. We demonstrate this design perspective through two multi-objective examples. First, changes in Arctic temperature and the position of tropical precipitation due to CO_2 increases are offset by adjusting high-latitude insolation in each hemisphere independently. Second, three different latitude-dependent patterns of insolation are modified to offset CO_2-induced changes in global mean temperature, interhemispheric temperature asymmetry, and the Equator-to-pole temperature gradient. In both examples, the "design" and "evaluation" models are state-of-the-art fully coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation models. © 2016 Author(s). This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Received: 06 Aug 2015 – Published in Earth Syst. Dynam. Discuss.: 08 Sep 2015; Revised: 18 Mar 2016 – Accepted: 10 May 2016 – Published: 24 May 2016. We thank the reviewers and the editor for thorough comments that greatly improved the manuscript. The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory is operated for the US Department of Energy by Battelle Memorial Institute under contract DE-AC05-76RL01830. CESM simulations were performed using PNNL institutional computing resources. GISS ModelE2 simulations were supported by the NASA High-End Computing (HEC) Program through the NASA Center for Climate Simulation (NCCS) at Goddard Space Flight Center. ... |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Kravitz, Ben MacMartin, Douglas G. Wang, Hailong Rasch, Philip J. |
spellingShingle |
Kravitz, Ben MacMartin, Douglas G. Wang, Hailong Rasch, Philip J. Geoengineering as a design problem |
author_facet |
Kravitz, Ben MacMartin, Douglas G. Wang, Hailong Rasch, Philip J. |
author_sort |
Kravitz, Ben |
title |
Geoengineering as a design problem |
title_short |
Geoengineering as a design problem |
title_full |
Geoengineering as a design problem |
title_fullStr |
Geoengineering as a design problem |
title_full_unstemmed |
Geoengineering as a design problem |
title_sort |
geoengineering as a design problem |
publisher |
European Geosciences Union |
publishDate |
2016 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-469-2016 |
geographic |
Arctic Pacific |
geographic_facet |
Arctic Pacific |
genre |
Arctic |
genre_facet |
Arctic |
op_source |
Earth System Dynamics, 7(2), 469-497, (2016-05-24) |
op_relation |
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-469-2016 oai:authors.library.caltech.edu:md0zr-97q47 eprintid:69449 resolverid:CaltechAUTHORS:20160804-132109803 |
op_rights |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Other |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-469-2016 |
container_title |
Earth System Dynamics |
container_volume |
7 |
container_issue |
2 |
container_start_page |
469 |
op_container_end_page |
497 |
_version_ |
1809896771050012672 |