Articles | Volume 17, issue 15
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5913-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5913-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Development and technical paper
| 
08 Aug 2024
Development and technical paper |
| 08 Aug 2024
| 08 Aug 2024
HSW-V v1.0: localized injections of interactive volcanic aerosols and their climate impacts in a simple general circulation model
Department of Climate and Space Sciences and Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Christiane Jablonowski
Department of Climate and Space Sciences and Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Hunter Y. Brown
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Benjamin R. Hillman
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Diana L. Bull
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Joseph L. Hart
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Related authors
Joseph Hollowed, Christiane Jablonowski, Thomas Ehrmann, Diana Bull, Benjamin Wagman, and Benjamin Hillman
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1756, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1756, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Simulations of the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption are used to study how radiative heating by volcanic aerosols alter stratospheric winds. We found that heating of the tropical stratosphere by volcanic aerosols drives increased wind speeds in the mid-latitude vortex region. A theoretical framework is then used to identify the dynamical origin of these enhanced winds, which we find to be a combination of a strengthened global circulation, and a modification of large-scale atmospheric waves.
Ci Song, Daniel T. McCoy, Isabel L. McCoy, Hunter Brown, Andrew Gettelman, Trude Eidhammer, and Donifan Barahona
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2009, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2009, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study examines how aerosols from human activities alter cloud microphysical properties. Airborne observations from a field campaign are used to constrain an ensemble of global model configurations and their associated cloud property changes. Results show that airborne in-situ measurements of aerosol and cloud properties do provide insight into global changes in cloud microphysics but are sensitive to uncertainties in both airborne measurements and Earth system model emulators.
Naser Mahfouz, Hassan Beydoun, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Noel Keen, Adam C. Varble, Luca Bertagna, Peter Bogenschutz, Andrew Bradley, Matthew W. Christensen, T. Conrad Clevenger, Aaron Donahue, Jerome Fast, James Foucar, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Oksana Guba, Walter Hannah, Benjamin Hillman, Robert Jacob, Wuyin Lin, Po-Lun Ma, Yun Qian, Balwinder Singh, Christopher Terai, Hailong Wang, Mingxuan Wu, Kai Zhang, Andrew Gettelman, Mark Taylor, L. Ruby Leung, Peter Caldwell, and Susannah Burrows
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1868, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1868, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our study assesses the aerosol effective radiative forcing in a global cloud-resolving atmosphere model at ultra-high resolution. We demonstrate that global ERFaer signal can be robustly reproduced across resolutions when aerosol activation processes are carefully parameterized. Further, we argue that simplified prescribed aerosol schemes will open the door for further process/mechanism studies under controlled conditions.
Joseph Hollowed, Christiane Jablonowski, Thomas Ehrmann, Diana Bull, Benjamin Wagman, and Benjamin Hillman
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1756, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1756, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Simulations of the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption are used to study how radiative heating by volcanic aerosols alter stratospheric winds. We found that heating of the tropical stratosphere by volcanic aerosols drives increased wind speeds in the mid-latitude vortex region. A theoretical framework is then used to identify the dynamical origin of these enhanced winds, which we find to be a combination of a strengthened global circulation, and a modification of large-scale atmospheric waves.
Alexander Lojko, Andrew C. Winters, Annika Oertel, Christiane Jablonowski, and Ashley E. Payne
Weather Clim. Dynam., 6, 387–411, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-387-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-387-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Convective storms can produce intense anticyclonically rotating vortices (~10 km) defined by negative potential vorticity (NPV), which can elongate to larger scales (~1000 km). Our composite analysis shows that elongated NPV frequently occurs along the western North Atlantic tropopause, where we observed it enhancing jet stream kinematics. Elongated NPV may impinge on aviation turbulence and weather forecasting despite its small-scale origin.
Daniel Ries, Katherine Goode, Kellie McClernon, and Benjamin Hillman
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1041–1065, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1041-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1041-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Machine learning has advanced research in the climate science domain, but its models are difficult to understand. In order to understand the impacts and consequences of climate interventions such as stratospheric aerosol injection, complex models are often necessary. We use a case study to illustrate how we can understand the inner workings of a complex model. We present this technique as an exploratory tool that can be used to quickly discover and assess relationships in complex climate data.
Ram Singh, Kostas Tsigaridis, Diana Bull, Laura P. Swiler, Benjamin M. Wagman, and Kate Marvel
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2280, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2280, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Analysis of post-eruption climate conditions using the impact metrics is crucial for understanding the hydroclimatic responses. We used NASA’s Earth system model to perform the experiments and utilize the moisture-based impact metrics and hydrological variables to investigate the effect of volcanically induced conditions that govern plant productivity. This study demonstrates the Mt. Pinatubo’s impact on drivers of plant productivity and regional and seasonal dependence of different drivers.
