Simulation of geoengineering volcano shows desired surface cooling

Simulations have been used to analyze geoengineering to mimic the cooling effect of volcanic eruptions. Aerosols would be dispersed from balloons or airplanes at approximately 15 and 30 degrees latitude on both sides of the equator. The desired results would be reduced surface warming and a positive change in the temperature gradient.

Researchers ran 20 computer simulations to demonstrate the impact of adding sulfate aerosols to the stratosphere in the proposed manner.

The models showed the desired cooling impact.

But it is not perfect. There would be reduced global rainfall. The models showed that the changes in rainfall would not be uniform, either; some areas would get less than others. And as some of those areas, such as the North Atlantic, received less rainfall, the ocean would experience an increase in salinity, which would make the water denser.

Enhancement of the Earth’s albedo through the injection of sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere has been proposed as an approach to offset some of the adverse effects of climate change. Here we analyze an ensemble of simulations of the twenty-first century climate designed to explore a strategic geoengineering approach. Specifically, stratospheric sulfur injections are imposed at 15° and 30° in both hemispheres with the aim to minimize the changes in surface temperature, both in the global mean and in its gradients between hemispheres and from equator to pole. The approach accomplishes these goals and reduces previously noted adverse impacts of solar radiation management, such as excessive cooling in the tropics and weakening rainfall over land. Nonetheless, hydrological responses over the North Atlantic Ocean lead to an acceleration of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation and to continued warming of the deep and polar oceans, particularly in the vicinity of southern Greenland. These changes could cause continued, albeit slower, cryospheric melt and global sea level rise. Our simulations demonstrate the complexity of the coupled climate response to geoengineering and highlight the need for significant advances in our ability to simulate the coupled climate system and the continued refinement of geoengineering strategies as a prerequisite to their successful implementation.

Nature Geoscience – Persistent polar ocean warming in a strategically geoengineered climate

43 thoughts on “Simulation of geoengineering volcano shows desired surface cooling”

  1. While I am an advocate of this type of geo-engineering if truly needed … don’t fool yourselves with models saying A or B. Models often pretend to be predictive … few have been.

  2. While I am an advocate of this type of geo-engineering if truly needed … don’t fool yourselves with models saying A or B. Models often pretend to be predictive … few have been.

  3. So y’all are going to use chemtrails to deploy stratospheric aerosols? This article is explaining what’s already going on.

  4. Agreed, and honestly have done so with the intent of warming up the South Pole to get to the Earths last untouched resoutres of gold, oil, and all the other precious money making things they can take from all of us for free to change is money to use!

  5. ‘…particles that are about 100x better at blocking the sun’ – Titanium dioxide ? Whatever was used, effects on the ozone layer would need to be checked.

  6. I agree with the point about ocean fertilization being sold as a form of enhanced fishing and never mentioning climate at all.

  7. “We even let coal plants emit pollutants that kill about ten thousand Americans every year and many more worldwide. Don’t see any lawsuits there either. “Actually there are HEAPS of lawsuits.Google “coal pollution lawsuit” About 2,560,000 results (0.44 seconds)

  8. It sounded like they had good luck with ocean fertilizing using iron… off of Chile as I recall. Does anyone know the current state of that research?

  9. Do you know they already use tanker jets to spray chemicals in the stratosphere and have been doing it for years calling it “contrails”. So now when we see these jets spraying lines in the sky we can pretend it’s solar radiation management.

  10. Goat Guy is just an anonymous person reasonably ok with simple physics calculations who likes this blog. Please get some perspective.

