Connect with us

Published

on

Last year was the warmest since records began in the mid-1800s – and likely for many thousands of years before.

It was the first year in which average global temperatures at the surface exceeded 1.5C above pre-industrial levels in at least one global temperature dataset.

Here, Carbon Brief examines the latest data across the oceans, atmosphere, cryosphere and surface temperature of the planet.

Noteworthy findings from this 2023 review include…

  • Global surface temperatures: It was the warmest year on record by a large margin – at between 1.34C and 1.54C above pre-industrial levels across different temperature datasets.
  • Exceptional monthly temperatures: Global temperatures set a new record each month between June and December. September smashed the prior record for the month by a “gobsmacking” 0.5C.
  • Warmest over land: It was the first year the global average land temperature was more than 2C above pre-industrial levels.
  • Warmest over oceans: It was the first year that global average ocean surface temperatures exceeded 1C compared with pre-industrial levels.
  • Ocean heat content: It was the warmest year on record for ocean heat content, which increased notably between 2022 and 2023.
  • Regional warming: It was the warmest year on record in 77 countries – including China, Brazil, Austria, Bangladesh, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Korea and Ukraine – and in areas where 2.3 billion people live.
  • Unusual warmth: 2023 was much warmer than scientists estimated it would be at the start of the year and there remain open questions about what precise factors have driven the exceptional warmth. Even El Niño – the usual suspect behind record warm years – does not clearly explain 2023 temperatures.
  • Comparison with climate models: Observations for 2023 are above the central estimate of climate model projections in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) sixth assessment report, but well within the model range.
  • Warming of the atmosphere: It was the warmest year in the lower troposphere – the lowest part of the atmosphere. The stratosphere – in the upper atmosphere – is cooling, due in part to heat trapped in the lower atmosphere by greenhouse gases.
  • Sea level rise: Sea levels reached new record-highs, with notable acceleration over the past three decades.
  • Shrinking glaciers and ice sheets: Cumulative ice loss from the world’s glaciers and from the Greenland ice sheet reached a new record high in 2023, contributing to sea level rise.
  • Greenhouse gases: Concentrations reached record levels for CO2, methane and nitrous oxide.
  • Sea ice extent: Arctic sea ice saw its sixth-lowest minimum extent on record, while Antarctic sea ice saw a new record low extent for almost the entire year, much of it by an exceptionally large margin.
  • Looking ahead to 2024: Carbon Brief predicts that global average surface temperatures in 2024 are most likely to be slightly warmer than 2023 and set a new all-time record. However, large uncertainties remain given how exceptionally and unexpectedly warm 2023 was.

Use the links below to navigate between the article’s sections.

Warmest year on record for the Earth’s surface

Global surface temperatures were exceptionally hot in 2023, exceeding the prior record set in 2016 by between 0.14C and 0.17C across different surface temperature datasets. It was unambiguously the warmest year since records began in the mid-1800s.

The figure below shows global surface temperature records from five different datasets: NASA; NOAA; the Met Office Hadley Centre/University of East Anglia’s (UEA) HadCRUT5; Berkeley Earth; and Copernicus ERA5.

Other surface temperature datasets not shown, including JRA-55, the AIRS satellite data and the Japanese Meteorological Agency, also show 2023 as the warmest year on record.

Annual global average surface temperatures over 1850-2023. Data from NASA GISTEMP, NOAA GlobalTemp, Hadley/UEA HadCRUT5, Berkeley Earth and Copernicus ERA5. Temperature records are aligned over the 1981-2010 period and use the average of NOAA, Berkeley and Hadley records to calculate warming relative to the pre-industrial baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Annual global average surface temperatures over 1850-2023. Data from NASA GISTEMP, NOAA GlobalTemp, Hadley/UEA HadCRUT5, Berkeley Earth and Copernicus ERA5. Temperature records are aligned over the 1981-2010 period and use the average of NOAA, Berkeley and Hadley records to calculate warming relative to the pre-industrial baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Global surface temperature records can be calculated back to 1850, though some groups such as NASA GISTEMP choose to start their records in 1880 when more data was available.

Prior to 1850, records exist for some specific regions, but are not sufficiently widespread to calculate global temperatures with high accuracy (though work is ongoing to identify and digitise additional records to extend these further back in time).

These longer surface temperature records are created by combining ship- and buoy-based measurements of ocean sea surface temperatures with temperature readings of the surface air temperature from weather stations on land. (Copernicus ERA5 and JRA-55 are an exception, as they use weather model-based reanalysis to combine lots of different data sources over time.)

Some differences between temperature records are apparent early in the record, particularly prior to 1900 when observations are more sparse and results are more sensitive to how different groups fill in the gaps between observations. However, there is excellent agreement between the different temperature records for the period since 1970, as shown in the figure below.

Annual global average surface temperatures as in the prior chart, but showing the period from 1970-2023. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Annual global average surface temperatures as in the prior chart, but showing the period from 1970-2023. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Global temperatures in 2023 clearly stand out as much warmer than anything that has come before. This can be seen in the figure below from Berkeley Earth. Each shaded curve represents the annual average temperature for that year. The further that curve is to the right, the warmer it was.

The width of each year’s curve reflects the uncertainty in the annual temperature values (caused by factors such as changes in measurement techniques and the fact that some parts of the world have fewer measurement locations than others).

Global mean temperature anomaly and uncertainty (in degrees C)
Global average surface temperatures for each year, relative pre-industrial, with their respective uncertainties (width of the curves) from the Berkeley Earth surface temperature record. Note that warming is shown here relative to the temperature to the 1850-1900 period. Figure from Berkeley Earth.

The year 2023 was the warmest on record for both the world’s land and ocean regions.

It was also the first year where global average land temperatures exceeded 2C and the first year in which global ocean temperatures exceeded 1C relative to pre-industrial levels.

The figure below shows land (red) and ocean (blue) temperatures along with their respective confidence intervals, relative to pre-industrial levels, in the Berkeley Earth surface temperature record.

Land and ocean temperatures 1850-2023
Land and ocean temperature rise since the pre-industrial 1850-1900 period. Figure from Berkeley Earth.

Global land regions – where the global human population lives – has been warming around 70% faster than the oceans – and 40% faster than the global average in the years since 1970.

While 2023 as a whole has been exceptionally warm, it started off a bit cooler, with the first few months of the year failing to set any new records. However, from June onward each month was warmer than the same month in any prior year since records began. September was particularly “gobsmacking”, shattering the prior September record by a full 0.5C.

The figure below shows each month of 2023 in black, compared to all prior years since 1850. Each year is coloured based on the decade in which it occurred, with the clear warming over time visible as well as the exceptional margin by which 2023 exceeded past years between July and December.

Global warming by month
Monthly global surface temperatures for each year since 1850, with anomalies shown relative to the pre-industrial 1850-1900 period. Figure from Berkeley Earth.

Back to top

Pushing up against the 1.5C target

In the 2015 Paris Agreement, the world agreed to work to limit global temperatures to well-below 2C and to pursue efforts to “limit the temperature increase to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels”.

While the exceedance of these climate targets was not specifically defined in the agreement, it has since been widely interpreted (for example, by the IPCC) as a 20-year average period.

Crucially, the limits refer to long-term warming, rather than an individual year that includes the short-term influence of natural fluctuations in the climate, such as El Niño.

However, a single year exceeding 1.5C still represents a grim milestone, a sign that the world is quickly approaching the target. And, in the Berkeley Earth dataset, 2023 was the first year above 1.5C.

It came in a hair’s width below 1.5C in the Copernicus and Hadley datasets, at 1.48C and 1.46C, respectively, and was lower on NOAA and NASA datasets as shown in the table below.

Temperature record 2023 temperatures relative to preindustrial
NOAA GlobalTemp 1.34C
NASA GISTEMP 1.39C*
Hadley/UAE HadCRUT5 1.46C
Copernicus/ECMWF 1.48C
Berkeley Earth 1.54C

Global temperature anomalies for 2023 relative to preindustrial temperatures (1850-1899). *Note that GISTEMP uses a 1880-1899 baseline as it does not cover the 1850-1879 period.