Allen Hu, Xiaohong Liu, Ziming Ke, Benjamin Wagman, Hunter Brown, Zheng Lu, Diana Bull, and Kara Peterson
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2227, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2227, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Volcanic eruptions have a major effect on temperature throughout the atmosphere and can be studied as a proxy for geo-engineering. The aerosol module in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) was originally intended for simulation of tropospheric aerosols and has problems handling stratospheric sulfate aerosols due to volcanic eruptions. We have made alterations to the aerosol module to overcome these problems, with simulation results more closely reproducing observations.
Hunter York Brown, Benjamin Wagman, Diana Bull, Kara Peterson, Benjamin Hillman, Xiaohong Liu, Ziming Ke, and Lin Lin
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5087–5121, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5087-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5087-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Explosive volcanic eruptions lead to long-lived, microscopic particles in the upper atmosphere which act to cool the Earth's surface by reflecting the Sun's light back to space. We include and test this process in a global climate model, E3SM. E3SM is tested against satellite and balloon observations of the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo, showing that with these particles in the model we reasonably recreate Pinatubo and its global effects. We also explore how particle size leads to these effects.
Justin L. Willson, Kevin A. Reed, Christiane Jablonowski, James Kent, Peter H. Lauritzen, Ramachandran Nair, Mark A. Taylor, Paul A. Ullrich, Colin M. Zarzycki, David M. Hall, Don Dazlich, Ross Heikes, Celal Konor, David Randall, Thomas Dubos, Yann Meurdesoif, Xi Chen, Lucas Harris, Christian Kühnlein, Vivian Lee, Abdessamad Qaddouri, Claude Girard, Marco Giorgetta, Daniel Reinert, Hiroaki Miura, Tomoki Ohno, and Ryuji Yoshida
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2493–2507, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2493-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2493-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate simulation of tropical cyclones (TCs) is essential to understanding their behavior in a changing climate. One way this is accomplished is through model intercomparison projects, where results from multiple climate models are analyzed to provide benchmark solutions for the wider climate modeling community. This study describes and analyzes the previously developed TC test case for nine climate models in an intercomparison project, providing solutions that aid in model development.
Owen K. Hughes and Christiane Jablonowski
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6805–6831, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6805-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6805-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Atmospheric models benefit from idealized tests that assess their accuracy in a simpler simulation. A new test with artificial mountains is developed for models on a spherical earth. The mountains trigger the development of both planetary-scale and small-scale waves. These can be analyzed in dry or moist environments, with a simple rainfall mechanism. Four atmospheric models are intercompared. This sheds light on the pros and cons of the model design and the impact of mountains on the flow.
Qi Tang, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Luke P. Van Roekel, Mark A. Taylor, Wuyin Lin, Benjamin R. Hillman, Paul A. Ullrich, Andrew M. Bradley, Oksana Guba, Jonathan D. Wolfe, Tian Zhou, Kai Zhang, Xue Zheng, Yunyan Zhang, Meng Zhang, Mingxuan Wu, Hailong Wang, Cheng Tao, Balwinder Singh, Alan M. Rhoades, Yi Qin, Hong-Yi Li, Yan Feng, Yuying Zhang, Chengzhu Zhang, Charles S. Zender, Shaocheng Xie, Erika L. Roesler, Andrew F. Roberts, Azamat Mametjanov, Mathew E. Maltrud, Noel D. Keen, Robert L. Jacob, Christiane Jablonowski, Owen K. Hughes, Ryan M. Forsyth, Alan V. Di Vittorio, Peter M. Caldwell, Gautam Bisht, Renata B. McCoy, L. Ruby Leung, and David C. Bader
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3953–3995, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3953-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3953-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
High-resolution simulations are superior to low-resolution ones in capturing regional climate changes and climate extremes. However, uniformly reducing the grid size of a global Earth system model is too computationally expensive. We provide an overview of the fully coupled regionally refined model (RRM) of E3SMv2 and document a first-of-its-kind set of climate production simulations using RRM at an economic cost. The key to this success is our innovative hybrid time step method.
Marco A. Giorgetta, William Sawyer, Xavier Lapillonne, Panagiotis Adamidis, Dmitry Alexeev, Valentin Clément, Remo Dietlicher, Jan Frederik Engels, Monika Esch, Henning Franke, Claudia Frauen, Walter M. Hannah, Benjamin R. Hillman, Luis Kornblueh, Philippe Marti, Matthew R. Norman, Robert Pincus, Sebastian Rast, Daniel Reinert, Reiner Schnur, Uwe Schulzweida, and Bjorn Stevens
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6985–7016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6985-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6985-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This work presents a first version of the ICON atmosphere model that works not only on CPUs, but also on GPUs. This GPU-enabled ICON version is benchmarked on two GPU machines and a CPU machine. While the weak scaling is very good on CPUs and GPUs, the strong scaling is poor on GPUs. But the high performance of GPU machines allowed for first simulations of a short period of the quasi-biennial oscillation at very high resolution with explicit convection and gravity wave forcing.
