Earth's Energy Imbalance and Implications

Improving observations of ocean heat content show that Earth is absorbing more energy from the sun than it is radiating to space as heat, even during the recent solar minimum. The inferred planetary energy imbalance, 0.59 \pm 0.15 W/m2 during the 6-year period 2005-2010, confirms the dominant role of the human-made greenhouse effect in driving global climate change. Observed surface temperature change and ocean heat gain together constrain the net climate forcing and ocean mixing rates. We conclude that most climate models mix heat too efficiently into the deep ocean and as a result underestimate the negative forcing by human-made aerosols. Aerosol climate forcing today is inferred to be 1.6 \pm 0.3 W/m2, implying substantial aerosol indirect climate forcing via cloud changes. Continued failure to quantify the specific origins of this large forcing is untenable, as knowledge of changing aerosol effects is needed to understand future climate change. We conclude that recent slowdown of ocean heat uptake was caused by a delayed rebound effect from Mount Pinatubo aerosols and a deep prolonged solar minimum. Observed sea level rise during the Argo float era is readily accounted for by ice melt and ocean thermal expansion, but the ascendency of ice melt leads us to anticipate acceleration of the rate of sea level rise this decade.Comment: 39 pages, 18 figures; revised version submitted to Atmos. Chem. Phy

Response to Comment by Rabilloud on 'prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power'

The critique by Rabilloud-whose only listed professional affiliation is an antinuclear activist groupis grossly biased and contains numerous misleading, hyperbolic, and erroneous claims about our paper2 and about nuclear energy in general. The nature of his comments bears a striking resemblance to the fallacious reasoning commonly employed by climate change deniers to try to undermine public concern about the climate crisis. Specifically, he resorts to cherry-picking of information and diversionary (red herring) arguments, demands unrealistic exactness, and cites untrustworthy sources. None of his claims undermine any of the key results of our paper, most notably our conclusion that nuclear energy has prevented, and can continue to prevent, a very high number of fatalities and very large greenhouse gas emissions due to fossil fuel burning. It follows that, as uncomfortable as it is for many well-intentioned environmentalists to admit, efforts to undermine nuclear energy also undermine mitigation of climate change and air pollution, with a heavy cost in human lives and potentially disastrous future climate change

Response to Comment on 'Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power'

Sovacool et al.'s analysis of our paper contains numerous errors, misinterpretations, and dubious assumptions. For instance, we make no presumption in our paper that nuclear power is the only major option to replace fossil fuels nor have we in the past, as evidenced by our other peer-reviewed publications. Furthermore, all of our results are based on complete fuel cycle analysis and are presented as mean values along with their ranges. Thus it is incorrect to claim that we single out the worst estimates for coal mortality. Contrary to Sovacool et al.'s assertions, our only bias is our belief that humanity's best chance of success for mitigating the daunting challenge of climate change is to utilize all available and proven means

Climate Forcing Growth Rates: Doubling Down on Our Faustian Bargain

Rahmstorf et al 's (2012) conclusion that observed climate change is comparable to projections, and in some cases exceeds projections, allows further inferences if we can quantify changing climate forcings and compare those with projections. The largest climate forcing is caused by well-mixed long-lived greenhouse gases. Here we illustrate trends of these gases and their climate forcings, and we discuss implications. We focus on quantities that are accurately measured, and we include comparison with fixed scenarios, which helps reduce common misimpressions about how climate forcings are changing. Annual fossil fuel CO2 emissions have shot up in the past decade at about 3/yr, double the rate of the prior three decades (figure 1). The growth rate falls above the range of the IPCC (2001) 'Marker' scenarios, although emissions are still within the entire range considered by the IPCC SRES (2000). The surge in emissions is due to increased coal use (blue curve in figure 1), which now accounts for more than 40 of fossil fuel CO2 emissions

Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Historical and Projected Nuclear Power

In the aftermath of the March 2011 accident at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the future contribution of nuclear power to the global energy supply has become somewhat uncertain. Because nuclear power is an abundant, low-carbon source of base-load power, it could make a large contribution to mitigation of global climate change and air pollution. Using historical production data, we calculate that global nuclear power has prevented an average of 1.84 million air pollution-related deaths and 64 gigatonnes of CO2-equivalent (GtCO2-eq) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that would have resulted from fossil fuel burning. On the basis of global projection data that take into account the effects of the Fukushima accident, we find that nuclear power could additionally prevent an average of 420 0007.04 million deaths and 80240 GtCO2-eq emissions due to fossil fuels by midcentury, depending on which fuel it replaces. By contrast, we assess that large-scale expansion of unconstrained natural gas use would not mitigate the climate problem and would cause far more deaths than expansion of nuclear power