As noted earlier, these datasets are nearly identical over the past 50 years. Differences in warming relative to pre-industrial levels emerge earlier in the record, particularly prior to 1900 when observations are more sparse and the choice of how to fill in the gaps between observations has a large impact on the resulting temperature estimate.

The figure below shows how different temperature records look if each is calculated relative to its own pre-industrial baseline, rather than using an average pre-industrial baseline as shown in the prior section. Focusing on warming since pre-industrial – rather than more recent warming – magnifies differences between groups, with the variation in warming across groups largely due to the most uncertain early part of the record.

Global Warming 1850 to 2023
Annual global surface temperatures since 1850, with anomalies shown relative to the pre-industrial 1850-1900 period for each dataset. Figure from Berkeley Earth.

Back to top

Highest ocean heat content on record

Last year was the warmest on record for the heat content of the world’s oceans. Ocean heat content (OHC) has increased by around 473 zettajoules – a billion trillion joules – since the 1940s. The heat increase in 2023 alone compared to 2021 – about 15 zettajoules – is around 25 times as much as the total energy produced by all human activities on Earth in 2021 (the latest year in which global primary energy statistics are available).

Human-emitted greenhouse gases trap extra heat in the atmosphere. While some of this warms the Earth’s surface, the vast majority – around of 93% – goes into the oceans. About two-thirds of this accumulates in the top 700 metres, but some also ends up in the deep oceans.

The figure below shows annual OHC estimates between 1950 and present for both the upper 700 metres (light blue shading) and 700-2,000 metres (dark blue) of the ocean.

Annual global ocean heat content (in zettajoules – billion trillion joules, or 10^21 joules) for the 0-700 metre and 700-2,000 metre layers. Data from Cheng et al. (2024). Chart by Carbon Brief.

Annual global ocean heat content (in zettajoules – billion trillion joules, or 10^21 joules) for the 0-700 metre and 700-2,000 metre layers. Data from Cheng et al. (2024). Chart by Carbon Brief.

In many ways, OHC represents a much better measure of climate change than global average surface temperatures. It is where most of the extra heat ends up and is much less variable on a year-to-year basis than surface temperatures. It shows a distinct acceleration after 1991, matching the increased rate of greenhouse gas emissions and other radiative forcing elements over the past few decades.

This year saw a substantial update to the OHC dataset provided by the Institute for Atmospheric Physics (IAP) that Carbon Brief features in its State of the Climate reports. The transition from version 3 to version 4 introduced a new quality control system to detect and remove spurious measurements across different instrument types.

As the figure below highlights, this results in a notable increase in OHC over the past decade (red lines and shading) relative to the prior version of the dataset (black lines).

Monthly global ocean heat content, 1950-2023
Monthly global ocean heat content (in zettajoules – billion trillion joules, or 10^21 joules) for the 0-2,000 metres for version 3 and version 4 of the IAP dataset. Figure from Cheng et al. (2024).

Back to top

A year of climate extremes

While media coverage of 2023 temperatures has largely focused on the global average, there have been many different regions of the planet experiencing climate extremes.

The figure below shows global temperature anomalies in 2023 across the world, with red areas warmer than the baseline period (1951-80) used by Berkeley Earth and blue areas experiencing cooler temperatures.

Surface temperature anomalies for 2023
Surface temperature anomalies for 2023 from Berkeley Earth. Note that Berkeley uses a 1951-80 baseline to calculate anomalies.

In 2023, 77 countries saw their warmest year on record, including: Afghanistan, Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cape Verde, Cameroon, China, Comoros, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Czechia, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Federated States of Micronesia, Gambia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Ireland, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, Myanmar, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Korea, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Republic of the Congo, Romania, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Tajikistan, The Bahamas, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Venezuela and Yemen.

Approximately 2.3 billion people, or around 29% of Earth’s population, live in places that observed their locally warmest year during 2023.

The figure below highlights regions of the planet that experienced their top-five warmest (red shading) or coldest (blue) temperatures on record in 2023. Overall, around 17% of the planet set a new record, including 23% of the land and 14% of the ocean. No location on the planet experienced record cold temperatures (or even top-5 record cold temperatures) for the year as a whole.

Annual average temperature rankings in 2023
Regions of the world among the five warmest (reds) of five coolest (blues) on record for average annual temperatures in 2023. Figure from Berkeley Earth.

Back to top

Explaining 2023’s unusual heat

Scientists did not expect 2023 to be all that exceptional at the start of the year. As Carbon Brief reported at the start of 2023, four different groups provided temperature predictions for the year prior to any data being collected – the UK Met Office, NASA’s Dr Gavin Schmidt, Berkeley Earth and Carbon Brief’s own estimate.

Temperature predictions for 2023 from the UK Met Office, NASA’s Dr Gavin Schmidt, Berkeley Earth and Carbon Brief relative to pre-industrial (1880-99) temperatures. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Temperature predictions for 2023 from the UK Met Office, NASA’s Dr Gavin Schmidt, Berkeley Earth and Carbon Brief relative to pre-industrial (1880-99) temperatures. Chart by Carbon Brief.

As Carbon Brief noted in January 2023:

“La Niña conditions are expected to persist for at least the first three months of 2023. Because there is a lag of a few months between when El Niño or La Niña conditions peak in the tropical Pacific and their impact on global temperatures, these La Niña conditions will likely have a lingering cooling influence on 2023 temperatures.”

Carbon Brief estimated that 2023 was “very likely to be between the third and ninth warmest year on record, with a best estimate of being the fifth warmest on record – similar to 2022”, and suggest that if an El Niño develops in latter half of 2023 it would make it likely that 2024 will set a new record.

This estimate, alongside all the other groups predicting 2023 temperatures, was wrong. Not only did 2023 turn out to be the warmest year on record, but it fell well outside the confidence intervals of any of the estimates. And while there are a number of factors that researchers have proposed to explain 2023’s exceptional warmth, scientists still lack a clear explanation for why global temperatures were so unexpectedly high.

Over the longer-term, human emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases alongside planet-cooling aerosols are the main driver of global temperatures. Global temperatures have risen by approximately 1.3C since pre-industrial times as a result of human activity. However, on top of long-term warming, global temperatures vary year to year by up to 0.2C.

These variations are primarily driven by El Niño and La Niña events that redistribute heat between the atmosphere and oceans. However, other factors such as volcanic eruptions, the 11-year solar cycle and changes in short-lived climate forcers can influence year-to-year temperature changes.

The figure below, created by Dr Robert Rohde at Berkeley Earth, explores some of the main drivers of temperature change over the past decade.

These include continued accumulation of greenhouse gases, the evolution of El Niña and La Niña, and the 11-year solar cycle. It also includes two new factors that emerged during the decade: the 2022 eruption of the Hunga Tonga volcano and the 2020 phase-out of sulphur in marine fuels. Both of these are estimated to have relatively modest effects at present – less than 0.05C each – but with large scientific uncertainties.

Factors contributing to global temperature change over the last 10 years
Illustration of contributing factors driving global surface temperatures over the past decade. Figure from Berkeley Earth.

However, both the Tonga eruption and the phase-out of sulphur in marine fuel are problematic explanations of extreme temperatures in 2023.

There is still a vigorous debate in the scientific literature about whether the eruption cooled or warmed the planet based on estimates of both sulphur dioxide and water vapour in the atmosphere, with some papers arguing for warming and others for cooling. Some modelling suggests that the largest impacts of the eruption would be in winter months, which does not match the timing of extreme summer temperatures experienced in 2023.

Similarly, the phase-out of sulphur in marine fuels occurred in 2020. If it had a large climate impact, it would show up in 2021 and 2022 rather than suddenly affecting the record in 2023. While it definitely has had a climate impact – alongside the broader reduction in aerosol emissions over the past three decades – the timing suggests that its likely not the primary driver of 2023 extremes.