  11. The result of this only vaguely scientific experiment was so compelling, I believe the failure to follow up by NOAA, or the department of the interior, the near prosecution of the experimenter, rather than him getting a medal for all the extra salmon, and the near fit thrown by the UN show that the powers that be do not want a solution. That is why government functionaries were so angry about the event.What governments, socialists, and globalists in general want is a “problem” that they can use as an excuse to tell us peons how big of a home we can have, what we can eat for supper, and if we are allowed to have a gasoline operated chain saw. Then there is the juicy proposed carbon tax in the works.Consider how the “war on drugs” has played out. Sick people are denied medicine, chronic pain victims are under medicated, or even persecuted, people are put in prison for what are essentially bad personal habits, every bit as evil as a lunchtime martini, and people’s legally obtained property is stolen by governments, unless the victim can hire an attorney, and prove the property is not the result of selling government unapproved drugs.Don’t believe me? Try carrying several thousand dollars along next time you fly in the US.

  12. Is this one of those articles where the loonies get to roam? Goatguy tried to inject reason in a sea of confused insanity. Really goes to show how effective the AGM agenda has become. Collective madness. I must bow to the amazing predictability of cognitive dissonance. It puts the Milgram experiment to shame.

  13. We can engineer particles that are about 100x better at blocking the sun as volcanic by-products in the air. Volcanic activity is just a natural example of SRM (solar radiation management).

  14. Simulations aren’t reality. You can cook up a simulation to show whatever warming/cooling you please from whatever inputs you like – but that doesn’t mean that the planet is going to respond the same way.In fact, having seen the inaccuracies in the CAGW sims, I’m pretty darn dubious about the claims that these guys have a magic bullet fix for the ‘warming’ that should have destroyed the planet by now… if you took the claims in the early ’90s seriously.

  15. Geoengineering works best when an entity does it on it’s own accord without regard for everyone else. If I were a billionaire I’d buy a bunch of sulfur and fluorine and release a few kilotons of SF6 in the air above Antarctica to melt all that stupid, useless ice.

  16. But apparently it’s perfectly fine to emit as much CO2 and methane as you like, causing all sorts of problems including many of the less-frivolous ones you mentioned. Nobody’s been successfully sued for that, so far.We even let coal plants emit pollutants that kill about ten thousand Americans every year and many more worldwide. Don’t see any lawsuits there either.But I’m sure you’re right that geoengineers would get sued. The solution is clear: we have to geoengineer as a side effect of some moneymaking venture, without mentioning any intent to alter the environment on purpose. Then nobody will blink an eye.Ocean fertilization should never have been branded as geoengineering. If they’d just called it “fishing” we could have stabilized the climate by now.

  17. Pretty sure that there are organic materials that both increase the reflecatability of the atmosphere and help in cloud fertilization that are being naturally released

  18. “We even let coal plants emit pollutants that kill about ten thousand Americans every year and many more worldwide. Don’t see any lawsuits there either. ”

    Actually there are HEAPS of lawsuits.

    Google “coal pollution lawsuit”

    About 2,560,000 results (0.44 seconds)

  19. Apart from the positive — and not mentioned in the article but also true: there are millions of tons of pure sulfur sitting in great mounds in places like Saudi Arabia — directly the byproduct of their sour crude refining and desulfurizing — apart from that, I fear that there are a lot of geopolitical downsides. № 1, “you idiots caused our … drought, flood, monsoon failure, hurricane hit, typhoon, sirocco, rash of tornadoes, forest wildfires, famine, plague of locusts, extinction of purple spotted blowflies, recession, depression, nightmares, rise in venereal disease, impotence, corns, horns, piles, rashes, skin cancer, ovary misfires, civil unrest, extremism, crime rate rise, job loss …”Go ahead, pick. ANy of them. All of them. You pro’lly cold think up another dozen. Without trying too hard. № 2, (or № 1b)… “and someone’s going to pay for this one way or the other”. Yep. With every complaint comes a monetary remediation drive. Line the streets with blubbering babies, wailing mothers, grannies in wheel chairs, divorcees and impotent schlubs wearing poorly written screeds on sandwich boards. … Roll the video to the politicians, harumphing, trumpeting, buffooning, lampooning, poltrooning … day after day, sound-bite after sound-bite. “And furthermore, because of the absolutely egregious disregard for My People, the so-called conservatıve scientists that engineered this disaster must be taken before the Law and tasked to pay for their crimes against Humanity…”Right.Those are some pretty strong arguments. Taken together.Just saying,GoatGuy

