Identification

Title

Informative risk analyses of radiative forcing geoengineering require proper counterfactuals

Abstract

<p><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width:0px;background-color:oklch(0.99 0.004 106.471);color:oklch(0.304 0.04 213.681);display:inline !important;float:none;font-family:__fkGroteskNeue_598ab8, __fkGroteskNeue_Fallback_598ab8, ui-sans-serif, system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, &quot;Segoe UI&quot;, Roboto, &quot;Helvetica Neue&quot;, Arial, &quot;Noto Sans&quot;, sans-serif, &quot;Apple Color Emoji&quot;, &quot;Segoe UI Emoji&quot;, &quot;Segoe UI Symbol&quot;, &quot;Noto Color Emoji&quot;;font-size:16px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;orphans:2;text-align:start;text-decoration-color:initial;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-thickness:initial;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;widows:2;word-spacing:0px;">This critique of the study by Müller et al. examines the implications of radiative forcing geoengineering on Arctic wildfires and permafrost thaw. The authors argue that while Müller et al. assert that geoengineering increases these risks, their findings actually indicate a reduction in risk compared to high-emission scenarios (RCP8.5), albeit less effectively than targeted emissions reductions (RCP4.5). Key concerns include the inappropriate baseline comparison used in the study, which mischaracterizes the effectiveness of geoengineering interventions, and the limited scope of geoengineering strategies considered, potentially leading to overgeneralizations. The critique emphasizes the necessity for accurate framing and communication of geoengineering's potential impacts to avoid misinterpretation and to inform climate response strategies effectively.</span></p>

Resource type

document

Resource locator

Unique resource identifier

code

http://n2t.net/ark:/85065/d7st7v7p

codeSpace

Dataset language

eng

Spatial reference system

code identifying the spatial reference system

Classification of spatial data and services

Topic category

geoscientificInformation

Keywords

Keyword set

keyword value

Text

originating controlled vocabulary

title

Resource Type

reference date

date type

publication

effective date

2016-01-01T00:00:00Z

Geographic location

West bounding longitude

East bounding longitude

North bounding latitude

South bounding latitude

Temporal reference

Temporal extent

Begin position

End position

Dataset reference date

date type

publication

effective date

2024-12-01T00:00:00Z

Frequency of update

Quality and validity

Lineage

Conformity

Data format

name of format

version of format

Constraints related to access and use

Constraint set

Use constraints

<span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10pt;font-style:normal;" data-sheets-root="1">Copyright author(s). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.</span>

Limitations on public access

None

Responsible organisations

Responsible party

contact position

OpenSky Support

organisation name

UCAR/NCAR - Library

full postal address

PO Box 3000

Boulder

80307-3000

email address

opensky@ucar.edu

web address

http://opensky.ucar.edu/

name: homepage

responsible party role

pointOfContact

Metadata on metadata

Metadata point of contact

contact position

OpenSky Support

organisation name

UCAR/NCAR - Library

full postal address

PO Box 3000

Boulder

80307-3000

email address

opensky@ucar.edu

web address

http://opensky.ucar.edu/

name: homepage

responsible party role

pointOfContact

Metadata date

2025-12-24T17:59:59.878491

Metadata language

eng; USA