Impact of solar geoengineering on wildfires in the 21st century in CESM2/WACCM6
-
Published:2023-05-16
Issue:9
Volume:23
Page:5467-5486
-
ISSN:1680-7324
-
Container-title:Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Atmos. Chem. Phys.
Author:
Tang WenfuORCID, Tilmes SimoneORCID, Lawrence David M.ORCID, Li FangORCID, He CenlinORCID, Emmons Louisa K.ORCID, Buchholz Rebecca R.ORCID, Xia LiliORCID
Abstract
Abstract. We quantify future changes in wildfire burned area and carbon emissions in
the 21st century under four Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) scenarios
and two SSP5-8.5-based solar geoengineering scenarios with a target surface
temperature defined by SSP2-4.5 – solar irradiance reduction (G6solar) and
stratospheric sulfate aerosol injections (G6sulfur) – and explore the
mechanisms that drive solar geoengineering impacts on fires. This study is
based on fully coupled climate–chemistry simulations with simulated
occurrence of fires (burned area and carbon emissions) using the Whole
Atmosphere Community Climate Model version 6 (WACCM6) as the atmospheric
component of the Community Earth System Model version 2 (CESM2). Globally,
total wildfire burned area is projected to increase over the 21st century
under scenarios without geoengineering and decrease under the two
geoengineering scenarios. By the end of the century, the two geoengineering
scenarios have lower burned area and fire carbon emissions than not only
their base-climate scenario SSP5-8.5 but also the targeted-climate scenario
SSP2-4.5. Geoengineering reduces wildfire occurrence by decreasing surface
temperature and wind speed and increasing relative humidity and soil water,
with the exception of boreal regions where geoengineering increases the
occurrence of wildfires due to a decrease in relative humidity and soil
water compared with the present day. This leads to a global reduction in burned
area and fire carbon emissions by the end of the century relative to their
base-climate scenario SSP5-8.5. However, geoengineering also yields
reductions in precipitation compared with a warming climate, which offsets
some of the fire reduction. Overall, the impacts of the different driving
factors are larger on burned area than fire carbon emissions. In general,
the stratospheric sulfate aerosol approach has a stronger fire-reducing
effect than the solar irradiance reduction approach.
Funder
National Center for Atmospheric Research
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
Atmospheric Science
Reference71 articles.
1. Abatzoglou, J. T., Williams, A. P., and Barbero, R.: Global Emergence of
Anthropogenic Climate Change in Fire Weather Indices, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
46, 326–336, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL080959, 2019. 2. Andreae, M. O. and Merlet, P.: Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 15, 955–966, 2001. 3. Bala, G., Duffy, P. B., and Taylor, K. E.: Impact of geoengineering schemes on the global hydrological cycle, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 105, 7664–7669, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0711648105, 2008. 4. Bowman, D. M. J. S., Balch, J. K., Artaxo, P., Bond, W. J., Carlson, J. M.,
Cochrane, M. A., D'Antonio, C. M., DeFries, R. S., Doyle, J. C., Harrison,
S. P., Johnston, F. H., Keeley, J. E., Krawchuk, M. A., Kull, C. A.,
Marston, J. B., Moritz, M. A., Prentice, I. C., Roos, C. I., Scott, A. C.,
Swetnam, T. W., van der Werf, G. R., and Pyne, S. J.: Fire in the Earth
System, Science, 324, 481–484, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1163886, 2009. 5. Bowman, D. M., Kolden, C. A., Abatzoglou, J. T., Johnston, F. H., van der
Werf, G. R., and Flannigan, M.: Vegetation fires in the Anthropocene, Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 1, 500–515, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0085-3,
2020.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|