English references

The growth rate of greenhouse gas (GHG) climate forcing increased rapidly in the last 15 years to about 0.5 W/m2 per decade, as shown by the “colorful chart” for GHG climate forcing that we have been publishing for 25 years (Fig. 1).[1] The chart is not in IPCC reports, perhaps because it reveals inconvenient facts. Although growth of GHG climate forcing declined rapidly after the 1987 Montreal Protocol, other opportunities to decrease climate forcing were missed. If policymakers do not appreciate the significance of present data on changing climate forcings, we scientists must share the blame.

22 of the planet’s 34 vital signs are at record levels, with many of them continuing to trend sharply in the wrong direction. This is the message of the sixth issue of the annual “State of the climate” report. The report was prepared by an international coalition with contribution from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and led by Oregon State University scientists. Published today in BioScience, it cites global data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in proposing “high-impact” strategies.

– how climate scientists and the IPCC still won’t tell the truth about accelerating climate change.

This article examines the technocentric bias that characterizes climate mitigation literature, focusing on the reports of the IPCC's Working Group III. This bias stems from structural features of the scientific field that prioritizes innovation, leading to the overrepresentation of technological solutions in climate research. Funding mechanisms further reinforce this tendency by incentivizing collaboration with industrial R&D, creating a self-reinforcing loop in which scientific authority and industrial interests converge. The IPCC's institutional positioning—as a policy-relevant yet politically cautious body—amplifies this dynamic by favoring allegedly “cost-effective” technological pathways that lack practical feasibility.

Climate sensitivity is substantially higher than IPCC’s best estimate (3°C for doubled CO2), a conclusion we reach with greater than 99 percent confidence. We also show that global climate forcing by aerosols became stronger (increasingly negative) during 1970-2005, unlike IPCC’s best estimate of aerosol forcing. High confidence in these conclusions is based on a broad analysis approach. IPCC’s underestimates of climate sensitivity and aerosol cooling follow from their disproportionate emphasis on global climate modeling, an approach that will not yield timely, reliable, policy advice.

In a rapidly changing climate, evidence-based decision-making benefits from up-to-date and timely information. Here we compile monitoring datasets (published at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15639576; Smith et al., 2025a) to produce updated estimates for key indicators of the state of the climate system: net emissions of greenhouse gases and short-lived climate forcers, greenhouse gas concentrations, radiative forcing, the Earth's energy imbalance, surface temperature changes, warming attributed to human activities, the remaining carbon budget, and estimates of global temperature extremes. This year, we additionally include indicators for sea-level rise and land precipitation change. We follow methods as closely as possible to those used in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) Working Group One report.

Global temperature for 2025 should decline little, if at all, from the record 2024 level. Absence of a large temperature decline after the huge El Nino-spurred temperature increase in 2023-24 will provide further confirmation that IPCC’s best estimates for climate sensitivity and aerosol climate forcing were both underestimates. Specifically, 2025 global temperature should remain near or above +1.5C relative to 1880-1920, and, if the tropics remain ENSO-neutral, there is good chance that 2025 may even exceed the 2024 record high global temperature.

As an average citizen of the United States, one with no particular power over our political trajectory beyond my ability to vote and encourage others to vote, I have very little say in how our descent into a hotter, resource-depleted world will play out. This contrasts with how much I worry about that impending descent, its impact on my children and grandchildren, and its deep implications for the future of humanity writ large.

Summary for Policymakers. A Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The new report evokes a mild sense of urgency, calling on governments to mobilise finance to accelerate the uptake of green technology. But its conclusions are far removed from a direct interpretation of the IPCC’s own carbon budgets (the total amount of CO₂ scientists estimate can be put into the atmosphere for a given temperature rise).

Figure TS.15 | Contribution to (a) effective radiative forcing (ERF) and (b) global surface temperature change from component emissions for1750–2019based on Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) models and (c) net aerosol ERF for 1750–2014 from different lines of evidence.

A novel tool for flexible spatial and temporal analyses of much of the observed and projected climate change information underpinning the Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report, including regional synthesis for Climatic Impact-Drivers (CIDs).

Since 1992, the IPCC has highlighted rising greenhouse gases, marking their ‘widespread and unprecedented’ impacts by 2014

Humanity received a “final warning” Monday from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The bottom line of the Synthesis Report of the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report is to “act now, or it’s too late,” the Guardian wrote. The scale of the emergency screams out from almost every page — climate change is already displacing and killing millions of people globally — but the report also provides what UN Secretary-General António Guterres called a roadmap for defusing the “climate time bomb.”

IPCC report says only swift and drastic action can avert irrevocable damage to world

AR6 Synthesis Report

Summary for Policymakers

INTERLAKEN, Switzerland, March 20, 2023 -- There are multiple, feasible and effective options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to human-caused climate change, and they are available now, said scientists in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report released today. ...

The IPCC is currently in its Sixth Assessment cycle, during which the IPCC will produce the Assessment reports of its three Working Groups, three Special Reports, a refinement to the methodology report and the Synthesis Report. The Synthesis Report will be the last of the AR6 products, due for release in March 2023.

Corporations and politicians edited the Policy Summary to omit the scientists’ most powerful conclusions