Yang Shi, Xiaohong Liu, Mingxuan Wu, Xi Zhao, Ziming Ke, and Hunter Brown
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2909–2935, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2909-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2909-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We perform a modeling study to evaluate the contribution to Arctic dust loading and ice-nucleating particle (INP) population from high-latitude local and low-latitude dust. High-latitude dust has a large contribution in the lower troposphere, while low-latitude dust dominates the upper troposphere. The high-latitude dust INPs result in a net cooling effect on the Arctic surface by glaciating mixed-phase clouds. Our results highlight the contribution of high-latitude dust to the Arctic climate.
Cited articles
Abalos, M., Calvo, N., Benito-Barca, S., Garny, H., Hardiman, S. C., Lin, P., Andrews, M. B., Butchart, N., Garcia, R., Orbe, C., Saint-Martin, D., Watanabe, S., and Yoshida, K.: The Brewer–Dobson circulation in CMIP6, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 13571–13591, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-13571-2021, 2021. a
Andrews, D. G., Holton, J. R., and Leovy, C. B.: Middle Atmosphere Dynamics, Academic Press, ISBN 978-0-12-058576-2, 1987. a
Barnes, J. E. and Hofmann, D. J.: Lidar measurements of stratospheric aerosol over Mauna Loa Observatory, Geophys. Rese. Lett., 24, 1923–1926, https://doi.org/10.1029/97GL01943, 1997. a, b, c
Bekki, S.: Oxidation of volcanic SO2: A sink for stratospheric OH and H2O, Geophys. Rese. Lett., 22, 913–916, https://doi.org/10.1029/95GL00534, 1995. a, b, c, d
Bekki, S. and Pyle, J. A.: A two-dimensional modeling study of the volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 99, 18861–18869, https://doi.org/10.1029/94JD00667, 1994. a
Bluth, G., Rose, W., Sprod, I., and Krueger, A.: Stratospheric Loading of Sulfur from Explosive Volcanic Eruptions, J. Geol., 105, 671–684, https://doi.org/10.1086/515972, 1997. a, b, c
Bradley, A. M., Bosler, P. A., and Guba, O.: Islet: interpolation semi-Lagrangian element-based transport, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6285–6310, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6285-2022, 2022. a
Brown, H. Y., Wagman, B., Bull, D., Peterson, K., Hillman, B., Liu, X., Ke, Z., and Lin, L.: Validating a microphysical prognostic stratospheric aerosol implementation in E3SMv2 using the Mount Pinatubo eruption, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-3041, 2024. a, b, c, d, e, f
Burger, M., Wentz, J., and Horton, R.: The Law and Science of Climate Change Attribution, Columbia J. Environ. Law, 45, 184 pp., https://doi.org/10.7916/cjel.v45i1.4730, 2020. a
Butchart, N.: The Brewer-Dobson circulation, Rev. Geophys., 52, 157–184, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000448, 2014. a, b
Butler, A. H., Thompson, D. W. J., and Heikes, R.: The Steady-State Atmospheric Circulation Response to Climate Change – like Thermal Forcings in a Simple General Circulation Model, J. Clim., 23, 3474–3496, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JCLI3228.1, 2010. a
Clyne, M., Lamarque, J.-F., Mills, M. J., Khodri, M., Ball, W., Bekki, S., Dhomse, S. S., Lebas, N., Mann, G., Marshall, L., Niemeier, U., Poulain, V., Robock, A., Rozanov, E., Schmidt, A., Stenke, A., Sukhodolov, T., Timmreck, C., Toohey, M., Tummon, F., Zanchettin, D., Zhu, Y., and Toon, O. B.: Model physics and chemistry causing intermodel disagreement within the VolMIP-Tambora Interactive Stratospheric Aerosol ensemble, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 3317–3343, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3317-2021, 2021. a
Cook, K. H.: Role of Continents in Driving the Hadley Cells, J. Atmos. Sci., 60, 957–976, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2003)060<0957:ROCIDT>2.0.CO;2, 2003. a, b
Crutzen, P. J.: Albedo Enhancement by Stratospheric Sulfur Injections: A Contribution to Resolve a Policy Dilemma?, Climatic Change, 77, 211–220, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9101-y, 2006. a
DallaSanta, K., Gerber, E. P., and Toohey, M.: The Circulation Response to Volcanic Eruptions: The Key Roles of Stratospheric Warming and Eddy Interactions, J. Clim., 32, 1101–1120, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0099.1, 2019. a, b
Danabasoglu, G., Lamarque, J.-F., Bacmeister, J., Bailey, D. A., DuVivier, A. K., Edwards, J., Emmons, L. K., Fasullo, J., Garcia, R., Gettelman, A., Hannay, C., Holland, M. M., Large, W. G., Lauritzen, P. H., Lawrence, D. M., Lenaerts, J. T. M., Lindsay, K., Lipscomb, W. H., Mills, M. J., Neale, R., Oleson, K. W., Otto‐Bliesner, B., Phillips, A. S., Sacks, W., Tilmes, S., Kampenhout, L. v., Vertenstein, M., Bertini, A., Dennis, J., Deser, C., Fischer, C., Fox‐Kemper, B., Kay, J. E., Kinnison, D., Kushner, P. J., Larson, V. E., Long, M. C., Mickelson, S., Moore, J. K., Nienhouse, E., Polvani, L., Rasch, P. J., and Strand, W. G.: The Community Earth System Model Version 2 (CESM2), J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001916, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001916, 2020. a
