Search This Blog

Friday, February 20, 2026

Tipping points in the climate system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Map showing global and regional tipping elements: if the global temperature increases past a certain point (color-coded for temperature thresholds), this particular element would be tipped.[1] The result would be a transition to a different state.

In climate science, a tipping point is a critical threshold that, when crossed, leads to large, accelerating and often irreversible changes in the climate system. If tipping points are crossed, they are likely to have severe impacts on human society and may accelerate global warming. Tipping behavior is found across the climate system, for example in ice sheets, mountain glaciers, circulation patterns in the ocean, in ecosystems, and the atmosphere. Examples of tipping points include thawing permafrost, which will release methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, or melting ice sheets and glaciers reducing Earth's albedo, which would warm the planet faster. Thawing permafrost is a threat multiplier because it holds roughly twice as much carbon as the amount currently circulating in the atmosphere.

Tipping points are often, but not necessarily, abrupt. For example, with average global warming somewhere between 0.8 °C (1.4 °F) and 3 °C (5.4 °F), the Greenland ice sheet passes a tipping point and is doomed, but its melt would take place over millennia. Tipping points are possible at today's global warming of just over 1 °C (1.8 °F) above preindustrial times, and highly probable above 2 °C (3.6 °F) of global warming. It is possible that some tipping points are close to being crossed or have already been crossed, like those of the West Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets, the Amazon rainforest and warm-water coral reefs. A 2022 study published in Science found that exceeding 1.5 °C of global warming could trigger multiple tipping points, including the collapse of major ice sheets, abrupt thawing of permafrost, and coral reef die-off, with potential for cascading system effects.

A danger is that if the tipping point in one system is crossed, this could cause a cascade of other tipping points, leading to severe, potentially catastrophic, impacts. Crossing a threshold in one part of the climate system may trigger another tipping element to tip into a new state. For example, ice loss in West Antarctica and Greenland will significantly alter ocean circulation. Sustained warming of the northern high latitudes as a result of this process could activate tipping elements in that region, such as permafrost degradation, and boreal forest dieback.

Scientists have identified many elements in the climate system which may have tipping points. As of September 2022, nine global core tipping elements and seven regional impact tipping elements are known. Out of those, one regional and three global climate elements will likely pass a tipping point if global warming reaches 1.5 °C (2.7 °F). They are the Greenland ice sheet collapse, West Antarctic ice sheet collapse, tropical coral reef die off, and boreal permafrost abrupt thaw.

Tipping points exist in a range of systems, for example in the cryosphere, within ocean currents, and in terrestrial systems. The tipping points in the cryosphere include: Greenland ice sheet disintegration, West Antarctic ice sheet disintegration, East Antarctic ice sheet disintegration, arctic sea ice decline, retreat of mountain glaciers, permafrost thaw. The tipping points for ocean current changes include the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), the North Subpolar Gyre and the Southern Ocean overturning circulation. Lastly, the tipping points in terrestrial systems include Amazon rainforest dieback, boreal forest biome shift, Sahel greening, and vulnerable stores of tropical peat carbon.

Definition

A system going past a tipping point. The system starts (blue) in one of two alternative stable states, represented by the ball in the left hand valley. Under external forcing over time (left to right) this state loses stability (purple), represented by the valley getting shallower, lowering the hilltop. Past a tipping point the initial stable state disappears and the system undergoes an abrupt, self-propelling change into the alternative, remaining stable state (red).
Positive tipping point in society

The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report defines a tipping point as a "critical threshold beyond which a system reorganizes, often abruptly and/or irreversibly". It can be brought about by a small disturbance causing a disproportionately large change in the system. It can also be associated with self-reinforcing feedbacks, which could lead to changes in the climate system irreversible on a human timescale. For any particular climate component, the shift from one state to a new stable state may take many decades or centuries.

The 2019 IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate defines a tipping point as: "A level of change in system properties beyond which a system reorganises, often in a non-linear manner, and does not return to the initial state even if the drivers of the change are abated. For the climate system, the term refers to a critical threshold at which global or regional climate changes from one stable state to another stable state."

In ecosystems and in social systems, a tipping point can trigger a regime shift, a major systems reorganisation into a new stable state. Such regime shifts need not be harmful. In the context of the climate crisis, the tipping point metaphor is sometimes used in a positive sense, such as to refer to shifts in public opinion in favor of action to mitigate climate change, or the potential for minor policy changes to rapidly accelerate the transition to a green economy.

Comparison of tipping points

Scientists have identified many elements in the climate system which may have tipping points. In the early 2000s the IPCC began considering the possibility of tipping points, originally referred to as large-scale discontinuities. At that time the IPCC concluded they would only be likely in the event of global warming of 4 °C (7.2 °F) or more above preindustrial times, and another early assessment placed most tipping point thresholds at 3–5 °C (5.4–9.0 °F) above 1980–1999 average warming. Since then estimates for global warming thresholds have generally fallen, with some thought to be possible in the Paris Agreement range (1.5–2 °C (2.7–3.6 °F)) by 2016. As of 2021 tipping points are considered to have significant probability at today's warming level of just over 1 °C (1.8 °F), with high probability above 2 °C (3.6 °F) of global warming. Some tipping points may be close to being crossed or have already been crossed, like those of the ice sheets in West Antarctic and Greenland, warm-water coral reefs, and the Amazon rainforest.

As of September 2022, nine global core tipping elements and seven regional impact tipping elements have been identified. Out of those, one regional and three global climate elements are estimated to likely pass a tipping point if global warming reaches 1.5 °C (2.7 °F), namely Greenland ice sheet collapse, West Antarctic ice sheet collapse, tropical coral reef die off, and boreal permafrost abrupt thaw. Two further tipping points are forecast as likely if warming continues to approach 2 °C (3.6 °F): Barents sea ice abrupt loss, and the Labrador Sea subpolar gyre collapse.

Global core tipping elements
Proposed climate tipping element (and tipping point) Threshold ( °C) Timescale (years) Maximum Impact ( °C)
Estimated Minimum Maximum Estimated Minimum Maximum Global Regional
Greenland Ice Sheet (collapse) 1.5 0.8 3.0 10,000 1,000 15,000 0.13 0.5 to 3.0
West Antarctic Ice Sheet (collapse) 1.5 1.0 3.0 2,000 500 13,000 0.05 1.0
Labrador-Irminger Seas/SPG Convection (collapse) 1.8 1.1 3.8 10 5 50 -0.5 -3.0
East Antarctic Subglacial Basins (collapse) 3.0 2.0 6.0 2,000 500 10,000 0.05 ?
Arctic Winter Sea Ice (collapse) 6.3 4.5 8.7 20 10 100 0.6 0.6 to 1.2
East Antarctic Ice Sheet (collapse) 7.5 5.0 10.0 ? 10,000 ? 0.6 2.0
Amazon Rainforest (dieback) 3.5 2.0 6.0 100 50 200 0.1 (partial) 0.2 (total) 0.4 to 2.0
Boreal Permafrost (collapse) 4.0 3.0 6.0 50 10 300 0.2 - 0.4 ~
Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (collapse) 4.0 1.4 8.0 50 15 300 -0.5 -4 to -10
  1. The paper also provides the same estimate in terms of equivalent emissions: partial dieback would be equivalent to the emissions of 30 billion tonnes of carbon, while total dieback would be equivalent to 75 billion tonnes of carbon.
  2. The paper also provides the same estimate in terms of emissions: between 125 and 250 billion tonnes of carbon and between 175 and 350 billion tonnes of carbon equivalent.
Regional impact tipping elements
Proposed climate tipping element (and tipping point) Threshold ( °C) Timescale (years) Maximum Impact ( °C)
Estimated Minimum Maximum Estimated Minimum Maximum Global Regional
Low-latitude Coral Reefs (dieoff) 1.5 1.0 2.0 10 ~ ~ ~ ~
Boreal Permafrost (abrupt thaw) 1.5 1.0 2.3 200 100 300 0.04 per °C by 2100; 0.11 per °C by 2300 ~
Barents Sea Ice (abrupt loss) 1.6 1.5 1.7 25 ? ? ~ +
Mountain Glaciers (loss) 2.0 1.5 3.0 200 50 1,000 0.08 +
Sahel and W.African Monsoon (greening) 2.8 2.0 3.5 50 10 500 ~ +
Boreal Forest (southern dieoff) 4.0 1.4 5.0 100 50 ? net -0.18 -0.5 to -2
Boreal Forest (northern expansion) 4.0 1.5 7.2 100 40 ? net +0.14 0.5-1.0
  1. The paper clarifies that this represents a 50% increase of gradual permafrost thaw: it also provides the same estimate in terms of emissions per each degree of warming: 10 billion tonnes of carbon and 14 billion tonnes of carbon equivalent by 2100, and 25/35 billion tonnes of carbon/carbon equivalent by 2300.
  2. The loss of these forests would be equivalent to the emissions of 52 billion tons of carbon, but this would be more than offset by the area's albedo effect increasing and reflecting more sunlight.
  3. Extra forest growth here would absorb around 6 billion tons of carbon, but because this area receives a lot of sunlight, this is very minor when compared to reduced albedo, as this vegetation absorbs more heat than the snow-covered ground it moves into.

