Connect with us

Published

on

Volcanic eruptions pose a fundamental challenge for scientists and their climate models.

It is well known that explosive eruptions can cause sudden cooling at the Earth’s surface and that multiple eruptions shape climate variability over decades and centuries.

When sulphur dioxide is injected into the stratosphere during an eruption, it forms aerosols that block sunlight from reaching the Earth’s surface.

Unlike human influences on climate change, which occur slowly and can be accounted for in climate models under a range of socioeconomic scenarios, the sporadic nature of volcanic eruptions poses a challenge for climate projections.

Scientists cannot currently forecast the occurrence of volcanic eruptions – including when and where they will occur and how much sulphur they will emit.

How, then, to account for the climate impact of volcanic eruptions when projecting into the future?

In a recent study, published in Communications Earth & Environment, we show that volcanic eruptions make a substantial contribution to the uncertainty in projections of global temperatures.

Our findings suggest that, when sporadic volcanic eruptions are included in climate projections, breaching of the Paris Agreement’s 1.5C warming limit is slightly delayed – but we will also see more decades with rapid rates of warming and cooling.

Volcanic forcing in climate projections

Climate scientists refer to the influence volcanic eruptions have on the climate – largely through the release of sulphur dioxide gas into the atmosphere – as “volcanic forcing”.

Current climate models apply a constant volcanic forcing value when running future projections. This value is calculated based on the historical average of forcings from 1850 to the present day.

This is the case with the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), the international modelling effort that feeds into the influential assessment reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

However, this approach has significant limitations.

For starters, historically averaged forcing does not capture the episodic nature of eruptions.

Large-magnitude volcanic eruptions happen sporadically – sometimes clustering within decades and other times leaving century-long gaps between events.

Meanwhile, the reference period of 1850 to the present day has seen a relatively low frequency of large-magnitude eruptions that emitted more than 3 teragrams (Tg) of sulphur dioxide (SO2), when compared to multimillennial records.

Finally, volcanic forcing reconstructions used in earlier generations of CMIP climate models did not include small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions that emitted less than 3Tg of SO2.

This is because these eruptions went largely undetected before the satellite era began in 1980. Nonetheless, these smaller, but more frequent, eruptions contribute to 30-50% of long-term volcanic forcing.

Taking a new approach

Traditionally, climate scientists have recognised three main sources of uncertainty in climate projections: internal variability, model uncertainty and scenario uncertainty.

Here, “internal” variability refers to natural fluctuations that are generated within the climate system, such as by El Niño; model uncertainty refers to the differences in the results between multiple climate models; and scenario uncertainty refers to the different ways that the world could develop over the decades to come.

Our results show that volcanic eruptions should be specifically considered as a fourth significant source of uncertainty in climate projections.

To explore how climate projections change when accounting for volcanic forcing uncertainty, our study uses a probabilistic approach that builds on a 2017 methodology developed by Bethke et al.

To do this, we develop “stochastic forcing scenarios” – essentially, 1,000 different plausible timelines of volcanic activity extending to the end of the century.

These scenarios draw from past volcanic activity recorded in ice cores going back 11,500 years, along with satellite measurements and geological evidence. Each scenario represents different combinations of eruption magnitudes, location, timing and frequency.

(In mathematics, “stochastic” systems involve randomness or uncertainty of outcome, making them unpredictable. This is in contrast to “deterministic” systems, which are characterised by having outcomes that are completely predictable based on initial conditions and a set of rules or equations.)

We then simulate climate projections using both stochastic and historically-averaged volcanic forcing between 2015 and 2100, exploring temperature rise under three different emissions scenarios drawn from the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). These are a low-emission scenario (SSP1-1.9), an intermediate scenario that is in line with current climate policies(SSP2-4.5) and a very-high emissions scenario (SSP5-8.5).

For this step, we use a simple climate model, or “emulator”, called FaIR.

By simulating 1,000 different volcanic futures, we find that the climate uncertainty caused by future 21st century eruptions could exceed the internal variability of the climate system itself over the same period.

We also find that volcanic eruptions could account for more than one-third of total uncertainty in global temperature projections until the 2030s.

You can see these results in the plot below. It shows the contribution to the total uncertainty from the different sources. The colours represent volcanoes (orange), internal variability (dark blue), climate model response (yellow) and scenarios of future human emissions (green).

Chart: Annual mean contribution of uncertainties
Annual average contribution to the total uncertainty in global average surface temperature from volcanic eruptions, internal variability, climate model response and human emissions scenarios from 2020 to 2100. Credit: Amended from Chim et al. (2025).

What this means for the 1.5C threshold

Our simulations demonstrate that incorporating possible timelines of volcanic activity slightly reduces the probability of crossing the Paris Agreement’s aspirational 1.5C temperature limit in the near term.

