Study: Earth’s growing heat imbalance – it’s the clouds and natural climate variability

From the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine, Atmospheric, and Earth Science, and the “Hey whatever happened to that CO2 master control knob?” department, comes this encouraging news where real data-driven science was performed instead of the typical modeling madness. – Anthony

Earth’s growing heat imbalance driven more by clouds than air pollution, study finds

Satellite and reanalysis data show aerosol changes in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres largely cancel out, shifting attention to cloud changes due to surface warming and natural climate variability.

MIAMI — Earth is taking in more energy than it releases back to space—a growing “energy imbalance” that is fueling global warming. A new study led by scientists at the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine, Atmospheric, and Earth Science finds that recent changes in air pollution are not the main reason this imbalance has increased.

Aerosols—tiny airborne particles from sources such as pollution, wildfires, and volcanoes—can affect how clouds form and how much sunlight Earth reflects back to space. While aerosols can influence climate regionally, the new research shows their recent global impact has been small.

Published November 28 in the journal Science Advances, the study analyzed nearly two decades of satellite observations combined with modern atmospheric reanalysis data. The researchers found that aerosol changes have affected the climate in opposite ways in the two hemispheres.

In the Northern Hemisphere, cleaner air in heavily industrialized regions has reduced the number of particles that help clouds reflect sunlight, allowing more solar energy to reach Earth’s surface. In contrast, the Southern Hemisphere has seen large increases in natural aerosols from events such as the 2019–2020 Australian wildfires and the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha’apai volcanic eruption. These particles made clouds brighter and more reflective, sending more sunlight back to space. Together, the opposing effects largely cancel each other out, resulting in little net global influence from aerosols on Earth’s rising heat imbalance.

The study also shows that the recent increase in Earth’s energy imbalance is driven mainly by changes in reflected sunlight, rather than by changes in heat escaping to space. From 2003 to 2023, Earth gained heat at a rate of about half a watt more energy per square meter each decade, largely because the planet is absorbing more sunlight.

Fig. 1. Decadal trends (2003–2023) and monthly anomalies in the natural logarithm of aerosol proxies. (A) Spatial maps of trends in the natural logarithm of the aerosol index (AI) from MODIS satellite and (B) sulfate aerosol mass concentration at 925 hPa (SO4) from MERRA-2 reanalysis for the period 2003–2023. (C–E) Vertical profiles of ln(SO4) monthly anomalies over the boxed regions in (B): (C) East Asia, (D) North America, and (E) the Southeastern Pacific. The dashed line in each panel represents the 925 hPa pressure level. Credit: Park, Soden. University of Miami Rosenstiel School

To track how aerosols are changing over time, the researchers used two independent indicators. One came from satellites that observe how aerosols in the air affect the passage of sunlight through the atmosphere. The other came from reanalysis data, which combine observations and models to estimate sulfate particles produced by pollution, volcanoes, and wildfires. Despite their different approaches, both methods revealed the same pattern—declining aerosols in the Northern Hemisphere and increasing aerosols in the Southern Hemisphere—indicating that aerosols have had little overall effect on the global energy trend.

“Understanding this hemispheric “balancing act” helps society focus on the true forces behind global warming—changes in cloud behavior linked to surface warming and natural climate variability—rather than mistakenly attributing recent warming to cleaner air,” said Chanyoung Park, lead author of the study and a doctoral student in the Department of Atmospheric Sciences at the Rosenstiel School. “Even though the Northern Hemisphere may experience some regional warming due to reduced aerosols, this does not translate to a significant global impact. This clarity supports better climate planning, more accurate public communication, and informed policy decisions.”

The findings also highlight a potential limitation in some climate modeling studies, which focus mainly on pollution reductions in the Northern Hemisphere and may underestimate the growing influence of natural aerosol events in the Southern Hemisphere.

“Earth’s energy imbalance tells us how fast heat is building up in the climate system,” said Brian Soden, a co-author of the study and a professor in the Department of Atmospheric Sciences at the Rosenstiel School. “Many earlier studies suggested that cleaner air might explain much of the recent increase, but our results show that aerosol changes largely cancel out between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. That means we need to look more closely at changes in clouds and natural climate variability to understand why the planet is continuing to gain heat.”

