Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3275
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3275
14 Jul 2026
 | 14 Jul 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).

Process-level contributions to uncertainty in aerosol effective radiative forcing: a perturbed parameter ensemble with the aerosol–climate model ICON–HAM

Hailing Jia, David Neubauer, Yusuf Bhatti, Duncan Watson-Parris, Philip Stier, Johannes Quaas, Daniel Partridge, Ardit Arifi, Anne Kubin, Athanasios Nenes, Muhammed Irfan, Ulas Im, Carl Svenhag, Nick Schutgens, Bastiaan van Diedenhoven, Sylvaine Ferrachat, Ulrike Lohmann, Ina Tegen, Alice Henkes, Guangliang Fu, and Otto Hasekamp

Abstract. Changes in aerosols since the preindustrial era have altered the top-of-the-atmosphere radiation balance by scattering and absorbing solar radiation (ARI) and indirectly interacting with clouds (ACI), known as aerosol effective radiative forcing (ERFaer). ERFaer persistently remains one of the most uncertain components in climate projections, due to imperfect representations of aerosol and cloud processes in climate models. Here, we construct a perturbed parameter ensemble (PPE) with the aerosol–climate model ICON2.6.4–A–HAM2.3 (hereafter ICON–HAM) to quantify key sources of ERFaer uncertainty. We perturb 42 aerosol and cloud parameters over 383 PPE members. Parametric uncertainties in aerosol and cloud processes yield an ERFaer of −1.04Wm−2, with a 90 % credible range of −1.42 to −0.65 Wm−2 for the period 2024–2025. The parameters related to emissions (anthropogenic sulfur dioxide, natural dimethyl sulfide, and emitted particle size) dominate ACI uncertainty and hence ERFaer uncertainty (80 %), while absorption-related parameters (anthropogenic black carbon emissions and aerosol refractive indices) drive ARI uncertainty (60 %). Cloud parameters account for 13 % of ERFaer uncertainty, mainly via convection and entrainment processes. The sensitivity analysis of model diagnostics to parameters reveals that many present-day aerosol and cloud observables share dominant causes of uncertainty with ACI and ARI forcing, highlighting the potential for constraining ERFaer using existing space- and ground-based measurements. Notably, model biases against SPEXone and MODIS observations coincide spatially with parametric uncertainties, suggesting that much of these biases may be mitigated through appropriate constraint with observations, while the remainder requires structural model developments in combination with improved observations. 

Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Hailing Jia, David Neubauer, Yusuf Bhatti, Duncan Watson-Parris, Philip Stier, Johannes Quaas, Daniel Partridge, Ardit Arifi, Anne Kubin, Athanasios Nenes, Muhammed Irfan, Ulas Im, Carl Svenhag, Nick Schutgens, Bastiaan van Diedenhoven, Sylvaine Ferrachat, Ulrike Lohmann, Ina Tegen, Alice Henkes, Guangliang Fu, and Otto Hasekamp

Status: open (until 25 Aug 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Hailing Jia, David Neubauer, Yusuf Bhatti, Duncan Watson-Parris, Philip Stier, Johannes Quaas, Daniel Partridge, Ardit Arifi, Anne Kubin, Athanasios Nenes, Muhammed Irfan, Ulas Im, Carl Svenhag, Nick Schutgens, Bastiaan van Diedenhoven, Sylvaine Ferrachat, Ulrike Lohmann, Ina Tegen, Alice Henkes, Guangliang Fu, and Otto Hasekamp
Hailing Jia, David Neubauer, Yusuf Bhatti, Duncan Watson-Parris, Philip Stier, Johannes Quaas, Daniel Partridge, Ardit Arifi, Anne Kubin, Athanasios Nenes, Muhammed Irfan, Ulas Im, Carl Svenhag, Nick Schutgens, Bastiaan van Diedenhoven, Sylvaine Ferrachat, Ulrike Lohmann, Ina Tegen, Alice Henkes, Guangliang Fu, and Otto Hasekamp
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 14 Jul 2026
Download
Short summary
Tiny aerosol particles affect Earth’s climate by interacting with clouds and sunlight, but their impact remains uncertain. Combining climate model simulations and emulators, we explored millions of model variants across different aerosol and cloud settings to identify the causes of the uncertainty. We found that aerosol emissions and cloud convection are key contributors. Our work suggests that better integration of existing observations could help reduce these uncertainties in the future.
Share