Even El Niño – the usual suspect behind record warm years – does not clearly explain 2023 temperatures. Historically global temperatures have lagged around three months behind El Niño conditions in the tropical Pacific; for example, El Niño developed quite similarly in 1997, 2015 and 2023. But it was the following year – 1998 and 2016 – that saw record high temperatures.

The figure below shows the El Niño (red shading) and La Niña (blue) conditions over the past 40 years (collectively referred to as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, or “ENSO”). While not unprecedented, the extended La Niña conditions since the latter part of 2020 have extended for an unusually long period of time.

Historical Nino 3.4 sea surface temperature anomalies relative to the ocean average, for 1982-2023.
Niño3.4 sea surface temperature anomalies relative to the ocean average, for 1982-2023. Deviations below 0.5C and above 0.5C are generally used to determine La Niña and El Niño conditions, respectively. Figure from International Research Institute (IRI) at Columbia University.

Carbon Brief has used this historical relationship between ENSO conditions and temperature to effectively remove the effects of El Niño and La Niña events from global temperatures, as shown in the figure below.

However, this approach – which has worked well for prior years – indicates that there would be almost no effect of El Niño on temperatures in 2023. This is because the lingering global temperature impact of La Niña conditions on the first half of the year would approximately cancel out the influence of El Niño on the second half. This model would suggest that the current El Niño event would primarily affect 2024 temperatures, analogous to what occurred in 1998 and 2016.

Annual global average surface temperatures from Berkeley Earth, as well as Carbon Brief’s estimate of global temperatures with the effect of El Niño and La Niña (ENSO) events removed using the Foster and Rahmstorf (2011) approach. Figures are shown relative to a 1981-2010 baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Annual global average surface temperatures from Berkeley Earth, as well as Carbon Brief’s estimate of global temperatures with the effect of El Niño and La Niña (ENSO) events removed using the Foster and Rahmstorf (2011) approach. Figures are shown relative to a 1981-2010 baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

It is possible that this El Niño event is behaving differently and that the rapid switch from a rare and extended triple-dip La Niña event from late 2020 to the start of this year into strong El Niño conditions is resulting in a more rapid global temperature response.

But this remains speculative at this point and researchers are just starting to disentangle the causes of the unexpected extreme global heat the world experienced in 2023.

Back to top

Observations broadly in-line with climate model projections

Climate models provide physics-based estimates of future warming given different assumptions about future emissions, greenhouse gas concentrations and other climate-influencing factors.

Here, Carbon Brief examines a collection of climate models – known as CMIP6 – used in the 2021 science report of the IPCC’s sixth assessment. In CMIP6, model estimates of temperatures prior to 2015 are a “hindcast” using known past climate influences, while temperatures projected after 2015 are a “forecast” based on an estimate of how things might change.

Using the CMIP6 ensemble is a bit more challenging than past generations of models because a subset of models have unrealistically high climate sensitivity and poorly reproduce historical observations. Rather than simply average all the models – as had been done in prior assessments – the IPCC used an approach that effectively weights models by their performance. This means the models align better with the range of climate sensitivity derived from multiple different lines of evidence.

The figure below shows the range of individual CMIP6 model projections since 1950, as well as future projections through to 2100 under the middle-of-the-road SSP2-4.5 emissions scenario.

The black line shows the average of 22 different models whose transient climate response (TCR) falls within the IPCC’s “likely” range (which results in temperature projections nearly identical to the IPCC assessed warming). The grey area shows the 95% (two standard deviation) range of the TCR-screened model projections. Observational temperatures are plotted on top of the climate model data, with individual observational records represented by coloured lines.

Annual global average surface temperatures from CMIP6 models and observations between 1950 and 2030 (through to 2023 for observations). Models use the SSP2-4.5 scenario after 2015. They are screened to only include those models with a transient climate response (TCR) in-line with the IPCC’s “likely” range as discussed in Hausfather et al (2022). Anomalies plotted with respect to a 1981-2010 baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Annual global average surface temperatures from CMIP6 models and observations between 1950 and 2030 (through to 2023 for observations). Models use the SSP2-4.5 scenario after 2015. They are screened to only include those models with a transient climate response (TCR) in-line with the IPCC’s “likely” range as discussed in Hausfather et al (2022). Anomalies plotted with respect to a 1981-2010 baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Using the TCR-screened subset, the findings show that 2023 temperatures are above the model average, but still well within the range of climate model projections. While some individual months have approached the upper end of the model range, the year as a whole is less anomalous.

The figure below shows the observed warming since pre-industrial (1850-99) in the five different observational datasets compared with climate model projections. The box plot below shows the 25th to 75th percentile of models and observations with a solid box, while the whiskers show 1.5 times the interquartile range.

Comparing CMIP6 models and observations for 2023
2023 temperatures for both TCR-screened CMIP6 models and observations compared to pre-industrial. Models use the SSP2-4.5 scenario after 2015. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Temperatures in 2023, relative to pre-industrial, were in the upper quartile (>75th percentile) of climate models assessed. However, this is not unexpected, as models do not have internal variability such as El Niño or La Niña events that occur at the same time as they do in the real world. (Scientists would expect observations to be on the high end of the model range during El Niño years and on the low end in La Niña years even if climate models were perfectly accurate.)

Finally, the figure below shows how observations compare to the full ensemble of 37 CMIP6 models, with no screening for transient climate response. Here, observations are generally below the model average over the past two decades and are roughly equal to the model average in 2023.

Annual global average surface temperatures from CMIP6 models and observations between 1950 and 2030 (through 2023 for observations). Models use the SSP2-4.5 scenario after 2015. Anomalies plotted with respect to a 1981-2010 baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Annual global average surface temperatures from CMIP6 models and observations between 1950 and 2030 (through 2023 for observations). Models use the SSP2-4.5 scenario after 2015. Anomalies plotted with respect to a 1981-2010 baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Back to top

Record atmospheric temperatures

In addition to surface measurements over the world’s land and oceans, satellite microwave sounding units have been providing estimates of temperatures at various layers of the atmosphere since 1979.

The lowest layer they estimate – the lower troposphere – reflects temperatures a few kilometres above the surface and shows a pattern of warming similar – though not identical – to surface temperature changes. The records produced by Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) and the University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) both show 2023 as the warmest year on record in the lower troposphere. The chart below shows the two records – RSS in red and UAH in blue – for the lower troposphere (TLT).

Global average lower-troposphere temperatures from RSS version 4 (red) and UAH version 6 (blue) for the period from 1979-2023, relative to a 1981-2010 baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Global average lower-troposphere temperatures from RSS version 4 (red) and UAH version 6 (blue) for the period from 1979-2023, relative to a 1981-2010 baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

The lower troposphere tends to be influenced more strongly by El Niño and La Niña events than the surface. Therefore, satellite records show correspondingly larger warming or cooling spikes during these events. This is why, for example, 1998 shows up as one of the warmest years in satellites, but not in surface records.

The two lower-tropospheric temperature records show large differences after the early 2000s. RSS shows an overall rate of warming quite similar to surface temperature records, while UAH shows considerably slower warming in recent years than has been observed on the surface. Both have seen large adjustments in recent years that have warmed RSS and cooled UAH compared to prior versions of each record.

Overall, there is more agreement with RSS to other records that include satellite data (such as reanalysis products ERA5 and JRA-55, as well as the shorter AIRS satellite-based surface temperature record), while the UAH record is a bit of an outlier compared to the others.

In addition to a temperature record of the lower troposphere, RSS and UAH also provide measurements of the lower stratosphere – a region of the upper atmosphere around 18km above the surface. The figure below shows lower stratospheric temperature (TLS) records for both RSS (red) and UAH (blue) from 1979 through 2023.

Global average lower stratospheric temperatures from RSS version 4 (red) and UAH version 6 (blue) for the period from 1979-2023, relative to a 1981-2010 baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Global average lower stratospheric temperatures from RSS version 4 (red) and UAH version 6 (blue) for the period from 1979-2023, relative to a 1981-2010 baseline. Chart by Carbon Brief.