Tipping points in the cryosphere

Greenland ice sheet disintegration

Changes in extent (colored lines) and thickness (black lines) of the Greenland ice sheet over time, showing its rapid, sustained melting since 2000

The Greenland ice sheet is the second largest ice sheet in the world, and completely melting the water which it holds would raise sea levels globally by 7.2 metres (24 ft). Due to global warming, the ice sheet is currently melting at an accelerating rate, adding almost 1 mm to global sea levels every year. Around half of the ice loss occurs via surface melting, and the remainder occurs at the base of the ice sheet where it touches the sea, by calving (breaking off) icebergs from its margins.

The Greenland ice sheet has a tipping point because of the melt-elevation feedback. Surface melting reduces the height of the ice sheet, and air at a lower altitude is warmer. The ice sheet is then exposed to warmer temperatures, accelerating its melt. A 2021 analysis of sub-glacial sediment at the bottom of a 1.4 kilometres (0.87 mi) Greenland ice core finds that the Greenland ice sheet melted away at least once during the last million years, and therefore strongly suggests that its tipping point is below the 2.5 °C (4.5 °F) maximum temperature increase over the preindustrial conditions observed over that period. There is some evidence that the Greenland ice sheet is losing stability, and getting close to a tipping point.

West Antarctic ice sheet disintegration

A topographic and bathymetric map of Antarctica without its ice sheets, assuming constant sea levels and no post-glacial rebound

The West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) is a large ice sheet in Antarctica; in places more than 4 kilometres (2.5 mi) thick. It sits on bedrock mostly below sea level, having formed a deep subglacial basin due to the weight of the ice sheet over millions of years. As such, it is in contact with the heat from the ocean which makes it vulnerable to fast and irreversible ice loss. A tipping point could be reached once the WAIS's grounding lines (the point at which ice no longer sits on rock and becomes floating ice shelves) retreat behind the edge of the subglacial basin, resulting in self-sustaining retreat in to the deeper basin - a process known as the Marine Ice Sheet Instability (MISI). Thinning and collapse of the WAIS's ice shelves is helping to accelerate this grounding line retreat. If completely melted, the WAIS would contribute around 3.3 metres (11 ft) of sea level rise over thousands of years.

Ice loss from the WAIS is accelerating, and some outlet glaciers are estimated to be close to or possibly already beyond the point of self-sustaining retreat. The paleo record suggests that during the past few hundred thousand years, the WAIS largely disappeared in response to similar levels of warming and CO2 emission scenarios projected for the next few centuries.

Like with the other ice sheets, there is a counteracting negative feedback - greater warming also intensifies the effects of climate change on the water cycle, which result in an increased precipitation over the ice sheet in the form of snow during the winter, which would freeze on the surface, and this increase in the surface mass balance (SMB) counteracts some fraction of the ice loss. In the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, it was suggested that this effect could potentially overpower increased ice loss under the higher levels of warming and result in small net ice gain, but by the time of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, improved modelling had proven that the glacier breakup would consistently accelerate at a faster rate.

East Antarctic ice sheet disintegration

The East Antarctic ice sheet is the largest and thickest ice sheet on Earth, with the maximum thickness of 4,800 metres (3.0 mi). A complete disintegration would raise the global sea levels by 53.3 metres (175 ft), but this may not occur until global warming of 10 °C (18 °F), while the loss of two-thirds of its volume may require at least 6 °C (11 °F) of warming to trigger. Its melt would also occur over a longer timescale than the loss of any other ice on the planet, taking no less than 10,000 years to finish. However, the subglacial basin portions of the East Antarctic ice sheet may be vulnerable to tipping at lower levels of warming. The Wilkes Basin is of particular concern, as it holds enough ice to raise sea levels by about 3–4 metres (10–13 ft).

Arctic sea ice decline

Average decadal extent and area of the Arctic Ocean sea ice since 1979.
Average decadal extent and area of the Arctic Ocean sea ice since the start of satellite observations
Annual trend in the Arctic sea ice extent and area for the 2011-2022 time period.
Annual trend in the Arctic sea ice extent and area for the 2011–2022 time period

Arctic sea ice was once identified as a potential tipping element. The loss of sunlight-reflecting sea ice during summer exposes the (dark) ocean, which would warm. Arctic sea ice cover is likely to melt entirely under even relatively low levels of warming, and it was hypothesised that this could eventually transfer enough heat to the ocean to prevent sea ice recovery even if the global warming is reversed. Modelling now shows that this heat transfer during the Arctic summer does not overcome the cooling and the formation of new ice during the Arctic winter. As such, the loss of Arctic ice during the summer is not a tipping point for as long as the Arctic winter remains cool enough to enable the formation of new Arctic sea ice. However, if the higher levels of warming prevent the formation of new Arctic ice even during winter, then this change may become irreversible. Consequently, Arctic Winter Sea Ice is included as a potential tipping point in a 2022 assessment.

Additionally, the same assessment argued that while the rest of the ice in the Arctic Ocean may recover from a total summertime loss during the winter, ice cover in the Barents Sea may not reform during the winter even below 2 °C (3.6 °F) of warming. This is because the Barents Sea is already the fastest-warming part of the Arctic: in 2021–2022 it was found that while the warming within the Arctic Circle has already been nearly four times faster than the global average since 1979, Barents Sea warmed up to seven times faster than the global average. This tipping point matters because of the decade-long history of research into the connections between the state of Barents-Kara Sea ice and the weather patterns elsewhere in Eurasia.

Retreat of mountain glaciers

Projected loss of mountain glaciers over the 21st century, for different amounts of global warming

Mountain glaciers are the largest repository of land-bound ice after the Greenland and the Antarctica ice sheets, and they are also undergoing melting as the result of climate change. A glacier tipping point is when it enters a disequilibrium state with the climate and will melt away unless the temperatures go down. Examples include glaciers of the North Cascade Range, where even in 2005 67% of the glaciers observed were in disequilibrium and will not survive the continuation of the present climate, or the French Alps, where The Argentière and Mer de Glace glaciers are expected to disappear completely by end of the 21st century if current climate trends persist. Altogether, it was estimated in 2023 that 49% of the world's glaciers would be lost by 2100 at 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) of global warming, and 83% of glaciers would be lost at 4 °C (7.2 °F). This would amount to one quarter and nearly half of mountain glacier *mass* loss, respectively, as only the largest, most resilient glaciers would survive the century. This ice loss would also contribute ~9 cm (3+12 in) and ~15 cm (6 in) to sea level rise, while the current likely trajectory of 2.7 °C (4.9 °F) would result in the SLR contribution of ~11 cm (4+12 in) by 2100.

The absolute largest amount of glacier ice is located in the Hindu Kush Himalaya region, which is colloquially known as the Earth's Third Pole as the result. It is believed that one third of that ice will be lost by 2100 even if the warming is limited to 1.5 °C (2.7 °F), while the intermediate and severe climate change scenarios (Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) 4.5 and 8.5) are likely to lead to the losses of 50% and >67% of the region's glaciers over the same timeframe. Glacier melt is projected to accelerate regional river flows until the amount of meltwater peaks around 2060, going into an irreversible decline afterwards. Since regional precipitation will continue to increase even as the glacier meltwater contribution declines, annual river flows are only expected to diminish in the western basins where contribution from the monsoon is low: however, irrigation and hydropower generation would still have to adjust to greater interannual variability and lower pre-monsoon flows in all of the region's rivers.

Permafrost thaw

Ground collapse caused by abrupt permafrost thaw in Herschel Island, Canada, 2013
Feedback processes related to land and subsea permafrost

Perennially frozen ground, or permafrost, covers large fractions of land – mainly in Siberia, Alaska, northern Canada and the Tibetan plateau – and can be up to a kilometre thick. Subsea permafrost up to 100 metres thick also occurs on the sea floor under part of the Arctic Ocean. This frozen ground holds vast amounts of carbon from plants and animals that have died and decomposed over thousands of years. Scientists believe there is nearly twice as much carbon in permafrost than is present in Earth's atmosphere.

