Author | Lightnews

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Daniel Ospina

@daniel-ospina.bsky.social

*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

Future Earth @futureearth.bsky.social · Jan 8

What climate insights are policymakers missing?

If you’re working on new or emerging climate research, now’s the time to surface it.

Help shape the 2026 10 New Insights in Climate Science.

Submit by 31 Jan 2026: form.jotform.com/Future_Earth...

10 New Insights in Climate Science - CALL FOR EXPERT INPUT 2026

Please click the link to complete this form.

form.jotform.com

February 5, 2026 at 8:31 AM

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

$profrachelgan.bsky.social$

Prof Rachel Oliver

@profrachelgan.bsky.social

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.

January 12, 2026 at 8:59 AM

Pierre Friedlingstein

@pfriedling.bsky.social

Where is this 34% coming from ? It’s more like 65%.
See IPCC AR6 WG3 SPM

www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/w...

Figure: SPM.1

.

www.ipcc.ch

January 28, 2026 at 3:02 PM

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Andrew Dessler

@andrewdessler.com

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

Andrew Dessler @andrewdessler.com · Jan 10

It's the most magical time of the year — when estimates of last year's global average temperature anomaly come out. Time to dust off my "last year was hot" auto-response.

January 5, 2026 at 6:20 PM

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Zeke Hausfather

@hausfath.bsky.social

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....

December 20, 2025 at 5:43 PM

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Pep Canadell

@pepcanadell.bsky.social

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...

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.

www.carbonbrief.org

December 18, 2025 at 9:47 PM

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Marshall Shepherd

@drshepherd2013.bsky.social

Please read

www.forbes.com/sites/marsha...

December 19, 2025 at 2:03 AM

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Kate Marvel

@drkatemarvel.bsky.social

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"

November 25, 2025 at 8:18 PM

Pierre Friedlingstein

@pfriedling.bsky.social

bsky.app/profile/pfri...

Pierre Friedlingstein @pfriedling.bsky.social · Nov 13

2023-2024 El Niño led to a record high atmospheric CO₂ increase of 29 GtCO2 in 2024 (3.7 ppm), almost 50% above the decadal average.
The land sink decreased substantially, 20% below the decadal average, 40% below 2022 (pre-El Niño). The tropics recorded the largest drop in the land C sink

November 25, 2025 at 7:49 PM

Pierre Friedlingstein

@pfriedling.bsky.social

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.

November 25, 2025 at 7:47 PM

Pierre Friedlingstein

@pfriedling.bsky.social

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.”

November 25, 2025 at 7:45 PM

Pierre Friedlingstein

@pfriedling.bsky.social

For once, some good news about the Amazon tropical forest 🌳

www.nature.com/articles/s41...

Increasing tree size across Amazonia - Nature Plants

A global research network monitoring the Amazon for 30 years reports in this study that tree size increased by 3% each decade.

www.nature.com

November 25, 2025 at 7:34 PM

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

ESM2025

@esm2025.bsky.social

Eager for more details?
👀 Check our full Research Highlight here:bit.ly/4qMYPEy

With @docaharper.bsky.social from @universityofga.bsky.social @exeter.ac.uk, Gabriel Abrahão, from @pik-potsdam.bsky.social and @rosieafisher.bsky.social, from @cicero.oslo.no

Can We Count on the Land? Exploring the Uncertainty of Land-based Mitigation Strategies

How Earth System Models assess land-based carbon removal (AR, BECCS): carbon-cycle responses, and local climate side-effects; and how Integrated Assessment Models then asses socio-economic constraints that shape decision-ready deployment.

www.esm2025.eu

November 25, 2025 at 7:28 AM

Pierre Friedlingstein

@pfriedling.bsky.social

👏

Rishika Pardikar @rishpardikar.bsky.social · Nov 19

At #COP30 last week, India highlighted the impossibility of 1.5C and the reliance on CDR for overshoot scenarios. Interview with @glenpeters.bsky.social about Paris Agreement temperature goals, where we need to go and how to get there.

drilled.media/news/cop30-g...

A Reckoning with the 1.5°C Goal at COP30

Climate scientist Glen Peters about where we are in terms of achieving Paris Agreement temperature goals, where we need to go and how to get there.

drilled.media

November 22, 2025 at 7:45 AM

Pierre Friedlingstein

@pfriedling.bsky.social

👏
“When it comes to climate change, the “end of the world” and “good for you” are “the two lowest-probability outcomes”.

www.nature.com/articles/d41...

Bill Gates’s climate comments are a dangerous distraction

People do not have to dismiss or exaggerate the climate threat to justify concerted action.

www.nature.com

November 18, 2025 at 8:00 PM

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Michael E. Mann

@michaelemann.bsky.social

Direct air capture is not currently viable strategy. Likely increases carbon pollution (more carbon energy required to than saved). See @mzjacobson.bsky.social's work: news.stanford.edu/stories/2019... & Joe Romm's review for our center (@penncssm.bsky.social): bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/web.sas.upen...

Study casts doubt on carbon capture

Current approaches to carbon capture can increase air pollution and are not efficient at reducing carbon in the atmosphere, according to research from Mark Z. Jacobson.

news.stanford.edu

November 15, 2025 at 5:07 PM

Pierre Friedlingstein

@pfriedling.bsky.social

Très bel entretien 👍

November 17, 2025 at 12:28 AM

Reposted by Pierre Friedlingstein

Audrey Garric

@audreygarric.bsky.social

Au GIEC, une bataille très politique autour des dates de publication du prochain rapport d’évaluation. Pour la 4e fois en 2 ans, les pays n’ont pas réussi à s’accorder sur son calendrier. Certains pays veulent repousser sa parution pour amoindrir l’action climatique www.lemonde.fr/planete/arti...