We find that – depending on the emissions scenario – the probability of exceeding 1.5C decreases by 4-10%, compared to projections using constant volcanic forcing.

While this might sound encouraging, future volcanic activity does not provide any long-term mitigation of human-caused warming.

The eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815 offers a dramatic illustration of this point. While the event cooled global temperatures by an average of 0.8C, it led to a “year without a summer” and caused crop failures and widespread famine across Europe, North America and China.

Eruptions produce temporary cooling lasting just a few years. They do not alter the underlying warming trend driven by human emissions.

Our study finds that, taking into account a range of future volcanic activity, global warming will still exceed 1.5C within decades under all but the very lowest emissions scenarios.

A high level of volcanic activity over the 21st century would help offset just a small fraction of global warming – meaning that emission reduction remains essential for meeting long-term climate goals.

The charts below show the probability of scenarios exceeding 1.5C using stochastic volcanic forcing (solid lines) and constant volcanic forcing (dashed lines) under three emissions scenarios (top) and the difference in probability between the two forcing approaches (bottom).

Charts: Probability of exceeding 1.5C
The top chart (a) shows the probability of scenarios exceeding 1.5C using stochastic volcanic forcing (solid lines) and 1850-2014 mean historically-averaged forcing (dotted lines) for SSP1-1.9 (very low emissions), SSP2-4.5 (approximate current policies) and SSP5-8.5 (very high emissions) scenarios. The lower chart (b) shows the difference in probability in exceeding 1.5C between the simulations and historically-averaged forcing and stochastic volcanic forcing. Credit: Chim et al. (2025)

Decadal-scale temperature variability

Another important insight from our research is that extreme warm and cold decades become more likely once the variability of volcanic forcing is accounted for.

We find that the chance of a negative decadal trend – a decade where global surface temperature cools on average – increases by 10-18% under the intermediate emissions scenario.

We also find a corresponding increase in the probability of extremely warm decades, reflecting how volcanic forcing variability enhances the likelihood of both cooling and warming extremes.

This underscores how volcanic eruptions could introduce significant variability into the global temperature trends over decadal timescales.

Toward better climate projections

Understanding volcanic effects on the climate is essential for comprehensively assessing future risks to agriculture, infrastructure and energy systems.

Running thousands of volcanic scenarios with full-scale Earth system models is not practical as it requires too much computing power. On the other hand, current approaches have significant limitations, as described above.

However, there is a middle ground for future climate modelling efforts.

The next phase of future climate modelling experiments – the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP7 – can use a more representative “average” volcanic forcing baseline that incorporates the effects of small eruptions often missed in historical records. This bias has now been addressed in the historical volcanic forcing dataset that will underpin the next generation of climate model simulations.

Additionally, modelling teams should run additional scenarios with high and low future volcanic activity to capture the range of volcanic uncertainty on climate projections.

While human-caused greenhouse gas emissions remain the dominant driver of climate change, properly accounting for volcanic uncertainty provides a more complete picture of possible climate futures and their implications for society.

The post Guest post: Investigating how volcanic eruptions can affect climate projections appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Guest post: Investigating how volcanic eruptions can affect climate projections

Continue Reading

Climate Change

China’s Shark Finning Could Lead to US Seafood Sanctions

Published

on

A formal petition to the U.S. government calls for sanctions on Chinese seafood imports as it highlights China’s loophole-ridden illegal shark fin trade.

For migrant workers trapped onboard Chinese distant water fishing fleets, cutting the fins off sharks as they writhe violently on rusted decks in the Indian Ocean isn’t accidental. It’s an intentional and lucrative act that marks the start of a bloody half-a-billion-dollar offshore supply chain, tacitly supported by Beijing yet covertly concealed from port inspectors globally.

China’s Shark Finning Could Lead to US Seafood Sanctions

Continue Reading

Climate Change

New data shows rich nations likely missed 2025 goal to double adaptation finance

Published

on

New data on international climate finance for 2023 and 2024 suggests that wealthy countries are highly unlikely to have met their pledge to double funding for adaptation in developing nations to around $40 billion a year by 2025 amid cuts to their overseas aid budgets.

At the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow in 2021, all countries agreed to “urge” developed nations to at least double their funding for adaptation in developing countries from 2019 levels of around $20 billion by 2025. Funding for adaptation has lagged behind money to help reduce emissions and remains the dark spot even as the data showed overall climate finance rose to a record $136.7 billion in 2024.

A United Nations Environment Programme report warned last year that wealthy nations were likely to miss the adaptation finance target and the data released on Thursday by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shows that in 2024 adaptation finance was just under $35 billion.

The OECD, an intergovernmental policy forum for wealthy countries, said the increase between 2022 and 2024 was “modest”, adding that meeting the doubling target would require “strong growth” of close to 20% in 2025.

