Opinion: The scientific and community-building roles of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) – past, present, and future
Opinion: The scientific and community-building roles of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) – past, present, and future
复制标题
DOI：
10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023
复制
发表时间：
2023-05
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
D. Visioni;B. Kravitz;A. Robock;S. Tilmes;J. Haywood;O. Boucher;M. Lawrence;P. Irvine;U. Niemeier;L. Xia;G. Chiodo;C. Lennard;S. Watanabe;J. Moore;H. Muri
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Visioni;B. Kravitz;A. Robock;S. Tilmes;J. Haywood;O. Boucher;M. Lawrence;P. Irvine;U. Niemeier;L. Xia;G. Chiodo;C. Lennard;S. Watanabe;J. Moore;H. Muri
抽象。地球工程模型相互比较项目是一个协调框架，始于2010年，其中包括一系列标准化气候模型实验，旨在了解太阳地球工程的物理过程和预计影响。已经进行了许多实验，并提出了更多的“试验台”实验，涵盖旨在改变行星辐射收支的各种地球工程技术：平流层气溶胶注入，海洋云增亮，表面辐射改变，卷云变薄和反射镜。迄今为止，已发表了100多项使用GeoMIP模拟结果的研究。在这里，我们提供了一个关键的评估GeoMIP及其实验。我们讨论了它的成功和错过的机会，例如哪些实验引起了科学界的更多兴趣，哪些没有，以及发生这种情况的潜在原因。我们还讨论了知识，GeoMIP的地球工程研究和气候科学领域作为一个整体：我们学到了什么方面的模型间的差异，鲁棒性的预测结果为特定的地球工程方法，以及未来的模型开发领域，这将是必要的在未来？我们还提供了多个案例，其中GeoMIP实验是国际气候变化评估的基础。最后，我们就未来的实验和更一般的活动提出了一系列建议，目的是不断加深我们对潜在地球工程方法影响的理解，减少气候结果的不确定性，这对于评估对社会和生态系统的更广泛影响至关重要。在这样做的过程中，我们完善了GeoMIP的目的，并概述了一系列标准，使GeoMIP可以最好地服务于其参与者，利益相关者和更广泛的科学界。
Abstract. The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) is a coordinating framework, started in 2010, that includes a series of standardized climate model experiments aimed at understanding the physical processes and projected impacts of solar geoengineering. Numerous experiments have been conducted, and numerous more have been proposed as “test-bed” experiments, spanning a variety of geoengineering techniques aimed at modifying the planetary radiation budget: stratospheric aerosol injection, marine cloud brightening, surface albedo modification, cirrus cloud thinning, and sunshade mirrors. To date, more than 100 studies have been published that used results from GeoMIP simulations. Here we provide a critical assessment of GeoMIP and its experiments. We discuss its successes and missed opportunities, for instance in terms of which experiments elicited more interest from the scientific community and which did not, and the potential reasons why that happened. We also discuss the knowledge that GeoMIP has contributed to the field of geoengineering research and climate science as a whole: what have we learned in terms of intermodel differences, robustness of the projected outcomes for specific geoengineering methods, and future areas of model development that would be necessary in the future? We also offer multiple examples of cases where GeoMIP experiments were fundamental for international assessments of climate change. Finally, we provide a series of recommendations, regarding both future experiments and more general activities, with the goal of continuously deepening our understanding of the effects of potential geoengineering approaches and reducing uncertainties in climate outcomes, important for assessing wider impacts on societies and ecosystems. In doing so, we refine the purpose of GeoMIP and outline a series of criteria whereby GeoMIP can best serve its participants, stakeholders, and the broader science community.