As the climate warms and the permafrost begins to thaw, carbon dioxide and methane are released into the atmosphere. With higher temperatures, microbes become active and decompose the biological material in the permafrost, some of which is irreversibly lost. While most thaw is gradual and will take centuries, abrupt thaw can occur in some places where permafrost is rich in large ice masses, which once melted cause the ground to slump or form 'thermokarst' lakes over years to decades. These processes can become self-sustaining, leading to localised tipping dynamics, and could increase greenhouse gas emissions by around 40%. Because CO2 and methane are both greenhouse gases, they act as a self-reinforcing feedback on permafrost thaw, but are unlikely to lead to a global tipping point or runaway warming process.

Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC)

The Northern part of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

The Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC), also known as the Gulf Stream System, is a large system of ocean currents. It is driven by differences in the density of water; colder and more salty water is heavier than warmer fresh water. The AMOC acts as a conveyor belt, sending warm surface water from the tropics north, and carrying cold fresh water back south. As warm water flows northwards, some evaporates which increases salinity. It also cools when it is exposed to cooler air. Cold, salty water is more dense and slowly begins to sink. Several kilometres below the surface, cold, dense water begins to move south. Increased rainfall and the melting of ice due to global warming dilutes the salty surface water, and warming further decreases its density. The lighter water is less able to sink, slowing down the circulation.

Theory, simplified models, and reconstructions of abrupt changes in the past suggest the AMOC has a tipping point. If freshwater input from melting glaciers reaches a certain threshold, it could collapse into a state of reduced flow. Even after melting stops, the AMOC may not return to its current state. It is unlikely that the AMOC will tip in the 21st century, but it may do so before 2300 if greenhouse gas emissions are very high. A weakening of 24% to 39% is expected depending on greenhouse emissions, even without tipping behaviour. If the AMOC does shut down, a new stable state could emerge that lasts for thousands of years, possibly triggering other tipping points.

In 2021, a study which used a primitive finite-difference ocean model estimated that AMOC collapse could be invoked by a sufficiently fast increase in ice melt even if it never reached the common thresholds for tipping obtained from slower change. Thus, it implied that the AMOC collapse is more likely than what is usually estimated by the complex and large-scale climate models. Another 2021 study found early-warning signals in a set of AMOC indices, suggesting that the AMOC may be close to tipping. However, it was contradicted by another study published in the same journal the following year, which found a largely stable AMOC which had so far not been affected by climate change beyond its own natural variability. Two more studies published in 2022 have also suggested that the modelling approaches commonly used to evaluate AMOC appear to overestimate the risk of its collapse. In October 2024, 44 climate scientists published an open letter, claiming that according to scientific studies in the past few years, the risk of AMOC collapse has been greatly underestimated, it can occur in the next few decades, with devastating impacts especially for Nordic countries. An August 2025 study concluded that the collapse of AMOC could start as early as the 2060s.

North subpolar gyre

Modelled 21st century warming under the "intermediate" climate change scenario (top). The potential collapse of the subpolar gyre in this scenario (middle). The collapse of the entire AMOC (bottom).

Some climate models indicate that the deep convection in Labrador-Irminger Seas could collapse under certain global warming scenarios, which would then collapse the entire circulation in the North subpolar gyre. It is considered unlikely to recover even if the temperature is returned to a lower level, making it an example of a climate tipping point. This would result in rapid cooling, with implications for economic sectors, agriculture industry, water resources and energy management in Western Europe and the East Coast of the United States. Frajka-Williams et al. 2017 pointed out that recent changes in cooling of the subpolar gyre, warm temperatures in the subtropics and cool anomalies over the tropics, increased the spatial distribution of meridional gradient in sea surface temperatures, which is not captured by the AMO Index.

A 2021 study found that this collapse occurs in only four CMIP6 models out of 35 analyzed. However, only 11 models out of 35 can simulate North Atlantic Current with a high degree of accuracy, and this includes all four models which simulate collapse of the subpolar gyre. As the result, the study estimated the risk of an abrupt cooling event over Europe caused by the collapse of the current at 36.4%, which is lower than the 45.5% chance estimated by the previous generation of models. In 2022, a paper suggested that previous disruption of subpolar gyre was connected to the Little Ice Age.

Southern Ocean overturning circulation

Since the 1970s, the upper cell of the circulation has strengthened, while the lower cell weakened.

Southern ocean overturning circulation itself consists of two parts, the upper and the lower cell. The smaller upper cell is most strongly affected by winds due to its proximity to the surface, while the behaviour of the larger lower cell is defined by the temperature and salinity of Antarctic bottom water. The strength of both halves had undergone substantial changes in the recent decades: the flow of the upper cell has increased by 50–60% since 1970s, while the lower cell has weakened by 10–20%. This has been partly due to the natural cycle of Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation, and climate change has played a substantial role in both trends, as it had altered the Southern Annular Mode weather pattern, while the massive growth of ocean heat content in the Southern Ocean has increased the melting of the Antarctic ice sheets, and this fresh meltwater dilutes salty Antarctic bottom water.

Paleoclimate evidence shows that the entire circulation had strongly weakened or outright collapsed before: some preliminary research suggests that such a collapse may become likely once global warming reaches levels between 1.7 °C (3.1 °F) and 3 °C (5.4 °F). However, there is far less certainty than with the estimates for most other tipping points in the climate system. Even if the circulation's collapse starts in the near future, it is unlikely to be complete until close to 2300, Similarly, impacts such as the reduction in precipitation in the Southern Hemisphere, with a corresponding increase in the North, or a decline of fisheries in the Southern Ocean with a potential collapse of certain marine ecosystems, are also expected to unfold over multiple centuries.

Tipping points in terrestrial systems

As of 2022, 20% of the Amazon rainforest has been "transformed" (deforested) and another 6% has been "highly degraded", causing Amazon Watch to warn that the Amazonia is in the midst of a tipping point crisis.

Amazon rainforest dieback

The Amazon rainforest is the largest tropical rainforest in the world. It is twice as big as India and spans nine countries in South America. It produces around half of its own rainfall by recycling moisture through evaporation and transpiration as air moves across the forest. This moisture recycling expands the area in which there is enough rainfall for rainforest to be maintained, and without it one model indicates around 40% of the current forest area would be too dry to sustain rainforest. However, when forest is lost via climate change (from droughts and wildfires) or deforestation, there will be less rain in downwind regions, increasing tree stress and mortality there. Eventually, if enough forest is lost a threshold can be reached beyond which large parts of the remaining rainforest may die off and transform into drier degraded forest or savanna landscapes, particularly in the drier south and east. In 2022, a study reported that the rainforest has been losing resilience since the early 2000s. Resilience is measured by recovery-time from short-term perturbations, with delayed return to equilibrium of the rainforest termed as critical slowing down. The observed loss of resilience reinforces the theory that the rainforest could be approaching a critical transition, although it cannot determine exactly when or if a tipping point will be reached.

Boreal forest biome shift

During the last quarter of the twentieth century, the zone of latitude occupied by taiga experienced some of the greatest temperature increases on Earth. Winter temperatures have increased more than summer temperatures. In summer, the daily low temperature has increased more than the daily high temperature. It has been hypothesised that the boreal environments have only a few states which are stable in the long term - a treeless tundra/steppe, a forest with >75% tree cover and an open woodland with ≈20% and ≈45% tree cover. Thus, continued climate change would be able to force at least some of the presently existing taiga forests into one of the two woodland states or even into a treeless steppe - but it could also shift tundra areas into woodland or forest states as they warm and become more suitable for tree growth.

The response of six tree species common in Quebec's forests to 2 °C (3.6 °F) and 4 °C (7.2 °F) warming under different precipitation levels

These trends were first detected in the Canadian boreal forests in the early 2010s, and summer warming had also been shown to increase water stress and reduce tree growth in dry areas of the southern boreal forest in central Alaska and portions of far eastern Russia. In Siberia, the taiga is converting from predominantly needle-shedding larch trees to evergreen conifers in response to a warming climate.

