% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{vonHobe:1008648,
      author       = {von Hobe, Marc and Brühl, Christoph and Lennartz, Sinikka
                      T. and Whelan, Mary E. and Kaushik, Aleya},
      title        = {{C}omment on “{A}n approach to sulfate geoengineering
                      with surface emissions of carbonyl sulfide” by {Q}uaglia
                      et al. (2022)},
      journal      = {Atmospheric chemistry and physics},
      volume       = {23},
      number       = {11},
      issn         = {1680-7316},
      address      = {Katlenburg-Lindau},
      publisher    = {EGU},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2023-02449},
      pages        = {6591 - 6598},
      year         = {2023},
      abstract     = {Solar radiation management through artificially increasing
                      the amount of stratospheric sulfate aerosol is being
                      considered as a possible climate engineering method. To
                      overcome the challenge of transporting the necessary amount
                      of sulfur to the stratosphere, Quaglia and co-workers
                      suggest deliberate emissions of carbonyl sulfide (OCS), a
                      long-lived precursor of atmospheric sulfate. In their paper,
                      published in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics in 2022, they
                      outline two scenarios with OCS emissions either at the
                      Earth's surface or in the tropical upper troposphere and
                      calculate the expected radiative forcing using a climate
                      model. In our opinion, the study (i) neglects a
                      significantly higher surface uptake that will inevitably be
                      induced by the elevated atmospheric OCS concentrations and
                      (ii) overestimates the net cooling effect of this OCS
                      geoengineering approach due to some questionable
                      parameterizations and assumptions in the radiative forcing
                      calculations. In this commentary, we use state-of-the-art
                      models to show that at the mean atmospheric OCS mixing
                      ratios of the two emissions scenarios, the terrestrial
                      biosphere and the oceans are expected to take up more OCS
                      than is being released to reach these levels. Using
                      chemistry climate models with a long-standing record for
                      estimating the climate forcing of OCS and stratospheric
                      aerosols, we also show that the net radiative forcing of the
                      emission scenarios suggested by Quaglia and co-workers is
                      smaller than suggested and insufficient to offset any
                      significant portion of anthropogenically induced climate
                      change. Our conclusion is that a geoengineering approach
                      using OCS will not work under any circumstances and should
                      not be considered further.},
      cin          = {IEK-7},
      ddc          = {550},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-7-20101013},
      pnm          = {2112 - Climate Feedbacks (POF4-211)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-2112},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:001010623000001},
      doi          = {10.5194/acp-23-6591-2023},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1008648},
}