Dutton, E. G. and Christy, J. R.: Solar radiative forcing at selected locations and evidence for global lower tropospheric cooling following the eruptions of El Chichón and Pinatubo, Geophys. Rese. Lett., 19, 2313–2316, https://doi.org/10.1029/92GL02495, 1992. a, b, c, d
Elson, P., Andrade, E. S. d., Lucas, G., May, R., Hattersley, R., Campbell, E., Dawson, A., Little, B., Raynaud, S., scmc72, Snow, A. D., Comer, R., Donkers, K., Blay, B., Killick, P., Wilson, N., Peglar, P., lgolston, lbdreyer, Andrew, Szymaniak, J., Berchet, A., Bosley, C., Davis, L., Filipe, Krasting, J., Bradbury, M., Kirkham, D., Worsley, S., and Havlin, C.: SciTools/cartopy: v0.22.0, Zenodo, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8216315, 2023. a
Eluszkiewicz, J., Crisp, D., Zurek, R., Elson, L., Fishbein, E., Froidevaux, L., Waters, J., Grainger, R. G., Lambert, A., Harwood, R., and Peckham, G.: Residual Circulation in the Stratosphere and Lower Mesosphere as Diagnosed from Microwave Limb Sounder Data, J. Atmos. Sci., 53, 217–240, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1996)053<0217:RCITSA>2.0.CO;2, 1996. a
Eyring, V., Lamarque, J.-F., Hess, P., Arfeuille, F., Bowman, K., Duncan, B., Fiore, A., Gettelman, A., Giorgetta, M. A., Granier, C., Hegglin, M., Kinnison, D., Kunze, M., Langematz, U., Luo, B., Martin, R., Matthes, K., Newman, P. A., Peter, T., Robock, A., Ryerson, T., Saiz-Lopez, A., Salawitch, R., Schultz, M., Shepherd, T. G., Shindell, D., Staehelin, J., Thomason, L., Tilmes, S., Vernier, J.-P., Waugh, D. W., and Young, P. J.: Overview of IGAC/SPARC Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI) Community Simulations in Support of Upcoming Ozone and Climate Assessments, SPARC Newsletter, 40, 48–66, 2013. a, b
Fisher, B. L., Krotkov, N. A., Bhartia, P. K., Li, C., Carn, S. A., Hughes, E., and Leonard, P. J. T.: A new discrete wavelength backscattered ultraviolet algorithm for consistent volcanic SO2 retrievals from multiple satellite missions, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 5137–5153, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-5137-2019, 2019. a, b, c
Fleming, E. L., Chandra, S., Barnett, J. J., and Corney, M.: Zonal mean temperature, pressure, zonal wind and geopotential height as functions of latitude, Adv. Space Res., 10, 11–59, https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-1177(90)90386-E, 1990. a, b
Frazer, M. E. and Ming, Y.: Understanding Controlling Factors of Extratropical Humidity and Clouds with an Idealized General Circulation Model, J. Clim., 35, 5321–5337, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-21-0580.1, 2022. a
Frierson, D. M. W., Held, I. M., and Zurita-Gotor, P.: A Gray-Radiation Aquaplanet Moist GCM, Part I: Static Stability and Eddy Scale, J. Atmos. Sci., 63, 2548–2566, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS3753.1, 2006. a
Fujiwara, M., Manney, G. L., Gray, L. J., and Wright, J. S. E.: SPARC Reanalysis Intercomparison Project (S-RIP) Final Report, SPARC Report No. 10, WCRP-6/2021, https://doi.org/10.17874/800dee57d13, 2022. a, b, c
Fulton, D. J. and Hegerl, G. C.: Testing Methods of Pattern Extraction for Climate Data Using Synthetic Modes, J. Clim., 34, 7645–7660, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0871.1, 2021. a
Fyfe, J. C., von Salzen, K., Cole, J. N. S., Gillett, N. P., and Vernier, J.-P.: Surface response to stratospheric aerosol changes in a coupled atmosphere–ocean model, Geophys. Rese. Lett., 40, 584–588, https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50156, 2013. a
Gao, C., Robock, A., and Ammann, C.: Volcanic forcing of climate over the past 1500 years: An improved ice core-based index for climate models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D23111, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010239, 2008. a
Gerber, E. P. and Manzini, E.: The Dynamics and Variability Model Intercomparison Project (DynVarMIP) for CMIP6: assessing the stratosphere–troposphere system, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3413–3425, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3413-2016, 2016. a, b
Gerber, E. P. and Polvani, L. M.: Stratosphere–Troposphere Coupling in a Relatively Simple AGCM: The Importance of Stratospheric Variability, J. Clim., 22, 1920–1933, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JCLI2548.1, 2009. a
Gerber, E. P., Voronin, S., and Polvani, L. M.: Testing the Annular Mode Autocorrelation Time Scale in Simple Atmospheric General Circulation Models, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 1523–1536, https://doi.org/10.1175/2007MWR2211.1, 2008. a, b, c