Subsequent research in Canada found that even in the forests where biomass trends did not change, there was a substantial shift towards the deciduous broad-leaved trees with higher drought tolerance over the past 65 years. A Landsat analysis of 100,000 undisturbed sites found that the areas with low tree cover became greener in response to warming, but tree mortality (browning) became the dominant response as the proportion of existing tree cover increased. A 2018 study of the seven tree species dominant in the Eastern Canadian forests found that while 2 °C (3.6 °F) warming alone increases their growth by around 13% on average, water availability is much more important than temperature. Also, further warming of up to 4 °C (7.2 °F) would result in substantial declines unless matched by increases in precipitation.

A 2021 paper had confirmed that the boreal forests are much more strongly affected by climate change than the other forest types in Canada and projected that most of the eastern Canadian boreal forests would reach a tipping point around 2080 under the RCP 8.5 scenario, which represents the largest potential increase in anthropogenic emissions. Another 2021 study projected that under the moderate SSP2-4.5 scenario, boreal forests would experience a 15% worldwide increase in biomass by the end of the century, but this would be more than offset by the 41% biomass decline in the tropics. In 2022, the results of a 5-year warming experiment in North America had shown that the juveniles of tree species which currently dominate the southern margins of the boreal forests fare the worst in response to even 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) or 3.1 °C (5.6 °F) of warming and the associated reductions in precipitation. While the temperate species which would benefit from such conditions are also present in the southern boreal forests, they are both rare and have slower growth rates.

Sahel greening

Greening of the Sahel between 1982 and 1999

The Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C and the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report indicate that global warming will likely result in increased precipitation across most of East Africa, parts of Central Africa and the principal wet season of West Africa. However, there is significant uncertainty related to these projections especially for West Africa.Currently, the Sahel is becoming greener but precipitation has not fully recovered to levels reached in the mid-20th century.

A study from 2022 concluded: "Clearly the existence of a future tipping threshold for the WAM (West African Monsoon) and Sahel remains uncertain as does its sign but given multiple past abrupt shifts, known weaknesses in current models, and huge regional impacts but modest global climate feedback, we retain the Sahel/WAM as a potential regional impact tipping element (low confidence)."

Some simulations of global warming and increased carbon dioxide concentrations have shown a substantial increase in precipitation in the Sahel/Sahara. This and the increased plant growth directly induced by carbon dioxide could lead to an expansion of vegetation into present-day desert, although it might be accompanied by a northward shift of the desert, i.e. a drying of northernmost Africa.

Vulnerable stores of tropical peat carbon: Cuvette Centrale peatland

Map of Cuvette Centrale location in the Congo Basin. Three graphs portray the evolution of its peatland carbon content over the past 20,000 years, as reconstructed from three peat cores.

In 2017, it was discovered that 40% of the Cuvette Centrale wetlands are underlain with a dense layer of peat, which contains around 30 petagrams (billions of tons) of carbon. This amounts to 28% of all tropical peat carbon, equivalent to the carbon contained in all the forests of the Congo Basin. In other words, while this peatland only covers 4% of the Congo Basin area, its carbon content is equal to that of all trees in the other 96%. It was then estimated that if all of that peat burned, the atmosphere would absorb the equivalent of 20 years of current United States carbon dioxide emissions, or three years of all anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

This threat prompted the signing of Brazzaville Declaration in March 2018: an agreement between Democratic Republic of Congo, the Republic of Congo and Indonesia (a country with longer experience of managing its own tropical peatlands) aiming to promote better management and conservation of this region. However, 2022 research by the same team which had originally discovered this peatland not only revised its area (from the original estimate of 145,500 square kilometres (56,200 sq mi) to 167,600 square kilometres (64,700 sq mi)) and depth (from 2 m (6.6 ft) to (1.7 m (5.6 ft)) but also noted that only 8% of this peat carbon is currently covered by the existing protected areas. For comparison, 26% of its peat is located in areas open to logging, mining or palm oil plantations, and nearly all of this area is open for fossil fuel exploration.

Even in the absence of local disturbance from these activities, this area is the most vulnerable store of tropical peat carbon in the world, as its climate is already much drier than that of the other tropical peatlands in the Southeast Asia and the Amazon rainforest. A 2022 study suggests that the geologically recent conditions between 7,500 years ago and 2,000 years ago were already dry enough to cause substantial peat release from this area, and that these conditions are likely to recur in the near future under continued climate change. In this case, Cuvette Centrale would act as one of the tipping points in the climate system at some yet unknown time.

Other tipping points

Coral reef die-off

Bleached coral with normal coral in the background

Around 500 million people around the world depend on coral reefs for food, income, tourism and coastal protection. Since the 1980s, this is being threatened by the increase in sea surface temperatures which is triggering mass bleaching of coral, especially in sub-tropical regions. A sustained ocean temperature spike of 1 °C (1.8 °F) above average is enough to cause bleaching. Under heat stress, corals expel the small colourful algae which live in their tissues, which causes them to turn white. The algae, known as zooxanthellae, have a symbiotic relationship with coral such that without them, the corals slowly die. After these zooxanthellae have disappeared, the corals are vulnerable to a transition towards a seaweed-dominated ecosystem, making it very difficult to shift back to a coral-dominated ecosystem. The IPCC estimates that by the time temperatures have risen to 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) above pre-industrial times, "Coral reefs... are projected to decline by a further 70–90%"; and that if the world warms by 2 °C (3.6 °F), they will become extremely rare.

Break-up of equatorial stratocumulus clouds

In 2019, a study employed a large eddy simulation model to estimate that equatorial stratocumulus clouds could break up and scatter when CO2 levels rise above 1,200 ppm (almost three times higher than the current levels, and over 4 times greater than the preindustrial levels). The study estimated that this would cause a surface warming of about 8 °C (14 °F) globally and 10 °C (18 °F) in the subtropics, which would be in addition to at least 4 °C (7.2 °F) already caused by such CO2 concentrations. In addition, stratocumulus clouds would not reform until the CO2 concentrations drop to a much lower level. It was suggested that this finding could help explain past episodes of unusually rapid warming such as Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum. In 2020, further work from the same authors revealed that in their large eddy simulation, this tipping point cannot be stopped with solar radiation modification: in a hypothetical scenario where very high CO2 emissions continue for a long time but are offset with extensive solar radiation modification, the break-up of stratocumulus clouds is simply delayed until CO2 concentrations hit 1,700 ppm, at which point it would still cause around 5 °C (9.0 °F) of unavoidable warming.

However, because large eddy simulation models are simpler and smaller-scale than the general circulation models used for climate projections, with limited representation of atmospheric processes like subsidence, this finding is currently considered speculative. Other scientists say that the model used in that study unrealistically extrapolates the behavior of small cloud areas onto all cloud decks, and that it is incapable of simulating anything other than a rapid transition, with some comparing it to "a knob with two settings". Additionally, CO2 concentrations would only reach 1,200 ppm if the world follows Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5, which represents the highest possible greenhouse gas emission scenario and involves a massive expansion of coal infrastructure. In that case, 1,200 ppm would be passed shortly after 2100.

Cascading tipping points

A proposed tipping cascade with four tipping elements

Crossing a threshold in one part of the climate system may trigger another tipping element to tip into a new state. Such sequences of thresholds are called cascading tipping points, an example of a domino effect. Ice loss in West Antarctica and Greenland will significantly alter ocean circulation. Sustained warming of the northern high latitudes as a result of this process could activate tipping elements in that region, such as permafrost degradation, and boreal forest dieback. Thawing permafrost is a threat multiplier because it holds roughly twice as much carbon as the amount currently circulating in the atmosphere. Loss of ice in Greenland likely destabilises the West Antarctic ice sheet via sea level rise, and vice-versa, especially if Greenland were to melt first as West Antarctica is particularly vulnerable to contact with warm sea water.

A 2021 study with three million computer simulations of a climate model showed that nearly one-third of those simulations resulted in domino effects, even when temperature increases were limited to 2 °C (3.6 °F) – the upper limit set by the Paris Agreement in 2015. The authors of the study said that the science of tipping points is so complex that there is great uncertainty as to how they might unfold, but nevertheless, argued that the possibility of cascading tipping points represents "an existential threat to civilisation". A network model analysis suggested that temporary overshoots of climate change – increasing global temperature beyond Paris Agreement goals temporarily as often projected – can substantially increase risks of climate tipping cascades ("by up to 72% compared with non-overshoot scenarios").

Formerly considered tipping elements

Earlier (2008) list of tipping elements in the climate system. When compared to later lists, the major differences are that in 2008 ENSO, Indian summer monsoon, Arctic ozone hole and all of Arctic sea ice were all listed as tipping points. Labrador-Irminger circulation, mountain glaciers and East Antarctic ice however were not included. This 2008 list also includes Antarctic bottom water (part of the Southern Ocean overturning circulation), which was left out of the 2022 list, but included in some subsequent ones.

