Search

The impacts of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) on the atmosphere and surface climate depend on when and where the sulfate aerosol precursors are injected, as well as on how much surface cooling is to be achieved. We use a set of CESM2(WACCM6) SAI simulations achieving three different levels of global mean surface cooling and demonstrate that unlike some direct surface climate impacts driven by the reflection of solar radiation by sulfate aerosols, the SAI‐induced changes in the high latitude circulation and ozone are more complex and could be non‐linear. This manifests in our simulations by disproportionally larger Antarctic springtime ozone loss, significantly larger intra‐ensemble spread of the Arctic stratospheric jet and ozone responses, and non‐linear impacts on the extratropical modes of surface climate variability under the strongest‐cooling SAI scenario compared to the weakest one. These potential non‐linearities may add to uncertainties in projections of regional surface impacts under SAI. Plain Language Summary: The injection of reflective aerosols, or their precursors, into the lower stratosphere (Stratospheric Aerosol Injection, SAI) has been proposed as a temporary measure to offset some of the adverse impacts of climate change whilst atmospheric concentrations of greenhouses are being stabilized and, ultimately, reduced. The impacts of SAI on the atmosphere and surface climate would depend on when and where the sulfate aerosol precursors are injected, as well as on how much surface cooling is to be achieved. Here we analyze SAI impacts on stratospheric climate and ozone in a set of Earth system model simulations under varying magnitudes of the SAI‐induced global mean cooling. We demonstrate that unlike some of the direct surface climate impacts from the reflection of solar radiation by sulfate aerosols, the SAI‐induced changes in stratospheric circulation, chemistry and climate are more complex, with the model simulations pointing toward more non‐linear behavior of the high latitude circulation and ozone under higher SAI scenarios. These potential non‐linearities may add to uncertainties in projections of regional surface impacts under SAI. Key Points: Impacts of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) depend on how much surface cooling is to be achievedHigh latitude circulation, ozone and modes of extratropical variability can vary non‐linearly with the SAI‐induced global surface coolingThese potential non‐linearities may add to uncertainties in projections of regional surface impacts under SAI [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The impacts of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) strategies on the Southern Annular Mode (SAM) are analyzed with the Community Earth System Model. Using a set of simulations with fixed single‐point SO2 injections we demonstrate the first‐order dependence of the SAM response on the latitude of injection, with the northern hemispheric and equatorial injections driving a response corresponding to a positive phase of SAM and the southern hemispheric injections driving a negative phase of SAM. We further demonstrate that the results can to first order explain the differences in the SAM responses diagnosed from the two recent large ensembles of geoengineering simulations utilizing more complex injection strategies – Geoengineering Large Ensemble and Assessing Responses and Impacts of Solar climate intervention on the Earth system with Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (GLENS and ARISE‐SAI) – as driven by the differences in the simulated sulfate aerosol distributions. Our results point to the meridional extent of aerosol‐induced lower stratospheric heating as an important driver of the sensitivity of the SAM response to the injection location. Plain Language Summary: Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) is a proposed climate intervention method in which sulfate aerosol precursors are injected into the lower stratosphere to mitigate some of the negative impacts of climate change. Here we analyze SAI impact on the Southern Annular Mode (SAM), a dominant mode of interannual climate variability in the southern mid‐ and high latitudes, using the Community Earth System Model. Using a set of simulations with fixed single‐point injections of aerosol precursors we demonstrate the first‐order dependence of the SAM response on the latitude of injection, with the northern hemispheric and equatorial injections driving a response corresponding to a positive phase of SAM and the southern hemispheric injections driving a negative phase of SAM. We further demonstrate that our results can to first order explain the differences in the SAM responses diagnosed from the two recent large ensembles of geoengineering simulations utilizing more complex injection strategies as driven by the differences in the simulated sulfate aerosol distributions. Our findings illustrate the complex interplay of the microphysical, radiative and dynamical processes contributing to the SAI responses on regional scales. Key Points: Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) impacts the Southern Annular Mode (SAM), and the response is strongly sensitive to the latitude of SAIInjections in the Northern Hemisphere drive positive SAM response and injections in the Southern Hemisphere drive negative SAM responseMeridional extent of lower stratospheric aerosol heating likely an important contributor to the sensitivity to injection latitude [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stratospheric circulation is