More cuts likely

The OECD’s figures do not go up to 2025, but several nations announced cuts to climate finance last year. The most notable was the abandonment of US pledges to international climate funds by the new Trump administration but the UK, France, Germany and other wealthy European countries also pared back their contributions.

Joe Thwaites, international finance director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said developed countries were “not on track” to meet the adaptation funding goal.

Power Shift Africa director Mohamed Adow said adaptation finance is needed to expand flood defences, drought-resistant crops, early warning systems and resilient health services as the world warms, bringing more extreme weather and rising seas. “When that money fails to arrive, people lose homes, harvests and livelihoods – and in the worst cases, their lives,” he warned.

Imane Saidi, a senior researcher at the North Africa-based Imal Initiative, called the $35 billion in adaptation finance in 2024 “a drop in the ocean”, considering that the United Nations estimates the annual adaptation needs of developing countries at between $215 billion and $387 billion.

    If confirmed, a failure to meet the goal is likely to further strain relations between developed and developing countries within the UN climate process. A previous pledge to provide $100 billion a year of total climate finance by 2020 was only met two years late, a failure labelled “dismal” by the UAE’s COP28 President Sultan Al Jaber and many other Global South diplomats.

    Missing that goal would also raise doubts about donor governments’ commitment to meeting their new post-2025 adaptation finance goal. At COP30 last year, governments agreed to urge developed countries to triple adaptation finance – without defining the baseline – by 2035.

    African and other developing countries have pointed to lack of funding as a key flaw in ongoing attempts to set indicators to measure progress on adapting to climate change.

    Speaking to climate ministers from around the world in Copenhagen on Wednesday, Turkish COP31 President Murat Kurum stressed the importance of climate finance. “It is easy to say we support global climate action,” he said, “but promises must be kept.”

    He said the COP31 Presidency will use the new Global Implementation Accelerator and recommendations in the Baku-to-Belem roadmap, published last year, to scale up climate finance – and will hold donors accountable for their collective finance goals.

    He noted that developed countries should this year submit their first reports showing how they will deliver their “fair share” of the new broader finance goal set at COP29 in 2024, to deliver $300 billion a year in climate finance by 2035. They are due to report on this once every two years.

    Broader climate finance

    The OECD data shows that the overall amount of climate finance – including funding for emissions cuts – provided by developed countries grew fast in 2023 before declining in 2024. In contrast, the amount of private finance developed countries say they “mobilised” increased in both 2023 and 2024, pushing the top-line figure to a record high.

    While the OECD does not say which countries provided what amounts, data from the ODI Global think-tank suggests that the 2024 cuts to bilateral climate finance were spread broadly among wealthy nations.

    Thwaites of NRDC welcomed the fact that overall climate finance provided and mobilised by developed countries exceeded $130 billion in both 2023 and 2024. He said that this was “well above earlier projections” and “shows that when rich countries work together, they can over-achieve on climate finance goals”.

    But Sehr Raheja, programme officer at the Delhi-based Centre for Science and Environment, said these figures are “modest” when set against the new $300-billion goal.

    “While the headline total figure of climate finance remains alright,” she said, “declining bilateral climate spending raises important questions about the predictability of high-quality, concessional public finance, which has consistently been a key demand of the Global South.”

    She also lamented that loans continue to dominate public climate finance and that mobilised private finance is concentrated in middle-income countries and on emissions-reduction measures rather than adaptation projects. “Private capital continues to follow bankability rather than climate vulnerability or need,” she added.

    Ritu Bharadwaj, climate finance and resilience researcher at the International Institute for Environment and Development, said the figures painted an outdated picture as climate finance has since declined as rich countries shrink their overseas aid budgets and increase spending on defence.

    Last month, the OECD published figures showing that international aid – which includes climate finance – fell by nearly a quarter in 2025. The US was responsible for three-quarters of this decline. The OECD projects a further decline in 2026.

    With Thursday’s climate finance report, the OECD is “publishing a victory lap for 2023 and 2024 at almost the same moment its own aid statistics show the funding base eroding underneath it,” Bharadwaj said.

    The post New data shows rich nations likely missed 2025 goal to double adaptation finance appeared first on Climate Home News.

    New data shows rich nations likely missed 2025 goal to double adaptation finance

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    NextEra Energy to Join the Offshore Wind Club, But Does It Matter?

    Published

    on

    The country’s most valuable utility didn’t like offshore wind. But a proposed merger with Dominion would include a $11.4 billion project in Coastal Virginia.

    A utility megamerger announced this week would mean that the largest offshore wind project in the United States would be owned by the same company that already is the nation’s leading developer of renewables and battery storage.

    NextEra Energy to Join the Offshore Wind Club, But Does It Matter?

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com