The possibility that the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a tipping element had attracted attention in the past. Normally strong winds blow west across the South Pacific Ocean from South America to Australia. Every two to seven years, the winds weaken due to pressure changes and the air and water in the middle of the Pacific warms up, causing changes in wind movement patterns around the globe. This is known as El Niño and typically leads to droughts in India, Indonesia and Brazil, and increased flooding in Peru. In 2015/2016, this caused food shortages affecting over 60 million people. El Niño-induced droughts may increase the likelihood of forest fires in the Amazon. The threshold for tipping was estimated to be between 3.5 °C (6.3 °F) and 7 °C (13 °F) of global warming in 2016. After tipping, the system would be in a more permanent El Niño state, rather than oscillating between different states. This has happened in Earth's past, in the Pliocene, but the layout of the ocean was significantly different from now. So far, there is no definitive evidence indicating changes in ENSO behaviour, and the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report concluded that it is "virtually certain that the ENSO will remain the dominant mode of interannual variability in a warmer world". Consequently, the 2022 assessment no longer includes it in the list of likely tipping elements.

The Indian summer monsoon is another part of the climate system which was considered suspectible to irreversible collapse in the earlier research. However, more recent research has demonstrated that warming tends to strengthen the Indian monsoon, and it is projected to strengthen in the future.

Methane hydrate deposits in the Arctic were once thought to be vulnerable to a rapid dissociation which would have a large impact on global temperatures, in a dramatic scenario known as a clathrate gun hypothesis. Later research found that it takes millennia for methane hydrates to respond to warming, while methane emissions from the seafloor rarely transfer from the water column into the atmosphere. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report states "It is very unlikely that gas clathrates (mostly methane) in deeper terrestrial permafrost and subsea clathrates will lead to a detectable departure from the emissions trajectory during this century."

Mathematical theory

Illustration of three types of tipping point; (a), (b) noise-, (c), (d) bifurcation- and (e), (f) rate-induced. (a), (c), (e) example time-series (coloured lines) through the tipping point with black solid lines indicating stable climate states (e.g. low or high rainfall) and dashed lines represent the boundary between stable states. (b), (d), (f) stability landscapes provide an understanding for the different types of tipping point. The valleys represent different climate states the system can occupy with hill tops separating the stable states.

Tipping point behaviour in the climate can be described in mathematical terms. Three types of tipping points have been identified—bifurcation, noise-induced and rate-dependent.

Bifurcation-induced tipping

Bifurcation-induced tipping happens when a particular parameter in the climate (for instance a change in environmental conditions or forcing), passes a critical level – at which point a bifurcation takes place – and what was a stable state loses its stability or simply disappears. The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) is an example of a tipping element that can show bifurcation-induced tipping. Slow changes to the bifurcation parameters in this system – the salinity and temperature of the water – may push the circulation towards collapse.

Many types of bifurcations show hysteresis, which is the dependence of the state of a system on its history. For instance, depending on how warm it was in the past, there can be differing amounts of ice on the poles at the same concentration of greenhouse gases or temperature.

Early warning signals

For tipping points that occur because of a bifurcation, it may be possible to detect whether a system is getting closer to a tipping point, as it becomes less resilient to perturbations on approach of the tipping threshold. These systems display critical slowing down, with an increased memory (rising autocorrelation) and variance. Depending on the nature of the tipping system, there may be other types of early warning signals. Abrupt change is not an early warning signal (EWS) for tipping points, as abrupt change can also occur if the changes are reversible to the control parameter.

These EWSs are often developed and tested using time series from the paleo record, like sediments, ice caps, and tree rings, where past examples of tipping can be observed. It is not always possible to say whether increased variance and autocorrelation is a precursor to tipping, or caused by internal variability, for instance in the case of the collapse of the AMOC. Quality limitations of paleodata further complicate the development of EWSs. They have been developed for detecting tipping due to drought in forests in California, and melting of the Pine Island Glacier in West Antarctica, among other systems. Using early warning signals (increased autocorrelation and variance of the melt rate time series), it has been suggested that the Greenland ice sheet is currently losing resilience, consistent with modelled early warning signals of the ice sheet.

Human-induced changes in the climate system may be too fast for early warning signals to become evident, especially in systems with inertia.

Noise-induced tipping

Noise-induced tipping is the transition from one state to another due to random fluctuations or internal variability of the system. Noise-induced transitions do not show any of the early warning signals which occur with bifurcations. This means they are unpredictable because the underlying potential does not change. Because they are unpredictable, such occurrences are often described as a "one-in-x-year" event. An example is the Dansgaard–Oeschger events during the last ice age, with 25 occurrences of sudden climate fluctuations over a 500-year period.

Rate-induced tipping

Rate-induced tipping occurs when a change in the environment is faster than the force that restores the system to its stable state. In peatlands, for instance, after years of relative stability, rate-induced tipping can lead to an "explosive release of soil carbon from peatlands into the atmosphere" – sometimes known as "compost bomb instability". The AMOC may also show rate-induced tipping: if the rate of ice melt increases too fast, it may collapse, even before the ice melt reaches the critical value where the system would undergo a bifurcation.

Potential impacts

Schematic of some possible interactions and cascading effects between the Earth's climate system and humanity's social system

Tipping points can have very severe impacts. They can exacerbate current dangerous impacts of climate change, or give rise to new impacts. Some potential tipping points would take place abruptly, such as disruptions to the Indian monsoon, with severe impacts on food security for hundreds of millions. Other impacts would likely take place over longer timescales, such as the melting of the ice caps. The circa 10 metres (33 ft) of sea level rise from the combined melt of Greenland and West Antarctica would require moving many cities inland over the course of centuries, but would also accelerate sea level rise this century, with Antarctic ice sheet instability projected to expose 120 million more people to annual floods in a mid-emissions scenario. A collapse of the Atlantic Overturning Circulation would cause over 10 °C of cooling in parts of Europe, cause drying in Europe, Central America, West Africa, and southern Asia, and lead to about 1 metre (3+12 ft) of sea level rise in the North Atlantic. The impacts of AMOC collapse would have serious implications for food security, with one projection showing reduced yields of key crops across most world regions, with for example arable agriculture becoming economically infeasible in Britain. These impacts could happen simultaneously in the case of cascading tipping points. A review of abrupt changes over the last 30,000 years showed that tipping points can lead to a large set of cascading impacts in climate, ecological and social systems. For instance, the abrupt termination of the African humid period cascaded, and desertification and regime shifts led to the retreat of pastoral societies in North Africa and a change of dynasty in Egypt.

Some scholars have proposed a threshold which, if crossed, could trigger multiple tipping points and self-reinforcing feedback loops that would prevent stabilisation of the climate, causing much greater warming and sea-level rises and leading to severe disruption to ecosystems, society, and economies. This scenario is sometimes called the Hothouse Earth scenario. The researchers proposed that this scenario could unfold beyond a threshold of around 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. However, while this scenario is possible, the existence and value of this threshold remains speculative, and doubts have been raised if tipping points would lock in much extra warming in the shorter term. Decisions taken over the next decade could influence the climate of the planet for tens to hundreds of thousands of years and potentially even lead to conditions which are inhospitable to current human societies. The report also states that there is a possibility of a cascade of tipping points being triggered even if the goal outlined in the Paris Agreement to limit warming to 1.5–2.0 °C (2.7–3.6 °F) is achieved.

Geological timescales

Meltwater pulse 1A was a period of abrupt sea level rise around 14,000 years ago. It may be an example of a tipping point.

The geological record shows many abrupt changes on geologic time scales that suggest tipping points may have been crossed in pre-historic times. For instance, the Dansgaard–Oeschger events during the last ice age were periods of abrupt warming (within decades) in Greenland and Europe, that may have involved the abrupt changes in major ocean currents. During the deglaciation in the early Holocene, sea level rise was not smooth, but rose abruptly during meltwater pulses. The monsoon in North Africa saw abrupt changes on decadal timescales during the African humid period. This period, spanning from 15,000 to 5,000 years ago, also ended suddenly in a drier state.

Runaway greenhouse effect

A runaway greenhouse effect is a tipping point so extreme that oceans evaporate and the water vapour escapes to space, an irreversible climate state that happened on Venus. A runaway greenhouse effect has virtually no chance of being caused by people. Venus-like conditions on the Earth require a large long-term forcing that is unlikely to occur until the sun brightens by a ten of percents, which will take 600–700 million years.

