iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 18/09/2026

Sad news. Bob was the godfather of land surface modeling.

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 11/09/2026

According to their study, under net zero, the global ocean is still a sink of carbon. It is the southern ocean that becomes a source.

061

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Kevin Anderson @kevinclimate.bsky.social · 10/09/2026

I was asked by a colleague from my oil & gas days (who has remained in the industry) why UK producing its own gas is less acceptable to the Greens (& others) than importing it from America and West Africa.' The full question & my reply is now online at: climateuncensored.com/there-is-no-...

climateuncensored.com

There Is No Atmospheric Exemption for British Oil and Gas - Climate Uncensored

I was recently contacted by a colleague from my days in the 1980s and 90s when I worked as an engineer in the offshore oil and gas sector. He remains in the

1517292

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 27/08/2026

It would be like saying population is growing globally therefore it’s not declining in some countries.

000

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 27/08/2026

No but there is a conflict when one uses global numbers to state that transition is not possible, while it is clearly happening in some regions.

210

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 27/08/2026

Not sure I’ll find the time to listen to his talk but my point remains valid. Many countries have a net zero target and are already reducing fossil fuel use (ex EU). China is not far from peak fossil use. More countries will follow. Global fossil emissions will decline. Happy to bet on that. 😉

120

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 26/08/2026

Sorry, I have no idea what you mean by “the symbiotic argument”.

041

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 24/08/2026

Except that he is wrong. Many countries are now reducing their fossil fuel consumption. Fossil CO₂ emissions are still increasing (1% per year) globally but that hides large regional disparities. Transitions can work. Which doesn’t mean that reducing the overall energy demand wouldn’t be helpful!

330

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 24/08/2026

An El Niño typically adds 1 to 2 ppm to the atmosphere. That’s (slightly less than) one year of fossil emissions.

032

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 24/08/2026

Les forêts et océan captent toujours du CO₂, certes moins qu’en l’absence de changement climatique, mais ce sont toujours des puits de carbone.

100

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 11/08/2026

Deadline for abstract submission is 15th December 2026.

110

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 11/08/2026

You can submit an abstract for an oral presentation or a poster. You can also submit an abstract for a mini workshop during the week.

120

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 11/08/2026

The call for abstract for the 12th International Carbon Dioxide Conference (ICDC12) is open.

145

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

I know. I meant it’s not like we didn’t say it would happen (if not in 2026, at some point in the near future). I don’t see any strong evidence we were actively working on mitigation and adaptation of extreme events impacts 🙁

240

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

I would argue we have been saying this for 30 years.

2120

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

I suppose no tractor is your solution then . 🙄

111

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 11/06/2026

Thanks. We say today’s emissions rate (42GtCO2). That’s the emission level for 2025.

120

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 10/06/2026

Indeed. I got over excited when I saw your 8ppm 😉

020

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 09/06/2026

That’s interesting. 8ppm is also the climate effect on the natural sinks (see GCB). So in short : the benefits of reducing the growth in emissions has been negated by a decline in the growth of the sinks of similar amplitude. 🧐

290

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 09/06/2026

Is your 8% an average over the whole period ? Or is it an estimate for the UK not for the globe (assuming the UK should do better than the global average) ?

020

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 09/06/2026

That’s a 1,8 GtCO₂ reduction every year ( from 42 to 0 in 24 years), equivalent to 4% for the first year (and 100% for the final year !).

110

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 09/06/2026

Hi Kevin. I broadly agree with the first part. Well below 2C could be defined as the 83% RCB for 2C. That’s estimated as 690 GtCO₂ in Forster et al 2024. So about 600 from 2027. But even if one take your 500 estimate. That’s 12 years of current CO₂ emissions. So zero in 24 years (linear decrease)

320

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 05/06/2026

I’m afraid that staying below 1.5C is not possible anymore. Too little too late. 🙁

231

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 05/06/2026

Would you take a central estimate for climate sensitivity of for a warming projection ? PS Agree that the 10% likelihood is not very useful…

210

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 05/06/2026

I had this discussion with Kevin before. It comes down to what the carbon budget to keep warming below 2C is. Take the central estimate from IPCC, IGCC, GCB and its about 1000 GtCO₂. That’s net zero by 2075 globally assuming linear decrease. Kevin would use a much lower budget.

220

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 05/06/2026

So which one is he ? Expert whitewash or charlatan? 😉

210

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Robbie Andrew @robbieandrew.bsky.social · 01/06/2026

Have you read my deep-dive history of estimating global CO₂ emissions? From the first documented effort by Högbom in 1894, via Arrhenius, Popular Mechanics, Plass, Revelle, and more through to 1999: robbieandrew.github.io/www_docs/t/E...

03711

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 28/05/2026

I wish this would happen but I seriously doubt. Many countries currently have a net zero emission target that is after 2050. 🙁

100

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 28/05/2026

In the context of adaptation by mid century he is not completely wrong 😉

140

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 19/05/2026

Exeter will host the 12th International Carbon Dioxide Conference (ICDC12), 21-25 June 2027. These CO₂ conferences have been running every 4 years since 1981 ! You can register your interest at icdc12.org. Call for abstract will open later this summer. #ICDC12

icdc12.org

Welcome to the 12th International Carbon Dioxide Conference

096

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Daniel Ospina @daniel-ospina.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

*DEADLINE EXTENDED* February 8 Submit your suggestions and nominate (yourself or others) as a co-author for the 2026 edition of the 10 New Insights in Climate Science

21916

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Prof Rachel Oliver @profrachelgan.bsky.social · 12/01/2026

Following coverage over the weekend of Sir Paul Nurse's comments that suggested that the only reason that a Fellow should be expelled from @royalsociety.org is scientific misconduct, I have written to him to explain the risks such an attitude poses of increasing sexual harassment in STEM.

