@article{Bellouin:2020:10.1029/2019RG000660,
author = {Bellouin, N and Quaas, J and Gryspeerdt, E and Kinne, S and Stier, P and Watson-Parris, D and Boucher, O and Carslaw, K and Christensen, M and Daniau, A-L and Dufresne, J-L and Feingold, G and Fiedler, S and Forster, P and Gettelman, A and Haywood, J and Lohmann, U and Malavelle, F and Mauritsen, T and McCoy, D and Myhre, G and Mülmenstädt, J and Neubauer, D and Possner, A and Rugenstein, M and Sato, Y and Schulz, M and Schwartz, S and Sourdeval, O and Storelvmo, T and Toll, V and Winker, D and Stevens, B},
doi = {10.1029/2019RG000660},
journal = {Reviews of Geophysics},
pages = {1--45},
title = {Bounding global aerosol radiative forcing of climate change},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000660},
volume = {58},
year = {2020}
}

Download

TY  - JOUR
AB  - Aerosols interact with radiation and clouds. Substantial progress made over the past 40 years in observing, understanding, and modeling these processes helped quantify the im balance in the Earth’s radiation budget caused by anthropogenic aerosols, called aerosol radiative forcing, but uncertainties remain large. This review provides a new range of aerosol radiative forcing over the industrial era based on multiple, traceable and arguable lines of evidence, including modelling approaches, theoretical considerations, and obser vations. Improved understanding of aerosol absorption and the causes of trends in surface radiative fluxes constrain the forcing from aerosol-radiation interactions. A robust theoretical foundation and convincing evidence constrain the forcing caused by aerosol61 driven increases in liquid cloud droplet number concentration. However, the influence of anthropogenic aerosols on cloud liquid water content and cloud fraction is less clear, and the influence on mixed-phase and ice clouds remains poorly constrained. Observed changes in surface temperature and radiative fluxes provide additional constraints. These multiple lines of evidence lead to a 68% confidence interval for the total aerosol effective radiative forcing of −1.60 to −0.65 W m−2, or −2.0 to −0.4 W m−2 with a 90% like lihood. Those intervals are of similar width to the last Intergovernmental Panel on Cli mate Change assessment but shifted towards more negative values. The uncertainty will narrow in the future by continuing to critically combine multiple lines of evidence, especially those addressing industrial-era changes in aerosol sources and aerosol effects on liquid cloud amount and on ice clouds.
AU  - Bellouin,N
AU  - Quaas,J
AU  - Gryspeerdt,E
AU  - Kinne,S
AU  - Stier,P
AU  - Watson-Parris,D
AU  - Boucher,O
AU  - Carslaw,K
AU  - Christensen,M
AU  - Daniau,A-L
AU  - Dufresne,J-L
AU  - Feingold,G
AU  - Fiedler,S
AU  - Forster,P
AU  - Gettelman,A
AU  - Haywood,J
AU  - Lohmann,U
AU  - Malavelle,F
AU  - Mauritsen,T
AU  - McCoy,D
AU  - Myhre,G
AU  - Mülmenstädt,J
AU  - Neubauer,D
AU  - Possner,A
AU  - Rugenstein,M
AU  - Sato,Y
AU  - Schulz,M
AU  - Schwartz,S
AU  - Sourdeval,O
AU  - Storelvmo,T
AU  - Toll,V
AU  - Winker,D
AU  - Stevens,B
DO  - 10.1029/2019RG000660
EP  - 45
PY  - 2020///
SN  - 8755-1209
SP  - 1
TI  - Bounding global aerosol radiative forcing of climate change
T2  - Reviews of Geophysics
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000660
UR  - https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019RG000660
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/74392
VL  - 58
ER  - 

Download