Post

If only people valued peer reviewed scientific papers and regional data more than tweets and blogs and global averages... This is barely ever addressed. Helge Goessling gave a great presentation at the EGU yesterday. More soon.

Thomas Rackow 🧊@trackow.bsky.social

We have a new paper out in @science.org today, led by Helge Goessling from #AWI: The recent global temperature surge in 2023 was intensified by a record-low planetary #albedo 👉 doi.org/10.1126/scie... @thomasjung.bsky.social @ecmwf.bsky.social This is what we found (🧵1/8)

Excluding most of Eurasia makes it even worse. Regional Absorbed Solar Radiation increased by 4 W/m² (4-year average) and the Outgoing Longwave Radiation increase from regional warming only compensates about half of that, implying there's much more regional warming in the pipeline.

Would a simplistic way of interpreting this graph be that the industrial scale geoengineering done to our atmosphere between 1850-1980 broadly kept a rough balance between positive forcings (greenhouse gases) and negative forcings (aerosols)? It seems temperatures stayed broadly flat.

I don't know source of that particular graph, but the uncertainties look similar to IPCC AR6. Radiative forcing (left) is relatively certain, but temperature response including cloud feedback, and how much aerosols have masked, is related to climate sensitivity.

If we've both accelerating GHG emissions (with a lifetime of centuries) and aerosols (lifetime of years), I'd expect warming to accelerate, including as emissions plateau. That would be most marked in northern mid-latitudes where most SO2 aerosols originate. climatechangetracker.org/global-warmi...

climatechangetracker.orgMonthly Earth's Energy Imbalance: Insights, Data, Charts: ClimateChangeTracker.orgMonthly Earth's Energy Imbalance: Discover the factors affecting Earth's energy balance and its relation to global warming.