arxiv: 2605.14947 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-14 · ⚛️ physics.ao-ph · physics.geo-ph· physics.soc-ph

Recognition: no theorem link

From Particles to Policy: Technical Building Blocks for Multi-State SAI Coordination

R. Yahav , A. Spector , D. Kushnir , M. C. Waxman

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 03:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.ao-ph physics.geo-phphysics.soc-ph

keywords stratospheric aerosol injectionSAIengineered particlesradiative forcingparticle traceabilitymulti-state coordinationmonitoring databasegovernance metrics

0 comments

The pith

Engineered particles for stratospheric aerosol injection let observers measure the cooling effect and trace particle origins independently of who releases them.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper proposes replacing in-situ sulfate aerosols with custom solid particles that have fixed size, composition, surface chemistry, and embedded production signatures. These features allow the cooling impact, called SAI-induced radiative forcing, to be calculated directly from aerosol-layer observations without relying on operator data. The same signatures would let any party identify where specific particles originated. Together the two capabilities could populate a shared public database for checking compliance in any future multi-country SAI program. The authors outline a path of joint small-scale tests that develop both the particles and the coordination habits at once, while stating that large-scale use remains premature.

Core claim

Engineered solid particles with dedicated properties turn the SAI-induced radiative forcing into an operator-independent quantity obtainable from direct aerosol-layer measurements and allow particles to carry identifiable signatures from their production site; these two metrics could feed a shared, publicly accessible monitoring database that anchors compliance assessments in measurable parameters and thereby supports multi-state coordination of SAI activities.

What carries the argument

Operator-independent SAI-induced radiative forcing derived from direct aerosol-layer measurements together with embedded production signatures for particle traceability, which together supply verifiable data for a shared monitoring database.

If this is right

Compliance assessments could rest on observable parameters instead of self-reported figures.
Shared metrics modeled on the Montreal Protocol and IAEA safeguards could enable multi-state cooperation on SAI.
A phased program at scales orders of magnitude below deployment would test both the technical metrics and the coordination practices together.
The resulting infrastructure could support a wide range of governance frameworks without specifying any single one.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Independent derivation of the cooling effect could let non-participating countries monitor SAI impacts without operator cooperation.
Traceable particles could reduce incentives for unilateral actions by making attribution feasible after the fact.
A public database built around these metrics might integrate with existing satellite and ground-based atmospheric networks.

Load-bearing premise

Direct aerosol-layer measurements can reliably yield an operator-independent value for the cooling effect and embedded signatures will remain detectable and unique enough to trace particles at the scales needed for coordination.

What would settle it

A controlled release experiment in which independent observers cannot calculate the radiative forcing value from aerosol measurements alone or cannot match recovered particles to their production signatures after atmospheric exposure.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.14947 by A. Spector, D. Kushnir, M. C. Waxman, R. Yahav.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Both building blocks applied to the same physical reality - a mixed stratospheric aerosol cloud containing tagged [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Phased co-development of technical infrastructure and the multi-state coordination practices that would use it, from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is a solar radiation modification technique, proposed as an interim measure to offset warming while greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are reduced. This paper discusses a possible SAI implementation route - an alternative to sulfate aerosols formed in situ - based on engineered solid particles having dedicated properties such as size, composition, surface chemistry, and traceable origin, supporting safety, controllability, and functionality needed for SAI systems. These engineered properties also open up options for any future multi-state coordination of SAI through two technical building blocks: (1) the SAI-induced radiative forcing (SRF) - the magnitude of the cooling effect attributable specifically to the SAI layer - as an operator-independent quantity, derivable from direct aerosol-layer measurements; and (2) particle traceability through identifying signatures embedded at production. Both could feed into a shared, publicly accessible monitoring database open to independent interrogation, addressing several governance challenges by anchoring compliance assessments in measurable parameters. Drawing on precedents from the Montreal Protocol, IAEA safeguards, and other regimes, we show that shared technical metrics have historically enabled multi-state cooperation, and we argue the same could apply to SAI. We describe a phased pathway in which the technical capabilities and coordination practices that would use them are developed and tested together, at scales orders of magnitude below operational deployment. To be clear - we regard SAI deployment as premature; the conditions under which it might be considered have not been met. The paper does not propose a governance framework; rather, it identifies technical infrastructure that could support a wide range of such frameworks.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper sketches traceable engineered particles as a way to create measurable, operator-independent anchors for SAI coordination, but the central mapping from measurements to SRF is asserted without any derivation or example.