The study, titled Negligible Contribution from Aerosols to Recent Trends in Earth’s Energy Imbalance,” was published in Science Advances on November 28, 2025. The authors include Chanyoung Park and Brian Soden of the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine, Atmospheric, and Earth Science.

4.4 10 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

24 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
December 27, 2025 2:04 pm

AFAIK, clouds are among the things models do not handle well, if at all.

Editor
Reply to  Tom Halla
December 27, 2025 2:10 pm

I am very glad that I don’t write climate or weather models. The transition from water vapor (a transparent and ubiquitous greenhouse gas to a zillion tiny water droplets reflecting sunlight away from Earth is just a fraction of a kelvin and oh so important to get right.

Reply to  Ric Werme
December 28, 2025 7:19 am

On the other hand, in that business, it doesn’t matter whether your results are right or wrong, you still get paid! What’s not to love?

Richard M
December 27, 2025 2:21 pm

Pretty clear from the CERES data that the reduction clouds is the primary warming effect in the 21st century. The only real debate is what is driving those changes.

Since the reductions have occurred a different times, I’m going with natural events and cycles. Humans are off the hook.

Denis
Reply to  Richard M
December 27, 2025 8:21 pm

I blame President Nixon who signed the Clean Air Act in 1970 leading to notable reductions in cloud forming particles in industrialized areas.

DD More
Reply to  Denis
December 28, 2025 9:15 pm

Wasn’t Nixon’s fault, but the river fires.

The 1969 Cleveland Cuyahoga River fire, fueled by industrial pollution, became a powerful symbol that catalyzed national environmental action, leading to the Clean Water Act of 1972, the formation of the EPA, and greater public awareness, though the Clean Air Act (1970) 

Reply to  Richard M
December 28, 2025 3:19 am

I’ve always thought the “culprit” was the various clean air acts causing the natural bounce back from the LIA

gyan1
December 27, 2025 2:45 pm

At least 15 peer reviewed papers using data from NASA show that most of modern warming was due to fewer clouds. Three papers concluded that all of modern warming can be explained by the increase in solar radiation reaching the surface and heating the oceans to depth.

December 27, 2025 2:54 pm

““Earth’s energy imbalance tells us how fast heat is building up in the climate system,” said Brian Soden, a co-author of the study and a professor in the Department of Atmospheric Sciences at the Rosenstiel School.”

Wait. This is backwards. You wouldn’t know an imbalance even existed without first measuring heat storage trends. If the oceans are indeed warming, then the existence of a radiative imbalance is trivially true and the strength of the imbalance is inferred from the trend. Don’t get me wrong – this is not intended as a criticism of this paper’s findings.

But there is a narrative out there that observations from the oceans and from space independently confirm an imbalance. This is incorrect. You can’t identify and quantify an imbalance from space independently. Too much uncertainty. All you can do is trending of LW and SW and of derived values of ASR, for example.

Loeb, et al, 2018 explains this. This paper is currently referenced from the CERES EBAF documentation page. Find and read “3) TOA Flux Adjustments”
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/31/2/jcli-d-17-0208.1.xml

The documentation page is here.
https://ceres.larc.nasa.gov/data/documentation/#ebaf

Thank you for listening.

gyan1
Reply to  David Dibbell
December 27, 2025 5:05 pm

“You wouldn’t know an imbalance even existed without first measuring heat storage trends.”

The worst of this are simplistic TOA imbalance equations that assume CO2 is responsible for all of the imbalance without considering the complex internal dynamics that are actually at play, like the measured cloud reduction during the modern warm period.

mleskovarsocalrrcom
December 27, 2025 4:14 pm
Reply to  mleskovarsocalrrcom
December 27, 2025 4:39 pm

I’ve looked at clouds from both sides now
From up and down and still somehow
It’s cloud illusions I recall
I really don’t know clouds at all

Mr.
December 27, 2025 4:32 pm

That means we need to look more closely at changes in clouds and natural climate variability to understand why the planet is continuing to gain heat

A big clue would be the planet shrugging off the cold effects of the Little Ice Age, which in planetary climate cycles, happened just yesterday.

Let’s give the old girl a chance to wake up and get ready for her next dance, shall we?