The stratosphere has been cooling for the past few decades in a clear fingerprint of human greenhouse gases, which warm the lower part of the atmosphere by trapping heat while cooling the upper atmosphere as less heat escapes. If other factors – such as changing solar output – were causing climate change, both the stratosphere and troposphere would be warming.

Back to top

Greenhouse gas concentrations reach new highs

Greenhouse gas concentrations reached a new high in 2023, driven by human emissions from fossil fuels, land use and agriculture.

Three greenhouse gases – CO2, methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) – are responsible for the bulk of additional heat trapped by human activities. CO2 is by far the largest factor, accounting for roughly 42% of the increase in global surface temperatures since the pre-industrial era (1850-1900).

Methane accounts for 28%, while nitrous oxide accounts for around 5%. The remaining 25% comes from other factors including carbon monoxide, black carbon and halocarbons, such as CFCs.

Human emissions of greenhouse gases have increased atmospheric concentrations of CO2, methane and nitrous oxide to their highest levels in at least a few million years – if not longer.

The figure below shows concentrations of these greenhouse gases – in parts per million (ppm) for CO2 (blue line) and parts per billion (ppb) for methane (orange) and nitrous oxide (red) – from the early 1980s through to October 2023 for CO2 and September 2023 for CH4 and N2O (the most recent data currently available).

Global concentrations of CO2, methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). Based on data from NOAA’s Earth Systems Research Laboratory. Note that the y-axes do not start at zero. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Global concentrations of CO2, methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). Based on data from NOAA’s Earth Systems Research Laboratory. Note that the y-axes do not start at zero. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Methane concentrations, in particular, have seen a sharp rise over the past decade after a plateau in the 2000s. This appears to be driven by both increased emissions from agriculture and fossil fuels, in roughly equal measure. Thawing Arctic permafrost and other sources of methane in high-latitude regions are growing, but emissions above a latitude of 60 degrees north are only around 4% of the total global methane emissions.

Back to top

Accelerating sea level rise

Modern-day sea levels have risen to a new high, due to a combination of melting land ice (such as glaciers and ice sheets), the thermal expansion of water as it warms and changes in land water storage.

In recent years, there have been larger contributions to sea level rise from melting ice sheets and glaciers, as warmer temperatures accelerate ice sheet losses in Greenland and Antarctica.

Since the early 1990s, the increase in global sea level has been estimated using altimeter data from satellites. Earlier global sea levels have been reconstructed from a network of global tide gauge measurements. This allows researchers to estimate how sea level has changed since the late 1800s.

The chart below shows five different modern sea level rise datasets (coloured lines), along with satellite altimeter measurements from NASA satellites as assessed by the University of Colorado (in black) after 1993. (As sea level rise data has not yet been released for the whole year, the 2023 value is estimated based on data through October.)

Global average sea level rise reconstructed from tide gauge data between 1880 and 2023 from Frederikse et al 2020, Dangendorf et al 2019, Hay et al 2015, Church and White 2011, and Palmer et al 2021. Satellite altimeter data from 1993 (black) to present is taken from the University of Colorado. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Global average sea level rise reconstructed from tide gauge data between 1880 and 2023 from Frederikse et al 2020, Dangendorf et al 2019, Hay et al 2015, Church and White 2011, and Palmer et al 2021. Satellite altimeter data from 1993 (black) to present is taken from the University of Colorado. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Sea levels have risen by over 0.2 metres (200mm) since 1900. While sea level rise estimates mostly agree in recent decades, larger divergences are evident before 1980. There is also evidence of accelerating sea level rise over the post-1993 period when high-quality satellite altimetry data is available. (See Carbon Brief’s explainer on how climate change is accelerating sea level rise.)

Back to top

Shrinking glaciers and ice sheets

A portion of this sea level rise is being driven by melting glaciers on land. Scientists measure the mass of glaciers around the world using a variety of remote-sensing techniques, as well as through GRACE measurements of the Earth’s gravitational field. The balance between snow falling on a glacier and ice loss through melting and the breaking off – or “calving” – of icebergs determines if glaciers grow or shrink over time.

The World Glacier Monitoring Service is an international consortium that tracks 164 different glaciers in 19 different regions around the world. The figure below shows the change in global average glacier mass from 1950 through to the end of 2022 (2023 values are not yet available). Note that glacier melt is reported in metres of water equivalent, which is a measure of how much mass has been lost on average.

Global average glacier melt over the 1950-2022 period from the World Glacier Monitoring Service, in metres of water equivalent. Carbon Brief.

Global average glacier melt over the 1950-2022 period from the World Glacier Monitoring Service, in metres of water equivalent. Carbon Brief.

Greenland ice sheets have become a larger contributor to sea level rise in recent years due to accelerating loss of mass. The year 2023 was the 27th in a row where Greenland lost ice overall, with 196Gt of ice lost over the 12 months from September 2022 to August 2023. Greenland last saw an annual net gain of ice in 1996.

The figure below shows the cumulative mass balance change – that is, the net ice loss – from Greenland between 1970 and October 2021. The different coloured lines indicate estimates from different studies. The authors find that Greenland has lost over 6tn metric tonnes of ice over the past 50 years – more than 700 tonnes lost per person for every person on the planet.

Cumulative ice loss from Greenland in billion metric tonnes (gigatonnes) between 1970 and 2023 from Mankoff et al 2021, updated through December 2023. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Cumulative ice loss from Greenland in billion metric tonnes (gigatonnes) between 1970 and 2023 from Mankoff et al 2021, updated through December 2023. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Back to top

Record-low Antarctic sea ice levels

Arctic sea ice was at the low end of the historical (1979-2010) range for most of 2023, but did not set any new all-time low records apart from a few individual days in February and March. The summer minimum extent – the lowest recorded level for the year – was the sixth-lowest since records began in the late 1970s.

Antarctic sea ice, on the other hand, saw new record low levels for virtually the entire year – except for periods in April, November and December of the year.

Antarctic sea ice was particularly low between June and November, shattering prior records by a substantial margin. While long-term trends in Antarctic sea ice have been ambiguous in the past (unlike in the Arctic where there is a consistent long-term decline), there is increasing evidence that human-driven warming is starting to drive significant loss of sea ice in the region.

The figure below shows both Arctic (red line) and Antarctic (blue line) sea ice extent for each day of the year, along with how it compares to the historical range (corresponding shading).

Arctic and Antarctic daily sea ice extent from the US National Snow and Ice Data Center. The bold lines show daily 2023 values, the shaded area indicates the two standard deviation range in historical values between 1979 and 2010. The dotted black lines show the record lows for each pole. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Arctic and Antarctic daily sea ice extent from the US National Snow and Ice Data Center. The bold lines show daily 2023 values, the shaded area indicates the two standard deviation range in historical values between 1979 and 2010. The dotted black lines show the record lows for each pole. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Back to top

Looking ahead to 2024

The unusual global temperatures experienced in 2023 makes it more challenging to predict what 2024 might have in store.

If history is any guide here, the year after the development of an El Niño event tends to be considerably warmer than the year in which it develops. For example, strong El Niño events developed over the latter half of both 1997 and 2015 and peaked early the following year, and 1998 and 2016 both set new records by a large margin.

However, 2023 was so exceptionally warm that it suggests that this El Niño might be behaving differently, with global surface temperatures responding more rapidly than in the past. If this is the case, 2024 would not necessarily follow the pattern of past El Niño events and is less likely to be substantially warmer than 2023.

There have been four published predictions – from the UK Met Office, NASA’s Dr Gavin Schmidt, Berkeley Earth and Carbon Brief (in this article) – of what temperatures might look like in 2024.

The figure below shows the four different 2024 predictions compared to the average of six different temperature records (NASA, NOAA, Hadley, Berkeley, Copernicus, and the Japanese JRA-55 reanalysis) used by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). These have been “normalised” to show 2024 warming relative to 2023 in the WMO dataset. This is to remove any differences in predictions due to divergences in the baselines used by different temperature records.