Golaz, J.-C., Van Roekel, L. P., Zheng, X., Roberts, A. F., Wolfe, J. D., Lin, W., Bradley, A. M., Tang, Q., Maltrud, M. E., Forsyth, R. M., Zhang, C., Zhou, T., Zhang, K., Zender, C. S., Wu, M., Wang, H., Turner, A. K., Singh, B., Richter, J. H., Qin, Y., Petersen, M. R., Mametjanov, A., Ma, P.-L., Larson, V. E., Krishna, J., Keen, N. D., Jeffery, N., Hunke, E. C., Hannah, W. M., Guba, O., Griffin, B. M., Feng, Y., Engwirda, D., Di Vittorio, A. V., Dang, C., Conlon, L. M., Chen, C.-C.-J., Brunke, M. A., Bisht, G., Benedict, J. J., Asay-Davis, X. S., Zhang, Y., Zhang, M., Zeng, X., Xie, S., Wolfram, P. J., Vo, T., Veneziani, M., Tesfa, T. K., Sreepathi, S., Salinger, A. G., Reeves Eyre, J. E. J., Prather, M. J., Mahajan, S., Li, Q., Jones, P. W., Jacob, R. L., Huebler, G. W., Huang, X., Hillman, B. R., Harrop, B. E., Foucar, J. G., Fang, Y., Comeau, D. S., Caldwell, P. M., Bartoletti, T., Balaguru, K., Taylor, M. A., McCoy, R. B., Leung, L. R., and Bader, D. C.: The DOE E3SM Model Version 2: Overview of the Physical Model and Initial Model Evaluation, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2022MS003156, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022MS003156, 2022. a, b
Guo, S., Bluth, G. J. S., Rose, W. I., Watson, I. M., and Prata, A. J.: Re-evaluation of SO2 release of the 15 June 1991 Pinatubo eruption using ultraviolet and infrared satellite sensors, Geochem. Geophy. Geosy., 5, Q04001, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GC000654, 2004a. a, b, c
Guo, S., Rose, W. I., Bluth, G. J. S., and Watson, I. M.: Particles in the great Pinatubo volcanic cloud of June 1991: The role of ice, Geochem. Geophy. Geosy., 5, Q05003, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GC000655, 2004b. a, b, c
Gupta, A., Gerber, E. P., and Lauritzen, P. H.: Numerical impacts on tracer transport: A proposed intercomparison test of Atmospheric General Circulation Models, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 146, 3937–3964, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3881, 2020. a
Hannah, W. M., Bradley, A. M., Guba, O., Tang, Q., Golaz, J.-C., and Wolfe, J.: Separating Physics and Dynamics Grids for Improved Computational Efficiency in Spectral Element Earth System Models, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2020MS002419, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002419, 2021. a
Hansen, J., Lacis, A., Ruedy, R., and Sato, M.: Potential climate impact of Mount Pinatubo eruption, Geophys. Rese. Lett., 19, 215–218, https://doi.org/10.1029/91GL02788, 1992. a
Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., Gommers, R., Virtanen, P., Cournapeau, D., Wieser, E., Taylor, J., Berg, S., Smith, N. J., Kern, R., Picus, M., Hoyer, S., van Kerkwijk, M. H., Brett, M., Haldane, A., del Río, J. F., Wiebe, M., Peterson, P., Gérard-Marchant, P., Sheppard, K., Reddy, T., Weckesser, W., Abbasi, H., Gohlke, C., and Oliphant, T. E.: Array programming with NumPy, Nature, 585, 357–362, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2, 2020. a
Harris, L., Chen, X., Putman, W., Zhou, L., and Chen, J.-H.: A Scientific Description of the GFDL Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere Dynamical Core, Technical Memorandum GFDL2021001, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, New Jersey, https://github.com/NOAA-GFDL/GFDL_atmos_cubed_sphere/tree/master/docs (last access: 2 February 2024), 2021. a
Hegerl, G. C., Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Casassa, G., Hoerling, M., Kovats, S., Parmesan, C., Pierce, D., and Stott, P.: Good Practice Guidance Paper on Detection and Attribution Related to Anthropogenic Climate Change, in: Meeting Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Expert Meeting on Detection and Attribution of Anthropogenic Climate Change, IPCC Working Group I Technical Support Unit, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland, 2010. a
Heidinger, A. K., Foster, M. J., Walther, A., and Zhao, X. T.: The Pathfinder Atmospheres–Extended AVHRR Climate Dataset, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 909–922, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00246.1, 2014. a
Herrington, A. R., Lauritzen, P. H., Reed, K. A., Goldhaber, S., and Eaton, B. E.: Exploring a Lower-Resolution Physics Grid in CAM-SE-CSLAM, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 1894–1916, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001684, 2019. a
Hollowed, J., Jablonowski, C., Brown, H., Bull, D., Hillman, B., and Hart, J.: Code Supplement for “Localized injections of interactive volcanic aerosols and their climate impacts in a simple general circulation model”, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10524801, 2024. a