  20. “it” (unscientifically run but innocuous iron fertilization experiment) resulted not just in a “statistically significant” salmon harvest, but the largest on record. Ever. Now, while it could be a total coincidence, the likelihood — as you note with the generally declining salmon runs — is so far from expected that causation should at least be at the front of ideas entertained. Just saying,GoatGuy

  21. When geoengineering is mentioned(seldom) as a solution to alleged anthropogenic climate change, it’s usually decreasing insolation at ground level. Occasionally, removing CO2 from the atmosphere by some sort of chemical plant is touted, which is always way to expensive. The relatively easy, cheap way seems to be regarded as cheating. Could this be to avoid an easy solution, so government can use CO2 production as an excuse to restrict freedoms?What if the rise in CO2 is as much due to the drop in the population of great whales, as it is fossil fuels? For all we know, evolution has programmed them to crap in iron poor regions, near the surface, and to mix their excreta in well, so it does not sink. Grazing behavior in terrestrial wildlife generally, if not always improves browse over the long term. Why should the oceans be any different.Likely, iron fertilization would increase their food supply, and help their populations recover. Certainly, it’s easier to deal with other environmental insults, when an animal is well fed. In every species I can think of, better nutrition results in healthier, and more offspring. For goodness sake, there has already been one apparently successful experiment in ocean iron fertilization, that resulted in a statistically signifigant increase in salmon catch. As I recall, it was a reversal of the general trend toward smaller runs.

  22. A reduced increase in warming < reduced rainfall over the North Atlantic. The increased salinity of the North Atlantic would slow down the “Atlantic conveyor”, bifurcating a hot equator and a cold Europe even further. It’s a bandage approach for sure, but then we could also treat the root of the problem instead. Probably have to use them in conjunction at this point.

  23. The result of this only vaguely scientific experiment was so compelling, I believe the failure to follow up by NOAA, or the department of the interior, the near prosecution of the experimenter, rather than him getting a medal for all the extra salmon, and the near fit thrown by the UN show that the powers that be do not want a solution. That is why government functionaries were so angry about the event.
    What governments, socialists, and globalists in general want is a “problem” that they can use as an excuse to tell us peons how big of a home we can have, what we can eat for supper, and if we are allowed to have a gasoline operated chain saw. Then there is the juicy proposed carbon tax in the works.
    Consider how the “war on drugs” has played out. Sick people are denied medicine, chronic pain victims are under medicated, or even persecuted, people are put in prison for what are essentially bad personal habits, every bit as evil as a lunchtime martini, and people’s legally obtained property is stolen by governments, unless the victim can hire an attorney, and prove the property is not the result of selling government unapproved drugs.
    Don’t believe me? Try carrying several thousand dollars along next time you fly in the US.

  24. Is this one of those articles where the loonies get to roam? Goatguy tried to inject reason in a sea of confused insanity. Really goes to show how effective the AGM agenda has become. Collective madness. I must bow to the amazing predictability of cognitive dissonance. It puts the Milgram experiment to shame.

  25. We can engineer particles that are about 100x better at blocking the sun as volcanic by-products in the air. Volcanic activity is just a natural example of SRM (solar radiation management).

  26. Simulations aren’t reality. You can cook up a simulation to show whatever warming/cooling you please from whatever inputs you like – but that doesn’t mean that the planet is going to respond the same way.

    In fact, having seen the inaccuracies in the CAGW sims, I’m pretty darn dubious about the claims that these guys have a magic bullet fix for the ‘warming’ that should have destroyed the planet by now… if you took the claims in the early ’90s seriously.

  27. Geoengineering works best when an entity does it on it’s own accord without regard for everyone else. If I were a billionaire I’d buy a bunch of sulfur and fluorine and release a few kilotons of SF6 in the air above Antarctica to melt all that stupid, useless ice.