Carbon Brief’s prediction of likely 2024 temperatures is based on a statistical model using the year, the average temperature of the past year, and projections of El Niño/La Niña conditions over the first three months to predict the temperatures of the year.

Temperature projections for 2024 from the UK Met Office, NASA’s Dr Gavin Schmidt, Berkeley Earth, and Carbon Brief, relative to pre-industrial (1880-99) temperatures and compared to the historical average of six different datasets produced by the WMO. Chart by Carbon Brief.

Temperature projections for 2024 from the UK Met Office, NASA’s Dr Gavin Schmidt, Berkeley Earth, and Carbon Brief, relative to pre-industrial (1880-99) temperatures and compared to the historical average of six different datasets produced by the WMO. Chart by Carbon Brief.

The Met Office, Dr Schmidt, Berkeley Earth and Carbon Brief estimates all have 2024 as more likely than not to be warmer than 2023 – but only by a small margin. In all estimates it is close to a coin flip which will end up as the warmer year.

Against a 1880-99 pre-industrial baseline, the central estimate of all four forecasts is just below 1.5C of warming, with ranges suggesting that temperatures could top 1.5C next year.

However, the poor performance by all of these groups in accurately predicting 2023 temperatures mean these should be treated with some caution. Until scientists have a clearer understanding of the drivers of the unusual warmth the world experienced in 2023, it will not be possible to fully predict how temperatures will evolve in 2024 as the current El Niño event peaks and fades away.

Ultimately, what matters for the climate is not the leaderboard of individual years. Rather, it is the long-term upward trend in global temperatures driven by human emissions of greenhouse gases. Until the world reduces emissions down to net-zero, the planet will continue to warm.

As the chart below highlights, if the warming trend over the past 40 years continues, average surface temperatures are likely to pass 1.5C in the early 2030s and 2C by around 2060.

Expected exceedance years of 1.5C and 2C given a continuation of the long-term warming trend.
Expected exceedance years of 1.5C and 2C given a continuation of the long-term warming trend. Note that exceedance is defined as the long-term average temperature, rather than any individual year. Figure from Berkeley Earth.

Back to top

The post State of the Climate: 2023 smashes records for surface temperature and ocean heat appeared first on Carbon Brief.

State of the Climate: 2023 smashes records for surface temperature and ocean heat

Continue Reading

Greenhouse Gases

Cropped 13 August 2025: Fossil-fuelled bird decline; ‘Deadly’ wildfires; Empty nature fund

Published

on

We handpick and explain the most important stories at the intersection of climate, land, food and nature over the past fortnight.

This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s fortnightly Cropped email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.

Key developments

‘Deadly’ wildfires

WINE BRAKE: France experienced its “largest wildfire in decades”, which scorched more than 16,000 hectares in the country’s southern Aude region, the Associated Press said. “Gusting winds” fanned the flames, Reuters reported, but local winemakers and mayors also “blam[ed] the loss of vineyards”, which can act as a “natural, moisture-filled brake against wildfires”, for the fire’s rapid spread. It added that thousands of hectares of vineyards were removed in Aude over the past year. Meanwhile, thousands of people were evacuated from “deadly” wildfires in Spain, the Guardian said, with blazes ongoing in other parts of Europe.

MAJOR FIRES: Canada is experiencing its second-worst wildfire season on record, CBC News reported. More than 7.3m hectares burned in 2025, “more than double the 10-year average for this time of year”, the broadcaster said. The past three fire seasons were “among the 10 worst on record”, CBC News added. Dr Mike Flannigan from Thompson Rivers University told the Guardian: “This is our new reality…The warmer it gets, the more fires we see.” Elsewhere, the UK is experiencing a record year for wildfires, with more than 40,000 hectares of land burned so far in 2025, according to Carbon Brief.

Subscribe: Cropped
  • Sign up to Carbon Brief’s free “Cropped” email newsletter. A fortnightly digest of food, land and nature news and views. Sent to your inbox every other Wednesday.

WESTERN US: The US state of Colorado has recorded one of its largest wildfires in history in recent days, the Guardian said. The fire “charred” more than 43,300 hectares of land and led to the temporary evacuation of 179 inmates from a prison, the newspaper said. In California, a fire broke out “during a heatwave” and burned more than 2,000 hectares before it was contained, the Los Angeles Times reported. BBC News noted: “Wildfires have become more frequent in California, with experts citing climate change as a key factor. Hotter, drier conditions have made fire seasons longer and more destructive.”

FIRE FUNDING: “Worsening fires” in the Brazilian Amazon threaten new rainforest funding proposals due to be announced at the COP30 climate summit later this year, experts told Climate Home News. The new initiatives include the Tropical Forests Forever Facility, which the outlet said “aims to generate a flow of international investment to pay countries annually in proportion to their preserved tropical forests”. The outlet added: “If fires in the Amazon continue to worsen in the years to come, eligibility for funding could be jeopardised, Brazil’s environment ministry acknowledged.”

Farming impacts

OUT OF ORBIT: US president Donald Trump moved to “shut down” two space missions which monitor carbon dioxide and plant health, the Associated Press reported. Ending these NASA missions would “potentially shu[t] off an important source of data for scientists, policymakers and farmers”, the outlet said. Dr David Crisp, a retired NASA scientist, said the missions can detect the “glow” of plant growth, which the outlet noted “helps monitor drought and predict food shortages that can lead to civil unrest and famine”.

FARM EXTREMES: Elsewhere, Reuters said that some farmers are considering “abandoning” a “drought-hit” agricultural area in Hungary as “climate change cuts crop yields and reduces groundwater levels”. Scientists warned that rising temperatures and low rainfall threaten the region’s “agricultural viability”, the newswire added. Meanwhile, the Premium Times in Nigeria said that some farmers are “harvest[ing] crops prematurely” due to flooding fears. A community in the south-eastern state of Imo “has endured recurrent floods, which wash away crops and incomes alike” over the past decade, the newspaper noted.

SECURITY RISKS: Food supply chains in the UK face “escalating threats from climate impacts and the migration they are triggering”, according to a report covered by Business Green. The outlet said that £3bn worth of UK food imports originated from the 20 countries “with the highest numbers of climate-driven displacements” in 2024, based on analysis from the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit. The analysis highlighted that “climate impacts on food imports pose a threat to UK food security”. Elsewhere, an opinion piece in Dialogue Earth explored how the “role of gender equity in food security remains critically unaddressed”.

Spotlight

Fossil-fuelled bird decline

This week, Carbon Brief covers a new study tracing the impact of fossil-fuelled climate change on tropical birds.

Over the past few years, biologists have recorded sharp declines in bird numbers across tropical rainforests – even in areas untouched by humans – with the cause remaining a mystery.

A new study published this week in Nature Ecology and Evolution could help to shed light on this alarming phenomenon.

The research combined ecological and climate attribution techniques for the first time to trace the fingerprint of fossil-fuelled climate change on declining bird populations.

It found that an increase in heat extremes driven by climate change has caused tropical bird populations to decline by 25-38% in the period 1950-2020, when compared to a world without warming.

In their paper, the authors noted that birds in the tropics could be living close to their “thermal limits”.

Study lead author Dr Maximilian Kotz, a climate scientist at the Barcelona Supercomputing Center in Spain, explained to Carbon Brief:

“High temperature extremes can induce direct mortality in bird populations due to hyperthermia and dehydration. Even when they don’t [kill birds immediately], there’s evidence that this can then affect body condition which, in turn, affects breeding behaviour and success.”

Conservation implications

The findings have “potential ramifications” for commonly proposed conservation strategies, such as increasing the amount of land in the tropics that is protected for nature, the authors said. In their paper, they continued:

“While we do not disagree that these strategies are necessary for abating tropical habitat loss…our research shows there is now an additional urgent need to investigate strategies that can allow for the persistence of tropical species that are vulnerable to heat extremes.”

In some parts of the world, scientists and conservationists are looking into how to protect wildlife from more intense and frequent climate extremes, Kotz said.

He referenced one project in Australia which is working to protect threatened wildlife following periods of extreme heat, drought and bushfires.

