We assess evidence relevant to Earth's equilibrium climate sensitivity per doubling of atmospheric CO 2 , characterized by an effective sensitivity S. This evidence includes feedback process understanding, the historical climate record, and the paleoclimate record. An S value lower than 2 K is difficult to reconcile with any of the three lines of evidence. The amount of cooling during the Last Glacial Maximum provides strong evidence against values of S greater than 4.5 K. Other lines of evidence in combination also show that this is relatively unlikely. We use a Bayesian approach to produce a probability density function (PDF) for S given all the evidence, including tests of robustness to difficult-to-quantify uncertainties and different priors. The 66% range is 2.6-3.9 K for our Baseline calculation and remains within 2.3-4.5 K under the robustness tests; corresponding 5-95% ranges are 2.3-4.7 K, bounded by 2.0-5.7 K (although such high-confidence ranges should be regarded more cautiously). This indicates a stronger constraint on S than reported in past assessments, by lifting the low end of the range. This narrowing occurs because the three lines of evidence agree and are judged to be largely independent and because of greater confidence in understanding feedback processes and in combining evidence. We identify promising avenues for further narrowing the range in S, in particular using comprehensive models and process understanding to address limitations in the traditional forcing-feedback paradigm for interpreting past changes. Plain Language Summary Earth's global "climate sensitivity" is a fundamental quantitative measure of the susceptibility of Earth's climate to human influence. A landmark report in 1979 concluded that it probably lies between 1.5°C and 4.5°C per doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide, assuming that other influences on climate remain unchanged. In the 40 years since, it has appeared difficult to reduce this uncertainty range. In this report we thoroughly assess all lines of evidence including some new developments. We find that a large volume of consistent evidence now points to a more confident view of a climate sensitivity near the middle or upper part of this range. In particular, it now appears extremely unlikely that the climate sensitivity could be low enough to avoid substantial climate change (well in excess of 2°C warming) under a high-emission future scenario. We remain unable to rule out that the sensitivity could be above 4.5°C per doubling of carbon dioxide levels, although this is not likely. Continued ©2020. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

Heading in here running to two lines Names Name, Names Names Intro running about 8 lines across just one column Intro running about 8 lines across just one column Intro running about 8 lines across just one column Intro running about 8 lines across just one column Emissions-the 'business as usual' story is misleading Zeke Hausfather & Glen P. Peters Stop using the worst-case scenario for climate warming as the most likely outcomemore-realistic baselines make for better policy. Falling costs for generating clean electricity have led to a proliferation of wind farms, such as this one near Palm Springs, California.

To put the Paris Agreement in context, we reviewed available 1.5 °C scenarios to assess viable emissions pathways and required mitigation across all sectors. Recently released 1.5 °C (1.9 W m −2

Observational records of ocean heat content show that ocean warming is accelerating

The level of agreement between climate model simulations and observed surface temperature change is a topic of scientific and policy concern. While the Earth system continues to accumulate energy due to anthropogenic and other radiative forcings, estimates of recent surface temperature evolution fall at the lower end of climate model projections. Global mean temperatures from climate model simulations are typically calculated using surface air temperatures, while the corresponding observations are based on a blend of air and sea surface temperatures. This work quantifies a systematic bias in model‐observation comparisons arising from differential warming rates between sea surface temperatures and surface air temperatures over oceans. A further bias arises from the treatment of temperatures in regions where the sea ice boundary has changed. Applying the methodology of the HadCRUT4 record to climate model temperature fields accounts for 38% of the discrepancy in trend between models and observations over the period 1975–2014.