Holton, J. R. and Hakim, G. J.: The General Circulation, Chap. 10, in: An Introduction to Dynamic Meteorology (Fifth Edition), edited by: Holton, J. R. and Hakim, G. J., 325–375, Academic Press, Boston, ISBN 978-0-12-384866-6, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123848666000106 (last access: 3 February 2024), 2013. a
Hoskins, B. J., Yang, G.-Y., and Fonseca, R. M.: The detailed dynamics of the June–August Hadley Cell, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 146, 557–575, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3702, 2020. a
Hoyer, S. and Hamman, J.: xarray: N-D labeled Arrays and Datasets in Python, J. Open Res. Softw., 5, 10, https://doi.org/10.5334/jors.148, 2017. a
Hughes, O. K. and Jablonowski, C.: A mountain-induced moist baroclinic wave test case for the dynamical cores of atmospheric general circulation models, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6805–6831, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6805-2023, 2023. a
Jablonowski, C. and Williamson, D.: The Pros and Cons of Diffusion, Filters and Fixers in Atmospheric General Circulation Models, in: Numerical Techniques for Global Atmospheric Models, edited by: Lauritzen, P. H., Jablonowski, C., Taylor, M. A., and Nair, R. D., Vol. 80 of Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering, 381–493, Springer, ISBN 978-3-642-11639-1, 2011. a
Karpechko, A. Y., Gillett, N. P., Dall'Amico, M., and Gray, L. J.: Southern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation response to the El Chichón and Pinatubo eruptions in coupled climate models, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 136, 1813–1822, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.683, 2010. a, b
Kinne, S., Toon, O. B., and Prather, M. J.: Buffering of stratospheric circulation by changing amounts of tropical ozone a Pinatubo Case Study, Geophys. Rese. Lett., 19, 1927–1930, https://doi.org/10.1029/92GL01937, 1992. a
Kovilakam, M., Thomason, L. W., Ernest, N., Rieger, L., Bourassa, A., and Millán, L.: The Global Space-based Stratospheric Aerosol Climatology (version 2.0): 1979–2018, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2607–2634, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2607-2020, 2020. a
Kremser, S., Thomason, L. W., von Hobe, M., Hermann, M., Deshler, T., Timmreck, C., Toohey, M., Stenke, A., Schwarz, J. P., Weigel, R., Fueglistaler, S., Prata, F. J., Vernier, J.-P., Schlager, H., Barnes, J. E., Antuña-Marrero, J.-C., Fairlie, D., Palm, M., Mahieu, E., Notholt, J., Rex, M., Bingen, C., Vanhellemont, F., Bourassa, A., Plane, J. M. C., Klocke, D., Carn, S. A., Clarisse, L., Trickl, T., Neely, R., James, A. D., Rieger, L., Wilson, J. C., and Meland, B.: Stratospheric aerosol – Observations, processes, and impact on climate, Rev. Geophys., 54, 278–335, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000511, 2016. a
Labitzke, K. and McCormick, M. P.: Stratospheric temperature increases due to Pinatubo aerosols, Geophys. Rese. Lett., 19, 207–210, https://doi.org/10.1029/91GL02940, 1992. a
Lauritzen, P. H., Conley, A. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Vitt, F., and Taylor, M. A.: The terminator “toy” chemistry test: a simple tool to assess errors in transport schemes, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 1299–1313, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1299-2015, 2015. a
MacDonald, C. G. and Ming, Y.: Tropical Intraseasonal Variability Response to Zonally Asymmetric Forcing in an Idealized Moist GCM, J. Clim., 35, 8079–8101, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-22-0344.1, 2022. a
Mamalakis, A., Ebert-Uphoff, I., and Barnes, E. A.: Neural Network Attribution Methods for Problems in Geoscience: A Novel Synthetic Benchmark Dataset, Environ. Data Sci., 1, e8, https://doi.org/10.1017/eds.2022.7, 2022. a
Marshall, L. R., Maters, E. C., Schmidt, A., Timmreck, C., Robock, A., and Toohey, M.: Volcanic effects on climate: recent advances and future avenues, B. Volcanol., 84, 54, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-022-01559-3, 2022. a
Matthes, K., Marsh, R., Garcia, R., Kinnison, E., Sassi, F., and Walters, S.: Role of the QBO in modulating the influence of the 11 year solar cycle on the atmosphere using constant forcings, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D18110, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013020, 2010. a
May, R. M., Goebbert, K. H., Thielen, J. E., Leeman, J. R., Camron, M. D., Bruick, Z., Bruning, E. C., Manser, R. P., Arms, S. C., and Marsh, P. T.: MetPy: A Meteorological Python Library for Data Analysis and Visualization, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 103, E2273–E2284, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0125.1, 2022. a
McClernon, K., Goode, K., and Ries, D.: A comparison of model validation approaches for echo state networks using climate model replicates, Spat. Stat.-Neth., 59, 100813, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spasta.2024.100813, 2024. a