read the letter

The main point is that the authors want to replace in-situ sulfate aerosols with pre-engineered solid particles that carry size, composition, surface chemistry, and production signatures. These features are meant to support two governance tools: an SAI-induced radiative forcing value pulled directly from aerosol-layer measurements, and particle traceability for a shared public database. They tie this to precedents from the Montreal Protocol and IAEA safeguards to show how technical metrics have helped multi-state cooperation before, and they outline a small-scale phased testing path while stressing that full deployment remains premature.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper proposes engineered solid particles with tailored size, composition, surface chemistry, and traceability signatures as an alternative to in-situ sulfate aerosols for stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI). It argues these properties enable two technical building blocks for multi-state coordination: (1) an operator-independent SAI-induced radiative forcing (SRF) derivable directly from aerosol-layer measurements, and (2) particle traceability via production-embedded signatures. These could populate a shared public monitoring database to support compliance assessments. The argument draws on historical precedents from the Montreal Protocol and IAEA safeguards to suggest such metrics facilitate cooperation, outlines a phased small-scale development pathway, and stresses that operational SAI remains premature.

Significance. If the proposed measurement-to-SRF mapping and signature traceability prove feasible in practice, the manuscript could contribute to SAI governance discussions by supplying concrete, verifiable technical parameters that anchor compliance in observable quantities rather than model-dependent attributions. This framing aligns with precedents where shared metrics enabled cooperation, potentially informing future policy infrastructure even if SAI deployment itself is not imminent.

major comments (3)

[Abstract and technical building blocks discussion] The central claim that SRF is an operator-independent quantity derivable from direct aerosol-layer measurements (optical depth, size distribution, composition) lacks any equation, retrieval algorithm, or worked example. Radiative forcing calculations for solid particles are sensitive to vertical profile, spatial heterogeneity, and surface chemistry; without showing how the mapping avoids priors on these quantities or injection details, the operator-independence assertion remains ungrounded.
[Particle traceability section] The traceability building block asserts that embedded signatures at production will enable practical identification, but the manuscript provides no analysis of signature survival under stratospheric conditions (oxidation, coagulation, sedimentation) or detection feasibility at scale with existing or near-term instrumentation. This gap directly affects whether traceability can support coordination as claimed.
[Phased pathway discussion] The phased pathway for joint development of technical capabilities and coordination practices at scales orders of magnitude below deployment is described only qualitatively, without specific scale estimates, success metrics, or error budgets. This makes it difficult to evaluate whether the pathway can realistically test the SRF and traceability claims.

minor comments (1)

The term 'engineered solid particles' is introduced without an early, precise definition of the required properties (e.g., size range, composition bounds) that distinguish them from other SAI candidates.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which highlight opportunities to strengthen the grounding of our proposed technical building blocks. We address each major comment below and will implement revisions to provide greater specificity while preserving the manuscript's focus on governance-enabling infrastructure rather than full technical design.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and technical building blocks discussion] The central claim that SRF is an operator-independent quantity derivable from direct aerosol-layer measurements (optical depth, size distribution, composition) lacks any equation, retrieval algorithm, or worked example. Radiative forcing calculations for solid particles are sensitive to vertical profile, spatial heterogeneity, and surface chemistry; without showing how the mapping avoids priors on these quantities or injection details, the operator-independence assertion remains ungrounded.

