I have a broken logic board when it comes to lost cloud cooling from SO2 reduction.

I used to think:
you take SO2 away, and the atmosphere heats up by 0.x degrees, and afterwards, the forcings from GHG pile on that new level of achieved heat. But SO2-reduction from x Mt per year to zero is more like an event, and when zero is reached, it stops adding heat.

Now I think different and I really need help getting my head around it.

A stretch of ocean from now on is exposed to direct🌞and takes up more heat.
Every day its >layers< heat more, ie faster than before. Forever.
To me, it sounds like the recent growth rate must continue. Eg, 2023: +0.01*, 2024: +0.011, 2025: 0.012, 2026: 0.013 forever?

*dunno what the real cloud effect is. +0.01 in 2023 is only a guess for sake of the illustration.

Important with the ocean's exposure to direct sun is that it has layers. Yesterday's additional °C gets mixed down by wind and waves. But it also comes up again and re-interacts with the atmo= warms it today.

How is it with land?
When SO2 stops over hard land surface, lost cooling is a one-off and won't add °C beyond its local potential.
??? No, that can't be right.

( Over land, SO2 reduction also lets forests recover from acid rain – which increases cloud formation around "VOC", or call them tree pheromones. Over land, this new cloud formation mechanism counters the lost clouds from reduced SO2 pollution to some extent. Seen a paper somewhere saying by 40%. )

Now I think, in both environments, lost SO2 cloud-cooling is a gift that keeps on giving MORE. Not a single warming potential, but a forever growing heat addition.

Help?

#climateChange #climatefeedbacks #atmosphere #ocean #cloud #SO2

🌱 What’s up with carbon sinks, wildfires & ecosystem feedbacks in a changing climate?
We’ve got you at #EGU25. Models, remote sensing & field data combined.

Talks by Ilyina, Behncke, Nieradzik, Gomarasca & co. 🌍

#CarbonScience #ClimateFeedbacks #EGU25

Thinking of a theoretical CO2 removal calculation to get back down to 350ppm=1°C by year 2100. Theoretical assumptions: sinks stay as intact as today, fossil CO2 since 350ppm will stop at 1600Gt, permafrost and dried, non-rewettable wetlands add 360. 50% of all of this goes into sinks = 980Gt for removal?
No. Sinks in the net negative emission phase outgas 50% for every ton removed 💡=1470 Gt CO2 for NET by the year 2100, or 400 Gt Carbon. Where the outgassing occurs is shown in the middle row of maps in picture 3. The huge amount of removal best matches the left panel.

Regarding competition with food and biodiversity, I recall from another paper that #BECCS can sustainably remove 3Gt CO2 per year. The S for storage (or use) incurs energy needs in transport to storage or use sites.
By 2050, #Climeworks expects to suck 1Gt CO2 annually out of the atmosphere and stone-ify it in #Iceland's particular #geology.

Okay. So how much is my theoretical 1470 annually if I assume a constant removal rate from 2040ff?
-24.5 Gt CO2 per year.

Thoughts?

The screenshots are from Katarzyna B Tokarska and Kirsten Zickfeld 2015, "The effectiveness of net negative carbon dioxide emissions in reversing anthropogenic climate change" https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/9/094013

#CarbonRemoval #CDR #NET #Climate #ClimateFeedbacks

Up very early here. Does anyone in the other timezones know about our #climate emegency?

Only a few years of #Arctic sea ice left!

http://iwantsomeproof.com/extimg/siv_annual_max_loss_and_ice_remaining.png

After we lose the ice, #climatefeedbacks will cause warming to accelerate dramatically. It's practically irreversible already.

If you know, how are you dealing with it? Are trying to prepare?