Dear Sir Paul,

Re: Royal Society Code of Conduct

I am sure that many scientists have written to you about the specific question of Elon Musk’s Fellowship and whether, under the Royal Society’s Code of Conduct, his retaining that Fellowship is appropriate. I will not rehash these issues. Instead, as a female scientist with extensive experience of activities aiming to increase equality, diversity and inclusion in the engineering and physical sciences sector, I am writing to you (in a personal capacity) to ask you to reconsider the statements you have recently made in this context to the UK press about the Royal Society’s Code of Conduct and how it is applied.

A 2018 report from the joint National Academies of the United States of America, concluded that “sexual harassment is common in academic science, engineering, and medicine” and that “greater than 50 percent of women faculty and staff and 20–50 percent of women students encounter or experience sexually harassing conduct in academia”. This report described codes of conduct that make clear that sexual harassment is unethical and will not be tolerated as a “powerful incentive for change”. The authors also noted that sexual harassment can have significant and damaging effects on the integrity of research. In my own praxis, I have found that clear and consistently-implemented codes of conduct that address these issues make female scientists and engineers safer, and allow them to focus more effectively on their research. For codes of conduct to have such a positive effect, it is vital that sanctions for actions which transgress the code are meaningful and substantial.

I was hence aghast to realise that in an interview with the Financial Times published on 9/1/26, you appear to have suggested that the Royal Society “should only expel fellows if their science proved “faulty or fraudulent or highly defective””. Moreover, in a further interview with the Guardian on 11/1/26 you suggested that the code “may need to be looked at again”, with the implication that your aim would be to remove the option of sanctions on Fellows for reasons not strictly related to faults or defects in their research.

I suggest that changing the Royal Society’s code of conduct so that the likelihood of serious sanctions for sexual harassment is reduced, would directly endanger women who interact with the Royal Society at events or otherwise, and would provide a licence to harass to the already powerful people on whom the Society bestows fellowship. The implications of your words - that under your leadership the only infringements of the code which are likely to receive the sanction of the Fellowship being removed are those related to research misconduct - already risk empowering harassers. You stated, in the Financial Times interview, that “there’s many bad people around, but they have made scientific advances”. Given this awareness of the possibility of bad actors in our scientific community, it is wholly irresponsible to suggest that the Royal Society would not act to sanction these people if they harass more vulnerable scientists.

I am hence writing to request that you retract any suggestion that the Society’s Code of Conduct should be changed so that the only reason a Fellow might be sanctioned by the removal of their Fellowship is “faulty or fraudulent or highly defective” research. This action is necessary to safeguard female scientists, a requirement placed on the Society by safeguarding legislation and UK statutory guidance.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Rachel A. Oliver.

25819298

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 28/01/2026

Where is this 34% coming from ? It’s more like 65%. See IPCC AR6 WG3 SPM www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/w...

ipcc.ch

Figure: SPM.1

010

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Andrew Dessler @andrewdessler.com · 05/01/2026

I'm starting to get the emails. Reporters: please see my comments below.

024784

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Zeke Hausfather @zekehausfather.com · 20/12/2025

I've put together my predictions for 2026 and 2027 temperatures over at The Climate Brink. I expect 2026 will likely end up similar to 2023 and 2025 at ~1.4C, while 2027 will likely be considerably warmer (conditional on El Nino): www.theclimatebrink....

68329

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Pep Canadell @pepcanadell.bsky.social · 18/12/2025

The Global Carbon Project has just published the most comprehensive Global Hydrogen Budget to date. H2, although not a GHG, has an indirect Global Warming Potential 37 times more potent than CO2. Carbon Brief: www.carbonbrief.org/hydrogen-emi... Research paper: www.nature.com/articles/s41...

carbonbrief.org

Hydrogen emissions are ‘supercharging’ the warming impact of methane - Carbon Brief

The warming impact of hydrogen has been “overlooked” in projections of climate change, authors of the latest “global hydrogen budget” say.

14026

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Marshall Shepherd @drshepherd2013.bsky.social · 19/12/2025

Please read www.forbes.com/sites/marsha...

014570

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Kate Marvel @drkatemarvel.bsky.social · 25/11/2025

I really wish we'd stop calling them climate "skeptics" or "vaccine skeptics", if you jump off a cliff we don't call you a "gravity skeptic"

14354731365

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 25/11/2025

Last year record increase in atmospheric CO₂ (3.7ppm), well above the decadal average of about 2.5 ppm, was due to the El Niño conditions.

130

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · 25/11/2025

That statement is misleading: …” the concentration of carbon in Earth’s atmosphere rose more in 2024 than in any other year ..” “Climate scientists unanimously agree that last year’s increase was provoked by human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels like oil, coal and natural gas.”

110