Climate change feedbacks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The relative magnitude of the top 6 climate change feedbacks and what they influence. Positive feedbacks amplify the global warming response to greenhouse gas emissions and negative feedbacks reduce it. In this chart, the horizontal lengths of the red and blue bars indicate the strength of respective feedbacks.

Climate change feedbacks are natural processes that impact how much global temperatures will increase for a given amount of greenhouse gas emissions. Positive feedbacks amplify global warming while negative feedbacks diminish it. Feedbacks influence both the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the amount of temperature change that happens in response. While emissions are the forcing that causes climate change, feedbacks combine to control climate sensitivity to that forcing.

While the overall sum of feedbacks is negative, it is becoming less negative as greenhouse gas emissions continue. This means that warming is slower than it would be in the absence of feedbacks, but that warming will accelerate if emissions continue at current levels. Net feedbacks will stay negative largely because of increased thermal radiation as the planet warms, which is an effect that is several times larger than any other singular feedback. Accordingly, anthropogenic climate change alone cannot cause a runaway greenhouse effect.

Feedbacks can be divided into physical feedbacks and partially biological feedbacks. Physical feedbacks include decreased surface reflectivity (from diminished snow and ice cover) and increased water vapor in the atmosphere. Water vapor is not only a powerful greenhouse gas, it also influences feedbacks in the distribution of clouds and temperatures in the atmosphere. Biological feedbacks are mostly associated with changes to the rate at which plant matter accumulates CO2 as part of the carbon cycle. The carbon cycle absorbs more than half of CO2 emissions every year into plants and into the ocean. Over the long term the percentage will be reduced as carbon sinks become saturated and higher temperatures lead to effects like drought and wildfires.

Feedback strengths and relationships are estimated through global climate models, with their estimates calibrated against observational data whenever possible. Some feedbacks rapidly impact climate sensitivity, while the feedback response from ice sheets is drawn out over several centuries. Feedbacks can also result in localized differences, such as polar amplification resulting from feedbacks that include reduced snow and ice cover. While basic relationships are well understood, feedback uncertainty exists in certain areas, particularly regarding cloud feedbacks. Carbon cycle uncertainty is driven by the large rates at which CO2 is both absorbed into plants and released when biomass burns or decays. For instance, permafrost thaw produces both CO2 and methane emissions in ways that are difficult to model. Climate change scenarios use models to estimate how Earth will respond to greenhouse gas emissions over time, including how feedbacks will change as the planet warms.

Definition and terminology

The Planck response is the additional thermal radiation objects emit as they get warmer. Whether Planck response is a climate change feedback depends on the context. In climate science the Planck response can be treated as an intrinsic part of warming that is separate from radiative feedbacks and carbon cycle feedbacks. However, the Planck response is included when calculating climate sensitivity.

A feedback that amplifies an initial change is called a positive feedback while a feedback that reduces an initial change is called a negative feedback. Climate change feedbacks are in the context of global warming, so positive feedbacks enhance warming and negative feedbacks diminish it. Naming a feedback positive or negative does not imply that the feedback is good or bad.

The initial change that triggers a feedback may be externally forced, or may arise through the climate system's internal variabilityExternal forcing refers to "a forcing agent outside the climate system causing a change in the climate system" that may push the climate system in the direction of warming or cooling. External forcings may be human-caused (for example, greenhouse gas emissions or land use change) or natural (for example, volcanic eruptions).

Physical feedbacks

Planck response (negative)

Climate change occurs because the amount of thermal radiation absorbed by different parts of the Earth's environment currently exceeds the amount radiated away to space. As the warming increases, outgoing radiation to space increases quickly due to the Planck response, which eventually helps to stabilize the Earth at some higher temperature level

Planck response is "the most fundamental feedback in the climate system". As the temperature of a black body increases, the emission of infrared radiation increases with the fourth power of its absolute temperature according to the Stefan–Boltzmann law. This increases the amount of outgoing radiation back into space as the Earth warms. It is a strong stabilizing response and has sometimes been called the "no-feedback response" because it is an intensive property of a thermodynamic system when considered to be purely a function of temperature. Although Earth has an effective emissivity less than unity, the ideal black body radiation emerges as a separable quantity when investigating perturbations to the planet's outgoing radiation.

The Planck "feedback" or Planck response is the comparable radiative response obtained from analysis of practical observations or global climate models (GCMs). Its expected strength has been most simply estimated from the derivative of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation as −4σT3 = −3.8 W/m2·K (watts per square meter per degree of warming). Accounting from GCM applications has sometimes yielded a reduced strength, as caused by extensive properties of the stratosphere and similar residual artifacts subsequently identified as being absent from such models.

Most extensive "grey body" properties of Earth that influence the outgoing radiation are usually postulated to be encompassed by the other GCM feedback components, and to be distributed in accordance with a particular forcing-feedback framework. Ideally the Planck response strength obtained from GCMs, indirect measurements, and black body estimates will further converge as analysis methods continue to mature.

Water vapor feedback (positive)

Atmospheric gases only absorb some wavelengths of energy but are transparent to others. The absorption patterns of water vapor (blue peaks) and carbon dioxide (pink peaks) overlap in some wavelengths.

According to Clausius–Clapeyron relation, saturation vapor pressure is higher in a warmer atmosphere, and so the absolute amount of water vapor will increase as the atmosphere warms. It is sometimes also called the specific humidity feedback, because relative humidity (RH) stays practically constant over the oceans, but it decreases over land. This occurs because land experiences faster warming than the ocean, and a decline in RH has been observed after the year 2000.

Since water vapor is a greenhouse gas, the increase in water vapor content makes the atmosphere warm further, which allows the atmosphere to hold still more water vapor. Thus, a positive feedback loop is formed, which continues until the negative feedbacks bring the system to equilibrium. Increases in atmospheric water vapor have been detected from satellites, and calculations based on these observations place this feedback strength at 1.85 ± 0.32 W/m2·K. This is very similar to model estimates, which are at 1.77 ± 0.20 W/m2·K Either value effectively doubles the warming that would otherwise occur from CO2 increases alone. Like with the other physical feedbacks, this is already accounted for in the warming projections under climate change scenarios.

Lapse rate (negative)

Lapse rate (green) is a negative feedback everywhere on Earth besides the polar latitudes. The net climate feedback (black) becomes less negative if it were excluded (orange)

The lapse rate is the rate at which an atmospheric variable, normally temperature in Earth's atmosphere, falls with altitude. It is therefore a quantification of temperature, related to radiation, as a function of altitude, and is not a separate phenomenon in this context. The lapse rate feedback is generally a negative feedback. However, it is in fact a positive feedback in polar regions where it strongly contributed to polar amplified warming, one of the biggest consequences of climate change. This is because in regions with strong inversions, such as the polar regions, the lapse rate feedback can be positive because the surface warms faster than higher altitudes, resulting in inefficient longwave cooling.

The atmosphere's temperature decreases with height in the troposphere. Since emission of infrared radiation varies with temperature, longwave radiation escaping to space from the relatively cold upper atmosphere is less than that emitted toward the ground from the lower atmosphere. Thus, the strength of the greenhouse effect depends on the atmosphere's rate of temperature decrease with height. Both theory and climate models indicate that global warming will reduce the rate of temperature decrease with height, producing a negative lapse rate feedback that weakens the greenhouse effect.

Surface albedo feedback (positive)

Average decadal extent and area of the Arctic Ocean sea ice since 1979.
Average decadal extent and area of the Arctic Ocean sea ice since the start of satellite observations.
Annual trend in the Arctic sea ice extent and area for the 2011-2022 time period.
Annual trend in the Arctic sea ice extent and area for the 2011-2022 time period.

Albedo is the measure of how strongly the planetary surface can reflect solar radiation, which prevents its absorption and thus has a cooling effect. Brighter and more reflective surfaces have a high albedo and darker surfaces have a low albedo, so they heat up more. The most reflective surfaces are ice and snow, so surface albedo changes are overwhelmingly associated with what is known as the ice-albedo feedback. A minority of the effect is also associated with changes in physical oceanography, soil moisture and vegetation cover.