Prof Alex Pigot, a biodiversity scientist at University College London (UCL), who was not involved in the research, said the findings reinforced the need to systematically monitor the impact of extreme weather on wildlife. He told Carbon Brief:

“We urgently need to develop early warning systems to be able to anticipate in advance where and when extreme heatwaves and droughts are likely to impact populations – and also rapidly scale up our monitoring of species and ecosystems so that we can reliably detect these effects.”

There is further coverage of this research on Carbon Brief’s website.

News and views

EMPTY CALI FUND: A major voluntary fund for biodiversity remains empty more than five months after its launch, Carbon Brief revealed. The Cali Fund, agreed at the COP16 biodiversity negotiations last year, was set up for companies who rely on nature’s resources to share some of their earnings with the countries where many of these resources originate. Big pharmaceutical companies did not take up on opportunities to commit to contributing to the fund or be involved in its launch in February 2025, emails released to Carbon Brief showed. Just one US biotechnology firm has pledged to contribute to the fund in the future.

LOSING HOPE: Western Australia’s Ningaloo reef – long considered a “hope spot” among the country’s coral reefs for evading major bleaching events – is facing its “worst-ever coral bleaching”, Australia’s ABC News reported. The ocean around Ningaloo has been “abnormally” warm since December, resulting in “unprecedented” bleaching and mortality, a research scientist told the outlet. According to marine ecologist Dr Damian Thomson, “up to 50% of the examined coral was dead in May”, the Sydney Morning Herald said. Thomson told the newspaper: “You realise your children are probably never going to see Ningaloo the way you saw it.”

‘DEVASTATION BILL’: Brazil’s president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, signed a “contentious” environmental bill into law, but “partially vetoed” some of the widely criticised elements, the Financial Times reported. Critics, who dubbed it the “devastation bill”, said it “risked fuelling deforestation and would harm Brazil’s ecological credentials” just months before hosting the COP30 climate summit. The newspaper said: “The leftist leader struck down or altered 63 of 400 provisions in the legislation, which was designed to speed up and modernise environmental licensing for new business and infrastructure developments.” The vetoes need to be approved by congress, “where Lula lacks a majority”, the newspaper noted.

RAINFOREST DRILLING: The EU has advised the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) against allowing oil drilling in a vast stretch of rainforest and peatland that was jointly designated a “green corridor” earlier this year, Climate Home News reported. In May, the DRC announced that it planned to open the conservation area for drilling, the publication said. A spokesperson for the European Commission told Climate Home News that the bloc “fully acknowledges and respects the DRC’s sovereign right to utilise its diverse resources for economic development”, but that it “highlights the fact that green alternatives have facilitated the protection of certain areas”.

NEW PLAN FOR WETLANDS: During the 15th meeting of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, held in Zimbabwe from 23 to 31 July, countries agreed on the adoption of a new 10-year strategic plan for conserving and sustainably using the world’s wetlands. Down to Earth reported that 13 resolutions were adopted, including “enhancing monitoring and reporting, capacity building and mobilisation of resources”. During the talks, Zimbabwe’s environment minister announced plans to restore 250,000 hectares of degraded wetlands by 2030 and Saudi Arabia entered the Convention on Wetlands. Panamá will host the next COP on wetlands in July 2028.

MEAT MADNESS: DeSmog covered the details of a 2021 public relations document that revealed how the meat industry is trying to “make beef seem climate-friendly”. The industry “may have enlisted environmental groups to persuade people to ‘feel better’ about eating beef”, the outlet said, based on this document. The strategy was created by a communications agency, MHP Group, and addressed to the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef. One of the key messages of the plan was to communicate the “growing momentum in the beef industry to protect and nurture the Earth’s natural resources”. MHP Group did not respond to a request for comment, according to DeSmog.

Watch, read, listen

MAKING WAVES: A livestream of deep-sea “crustaceans, sponges and sea cucumbers” has “captivated” people in Argentina, the New York Times outlined.

BAFFLING BIRDS: The Times explored the backstory to the tens of thousands of “exotic-looking” parakeets found in parks across Britain.

PLANT-BASED POWER: In the Conversation, Prof Paul Behrens outlined how switching to a plant-based diet could help the UK meet its climate and health targets.

MARINE DISCRIMINATION: Nature spoke to a US-based graduate student who co-founded Minorities in Shark Science about her experiences of racism and sexism in the research field.

New science

  • Applying biochar – a type of charcoal – to soils each year over a long period of time can have “sustained benefits for crop yield and greenhouse gas mitigation”, according to a Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences study. 
  • New research, published in PLOS Climate, found that nearly one-third of highly migratory fish species in the US waters of the Atlantic Ocean have “high” or “very high” vulnerability to climate change, but the majority of species have “some level of resilience and adaptability”.
  • A study in Communications Earth & Environment found a “notable greening trend” in China’s wetlands over 2000-23, with an increasing amount of carbon being stored in the plants growing there.

In the diary

Cropped is researched and written by Dr Giuliana Viglione, Aruna Chandrasekhar, Daisy Dunne, Orla Dwyer and Yanine Quiroz. Please send tips and feedback to cropped@carbonbrief.org

The post Cropped 13 August 2025: Fossil-fuelled bird decline; ‘Deadly’ wildfires; Empty nature fund appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Cropped 13 August 2025: Fossil-fuelled bird decline; ‘Deadly’ wildfires; Empty nature fund

Continue Reading

Greenhouse Gases

Holding the line on climate: EPA

Published

on

A white man sits at a conference room style table, with papers in front of him, gesturing as he speaks. Three other people in business attire sit in the seats next to him.

CCL submits a formal comment on EPA’s proposed endangerment finding rollback

By Dana Nuccitelli, CCL Research Manager

On July 29, the EPA proposed to rescind its 2009 endangerment finding that forms the basis of all federal climate pollution regulations. 

Without the endangerment finding, the EPA may not be allowed or able to regulate greenhouse gas pollution from sources like power plants or vehicle tailpipes, as they have done for years. News coverage has framed this as a “radical transformation” and a “bid to scrap almost all pollution regulations,” so it has appropriately alarmed many folks in the climate and environment space.

At CCL, we focus our efforts on working with Congress to implement durable climate policies, and so we don’t normally take actions on issues like this that relate to federal agencies or the courts. Other organizations focus their efforts on those branches of the government and are better equipped to spearhead this type of moment, and we appreciate those allies. 

But in this case, we did see an opportunity for CCL’s voice — and our focus on Congress — to play a role here. We decided to submit a formal comment on this EPA action for two reasons.

First, this decision could have an immense impact by eliminating every federal regulation of climate pollutants in a worst case scenario. Second, this move relates to our work because the EPA is misinterpreting the text and intent of laws passed by Congress. Our representatives have done their jobs by passing legislation over the past many decades that supports and further codifies the EPA’s mandate to regulate climate pollution. That includes the Clean Air Act, and more recently, the Inflation Reduction Act. We at CCL wanted to support our members of Congress by making these points in a formal comment.

There has been a tremendous public response to this action. In just over one week, the EPA already received over 44,000 public comments on its decision, and the public comment period will remain open for another five weeks, until September 15. 

To understand more about the details and potential outcomes of the EPA’s actions, read my article on the subject at Yale Climate Connections, our discussion on CCL Community, and CCL’s formal comment, which represents our entire organization. As our comment concludes,

“In its justifications for rescinding the 2009 endangerment finding, the Reconsideration has misinterpreted the text of the Clean Air Act, Congress’ decadeslong support for the EPA’s mandate to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles and other major sources, and the vast body of peer-reviewed climate science research that documents the increasingly dangerous threats that those emissions pose to Americans’ health and welfare. Because the bases of these justifications are fundamentally flawed, CCL urges the EPA to withdraw its ill-conceived Reconsideration of the 2009 endangerment finding. The EPA has both the authority and the responsibility to act. Americans cannot afford a retreat from science, law, and common sense in the face of a rapidly accelerating climate crisis.”

After the EPA responds to the public comment record and finalizes its decision, this issue will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court several years from now. 