Authors: We agree that the manuscript presents the SRF concept at a conceptual level without explicit equations or a worked example, leaving the operator-independence claim insufficiently detailed. In the revised version we will add a dedicated subsection that includes a simplified retrieval relation expressing SRF in terms of measured aerosol optical depth, effective radius, and composition-derived refractive index under a single-scattering approximation. A worked numerical example will be supplied for a uniform layer, together with explicit discussion of how lidar-derived vertical profiles and multi-wavelength measurements can reduce (though not eliminate) dependence on priors for heterogeneity and surface chemistry. The revision will clarify that the approach still requires some assumptions but avoids dependence on operator-specific injection parameters by relying on post-injection observables. revision: yes
Referee: [Particle traceability section] The traceability building block asserts that embedded signatures at production will enable practical identification, but the manuscript provides no analysis of signature survival under stratospheric conditions (oxidation, coagulation, sedimentation) or detection feasibility at scale with existing or near-term instrumentation. This gap directly affects whether traceability can support coordination as claimed.

Authors: The referee is correct that the traceability discussion remains conceptual and omits quantitative treatment of signature persistence and detectability. We will add a new subsection that reviews stratospheric oxidation, coagulation, and sedimentation effects on candidate signatures (e.g., stable isotopic or refractory chemical tags) and supplies order-of-magnitude estimates for survival fractions based on published laboratory and modeling studies. Detection feasibility will be addressed by referencing existing aerosol mass spectrometry and lidar techniques, with discussion of required sensitivity thresholds at expected stratospheric number densities. While comprehensive in-situ validation lies beyond the present scope, these additions will better substantiate the coordination potential. revision: yes
Referee: [Phased pathway discussion] The phased pathway for joint development of technical capabilities and coordination practices at scales orders of magnitude below deployment is described only qualitatively, without specific scale estimates, success metrics, or error budgets. This makes it difficult to evaluate whether the pathway can realistically test the SRF and traceability claims.

Authors: We accept that the phased pathway is presented qualitatively and would benefit from concrete parameters to permit evaluation. The revised manuscript will expand this section with explicit scale estimates (initial coordinated tests at 1–10 tonne injection levels), success metrics (e.g., SRF retrieval agreement within 15–20 % of independent radiative-transfer calculations), and preliminary error budgets incorporating measurement uncertainties in optical depth, size distribution, and composition. These will be anchored to published results from existing small-scale aerosol release experiments to demonstrate that the proposed tests remain orders of magnitude below deployment while still exercising the measurement and traceability capabilities. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: conceptual proposal without derivations or self-referential reductions

full rationale

The paper advances a conceptual proposal for SAI coordination via two technical building blocks (operator-independent SRF from direct measurements and embedded particle signatures) but contains no equations, fitted parameters, or derivation chains. It draws on external historical precedents (Montreal Protocol, IAEA safeguards) rather than self-citations or author-prior results that close any loop. No step reduces a claimed prediction or uniqueness result to its own inputs by construction; the argument remains self-contained against external benchmarks and does not invoke fitted inputs called predictions or ansatzes smuggled via citation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The proposal assumes engineered particles with controllable properties can be produced and measured at scale, and that historical treaty examples translate directly to SAI coordination; no free parameters or new physical entities are quantified.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Direct aerosol-layer measurements can yield an operator-independent SRF value
Invoked in the definition of the first technical building block without supporting derivation or data.
domain assumption Identifying signatures can be embedded in particles and detected reliably for traceability
Central to the second building block; stated as enabling compliance assessment.

invented entities (1)

Engineered solid particles with dedicated size, composition, surface chemistry, and traceability signatures no independent evidence
purpose: Alternative to sulfate aerosols for SAI with added safety, controllability, and monitoring features
Introduced as the core technical alternative; no independent evidence or falsifiable prediction provided beyond the proposal itself.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5595 in / 1394 out tokens · 51400 ms · 2026-05-15T03:11:44.081293+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages

[1]

Myhre, Ø

G. Myhre, Ø. Hodnebrog, N. G. Loeb, and P. M. Forster, Observed trend in Earth’s energy imbalance may provide a constraint for low climate sensitivity models, Science388, 1210 (2025)

work page 2025
[2]

Waxmanet al.,A proposal for the safety and controllability requirements that SRM systems should meet, White Paper (Stardust Labs, 2026)

E. Waxmanet al.,A proposal for the safety and controllability requirements that SRM systems should meet, White Paper (Stardust Labs, 2026)

work page 2026
[3]

Stardust Labs, Composite sub-micron solid particles engineered to enable safe, controllable, efficient, and practical SAI (2026), in preparation

work page 2026
[4]

J. B. Horton, W. Smith, and D. W. Keith, Who could deploy stratospheric aerosol injection? The United States, China, and large-scale, rapid planetary cooling, Global Policy (2025)

work page 2025
[5]

J. B. Horton, Geoengineering and the myth of unilateralism: Pressures and prospects for international cooperation, Stanford Journal of Law, Science & Policy4(2011)

work page 2011
[6]

Biniaz and D

S. Biniaz and D. Bodansky, Why a global ‘moratorium’ on solar radiation management deployment should get a chilly reception, Just Security (2025)

work page 2025
[7]

Ostrom, Polycentric systems for coping with global collective action and climate change, Global Environmental Change 20, 550 (2010)

E. Ostrom, Polycentric systems for coping with global collective action and climate change, Global Environmental Change 20, 550 (2010)

work page 2010
[8]

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine,Reflecting Sunlight: Recommendations for Solar Geoengineer- ing Research and Research Governance, Tech. Rep. (2021)

work page 2021
[9]

UNEP,One Atmosphere: An Independent Expert Review on Solar Radiation Modification Research and Deployment, Tech. Rep. (2023)

work page 2023
[10]

The Royal Society,Solar Radiation Modification: Policy Briefing, Tech. Rep. (2025)

work page 2025
[11]

Climate Overshoot Commission,Reducing the Risks of Climate Overshoot, Tech. Rep. (2023)

work page 2023
[12]

J. L. Reynolds, Solar geoengineering to reduce climate change: a review of governance proposals, Proc. R. Soc. A475, 20190255 (2019)

work page 2019
[13]

Jinnah, S

S. Jinnah, S. Nicholson, D. R. Morrow,et al., Governing climate engineering: A proposal for immediate governance of solar radiation management, Sustainability11, 1 (2019)

work page 2019
[14]

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine,Solar Geoengineering Research Governance: Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief, Tech. Rep. (2020)

work page 2020
[15]

J. B. Moreno-Cruz, K. L. Ricke, and D. W. Keith, A simple model to account for regional inequalities in the effectiveness of solar radiation management, Climatic Change110, 649 (2012)

work page 2012
[16]

K. L. Ricke, J. B. Moreno-Cruz, and K. Caldeira, Strategic incentives for climate geoengineering coalitions to exclude broad participation, Environmental Research Letters8, 014021 (2013)

work page 2013
[17]

J. B. Horton, A. Parker, and D. Keith, Liability for solar geoengineering: Historical precedents, contemporary innovations, and governance possibilities, N.Y.U. Environmental Law Journal22, 225 (2015)

work page 2015
[18]

M. B. Gerrard and T. Hester,Climate Engineering and the Law: Regulation and Liability for Solar Radiation Management and Carbon Dioxide Removal(Cambridge University Press, 2018)

work page 2018
[19]

Martin and S

C. Martin and S. Moore, Geoengineering wars and atmospheric governance, Harvard International Law Journal66(2025)

work page 2025
[20]

Parker and P

A. Parker and P. J. Irvine, The risk of termination shock from solar geoengineering, Earth’s Future6, 456 (2018)

work page 2018
[21]

