Paper detail

Decadal attribution of historic temperature and ocean heat content change to anthropogenic emissions

We present an alternative method of calculating the historical effective radiative forcing using the observed temperature record and a kernel based on the CMIP5 temperature response. This estimate is the effective radiative forcing time series that the average climate model would need to simulate the observed global mean surface temperature anomalies. We further infer the anthropogenic aerosols radiative forcing as a residual using the better-known greenhouse gas radiative forcing. This allows an independent estimate of anthropogenic aerosol radiative forcing, which suggests a cooling influence due to aerosols in the early part of the 20th century. The temporal kernels are also used to calculate decadal contributions from the dominant forcing agents to present day temperature, ocean heat content, and thermosteric sea level rise. The current global mean temperature anomaly is dominated by emissions in the past two decades, while current ocean heat content is more strongly affected by earlier decades.

preprint2019arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.