a critical part of the Arctic ozone cycle. Sudden stratospheric warming events (SSWs) manifest the strongest alteration of stratospheric dynamics. During SSWs, changes in planetary wave propagation vigorously influence zonal mean zonal wind, temperature, and tracer concentrations in the stratosphere over the high latitudes. In this study, we examine six persistent major SSWs from 2004 to 2020 using the Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2). Using the unique density of observations around the Greenland sector at high latitudes, we perform comprehensive comparisons of high-latitude observations with the MERRA-2 ozone dataset during the six major SSWs. Our results show that MERRA-2 captures the high variability of mid-stratospheric ozone fluctuations during SSWs over high latitudes. However, larger uncertainties are observed in the lower stratosphere and troposphere. The zonally averaged stratospheric ozone shows a dramatic increase of 9 %–29 % in total column ozone (TCO) near the time of each SSW, which lasts up to 2 months. This study shows that the average shape of the Arctic polar vortex before SSWs influences the geographical extent, timing, and magnitude of ozone changes. The SSWs exhibit a more significant impact on ozone over high northern latitudes when the average polar vortex is mostly elongated as seen in 2009 and 2018 compared to the events in which the polar vortex is displaced towards Europe. Strong correlation (R2=90%) is observed between the magnitude of change in average equivalent potential vorticity before and after SSWs and the associated averaged total column ozone changes over high latitudes. This paper investigates the different terms of the ozone continuity equation using MERRA-2 circulation, which emphasizes the key role of vertical advection in mid-stratospheric ozone during the SSWs and the magnified vertical advection in elongated vortex shape as seen in 2009 and 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Various criteria exist for determining the occurrence of a major sudden stratospheric warming (SSW), but the most common is based on the reversal of the climatological westerly zonal-mean zonal winds at 60° latitude and 10 hPa in the winter stratosphere. This definition was established at a time when observations of the stratosphere were sparse. Given greater access to data in the satellite era, a systematic analysis of the optimal parameters of latitude, altitude, and threshold for the wind reversal is now possible. Here, the frequency of SSWs, the strength of the wave forcing associated with the events, changes in stratospheric temperature and zonal winds, and surface impacts are examined as a function of the stratospheric wind reversal parameters. The results provide a methodical assessment of how to best define a standard metric for major SSWs. While the continuum nature of stratospheric variability makes it difficult to identify a decisively optimal threshold, there is a relatively narrow envelope of thresholds that work well—and the original focus at 60° latitude and 10 hPa lies within this window. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The steady-state extratropical atmospheric response to thermal forcing is investigated in a simple atmospheric general circulation model. The thermal forcings qualitatively mimic three key aspects of anthropogenic climate change: warming in the tropical troposphere, cooling in the polar stratosphere, and warming at the polar surface. The principal novel findings are the following: 1) Warming in the tropical troposphere drives two robust responses in the model extratropical circulation: poleward shifts in the extratropical tropospheric storm tracks and a weakened stratospheric Brewer–Dobson circulation. The former result suggests heating in the tropical troposphere plays a fundamental role in the poleward contraction of the storm tracks found in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)-class climate change simulations; the latter result is in the opposite sense of the trends in the Brewer–Dobson circulation found in most previous climate change experiments. 2) Cooling in the polar stratosphere also drives a poleward shift in the extratropical storm tracks. The tropospheric response is largely consistent with that found in previous studies, but it is shown to be very sensitive to the level and depth of the forcing. In the stratosphere, the Brewer–Dobson circulation weakens at midlatitudes, but it strengthens at high latitudes because of anomalously poleward heat fluxes on the flank of the polar vortex. 3) Warming at the polar surface drives an equatorward shift of the storm tracks. The storm-track response to polar warming is in the opposite sense of the response to tropical tropospheric heating; hence large warming over the Arctic may act to attenuate the response of the Northern Hemisphere storm track to tropical heating. 4) The signs of the tropospheric and stratospheric responses to all thermal forcings considered here are robust to seasonal changes in the basic state, but the amplitude and details of the responses exhibit noticeable differences between equinoctial and wintertime conditions. Additionally, the responses exhibit marked nonlinearity in the sense that the response to multiple thermal forcings applied simultaneously is quantitatively different from the sum of the responses to the same forcings applied independently. Thus the response of the model to a given thermal forcing is demonstrably dependent on the other thermal forcings applied to the model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]