So2 Global Warming
So2 Global Warming
So2 Global Warming
Sulfate aerosols (SO4 ) from anthropogenic emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) generally have a cooling effect. However, if SO2 emissions
fall over time, accounting for sulfate aerosols will increase the predicted warming from greenhouse gases. This paper integrates the four
marker emission scenarios for CO2 and SO4 from the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES), the UIUC general circulation model
(GCM), and a country-specific impact model (GIM) to calculate the impacts of sulfate aerosols. By 2100, lower SO2 emissions slightly
increase warming in the temperate and polar regions causing small damages in the former and small benefits in the latter. If SO2 emissions
are also lower in tropical regions, temperatures will rise causing small damages there as well. However, if SO2 emissions rise in tropical
regions, temperatures will fall leading to small benefits.
Table 1
SRES scenarios for year 2100.
circulation/mixed-layer-ocean (AGC/MLO) model, a simple model generated the A1 scenario [12], the ASF model pro-
climate-ocean model, and a sophisticated interpolation tech- vided the A2 scenario [21], the IMAGE model created the
nique [17]. The impacts were calculated by the Global Im- B1 scenario [1], and the MESSAGE model generated the B2
pact Model (GIM) [8]. scenario [11]. The resulting global characteristics of each
marker scenario are shown in table 1.
2.1. SO2 emissions scenarios
2.2. Climate changes
When it became clear that sulfate aerosols can have a sig-
nificant effect on climate, it also became clear that sulfate In principle, climate changes could be calculated for each
aerosols would have to be included in future climate projec- SRES emission scenario using a coupled atmosphere–ocean
tions. The IPCC recently completed the difficult exercise of general circulation model. However, these models are ex-
generating a number of alternative emission scenarios for the pensive to run so that, in practice, they cannot be used for
SRES [13]. It is a difficult task to forecast these emissions the myriad of possible scenarios of interest to policymakers.
far into the future, requiring not only an ability to foresee Consequently, Schlesinger et al. [17] constructed geographi-
economic and energy development through the 21st century, cal distributions of surface temperature changes using a vari-
but also an ability to predict how future pollution regulation ant of the scenario-construction method developed by Santer
might shape SO2 emissions. et al. [16]. Here we employ the same method to construct the
The authors of the SRES report do not provide a single geographical scenarios of changes in precipitation.
“best estimate”, but instead provide four alternative marker The model begins by predicting the concentration of
scenarios, each being representative of a scenario family. greenhouse gases and sulfate aerosols for each emission sce-
The authors are very explicit that these are not four equally nario [17]. Carbon dioxide emissions become well mixed
likely outcomes, but merely four possible alternatives. We in the atmosphere, so that region-specific emissions are not
examine all four marker scenarios to present a range of pos- important. All that matters is global emissions. Sulfur diox-
sible effects. We, like the authors of the SRES report, do not ide emissions are more short-lived, so they lead to region-
assess the likely occurrence of each scenario. Some of the specific sulfate levels. Each SRES scenario makes a differ-
SRES marker scenarios may be more likely than others and ent forecast of regional SO2 emissions, leading to different
the set of scenarios does not reflect a broad range of likely regional sulfate aerosol concentrations. We assume that the
outcomes. Consequently the reader must be careful inter- spatial distribution of emissions within each region resem-
preting the results across the scenarios. bles current emissions.
The four marker scenarios correspond roughly to four sto- The concentration of greenhouse gases depends on the
rylines. The A1 scenario is a high economic and low popu- path of emissions over time. In addition to carbon being
lation growth story. Carbon dioxide emissions are moderate released by man-made emissions, some carbon is captured
and SO2 emissions are low. The B1 scenario is a moderate by natural processes through the carbon cycle. Given the
economic and low population growth story, with emphasis concentration of the greenhouse gases and the burden of the
on reduced materialization of the economy and movement sulfate aerosols, the level of radiative forcing is predicted for
away from fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide and SO2 emissions each scenario.
are low. The A2 scenario has low economic and high popula- The Atmospheric General Circulation/Mixed Layer
tion growth. It results in the highest CO2 and SO2 emissions Ocean (AGC/MLO) model calculates the geographical dis-
and continued disparity between rich and poor countries. tribution of temperature and precipitation change for eight
The B2 scenario has low economic and moderate population scenarios. One scenario examines a doubling of CO2 alone.
growth with continued disparity across countries. Carbon Six scenarios examine a 10 times increase in sulfates in each
dioxide and SO2 emissions are moderate. of 6 regions individually (Europe, North Africa, Siberia,
Four different integrated assessment models were used to Asia, North America and the Southern Hemisphere). A fi-
provide concrete values for each marker scenario. The AIM nal scenario examines a 10 times increase in sulfates jointly