The presence of ice cover and sea ice makes the North Pole and the South Pole colder than they would have been without it. During glacial periods, additional ice increases the reflectivity and thus lowers absorption of solar radiation, cooling the planet. But when warming occurs and the ice melts, darker land or open water takes its place and this causes more warming, which in turn causes more melting. In both cases, a self-reinforcing cycle continues until an equilibrium is found. Consequently, recent Arctic sea ice decline is a key reason behind the Arctic warming nearly four times faster than the global average since 1979 (the start of continuous satellite readings), in a phenomenon known as Arctic amplification. Conversely, the high stability of ice cover in Antarctica, where the East Antarctic ice sheet rises nearly 4 km above the sea level, means that it has experienced very little net warming over the past seven decades.

Aerial photograph showing a section of sea ice. The lighter blue areas are melt ponds and the darkest areas are open water; both have a lower albedo than the white sea ice, so their presence increases local and global temperatures, which helps to spur more melting

As of 2021, the total surface feedback strength is estimated at 0.35 [0.10 to 0.60] W/m2·K. On its own, Arctic sea ice decline between 1979 and 2011 was responsible for 0.21 (W/m2) of radiative forcing. This is equivalent to a quarter of impact from CO2 emissions over the same period. The combined change in all sea ice cover between 1992 and 2018 is equivalent to 10% of all the anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Ice-albedo feedback strength is not constant and depends on the rate of ice loss - models project that under high warming, its strength peaks around 2100 and declines afterwards, as most easily melted ice would already be lost by then.

When CMIP5 models estimate a total loss of Arctic sea ice cover from June to September (a plausible outcome under higher levels of warming), it increases the global temperatures by 0.19 °C (0.34 °F), with a range of 0.16–0.21 °C, while the regional temperatures would increase by over 1.5 °C (2.7 °F). These calculations include second-order effects such as the impact from ice loss on regional lapse rate, water vapor and cloud feedbacks, and do not cause "additional" warming on top of the existing model projections.

Cloud feedback (positive)

Details of how clouds interact with shortwave and longwave radiation at different atmospheric heights

Seen from below, clouds emit infrared radiation back to the surface, which has a warming effect; seen from above, clouds reflect sunlight and emit infrared radiation to space, leading to a cooling effect. Low clouds are bright and very reflective, so they lead to strong cooling, while high clouds are too thin and transparent to effectively reflect sunlight, so they cause overall warming. As a whole, clouds have a substantial cooling effect. However, climate change is expected to alter the distribution of cloud types in a way which collectively reduces their cooling and thus accelerates overall warming.While changes to clouds act as a negative feedback in some latitudes, they represent a clear positive feedback on a global scale.

As of 2021, cloud feedback strength is estimated at 0.42 [–0.10 to 0.94] W/m2·K. This is the largest confidence interval of any climate feedback, and it occurs because some cloud types (most of which are present over the oceans) have been very difficult to observe, so climate models don't have as much data to go on with when they attempt to simulate their behaviour. Additionally, clouds have been strongly affected by aerosol particles, mainly from the unfiltered burning of sulfur-rich fossil fuels such as coal and bunker fuel. Any estimate of cloud feedback needs to disentangle the effects of so-called global dimming caused by these particles as well.

Thus, estimates of cloud feedback differ sharply between climate models. Models with the strongest cloud feedback have the highest climate sensitivity, which means that they simulate much stronger warming in response to a doubling of CO2 (or equivalent greenhouse gas) concentrations than the rest. Around 2020, a small fraction of models was found to simulate so much warming as the result that they had contradicted paleoclimate evidence from fossils, and their output was effectively excluded from the climate sensitivity estimate of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report.

Biogeophysical and biogeochemical feedbacks

CO2 feedbacks (mostly negative)

This diagram of the fast carbon cycle shows the movement of carbon between land, atmosphere, soil and oceans in billions of tons of carbon per year. Yellow numbers are natural fluxes, red are human contributions in billions of tons of carbon per year. White numbers indicate stored carbon.

There are positive and negative climate feedbacks from Earth's carbon cycle. Negative feedbacks are large, and play a great role in the studies of climate inertia or of dynamic (time-dependent) climate change. Because they are considered relatively insensitive to temperature changes, they are sometimes considered separately or disregarded in studies which aim to quantify climate sensitivity. Global warming projections have included carbon cycle feedbacks since the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) in 2007. While the scientific understanding of these feedbacks was limited at the time, it had improved since then. These positive feedbacks include an increase in wildfire frequency and severity, substantial losses from tropical rainforests due to fires and drying and tree losses elsewhere.

The Amazon rainforest is a well-known example due to its enormous size and importance, and because the damage it experiences from climate change is exacerbated by the ongoing deforestation. The combination of two threats can potentially transform much or all of the rainforest to a savannah-like state, although this would most likely require relatively high warming of 3.5 °C (6.3 °F).

Altogether, carbon sinks in the land and ocean absorb around half of the current emissions. Their future absorption is dynamic. In the future, if the emissions decrease, the fraction they absorb will increase, and they will absorb up to three-quarters of the remaining emissions - yet, the raw amount absorbed will decrease from the present. On the contrary, if the emissions will increase, then the raw amount absorbed will increase from now, yet the fraction could decline to one-third by the end of the 21st century. If the emissions remain very high after the 21st century, carbon sinks would eventually be completely overwhelmed, with the ocean sink diminished further and land ecosystems outright becoming a net source. Hypothetically, very strong carbon dioxide removal could also result in land and ocean carbon sinks becoming net sources for several decades.

Role of oceans

The impulse response following a 100 GtC injection of CO2 into Earth's atmosphere. The majority of excess carbon is removed by ocean and land sinks in less than a few centuries, while a substantial portion persists.

Following Le Chatelier's principle, the chemical equilibrium of the Earth's carbon cycle will shift in response to anthropogenic CO2 emissions. The primary driver of this is the ocean, which absorbs anthropogenic CO2 via the so-called solubility pump. At present this accounts for only about one third of the current emissions, but ultimately most (~75%) of the CO2 emitted by human activities will dissolve in the ocean over a period of centuries: "A better approximation of the lifetime of fossil fuel CO2 for public discussion might be 300 years, plus 25% that lasts forever". However, the rate at which the ocean will take it up in the future is less certain, and will be affected by stratification induced by warming and, potentially, changes in the ocean's thermohaline circulation. It is believed that the single largest factor in determining the total strength of the global carbon sink is the state of the Southern Ocean - particularly of the Southern Ocean overturning circulation.

Chemical weathering

Chemical weathering over the geological long term acts to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. With current global warming, weathering is increasing, demonstrating significant feedbacks between climate and Earth surface. Biosequestration also captures and stores CO2 by biological processes. The formation of shells by organisms in the ocean, over a very long time, removes CO2 from the oceans. The complete conversion of CO2 to limestone takes thousands to hundreds of thousands of years.

Primary production through photosynthesis

Increase in global leaf area between 1982 and 2015, which was primarily caused by the CO2 fertilization effect

Net primary productivity of plants' and phytoplankton grows as the increased CO2 fuels their photosynthesis in what is known as the CO2 fertilization effect. Additionally, plants require less water as the atmospheric CO2 concentrations increase, because they lose less moisture to evapotranspiration through open stomata (the pores in leaves through which CO2 is absorbed). However, increased droughts in certain regions can still limit plant growth, and the warming beyond optimum conditions has a consistently negative impact. Thus, estimates for the 21st century show that plants would become a lot more abundant at high latitudes near the poles but grow much less near the tropics - there is only medium confidence that tropical ecosystems would gain more carbon relative to now. However, there is high confidence that the total land carbon sink will remain positive.

Non-CO2 climate-relevant gases (unclear)

Methane climate feedbacks in natural ecosystems.

Release of gases of biological origin would be affected by global warming, and this includes climate-relevant gases such as methane, nitrous oxide or dimethyl sulfide. Others, such as dimethyl sulfide released from oceans, have indirect effects. Emissions of methane from land (particularly from wetlands) and of nitrous oxide from land and oceans are a known positive feedback. I.e. long-term warming changes the balance in the methane-related microbial community within freshwater ecosystems so they produce more methane while proportionately less is oxidised to carbon dioxide. There would also be biogeophysical changes which affect the albedo. For instance, larch in some sub-arctic forests are being replaced by spruce trees. This has a limited contribution to warming, because larch trees shed their needles in winter and so they end up more extensively covered in snow than the spruce trees which retain their dark needles all year.

On the other hand, changes in emissions of compounds such sea salt, dimethyl sulphide, dust, ozone and a range of biogenic volatile organic compounds are expected to be negative overall. As of 2021, all of these non-CO2 feedbacks are believed to practically cancel each other out, but there is only low confidence, and the combined feedbacks could be up to 0.25 W/m2·K in either direction.

