Sentences with phrase «for aerosols in the stratosphere»

And most models looking at future climate change scenarios did not account for aerosols in the stratosphere.

Not exact matches

The effect also illustrates one proposal for so - called geoengineering — the deliberate, large - scale manipulation of the planetary environment — that would use various means to create such sulfuric acid aerosols in the stratosphere to reflect sunlight and thereby hopefully forestall catastrophic climate change.

«Volcanic aerosols in the stratosphere absorb infrared radiation, thereby heating up the stratosphere, and changing the wind conditions subsequently,» said Dr. Matthew Toohey, atmospheric scientist at GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel.

Such sulfuric acid aerosols are already responsible for the bulk of nacreous clouds that form in the polar stratosphere; added particles would just amp up the natural process (although it might also amp up damage the ozone layer).

Some of those gases in the chimney system such as chlorofluorocarbons (found in refrigerants and aerosols) and bromine compounds (found in products such as fire extinguishers) are man - made and can become trapped in the stratosphere, lingering there for years.

Ueno says that once aerosols are in the stratosphere they become very stable and can last for years, compared with days or weeks in the troposphere, and they can activate compounds such as chlorine that destroy the ozone layer.

The main removal process for aerosols is related to rain and clouds, and up in the stratosphere there isn't any to speak of.

To the contrary, as there is an inverse correlation between low cloud cover and solar irradiation, and solar / volcanic have influences in the stratosphere, non-excisting for CO2 or human made aerosols.

For example, they predicted the expansion of the Hadley cells, the poleward movement of storm tracks, the rising of the tropopause, the rising of the effective radiating altitude, the circulation of aerosols in the atmosphere, the modelling of the transmission of radiation through the atmosphere, the clear sky super greenhouse effect that results from increased water vapor in the tropics, the near constancy of relative humidity, and polar amplification, the cooling of the stratosphere while the troposphere warmed.

Not it is not similar because one event injected sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere where they stayed for years and affected the globe while the other («human particulates and aerosol pollution») were produced in the troposphere and have a residency time in the atmosphere of about 4 days and had only a regional effect.

Until the 1990s, the widespread use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) for refrigerants and aerosols created an ozone hole in the Earth's stratosphere (the second layer of the atmosphere from Earth's surface) over Antarctica.

Although we focus on a hypothesized CR - cloud connection, we note that it is difficult to separate changes in the CR flux from accompanying variations in solar irradiance and the solar wind, for which numerous causal links to climate have also been proposed, including: the influence of UV spectral irradiance on stratospheric heating and dynamic stratosphere - troposphere links (Haigh 1996); UV irradiance and radiative damage to phytoplankton influencing the release of volatile precursor compounds which form sulphate aerosols over ocean environments (Kniveton et al. 2003); an amplification of total solar irradiance (TSI) variations by the addition of energy in cloud - free regions enhancing tropospheric circulation features (Meehl et al. 2008; Roy & Haigh 2010); numerous solar - related influences (including solar wind inputs) to the properties of the global electric circuit (GEC) and associated microphysical cloud changes (Tinsley 2008).

Here, gasses react with water to form aerosol particles that linger in the stratosphere for one or two years, reflecting sunlight and heat from the sun, and cooling the planet.

There is no obvious answer, unless you look to stratospheric aerosol cooling — in the stratosphere, you'd need about 10 % of the sulphates you'd require in the troposphere for the same cooling effect.

In other words: Proposed strategies to alter the amount of sunlight hitting the Earth's surface by (for example) deliberately injecting millions of tons of sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere pose enormous risks and uncertainties and don «t address the underlying causes of global warming or other major risks from rising concentrations of carbon dioxide, such as ocean acidification.

For instance, given the physics of sulphate aerosols in the stratosphere (short wave reflectors, long wave absorbers), it would be surprising if putting in the aerosols seen during the Pinatubo eruption did not reduce the planetary temperature while warming the stratosphere in the model.

What does seem to be known is that aerosols fall out of the lower atmosphere (as high as they can be launched with conventional bombs) in days, and persist for less than 2 years when launched into the stratosphere by a major volcanic event like Pinatubo which was equivalent to several H bombs.

The story revolves around a paper that Paul Crutzen (Nobel Prize winner for chemistry related to the CFC / ozone depletion link) has written about deliberately adding sulphate aerosols in the stratosphere to increase the albedo and cool the planet — analogous to the natural effects of volcanoes.

During this period, the aerosol amount varied with dust export from Africa, but also from major eruptions by two volcanoes (El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991), each of which left a reflective layer of sulfate droplets in the lower stratosphere for a couple of years.

Volcanic eruptions emit sulfate aerosols via volcanic plumes, which may stay in the stratosphere for months to years, reflecting sunlight back into space, cooling the Earth's lower atmosphere or troposphere over a long time...