Letter | Published:

Insensitivity of global warming potentials to carbon dioxide emission scenarios

Naturevolume 366pages251253 (1993) | Download Citation



GLOBAL warming potentials for radiatively active trace gases (such as methane and chlorofluorocarbons) have generally been expressed1–2 relative to the time-integrated climate forcing per unit emission of carbon dioxide. Previous attempts to estimate the integrated climate forcing per unit CO2 emitted have focused on perturbations to steady-state conditions in carbon-cycle models. But for non-steady-state conditions, the integrated climate forcing from a CO2 perturbation depends both on the initial conditions and on future atmospheric CO2 concentrations. As atmospheric CO2concentrations increase, the radiative forcing per unit CO2 emitted will become smaller because the strongest absorption bands will already be saturated. At the same time, higher concentrations of dissolved carbon in the surface ocean will reduce the ocean's ability to absorb excess CO2from the atmosphere. Each of these effects taken alone would affect the climate forcing from a pulse of emitted CO2 by a factor of three or more; but here we show that, taken together, they compensate for each other. The net result is that the global warming potential of CO2 relative to other radiatively active trace gases is nearly independent of the CO2emission scenario. Thus, the concept of the global warming potential remains useful, despite the nonlinearities in the climate system and uncertainties in future emissions.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1

    Shine, K. P., Derwent, R. G., Wuebbles, D. J. & Morcrete, J.-J. in Climate Change—The IPPC Scientific Assessment (eds Houghton, J. T., Jenkins, G. J. & Elphraums, J. J.) 41–68 (Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 1990).

  2. 2

    Lashof, D. A. & Ahuja, D. R. Nature 344, 529–531 (1990).

  3. 3

    Caldeira, K. Globl Biogeochem. Cycles (submitted).

  4. 4

    Siegenthaler, U. J. geophys. Res. 88, 3599–3608 (1983).

  5. 5

    Stumm, W. & Morgan, J. J. Aquatic Chemistry 2nd edn (Wiley, New York, 1981).

  6. 6

    Maier-Reimer, E. & Hasselmann, K. Clim. Dyn. 2, 63–90 (1987).

  7. 7

    Killough, G. G. & Emanuel, W. R. Tellus 33, 274–290 (1981).

  8. 8

    Hansen, J. et al. J. geophys. Res. 93, 9341–9364 (1988).

  9. 9

    Kiehl, J. T. & Dickenson, R. E. J. geophys. Res. 92, 2991–2998 (1987).

Download references

Author information

Author notes

    • Ken Caldeira

    Present address: Global Climate Research Division, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, PO Box 808, L-256, Livermore, California, 94550, USA


  1. Earth System Science Center, 248 Deike Building, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, 16802, USA

    • Ken Caldeira
    •  & James F. Kasting


  1. Search for Ken Caldeira in:

  2. Search for James F. Kasting in:

About this article

Publication history



Issue Date



Further reading


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.