McCormick, M. P., Thomason, L. W., and Trepte, C. R.: Atmospheric effects of the Mt Pinatubo eruption, Nature, 373, 399–404, https://doi.org/10.1038/373399a0, 1995. a, b, c
McCusker, K., Battisti, D., and Bitz, C.: The Climate Response to Stratospheric Sulfate Injections and Implications for Addressing Climate Emergencies, J. Clim., 25, 3096–3116, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00183.1, 2012. a
Mills, M. J., Schmidt, A., Easter, R., Solomon, S., Kinnison, D. E., Ghan, S. J., Neely, R. R., Marsh, D. R., Conley, A., Bardeen, C. G., and Gettelman, A.: Global volcanic aerosol properties derived from emissions, 1990–2014, using CESM1(WACCM), J. Geophys. Re.-Atmos., 121, 2332–2348, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024290, 2016. a, b, c, d, e
Mills, M. J., Richter, J. H., Tilmes, S., Kravitz, B., MacMartin, D. G., Glanville, A. A., Tribbia, J. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Vitt, F., Schmidt, A., Gettelman, A., Hannay, C., Bacmeister, J. T., and Kinnison, D. E.: Radiative and Chemical Response to Interactive Stratospheric Sulfate Aerosols in Fully Coupled CESM1(WACCM), J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 13061–13078, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027006, 2017. a
Ming, Y. and Held, I. M.: Modeling Water Vapor and Clouds as Passive Tracers in an Idealized GCM, J. Clim., 31, 775–786, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0812.1, 2018. a
National Academies of Sciences and Medicine, E.: Reflecting Sunlight: Recommendations for Solar Geoengineering Research and Research Governance, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, ISBN 978-0-309-67605-2, https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/25762/ (last access: 17 January 2024), 2021. a
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Congressionally-Mandated Report on Solar Radiation Modification – OSTP, https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/news-updates/ (last access: 17 January 2024), 2023. a
Oort, A. H. and Yienger, J. J.: Observed Interannual Variability in the Hadley Circulation and Its Connection to ENSO, J. Clim., 9, 2751–2767, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26201418 (last access: 3 December 2023), 1996. a
Petty, G. W.: A first course in atmospheric radiation, Madison, Wis: Sundog Pub, 2nd Edn., ISBN 978-0-9729033-1-8, 2006. a
Pikovnik, M., Zaplotnik, Ž., Boljka, L., and Žagar, N.: Metrics of the Hadley circulation strength and associated circulation trends, Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 625–644, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-625-2022, 2022. a
Polvani, L. M. and Kushner, P. J.: Tropospheric response to stratospheric perturbations in a relatively simple general circulation model, Geophys. Rese. Lett., 29, 18-1–18-4, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GL014284, 2002. a, b
Ramachandran, S., Ramaswamy, V., Stenchikov, G. L., and Robock, A.: Radiative impact of the Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption: Lower stratospheric response, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 24409–24429, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900355, 2000. a, b, c
Reed, K. A. and Jablonowski, C.: Idealized tropical cyclone simulations of intermediate complexity: A test case for AGCMs, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 4, M04001, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011MS000099, 2012. a
Rieger, L. A., Cole, J. N. S., Fyfe, J. C., Po-Chedley, S., Cameron-Smith, P. J., Durack, P. J., Gillett, N. P., and Tang, Q.: Quantifying CanESM5 and EAMv1 sensitivities to Mt. Pinatubo volcanic forcing for the CMIP6 historical experiment, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4831–4843, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4831-2020, 2020. a
Robock, A.: Volcanic Eruptions and Climate, Rev. Geophys., 38, 191–219, https://doi.org/10.1029/1998RG000054, 2000. a
Robock, A.: The Climatic Aftermath, Science, 295, 1242–1244, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1069903, 2002. a
Rosen, J. M.: The Boiling Point of Stratospheric Aerosols, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 10, 1044–1046, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1971)010<1044:TBPOSA>2.0.CO;2, 1971. a
Sato, M., Hansen, J. E., McCormick, M. P., and Pollack, J. B.: Stratospheric aerosol optical depths, 1850–1990, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 98, 22987–22994, https://doi.org/10.1029/93JD02553, 1993. a
Schneider, T.: The General Circulation of the Atmosphere, Annu. Rev. Earth Pl. Sc., 34, 655–688, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.earth.34.031405.125144, 2006. a