D Sandberg
Reply to  Mr.
December 27, 2025 8:17 pm

Mr Agree, Mother Nature likes to dance to a slow graceful waltz most of the time but every 1500 years +/- 500 years she likes to rock & roll:

Bond cycles and Holocene climate variability are often linked. Bond events are roughly 1,500-year cycles of North Atlantic cooling, identified from ice-rafted debris in ocean sediments. They tend to correspond with many of the warm/cool phases

  • Minoan Warm Period (~1500–500 BCE) Before Common Era – before Christ – 3500 years ago -near a Bond warm phase.
  • Greek Dark Age Cool (~500–250 BCE) → aligns with a Bond cooling event.
  • Roman Warm Period (~250 BCE–400 CE) → rebound toward warmth.
  • Dark Ages Cool (~400–800 CE) → another Bond cooling signal.
  • Medieval Warm Period (~900–1300 CE) → warm phase between Bond cool events.
  • Little Ice Age (~1300–1850 CE) → coincides with a Bond cooling event.

The timing broadly matches Bond cycle theory, though the amplitude varies regionally.

If the ~1,500-year pacing holds, the next Bond-related cool phase could occur within the next millennium. Anthropogenic CO₂ forcing and clouds will temper but not overwhelm the Bond cycles between the Milankovitch cycles. The climate may be complicated but this isn’t IMHO.

Reply to  D Sandberg
December 28, 2025 10:30 am

Who could ever forget ‘Unstoppable Global Warming, Every ~ 1500 Years‘ — a sesqui-millennial cycle, based upon findings of G. C. Bond et al. Science (1997)?

Enjoy the comparative warmth while we can —
… given that we’re now
~ eight (8) millennia past the Holocene Optimum, and
~ three (3) centennia into this cycle’s warm-period —
And never bet against the deadly threat of ‘unstoppable’ re-glaciation, starting within the next couple centuries …
… the coincident cooling phases of Cycles short (Bond) & long (Milankovitch).

We’ve been warned!

ResourceGuy
December 27, 2025 4:45 pm

How is it going to cost us for the ultra giga mega climate supercomputer in order to add clouds to the models and their 400 odd versions?

Denis
December 27, 2025 8:18 pm

NOAA data says that global cloud cover has declined in recent decades by a few percent. Would that not cause surface temperature to globally increase?

December 27, 2025 8:24 pm

There is no heat imbalance in the Yukon. Environment Canada has issued a cold warming that windchill could plunge air temperature to -55° C. In Northern BC temperature could drop to -35° C.

There is much talk and hype about global warming. Why is it that there is no discussions of winter? In winter in Canada, carbon dioxide hibernates.

Reply to  Harold Pierce
December 28, 2025 6:47 am

Actually as I told you before it’s the water that hibernates! In fact the CO2 increases in the winter in the Arctic (see Barrow) https://gml.noaa.gov/dv/iadv/graph.php?code=BRW&program=ccgg&type=ts

Reply to  Phil.
December 28, 2025 7:46 am

Water never hibernates. Winter storms have deluged California with massive amounts of water causing mudslides and floods. Storms are dumping huge amounts of snow in the Midwest and Northeast. Compared to carbon dioxide, water is a killer molecule.

Reply to  Harold Pierce
December 28, 2025 3:30 pm

You were talking about Yukon and temperatures of -55ºC, not much water under those conditions!

Sparta Nova 4
December 29, 2025 7:07 am

“rather than by changes in heat escaping to space”

Oh boy.

Space is essentially a vacuum. Without molecules, without exchange of kinetic energy due to molecular collision, there is no heat.

Heat is not energy.

Once again a common social context driven definition in lieu of a precise scientific definition.

Heat is the flow of thermal energy across a thermal (temperature) gradient requiring kinetic energy exchanges from molecular collisions.

Control the language, control the ideas.

Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
December 30, 2025 4:36 am

Without molecules, without exchange of kinetic energy due to molecular collision, there is no heat.”

Perhaps it would be better to say “there is no TEMPERATURE”?

The concept of thermal” energy is based on the motion of matter. i.e. it’s temperature. However, power from the motion of matter can be transmitted via EM waves which don’t have kinetic energy as a component. It’s those EM waves that escape to space.

rxc6422
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
January 3, 2026 10:45 am

I think you are ignoring that large glowing ball that you see in the sky during the day. It transmits a LOT of heat, without molecules, to the entire solar system, and beyond.