In the meantime, CCL will continue to focus our efforts on areas where we can make the biggest difference in preserving a livable climate. Right now, that involves contacting our members of Congress to urge them to fully fund key climate and energy programs and protect critical work at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and Department of Energy. We’ve set an ambitious goal of sending 10,000 messages to our members of Congress, so let’s all do what CCL does best and make our voices heard on this critical issue.

This action by the EPA also reminds us that federal regulations are fragile. They tend to change with each new administration coming into the White House. Legislation passed by Congress – especially when done on a bipartisan basis – is much more durable. That’s why CCL’s work, as one of very few organizations engaging in nonpartisan advocacy for long-lasting climate legislation, is so critical. 

That’s especially true right now when we’re seeing the Trump administration slam shut every executive branch door to addressing climate change. We need Congress to step up now more than ever to implement durable solutions like funding key climate and energy programs, negotiating a new bipartisan comprehensive permitting reform bill, implementing healthy forest solutions like the Fix Our Forests Act, and advancing conversations about policies to put a price on carbon pollution. Those are the kinds of effective, durable, bipartisan climate solutions that CCL is uniquely poised to help become law and make a real difference in preserving a livable climate.

For other examples of how CCL is using our grassroots power to help ensure that Congress stays effective on climate in this political landscape, see our full “Holding the Line on Climate” blog series.

The post Holding the line on climate: EPA appeared first on Citizens' Climate Lobby.

Holding the line on climate: EPA

Continue Reading

Greenhouse Gases

Analysis: England’s most ethnically diverse areas are 15 times more likely to face extreme heat

Published

on

Neighbourhoods in England that are home to the most minority-ethnic people are 15 times more likely to face extreme heat than the least diverse areas, according to Carbon Brief analysis.

People with the lowest carbon footprints – who therefore contribute less to climate change – are also more likely to live in areas that experience high temperatures.

This is based on Carbon Brief analysis that combines satellite data on heat exposure with data on per-capita emissions, ethnicity and levels of deprivation across England.

Thousands of deaths in the UK have been attributed to heat in recent years and the threat is expected to grow as climate change worsens.

But heat is also felt differently across the country, with certain groups both more exposed and more vulnerable to dangerous temperatures.

Broadly, the analysis shows how those subject to the “urban heat island” effect in English cities, often in low-quality housing and with little access to green space, are more likely to experience extreme heat.

Experts tell Carbon Brief that policymaking should reflect the reality of climate change “amplifying” inequalities across society and provide help to those most in need, such as more heat-resilient social housing.

Heat threat

As greenhouse gas emissions and global temperatures rise, more people in the UK are likely to become ill or even die due to extreme heat.

Heat has killed around 6,000 people in England over the past three years, according to government figures. This is roughly double the number killed over the same period between 2016 and 2018.

Scientists have repeatedly linked extreme heat – and the resulting deaths – to climate change.

In June 2025 alone, more than 260 people died in London due to a heatwave, according to a recent attribution study that linked the event to climate change.

Government advisor the Climate Change Committee (CCC) estimates that the number of heat-related fatalities in the UK each year is set to triple by 2050, without adaptation measures.

Around half of homes in the country are already at risk of overheating and the CCC expects this to reach 90%, if global temperatures rise by 2C above pre-industrial levels.

However, these risks will not fall equally across society, with children, the elderly and disabled people more vulnerable to heat-related illness. There is also evidence that poorer communities and people of colour are more vulnerable to extreme heat.

Such communities also tend to have lower carbon footprints than those that are whiter and wealthier.

This fits with the broader concept of climate justice, which describes how people who are least responsible for climate change often end up bearing the brunt of its effects.

Carbon footprints

To investigate these issues, Carbon Brief combined detailed satellite data on heat exposure across England, provided by 4 Earth Intelligence, with neighbourhood-level carbon footprints compiled by the Centre for Research in Energy Demand Solutions (CREDS).

The CREDS dataset provides estimates of per-person carbon footprints, indicating how much the average person in each neighbourhood is contributing to climate change.

Due to data availability, this analysis focuses exclusively on England, the nation that experiences the most extreme heat in the UK.

Every neighbourhood is scored based on its “heat hazard”, meaning the likelihood that it will experience higher relative temperatures during hot weather, compared to surrounding areas.

The analysis then zooms in on the 10% worst-affected neighbourhoods in England. These neighbourhoods have a heat hazard score of 4 or 5, meaning that they face higher exposure to heat than 90% of areas around the country. (For a full explanation, see Methodology.)

The figure below shows that neighbourhoods with lower carbon footprints are twice as likely to face high heat hazard scores than areas with higher carbon footprints.

Specifically, it shows that 13.4% of neighbourhoods with the lowest carbon footprints are among the English areas most exposed to heat hazards. In contrast, only 7.0% of neighbourhoods with the highest carbon footprint are among the most heat-exposed areas.

Chart showing that people living in English neighbourhoods with lower carbon footprints are more likely to be exposed to extreme heat
Proportion of neighbourhoods in England with the highest heat hazard scores in each carbon footprint bracket. Each bar represents a group of English neighbourhoods, ranked by their per-capita emissions from 10% with the lowest carbon footprints (top bar) to the 10% with the highest (bottom bar). The bars in between each represent 20% of neighbourhoods. The “highest heat hazard scores” equate to the top 10% of total English neighbourhoods that are most likely to experience high temperatures during hot weather. Source: Carbon Brief analysis, 4 Earth Intelligence, CREDS.

Neighbourhoods in England with lower carbon footprints are often in dense, urban areas, where people tend to be less reliant on cars and more likely to live in energy-efficient flats.

Areas with higher carbon footprints are commonly found in rural areas, where travelling by car can be a necessity due to limited public transport.

Also, particularly in south-east England, people in these rural neighbourhoods are often wealthier, meaning they spend more money on flights and other high-emitting luxuries.

Ethnicity and deprivation

Carbon Brief also analysed the heat threat facing deprived neighbourhoods in England and those that are home to more people of colour.

Information about how many people identify as black, Asian and other minority ethnicities in each neighbourhood is based on 2021 census data, via the Office for National Statistics.

As the chart below shows, there is a clear correlation between the number of people of colour living in a neighbourhood and the likelihood of it facing extreme heat during periods of hot weather.

The most ethnically diverse neighbourhoods – where roughly half or more of the population are people of colour – are 15 times more likely to have high heat hazard scores than the least ethnically diverse neighbourhoods, where almost everyone is white.

Chart showing neighbourhoods in England that are home to more minority-ethnic people are far more likely to face extreme heat
Proportion of neighbourhoods in England with the highest heat hazard scores in each decile of minority-ethnic population. Each bar represents 10% of English neighbourhoods, ranked by their proportion of minority-ethnic inhabitants, from the highest (top bar) to the lowest (bottom bar). The “highest heat hazard scores” equate to the top 10% of total English neighbourhoods that are most likely to experience high temperatures during hot weather. Source: Carbon Brief analysis, 4 Earth Intelligence, Office for National Statistics.

Among the most diverse areas are parts of Newham in east London, Saltley in Birmingham and Spinney Hills in Leicester, all of which are inner-city areas.

The least diverse neighbourhoods range from coastal parts of Redcar and Cleveland in North Yorkshire to the rural villages of south Somerset. None of England’s hottest 1% of neighbourhoods are in this bracket.

Additionally, Carbon Brief assessed the relationship between levels of poverty and heat risk, based on England’s indices of deprivation dataset. This covers several measures of deprivation, including income, employment and health.

People living in the most deprived English neighbourhoods are more than three times as likely to face high levels of heat hazard as those in the least deprived neighbourhoods, as shown in the figure below.

Chart show more deprived areas in England are also more likely to experience extreme heat
Proportion of neighbourhoods in England with the highest heat hazard scores in each decile of deprivation. Each bar represents 10% of English neighbourhoods, ranked by their level of deprivation, from the highest (top bar) to the lowest (bottom bar). The “highest heat hazard scores” equate to the top 10% of total English neighbourhoods that are most likely to experience high temperatures during hot weather. Source: Carbon Brief analysis, 4 Earth Intelligence, UK government indices of deprivation for England.