Schneider, T., Bischoff, T., and Haug, G. H.: Migrations and dynamics of the intertropical convergence zone, Nature, 513, 45–53, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13636, 2014. a
Schurer, A., Hegerl, G., Mann, M., Tett, S., and Phipps, S.: Separating Forced from Chaotic Climate Variability over the Past Millennium, J. Clim., 26, 6954–6973, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00826.1, 2013. a
Sheng, J.-X., Weisenstein, D. K., Luo, B.-P., Rozanov, E., Arfeuille, F., and Peter, T.: A perturbed parameter model ensemble to investigate Mt. Pinatubo's 1991 initial sulfur mass emission, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11501–11512, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11501-2015, 2015. a
Sheshadri, A., Plumb, R. A., and Gerber, E. P.: Seasonal Variability of the Polar Stratospheric Vortex in an Idealized AGCM with Varying Tropospheric Wave Forcing, J. Atmos. Sci., 72, 2248–2266, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-14-0191.1, 2015. a
Taylor, M. A., Guba, O., Steyer, A., Ullrich, P. A., Hall, D. M., and Eldred, C.: An Energy Consistent Discretization of the Nonhydrostatic Equations in Primitive Variables, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001783, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001783, 2020. a
Thatcher, D. R. and Jablonowski, C.: A moist aquaplanet variant of the Held–Suarez test for atmospheric model dynamical cores, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1263–1292, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1263-2016, 2016. a
Thomas, M. A., Giorgetta, M. A., Timmreck, C., Graf, H.-F., and Stenchikov, G.: Simulation of the climate impact of Mt. Pinatubo eruption using ECHAM5 – Part 2: Sensitivity to the phase of the QBO and ENSO, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 3001–3009, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-3001-2009, 2009. a
Tilmes, S., Richter, J. H., Mills, M. J., Kravitz, B., MacMartin, D. G., Vitt, F., Tribbia, J. J., and Lamarque, J.-F.: Sensitivity of Aerosol Distribution and Climate Response to Stratospheric SO2 Injection Locations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 12591–12615, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026888, 2017. a
Tilmes, S., Richter, J. H., Kravitz, B., MacMartin, D. G., Mills, M. J., Simpson, I. R., Glanville, A. S., Fasullo, J. T., Phillips, A. S., Lamarque, J.-F., Tribbia, J., Edwards, J., Mickelson, S., and Ghosh, S.: CESM1(WACCM) Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering Large Ensemble Project, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 99, 2361–2371, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0267.1, 2018. a
Timmreck, C.: Modeling the climatic effects of large explosive volcanic eruptions, WIREs Clim. Change, 3, 545–564, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.192, 2012. a
Yao, W. and Jablonowski, C.: The Impact of GCM Dynamical Cores on Idealized Sudden Stratospheric Warmings and Their QBO Interactions, J. Atmos. Sci., 73, 3397–3421, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-15-0242.1, 2016. a, b, c
Yue, G. K., Poole, L. R., Wang, P.-H., and Chiou, E. W.: Stratospheric aerosol acidity, density, and refractive index deduced from SAGE II and NMC temperature data, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 99, 3727–3738, https://doi.org/10.1029/93JD02989, 1994. a, b
Zanchettin, D., Khodri, M., Timmreck, C., Toohey, M., Schmidt, A., Gerber, E. P., Hegerl, G., Robock, A., Pausata, F. S. R., Ball, W. T., Bauer, S. E., Bekki, S., Dhomse, S. S., LeGrande, A. N., Mann, G. W., Marshall, L., Mills, M., Marchand, M., Niemeier, U., Poulain, V., Rozanov, E., Rubino, A., Stenke, A., Tsigaridis, K., and Tummon, F.: The Model Intercomparison Project on the climatic response to Volcanic forcing (VolMIP): experimental design and forcing input data for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2701–2719, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2701-2016, 2016. a
Zhao, T. X.-P., Chan, P. K., and Heidinger, A. K.: A global survey of the effect of cloud contamination on the aerosol optical thickness and its long-term trend derived from operational AVHRR satellite observations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 2849–2857, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50278, 2013. a
Short summary
Large volcanic eruptions deposit material in the upper atmosphere, which is capable of altering temperature and wind patterns of Earth's atmosphere for subsequent years. This research describes a new method of simulating these effects in an idealized, efficient atmospheric model. A volcanic eruption of sulfur dioxide is described with a simplified set of physical rules, which eventually cools the planetary surface. This model has been designed as a test bed for climate attribution studies.
Large volcanic eruptions deposit material in the upper atmosphere, which is capable of altering...