  28. But apparently it’s perfectly fine to emit as much CO2 and methane as you like, causing all sorts of problems including many of the less-frivolous ones you mentioned. Nobody’s been successfully sued for that, so far.

    We even let coal plants emit pollutants that kill about ten thousand Americans every year and many more worldwide. Don’t see any lawsuits there either.

    But I’m sure you’re right that geoengineers would get sued. The solution is clear: we have to geoengineer as a side effect of some moneymaking venture, without mentioning any intent to alter the environment on purpose. Then nobody will blink an eye.

    Ocean fertilization should never have been branded as geoengineering. If they’d just called it “fishing” we could have stabilized the climate by now.

  29. Pretty sure that there are organic materials that both increase the reflecatability of the atmosphere and help in cloud fertilization that are being naturally released

  30. Apart from the positive — and not mentioned in the article but also true: there are millions of tons of pure sulfur sitting in great mounds in places like Saudi Arabia — directly the byproduct of their sour crude refining and desulfurizing — apart from that, I fear that there are a lot of geopolitical downsides.

    № 1, “you idiots caused our … drought, flood, monsoon failure, hurricane hit, typhoon, sirocco, rash of tornadoes, forest wildfires, famine, plague of locusts, extinction of purple spotted blowflies, recession, depression, nightmares, rise in venereal disease, impotence, corns, horns, piles, rashes, skin cancer, ovary misfires, civil unrest, extremism, crime rate rise, job loss …”

    Go ahead, pick. ANy of them. All of them. You pro’lly cold think up another dozen. Without trying too hard.

    № 2, (or № 1b)… “and someone’s going to pay for this one way or the other”. Yep. With every complaint comes a monetary remediation drive. Line the streets with blubbering babies, wailing mothers, grannies in wheel chairs, divorcees and impotent schlubs wearing poorly written screeds on sandwich boards.

    … Roll the video to the politicians, harumphing, trumpeting, buffooning, lampooning, poltrooning … day after day, sound-bite after sound-bite. “And furthermore, because of the absolutely egregious disregard for My People, the so-called conservatıve scientists that engineered this disaster must be taken before the Law and tasked to pay for their crimes against Humanity…”

    Right.

    Those are some pretty strong arguments.
    Taken together.

    Just saying,
    GoatGuy

  31. “it” (unscientifically run but innocuous iron fertilization experiment) resulted not just in a “statistically significant” salmon harvest, but the largest on record. Ever. Now, while it could be a total coincidence, the likelihood — as you note with the generally declining salmon runs — is so far from expected that causation should at least be at the front of ideas entertained.

    Just saying,
    GoatGuy

  32. When geoengineering is mentioned(seldom) as a solution to alleged anthropogenic climate change, it’s usually decreasing insolation at ground level. Occasionally, removing CO2 from the atmosphere by some sort of chemical plant is touted, which is always way to expensive. The relatively easy, cheap way seems to be regarded as cheating. Could this be to avoid an easy solution, so government can use CO2 production as an excuse to restrict freedoms?
    What if the rise in CO2 is as much due to the drop in the population of great whales, as it is fossil fuels? For all we know, evolution has programmed them to crap in iron poor regions, near the surface, and to mix their excreta in well, so it does not sink. Grazing behavior in terrestrial wildlife generally, if not always improves browse over the long term. Why should the oceans be any different.
    Likely, iron fertilization would increase their food supply, and help their populations recover. Certainly, it’s easier to deal with other environmental insults, when an animal is well fed. In every species I can think of, better nutrition results in healthier, and more offspring.
    For goodness sake, there has already been one apparently successful experiment in ocean iron fertilization, that resulted in a statistically signifigant increase in salmon catch. As I recall, it was a reversal of the general trend toward smaller runs.

  33. A reduced increase in warming < reduced rainfall over the North Atlantic. The increased salinity of the North Atlantic would slow down the "Atlantic conveyor", bifurcating a hot equator and a cold Europe even further. It's a bandage approach for sure, but then we could also treat the root of the problem instead. Probably have to use them in conjunction at this point.

Comments are closed.