The correlation between poverty and extreme heat is less extreme than the one between heat exposure and ethnicity.

While many of England’s most deprived areas are in cities, they are also clustered in some rural and coastal areas – such as parts of Cornwall and Lincolnshire – which tend to be cooler.

Urban heat island

The key phenomenon captured by this analysis is the urban heat island effect. This describes how cities – and particularly areas with dense buildings, roads and stretches of concrete that absorb heat – tend to be hotter than the surrounding countryside.

Cities such as London, Manchester and Birmingham have reached temperatures up to 5C hotter than the surrounding areas in recent decades, due to this effect.

The diagram below shows how air flows circulate between rural and urban areas, forming “heat domes” over cities.

Infographic diagram showing higher temperatures in cities lead to the formation of an urban heat dome
Illustration of air flow in and around a heat dome, based on Yang et al (2024). Graphic: Ada Carpenter, Carbon Brief.

Inner-city areas in England are also home to many people facing high levels of deprivation, as well as large black and Asian communities. Many of these communities are therefore exposed to more dangerous temperatures due to the urban heat island effect.

Access to green spaces, even within cities, also influences exposure to the urban heat island effect. Research has shown how people in deprived areas and people of colour – particularly black people – are more likely to live in areas with less access to green spaces.

There is already extensive scientific literature that uses satellite data to demonstrate the urban heat island effect in cities and other locations.

A number of studies have also used this data to show how people of colour and those living in poverty are more exposed to extreme heat. Much of this research has come from the US, where historic housing inequalities have created stark patterns of segregation in many cities.

A project led by environmental policy researcher Dr Angel Hsu of the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill shows how, globally, “cities are burdening lower-income populations with higher heat exposure”, as she tells Carbon Brief.

Given this, Hsu adds that “it’s not surprising to us to see similar disproportionate exposure patterns among UK neighbourhoods”.

Other researchers tell Carbon Brief that it is important to be wary of satellite data, as it does not precisely capture the air temperatures experienced in these neighbourhoods.

Dr Charles Simpson, who researches the health and economic impacts of climate change at University College London (UCL), notes:

“Satellite-measured surface temperature does not always correlate with the air temperature – what you are measuring includes a lot of road surfaces and rooftops. The air temperature is thought to be more directly relevant to people’s health and their cooling needs.”

Previous research has found that satellite data can therefore overestimate the urban heat island effect compared to data from weather stations.

These stations, however, are not widespread enough to allow comparisons with detailed neighbourhood data. They are particularly lacking in more deprived areas in England, potentially making measurements there less reliable.

Other scientists tell Carbon Brief that, in the absence of a comprehensive ground monitoring network, satellite measurements can serve as a stand-in to estimate heat exposure. Dr Chloe Brimicombe, an extreme-heat researcher based at the University of Graz, explains:

“Although it’s not a good indicator of perceived [temperature], it is a good indicator of what regions are most built up and have the environments that are most vulnerable to heat.”

‘Amplifying’ inequalities

There is a growing body of evidence gathered by activists, scientists and local governments around the UK revealing the unequal burden of climate change.

Dr Charles Ogunbode, an assistant professor of applied psychology at the University of Nottingham who specialises in how people experience climate change, tells Carbon Brief that this kind of data helps to clarify the links between climate change and inequalities:

“We can’t avoid dealing with the issue of social inequalities and climate change is just basically amplifying those things. It’s highlighting them, it’s revealing them. So whatever policies we put in place – be it in the health sector, be it in the climate sector – addressing those inequalities has to be an essential part of whatever those responses are.”

There are many factors influencing how people experience heat that are not captured in Carbon Brief’s analysis.

Previous work by researchers at the University of Manchester and Friends of the Earth has explored this issue, including an analysis of more than 40 indicators that could make neighbourhoods more “socially vulnerable” to heat.

This reveals similar outcomes, with people of colour and those contributing the least to climate change generally more vulnerable to its impacts.

One of the biggest factors that contributes to people’s exposure to heat extremes in the UK is the country’s housing stock, which is “not fit for the future”, according to the CCC.

UK homes have generally not been built for hotter conditions and poorer people are more likely to live in badly adapted housing. Those living in small homes, flats and social housing in England all “suffer significantly more overheating” during heatwaves, according to one study.

Dr Giorgos Petrou, a researcher in building physics modelling at UCL, tells Carbon Brief that it is also vital to consider whether households have the ability to adapt to climate change. “Amongst other factors, their capability will depend on their financial means and whether they own or rent their home,” he says.

Experts tell Carbon Brief that the government should act across its policy agenda to not only address extreme heat, but also support those who are most affected by it. This could involve expanding tree cover and renovating old social housing stock in at-risk communities.

Emma Howard Boyd, a former chair of the Environment Agency who also chaired the London Climate Resilience Review, tells Carbon Brief:

“I do think that with [the Labour] government focusing on house building and retrofit, this is a fantastic opportunity to get this right…For those communities that have had the least impact on the environment and climate change themselves.”

Methodology

This analysis collates several datasets that cover England at a neighbourhood level, with “neighbourhoods” defined as lower-layer super output areas (LSOAs). These are small statistical areas used by the UK government, covering populations of about 1,500-3,000 people. There are 33,755 LSOAs in England.

Data on vulnerability to heat comes from 4 Earth Intelligence (4EI), which analyses land surface temperature to generate “heat hazard” information at a 30m resolution. This detailed information has been converted into LSOAs by 4EI.

Heat hazard scores are calculated by 4EI, based on the likelihood that a given neighbourhood will experience high temperatures during hot weather, relative to the surrounding area.

Each score corresponds to a different percentile of English neighbourhoods. The bar below shows the percentage breakdown across all LSOAs in England.

The two hottest scores – those coloured in red – correspond to the 10% of English neighbourhoods that have higher heat hazard scores than the remaining 90%.

Chart: Carbon Brief analysed the 10% of English neighbourhoods with the highest heat hazard scores
Distribution of heat hazard scores across English neighbourhoods, as calculated by 4EI. The top two heat hazard scores are 5 – representing the 1% of neighbourhoods that are more prone to extreme heat than the remaining 99% – and 4, representing the 90th-99th percentile that are hotter than the remaining 90%. Source: 4 Earth Intelligence.

For simplicity, Carbon Brief’s analysis focuses on the red bars above, meaning neighbourhoods in either the top 90th-99th percentile or 99th percentile of heat hazard. (Neighbourhoods in the 90th-99th percentile have higher heat hazard scores than 90% of areas in England. Neighbourhoods in the 99th percentile have higher heat hazard scores than 99% of areas.)

It shows how these two scores are overrepresented in LSOAs that have lower carbon footprints, more diverse communities and higher levels of deprivation.

Carbon-footprint data is from the CREDS “place-based carbon calculator”, which estimates the average per-person carbon footprint for every LSOA in England. It accounts for emissions-producing activities ranging from electricity use to “consumption of goods and services”.

CREDS assigns the grades “A” to “F” (low carbon footprint to high carbon footprint) to neighbourhoods. Carbon Brief has based its carbon-footprint analysis on these grades.

LSOA-level data on black, Asian and other minority-ethnic populations comes from 2021 census data. English LSOAs were broken down into deciles, based on the percentage of the population that identified as non-white ethnicities.

The lowest decile covered the tenth of LSOAs with between 0 and 2% non-white minority-ethnic populations and the highest covered the tenth with more than 51%.

England’s indices of multiple deprivation dataset also includes LSOA-level information. It provides relative measures of deprivation for LSOAs in England, based on income, employment, education, health, crime, living environment and barriers to housing and services. Carbon Brief broke the LSOAs down into deciles based on the total deprivation scores, from the most deprived to the least deprived.

The post Analysis: England’s most ethnically diverse areas are 15 times more likely to face extreme heat appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Analysis: England’s most ethnically diverse areas are 15 times more likely to face extreme heat

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com