The interaction of Solar Radiation Modification and Earth System Tipping Elements

Futerman, Gideon; Adhikari, Mira; Duffey, Alistair; Fan, Yuanchao; Irvine, Peter; Gurevitch, Jessica; Wieners, Claudia

doi:10.5194/egusphere-2023-1753

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 243 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…6 If this were known precisely to be the case, then it might justify great effort to limit global-mean warming to 1.49°C, even -for example -invoking 'emergency' climate intervention measures such as stratospheric aerosol injection to avoid crossing this point of no return. 61,62 However, this is not what the substance of ref. 6 (and other assessments) have found.…”

Section: The Tipping Points Framing Does Not Provide Clear Entry Poin...mentioning

confidence: 92%

'Tipping points' confuse and can distract from urgent climate action

Kopp,

Gilmore,

Shwom

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tipping points have gained substantial traction in climate change discourses, both as representing the possibility of catastrophic and irreversible physical and societal impacts and as a way to set in motion positive, rapid and self-sustaining responses, such as the adoption of new technologies, practices, and behaviors. As such, tipping points appear ubiquitous in natural and social systems. Here, we critique 'tipping point' framings, specifically their insufficiency for describing the diverse dynamics of complex systems; their reductionist view of individuals, their agency and their aspirations; and their tendency to convey urgency without fostering a meaningful basis for climate action. We argue for clarifying the scientific discussion of the phenomena lumped under the 'tipping point' umbrella by using more specific language to capture relevant aspects (e.g., irreversibility, abruptness, self-amplification, potential surprise) and for the critical evaluation of whether, how and why the different framings can support accurate scientific understanding and effective climate risk management. Multiple social scientific frameworks suggest that deep uncertainty and perceived abstractness associated with many proposed Earth system 'tipping points' make them both unlikely to provoke effective action and not helpful for setting governance goals that must be sensitive to multiple constraints. The mental model of a 'tipping point' does not align with the multifaceted nature of social change; a broader focus on the dynamics of social transformation is more useful. Temperature-based benchmarks originating in a broad portfolio of concerns already provide a suitable guide for global mitigation policy targets and should not be confused with physical thresholds of the climate system.

show abstract

Section: The Tipping Points Framing Does Not Provide Clear Entry Poin...mentioning

confidence: 92%

'Tipping points' confuse and can distract from urgent climate action

Kopp,

Gilmore,

Shwom

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At present, solar geoengineering is mostly discussed (and opposed) in relation to the risks of a global application of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) technologies. While injecting sulphate aerosols into the stratosphere may be a rapid, effective and relatively inexpensive way to cool global temperatures , it poses new risks, including possible negative impacts on precipitation, ozone loss, ocean acidification, and acid rain impacts on forests and agriculture (Irvine, Kravitz, Lawrence and Muri, 2016;Hornigold and Allen 2021;Visioni et al, 2020;Futerman et al, 2023). Other mineral aerosols may overcome some of these problems (Keith, Weisenstein, Dykema and Keutsch, 2016;Oeste, de Richter, Ming, and Caillol, 2017), but present larger uncertainties (Dai et al, 2020).…”

Section: Direct Climate Cooling/solar Radiation Management/solar Geoe...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bad science and good intentions prevent effective climate action

Taylor,

Wadhams,

Visioni

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the 2015 Paris Agreement climate targets seem certain to be missed, only a few experts are questioning the adequacy of the current approach to limiting climate change and suggesting that additional approaches are needed to avoid unacceptable catastrophes. This article posits that selective science communication and unrealistically optimistic assumptions are obscuring the reality that greenhouse gas emissions reduction and carbon dioxide removal will not prevent climate change in the 21st Century. It also explains how overly pessimistic and speculative criticisms are behind opposition to considering potential climate cooling interventions as a complementary approach for mitigating dangerous warming. There is little evidence supporting assertions that: current greenhouse gas emissions reduction and removal methods can and will be ramped up in time to prevent dangerous climate change; overshoot of Paris Agreement targets will be temporary; net zero emissions will produce a safe, stable climate; the impacts of overshoot can be managed and reversed; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change models and assessments capture the full scope of prospective disastrous impacts; and the risks of climate interventions are greater than the risks of inaction. These largely unsupported assumptions distort risk assessments and discount the urgent need to develop a viable mitigation strategy. Owing to political pressures, many critical scientific concerns are ignored or preemptively dismissed in international negotiations. As a result, the present and growing crisis and the level of effort and time that will be required to control and rebalance the climate are severely underestimated. The paper concludes by outlining the key elements of a realistic policy approach that would augment current efforts to constrain dangerous warming by supplementing current mitigation approaches with climate cooling interventions.

show abstract

“…Knowing whether delaying the start of SAI deployment could result in one of these tipping elements being triggered would be an important factor to consider when making a decision about whether to deploy at any given time. It is, however, unclear exactly how effective climate intervention methods are in preventing such tipping elements, as their associated mechanisms have varying response times (Futerman et al 2023). It is also worth acknowledging that some authors (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kicking the can down the road: understanding the effects of delaying the deployment of stratospheric aerosol injection

Brody,

Visioni,

Bednarz

et al. 2024

Environ. Res.: Climate

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change is a prevalent threat, and it is unlikely that current mitigation efforts will be enough to avoid unwanted impacts. One potential option to reduce climate change impacts is the use of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI). Even if SAI is ultimately deployed, it might be initiated only after some temperature target is exceeded. The consequences of such a delay are assessed herein. This study compares two cases, with the same target global mean temperature of ~1.5°C above preindustrial, but start dates of 2035 or a “delayed” start in 2045. We make use of simulations in the Community Earth System Model version 2 with the Whole Atmosphere Coupled Chemistry Model version 6 (CESM2-WACCM6), using SAI under the SSP2-4.5 emissions pathway. We find that delaying the start of deployment (relative to the target temperature) necessitates lower net radiative forcing (-30%) and thus larger sulfur dioxide injection rates (+20%), even after surface temperatures converge, to compensate for the extra energy absorbed by the Earth system. Southern hemisphere ozone is higher from 2035 to 2050 in the delayed start scenario, but converges to the same value later in the century. However, many of the surface climate differences between the 2035 and 2045 start simulations appear to be small during the 10-25 years following the delayed SAI start, although longer simulations would be needed to assess any longer-term impacts in this model. In addition, irreversibilities and tipping points that might be triggered during the period of increased warming may not be adequately represented in the model but could change this conclusion in the real world.

show abstract

The interaction of Solar Radiation Modification and Earth System Tipping Elements

Cited by 3 publications

References 243 publications

'Tipping points' confuse and can distract from urgent climate action

'Tipping points' confuse and can distract from urgent climate action

Bad science and good intentions prevent effective climate action

Kicking the can down the road: understanding the effects of delaying the deployment of stratospheric aerosol injection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About