Nature 369, 734 - 737 (30 June 1994); doi:10.1038/369734a0

Response of the climate system to atmospheric aerosols and greenhouse gases

K. E. Taylor & J. E. Penner^*

Global Climate Research Division, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, PO Box 808, Livermore, California 94551– 990, USA
^*To whom correspondence should be addressed.

RECENTLY, Kiehl and Briegleb¹ evaluated the radiative forcing associated with the capacity of atmospheric sulphate aerosols to reflect solar radiation back into space, and compared this with the forcing associated with atmospheric greenhouse gases. They found that the (negative) climate forcing by the aerosols has strong regional character, with the greatest forcing over Northern Hemisphere land surfaces, whereas the (positive) forcing by greenhouse gases is distributed almost equally between the hemispheres and varies mainly as a function of latitude. Here we present simulations of the response of the climate system to these two types of forcing. We find that the global response to aerosol forcing is regionally heterogeneous, with a distribution that is different from the forcing pattern. The simulations also imply that, for equal magnitudes of forcing, the temperature response is markedly greater for carbon dioxide than for aerosol forcing. We conclude that to predict the global mean climate response to global mean forcing, it is necessary to separate out the different components of the forcing to which the climate system is sensitive.

References

1.	Kiehl, J. T. & Briegleb, B. P. Science 260, 331−314 (1993).
2.	Charlson, R. J. et al. Science 255, 423−430 (1992). | ISI | ChemPort |
3.	Charlson, R. J., Lovelock, J. E., Andreae, M. O. & Warren, S. G. Nature 326, 655−661 (1987). | Article | ISI | ChemPort |
4.	Twomey, S. A., Piepgrass, M. & Wolfe, T. L. Tellus 36B, 356−366 (1984). | ChemPort |
5.	Wigley, T. M. L. Nature 339, 365−367 (1989). | Article | ChemPort |
6.	Engardt, M. & Rodhe, H. Geophys. Res. Lett. 20, 117−120 (1993). | ChemPort |
7.	Walton, J. J., MacCracken, M. C. & Ghan, S. J. J. geophys. Res. 93, 8339−8354 (1988).
8.	Taylor, K. E. & Ghan, S. J. J. Clim. 5, 907−919 (1992). | Article |
9.	Covey, C. & Thompson, S. L. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 75, 331−341 (1989). | Article |
10.	Cess, R. D. et al Science 245, 513−516 (1989). | ISI |
11.	Penner, J. E. et al. J. geophys. Res. 96, 959−990 (1991).
12.	Penner, J. E., Atherton, C. A. & Graedel, T. in Proc. 1st Int. Global Atmospheric Biospheric Chemistry (ed. Prinn, R. G.) (OHOLO Conf. Ser., Plenum, New York, 1994).
13.	Spiro, P. A., Jacob, D. J. & Logan, J. A. J geophys. Res. 97, 6023−6036 (1992). | ChemPort |
14.	Benkovitz, C. Atmos. Envir. 16, 1551−1563 (1982). | Article | ChemPort |
15.	Charlson, R. J., Langner, J., Rodhe, H., Leovy, C. B. & Warren, S. G. Tellus 43AB, 152−163 (1991).
16.	Senior, C. A. & Mitchell, J. F. B. J. Clim. 6, 393−418 (1993). | Article | ISI |
17.	Roeckner, E., Feichter, J. & Siebert, T. 2nd Int. Conf. Modelling Global Climate Change and Variability (abst.) 78 (Max-Planck-lnsitut für Meteoroiogie, Hamburg, 1992).
18.	Wigley, T. M. L. & Raper, S. C. B. in Climate Change: Science. Impacts and Policy (eds. Jäger, J. & Ferguson, H. L.) 231−242 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991).
19.	Hansen, J., J. geophys. Res. 93, 9341−9364 (1988). | ChemPort |
20.	Penner, J. E. et al. Bull. Am. met. Soc. 75, 375−400 (1994).
21.	Crutcher, H. L. & Meserve, J. M. NAVAIR 50-1C-52 (Office of Chief of Naval Ops, Washington DC, 1970).
22.	Jaeger, L., Berichte des Deutschen Wettersdeinstes 139, 1−38 (1976).
23.	Rossow, W. B. & Schiffer, R. A. Bull. Am. met. Soc. 72, 2−20 (1991).
24.	Gloersen, P. & Campbell, W. J. J. geophys. Res. 93, 10666−10674 (1988).
25.	Taljaard, J. J., Van Loon, H., Crutcher, J. L. & Jenne, R. L. NAVAIR 50-1C-55 (Office of Chief of Naval Ops, Washington DC, 1969).