Climate Sensitivity, Sea Level, and Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide

Cenozoic temperature, sea level and CO2 covariations provide insights into climate sensitivity to external forcings and sea-level sensitivity to climate change. Climate sensitivity depends on the initial climate state, but potentially can be accurately inferred from precise palaeoclimate data. Pleistocene climate oscillations yield a fast-feedback climate sensitivity of 3+/-1deg C for a 4 W/sq m CO2 forcing if Holocene warming relative to the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) is used as calibration, but the error (uncertainty) is substantial and partly subjective because of poorly defined LGM global temperature and possible human influences in the Holocene. Glacial-to-interglacial climate change leading to the prior (Eemian) interglacial is less ambiguous and implies a sensitivity in the upper part of the above range, i.e. 3-4deg C for a 4 W/sq m CO2 forcing. Slow feedbacks, especially change of ice sheet size and atmospheric CO2, amplify the total Earth system sensitivity by an amount that depends on the time scale considered. Ice sheet response time is poorly defined, but we show that the slow response and hysteresis in prevailing ice sheet models are exaggerated. We use a global model, simplified to essential processes, to investigate state dependence of climate sensitivity, finding an increased sensitivity towards warmer climates, as low cloud cover is diminished and increased water vapour elevates the tropopause. Burning all fossil fuels, we conclude, would make most of the planet uninhabitable by humans, thus calling into question strategies that emphasize adaptation to climate change

Implications of energy and CO2 emission changes in Japan and Germany after the Fukushima accident.

Following the March 2011 nuclear power plant accident in Fukushima, Japan, nuclear power production declined sharply in that country as well as Germany. Despite widespread media coverage of CO2 emission increases in the first few years afterward, subsequent energy and emission changes and their implications are not well-studied. Here we analyze energy, electricity, and CO2 emissions data for both countries through 2017. We also quantify the human health and CO2 implications of two simple yet illuminating scenarios: What if both countries had reduced fossil fuel power output instead of nuclear? And what if the US and the rest of Europe eliminate their remaining nuclear power? We find that emissions increased after Fukushima until 2013 but decreased thereafter due to record-high renewable energy production and lower total energy use. However our “what if” scenarios demonstrate that these two countries could have prevented 28,000 air pollution-induced deaths and 2400 MtCO2 emissions between 2011 and 2017. Germany can still prevent 16,000 deaths and 1100 MtCO2 emissions by 2035 by reducing coal instead of eliminating nuclear as planned. If the US and the rest of Europe follow Germany's example they could lose the chance to prevent over 200,000 deaths and 14,000 MtCO2 emissions by 2035

Global warming in the pipeline

Improved knowledge of glacial-to-interglacial global temperature change implies that fast-feedback equilibrium climate sensitivity is at least ~4{\deg}C for doubled CO2 (2xCO2), with likely range 3.5-5.5{\deg}C. Greenhouse gas (GHG) climate forcing is 4.1 W/m2 larger in 2021 than in 1750, equivalent to 2xCO2 forcing. Global warming in the pipeline is greater than prior estimates. Eventual global warming due to today's GHG forcing alone -- after slow feedbacks operate -- is about 10{\deg}C. Human-made aerosols are a major climate forcing, mainly via their effect on clouds. We infer from paleoclimate data that aerosol cooling offset GHG warming for several millennia as civilization developed. A hinge-point in global warming occurred in 1970 as increased GHG warming outpaced aerosol cooling, leading to global warming of 0.18{\deg}C per decade. Aerosol cooling is larger than estimated in the current IPCC report, but it has declined since 2010 because of aerosol reductions in China and shipping. Without unprecedented global actions to reduce GHG growth, 2010 could be another hinge point, with global warming in following decades 50-100% greater than in the prior 40 years. The enormity of consequences of warming in the pipeline demands a new approach addressing legacy and future emissions. The essential requirement to "save" young people and future generations is return to Holocene-level global temperature. Three urgently required actions are: 1) a global increasing price on GHG emissions, 2) purposeful intervention to rapidly phase down present massive geoengineering of Earth's climate, and 3) renewed East-West cooperation in a way that accommodates developing world needs.Comment: 48 pages, 27 figures. Correction of formatting error on page 21, which messed up placement of all following figure

Scientific case for avoiding dangerous climate change to protect young people and nature

28 pages, 6 figures; version submitted to Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesPeer reviewe