Jones, J

A. Jones, J. M. Haywood, K. Alterskjær,et al., The impact of abrupt suspension of solar radiation management (termi- nation effect) in experiment G2 of the geoengineering model intercomparison project (GeoMIP), Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres118, 9743 (2013)

work page 2013
[22]

K. E. McCusker, K. C. Armour, C. M. Bitz, and D. S. Battisti, Rapid and extensive warming following cessation of solar radiation management, Environmental Research Letters9, 024005 (2014)

work page 2014
[23]

J. S. Fuglestvedtet al., Metrics of climate change: Assessing radiative forcing and emission indices, Climatic Change58, 267 (2003)

work page 2003
[24]

J. L. Reynolds, Solar geoengineering could be consistent with international law, inDebating Climate Law, edited by B. Mayer and A. Zahar (Cambridge University Press, 2021) pp. 257–273

work page 2021
[25]

Bodansky and H

D. Bodansky and H. van Asselt,The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2024)

work page 2024
[26]

M. L. Weitzman, A voting architecture for the governance of free-driver externalities, with application to geoengineering, The Scandinavian Journal of Economics117, 1049 (2015)

work page 2015
[27]

Butchart, The Brewer-Dobson circulation, Reviews of Geophysics52, 157 (2014)

N. Butchart, The Brewer-Dobson circulation, Reviews of Geophysics52, 157 (2014)

work page 2014
[28]

Department of State, New START treaty,https://www.state.gov/new-start-treaty()

U.S. Department of State, New START treaty,https://www.state.gov/new-start-treaty()

work page
[29]

Arms Control Association, The Open Skies Treaty at a Glance,https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/openskies (2022), accessed 2026-04-24

work page 2022
[30]

Department of State, The montreal protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer,https://www.state.gov/ the-montreal-protocol-on-substances-that-deplete-the-ozone-layer()

U.S. Department of State, The montreal protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer,https://www.state.gov/ the-montreal-protocol-on-substances-that-deplete-the-ozone-layer()

work page
[31]

International Atomic Energy Agency, Verification and other safeguards activities,https://www.iaea.org/topics/ verification-and-other-safeguards-activities

work page
[32]

International Telecommunication Union, Regulation of satellite systems,https://www.itu.int/en/mediacentre/ backgrounders/Pages/Regulation-of-Satellite-Systems.aspx

work page
[33]

United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, Committee on the peaceful uses of outer space,https://www.unoosa.org/ oosa/en/ourwork/copuos/index.html()

work page
[34]

unoosa.org/oosa/en/spaceobjectregister/index.html()

United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, United nations register of objects launched into outer space,https://www. unoosa.org/oosa/en/spaceobjectregister/index.html()

work page
[35]

United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, Guidelines for the long-term sustainability of outer space activities, https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/topics/long-term-sustainability-of-outer-space-activities.html (2019), adopted by COPUOS, June 2019

work page 2019
[36]

int, standards for Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B)

International Civil Aviation Organization, Annex 10 to the convention on international civil aviation (Chicago Convention, 1944): Aeronautical Telecommunications, volume IV – surveillance and collision avoidance systems,https://www.icao. int, standards for Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B)

work page 1944
[37]

Aireon, Space-based ADS-B global aircraft surveillance overview,https://aireon.com

work page
[38]

International Maritime Organization, Automatic identification systems (AIS) under the international convention for the safety of life at sea (SOLAS), chapter V, regulation 19,https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/AIS.aspx (2002), adopted 2000, in force since 2002

work page 2002
[39]

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Agreement on port state measures to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (PSMA),https://www.fao.org/port-state-measures/en/(2016), adopted 2009, entered into force 2016

work page 2016
[40]

dark fleet

Pew Charitable Trusts, Research and reporting on the use of AIS vessel-tracking data to identify illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and the “dark fleet” of transponder-off vessels,https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/topics/oceans

work page
[41]

Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, International monitoring system,https://www.ctbto.org/ our-work/international-monitoring-system

work page
[42]

D. W. Keithet al., Field experiments on solar geoengineering: Report of a workshop exploring a representative research portfolio, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A372, 20140175 (2014)

work page 2014
[43]

United Nations Treaty Series, Vol

United Nations Treaty Collection, Treaty on the limitation of anti-ballistic missile systems (1972), signed at Moscow, 26 May 1972. United Nations Treaty Series, Vol. 944, p. 13

work page 1972
[44]

International Telecommunication Union, International monitoring (2014), iTU Radiocommunication Bureau training ma- terial, RRS-14 Americas, Tobago, Trinidad and Tobago, 14–18 July 2014

work page 2014
[45]

Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, Verification regime (2026), official CTBTO webpage

work page 2026
[46]

Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, The international monitoring system (2026), official CTBTO web- page

work page 2026
[47]

International Atomic Energy Agency, Basics of iaea safeguards (2026), official IAEA webpage

work page 2026
[48]

International Atomic Energy Agency, Additional protocol for verification of nuclear safeguards (2026), official IAEA web- page

work page 2026
[49]

United Nations Environment Programme Ozone Secretariat, Article 7: Reporting of data (2026), montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer

work page 2026
[50]

United Nations Environment Programme Ozone Secretariat, Article 6: Assessment and review of control measures (2026), montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer

work page 2026
[51]

E. A. Parson and D. W. Keith, End the deadlock on governance of geoengineering research, Science339, 1278 (2013)

work page 2013
[52]

J. B. Horton, W. Smith, and D. W. Keith, Beyond the field trial: What climate-relevant solar geoengineering would actually look like, Global Policy (2025)

work page 2025
[53]

Nielsen, The big green button: Solar geoengineering and US–China strategic competition, Oxford Open Climate Change 5, kgaf009 (2025)

T. Nielsen, The big green button: Solar geoengineering and US–China strategic competition, Oxford Open Climate Change 5, kgaf009 (2025)

work page 2025
[54]

A. R. E. Abatayo, V. Bosetti, M. Casari, R. Ghidoni, and M. Tavoni, Solar geoengineering may lead to excessive cooling and high strategic uncertainty, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences117, 13393 (2020)

work page 2020
[55]

Ramge,Dimming the Sun(The Experiment, 2025)

T. Ramge,Dimming the Sun(The Experiment, 2025)

work page 2025
[56]

D. G. Victor,Global Warming Gridlock: Creating More Effective Strategies for Protecting the Planet(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2011)

work page 2011
[57]

R. O. Keohane and D. G. Victor, Cooperation and discord in global climate policy, Nature Climate Change6, 570 (2016)

work page 2016
[58]

Stardust Labs, Solid-particle stratospheric aerosol injection: a 2-d modeling exploration of the design space (2026), in preparation

work page 2026
[59]

Haynes and E

P. Haynes and E. Shuckburgh, Effective diffusivity as a diagnostic of atmospheric transport. 1. stratosphere, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres105, 22777 (2000)

work page 2000
[60]

Haynes and E

P. Haynes and E. Shuckburgh, Effective diffusivity as a diagnostic of atmospheric transport. 2. troposphere and lower stratosphere, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres105, 22795 (2000)

work page 2000
[61]

SPARC,SPARC Assessment of Stratospheric Aerosol Properties (ASAP), Tech. Rep. SPARC Report No. 4, WCRP-124, WMO/TD-No. 1295 (World Climate Research Programme, 2006)

work page 2006
[62]

SAGE III ATBD Team,SAGE III Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document: Solar and Lunar Algorithm, Tech. Rep. LaRC 475-00-109 (NASA Langley Research Center, 2002). Appendix A: Physical and Technical Basis This Annex provides order-of-magnitude estimates underlying the claims in the main text. The purpose is to establish scale rather than precise design values. ...

work page 2002