Permafrost (positive)

Permafrost is not included in the estimates above, as it is difficult to model, and the estimates of its role is strongly time-dependent as its carbon pools are depleted at different rates under different warming levels. Instead, it is treated as a separate process that will contribute to near-term warming, with the best estimates shown below.

Nine probable scenarios of greenhouse gas emissions from permafrost thaw during the 21st century, which show a limited, moderate and intense CO2 and CH4 emission response to low, medium and high-emission Representative Concentration Pathways. The vertical bar uses emissions of selected large countries as a comparison: the right-hand side of the scale shows their cumulative emissions since the start of the Industrial Revolution, while the left-hand side shows each country's cumulative emissions for the rest of the 21st century if they remained unchanged from their 2019 levels.

Altogether, it is expected that cumulative greenhouse gas emissions from permafrost thaw will be smaller than the cumulative anthropogenic emissions, yet still substantial on a global scale, with some experts comparing them to emissions caused by deforestation. The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report estimates that carbon dioxide and methane released from permafrost could amount to the equivalent of 14–175 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per 1 °C (1.8 °F) of warming. For comparison, by 2019, annual anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide alone stood around 40 billion tonnes. A major review published in the year 2022 concluded that if the goal of preventing 2 °C (3.6 °F) of warming was realized, then the average annual permafrost emissions throughout the 21st century would be equivalent to the year 2019 annual emissions of Russia. Under RCP4.5, a scenario considered close to the current trajectory and where the warming stays slightly below 3 °C (5.4 °F), annual permafrost emissions would be comparable to year 2019 emissions of Western Europe or the United States, while under the scenario of high global warming and worst-case permafrost feedback response, they would approach year 2019 emissions of China.

Fewer studies have attempted to describe the impact directly in terms of warming. A 2018 paper estimated that if global warming was limited to 2 °C (3.6 °F), gradual permafrost thaw would add around 0.09 °C (0.16 °F) to global temperatures by 2100, while a 2022 review concluded that every 1 °C (1.8 °F) of global warming would cause 0.04 °C (0.072 °F) and 0.11 °C (0.20 °F) from abrupt thaw by the year 2100 and 2300. Around 4 °C (7.2 °F) of global warming, abrupt (around 50 years) and widespread collapse of permafrost areas could occur, resulting in an additional warming of 0.2–0.4 °C (0.36–0.72 °F).

A study published in 2024 in Nature Climate Change found that coastal erosion in the Arctic, driven by permafrost thaw, reduces the ocean's capacity to absorb carbon dioxide, thereby triggering additional carbon–climate feedbacks in the region.

Long-term feedbacks

Ice sheets

The loss of albedo from major ice areas on Earth adds to warming: the values shown are for the initial warming of 1.5 °C (2.7 °F). Total ice sheet loss requires multiple millennia: the others can be lost in a century or two

The Earth's two remaining ice sheets, the Greenland ice sheet and the Antarctic ice sheet, cover the world's largest island and an entire continent, and both of them are also around 2 km (1 mi) thick on average. Due to this immense size, their response to warming is measured in thousands of years and is believed to occur in two stages.

The first stage would be the effect from ice melt on thermohaline circulation. Because meltwater is completely fresh, it makes it harder for the surface layer of water to sink beneath the lower layers, and this disrupts the exchange of oxygen, nutrients and heat between the layers. This would act as a negative feedback - sometimes estimated as a cooling effect of 0.2 °C (0.36 °F) over a 1000-year average, though the research on these timescales has been limited. An even longer-term effect is the ice-albedo feedback from ice sheets reaching their ultimate state in response to whatever the long-term temperature change would be. Unless the warming is reversed entirely, this feedback would be positive.

The total loss of the Greenland Ice Sheet is estimated to add 0.13 °C (0.23 °F) to global warming (with a range of 0.04–0.06 °C), while the loss of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet adds 0.05 °C (0.090 °F) (0.04–0.06 °C), and East Antarctic ice sheet 0.6 °C (1.1 °F) Total loss of the Greenland ice sheet would also increase regional temperatures in the Arctic by between 0.5 °C (0.90 °F) and 3 °C (5.4 °F), while the regional temperature in Antarctica is likely to go up by 1 °C (1.8 °F) after the loss of the West Antarctic ice sheet and 2 °C (3.6 °F) after the loss of the East Antarctic ice sheet.

These estimates assume that global warming stays at an average of 1.5 °C (2.7 °F). Because of the logarithmic growth of the greenhouse effect, the impact from ice loss would be larger at the slightly lower warming level of 2020s, but it would become lower if the warming proceeds towards higher levels. While Greenland and the West Antarctic ice sheet are likely committed to melting entirely if the long-term warming is around 1.5 °C (2.7 °F), the East Antarctic ice sheet would not be at risk of complete disappearance until the very high global warming of 5–10 °C (9.0–18.0 °F)

Methane hydrates

Methane hydrates or methane clathrates are frozen compounds where a large amount of methane is trapped within a crystal structure of water, forming a solid similar to ice. On Earth, they generally lie beneath sediments on the ocean floors, (approximately 1,100 m (3,600 ft) below the sea level). Around 2008, there was a serious concern that a large amount of hydrates from relatively shallow deposits in the Arctic, particularly around the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, could quickly break down and release large amounts of methane, potentially leading to 6 °C (11 °F) within 80 years. Current research shows that hydrates react very slowly to warming, and that it's very difficult for methane to reach the atmosphere after dissociation on the seafloor. Thus, no "detectable" impact on the global temperatures is expected to occur in this century due to methane hydrates. Some research suggests hydrate dissociation can still cause a warming of 0.4–0.5 °C (0.72–0.90 °F) over several millennia.

Forcing-feedback formulation of climate sensitivity

Earth is a thermodynamic system for which long-term temperature changes follow the global energy imbalance (EEI stands for Earth's energy imbalance):

where ASR is the absorbed solar radiation and OLR is the outgoing longwave radiation at top of atmosphere. When EEI is positive the system is warming, when it is negative they system is cooling, and when it is approximately zero then there is neither warming or cooling. The ASR and OLR terms in this expression encompass many temperature-dependent properties and complex interactions that govern system behavior.

In order to diagnose that behavior around a relatively stable equilibrium state, one may consider a perturbation to EEI as indicated by the symbol Δ. Such a perturbation is typically induced by a radiative forcing (ΔF) which can be natural or man-made. Responses within the system to either return towards the stable state, or to move further away from the stable state are called feedbacks λΔT:

.

A feedback is a thermodynamic process while a forcing is a thermodynamic operation according to classical principles.

Collectively the feedbacks may be approximated by the linearized parameter λ and the perturbed temperature ΔT because all components of λ (assumed to be first-order to act independently and additively) are also functions of temperature, albeit to varying extents, by definition for a thermodynamic system:

.

Some feedback components having significant influence on EEI are: = water vapor, = clouds, = surface albedo, = carbon cycle, = Planck response, and = lapse rate. All quantities are understood to be global averages, while T is usually translated to temperature at the surface because of its direct relevance to humans and much other life.

The negative Planck response, being an especially strong function of temperature, is sometimes factored out to give an expression in terms of the relative feedback gains gi from other components:

.

For example for the water vapor feedback.

Within the context of modern numerical climate modelling and analysis, the linearized formulation has limited use. One such use is to diagnose the relative strengths of different feedback mechanisms. An estimate of climate sensitivity to a forcing is then obtained for the case where the net feedback remains negative and the system reaches a new equilibrium state (ΔEEI=0) after some time has passed:

.

Implications for climate policy

diagram showing five historical estimates of equilibrium climate sensitivity by the IPCC
Historical estimates of climate sensitivity from the IPCC assessments. The first three reports gave a qualitative likely range, and the next three had formally quantified it, by adding >66% likely range (dark blue). This uncertainty primarily depends on feedbacks.

Uncertainty over climate change feedbacks has implications for climate policy. For instance, uncertainty over carbon cycle feedbacks may affect targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions (climate change mitigation). Emissions targets are often based on a target stabilization level of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, or on a target for limiting global warming to a particular magnitude. Both of these targets (concentrations or temperatures) require an understanding of future changes in the carbon cycle.

If models incorrectly project future changes in the carbon cycle, then concentration or temperature targets could be missed. For example, if models underestimate the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere due to positive feedbacks (e.g., due to thawing permafrost), then they may also underestimate the extent of emissions reductions necessary to meet a concentration or temperature target.

Neurohacking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurohacking   ...