Letter | Published:

Response of Arctic temperature to changes in emissions of short-lived climate forcers

Nature Climate Change volume 6, pages 286289 (2016) | Download Citation


There is growing scientific1,2 and political3,4 interest in the impacts of climate change and anthropogenic emissions on the Arctic. Over recent decades temperatures in the Arctic have increased at twice the global rate, largely as a result of ice–albedo and temperature feedbacks5,6,7,8. Although deep cuts in global CO2 emissions are required to slow this warming, there is also growing interest in the potential for reducing short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs; refs 9,10). Politically, action on SLCFs may be particularly promising because the benefits of mitigation are seen more quickly than for mitigation of CO2 and there are large co-benefits in terms of improved air quality11. This Letter is one of the first to systematically quantify the Arctic climate impact of regional SLCFs emissions, taking into account black carbon (BC), sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), organic carbon (OC) and tropospheric ozone (O3), and their transport processes and transformations in the atmosphere. This study extends the scope of previous works2,12 by including more detailed calculations of Arctic radiative forcing and quantifying the Arctic temperature response. We find that the largest Arctic warming source is from emissions within the Asian nations owing to the large absolute amount of emissions. However, the Arctic is most sensitive, per unit mass emitted, to SLCFs emissions from a small number of activities within the Arctic nations themselves. A stringent, but technically feasible mitigation scenario for SLCFs, phased in from 2015 to 2030, could cut warming by 0.2 (±0.17) K in 2050.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1.

    et al. One hundred years of Arctic surface temperature variation due to anthropogenic influence. Sci. Rep. 3, 2645 (2013).

  2. 2.

    et al. The Impact of Black Carbon on Arctic Climate (Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), 2011).

  3. 3.

    Time to Act to Reduce Short-lived Climate Pollutants (Climate and Clean Air Coalition, UNEP, 2014); .

  4. 4.

    Summary for Policy-makers: Arctic Climate Issues 2015 (Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), 2015).

  5. 5.

    et al. in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (eds Stocker, T. F. et al.) 159–254 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

  6. 6.

    & The central role of diminishing sea ice in recent Arctic temperature amplification. Nature 464, 1334–1337 (2010).

  7. 7.

    et al. Trends in Arctic sea ice extent from CMIP5, CMIP3 and observations. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L16502 (2012).

  8. 8.

    & Arctic amplification dominated by temperature feedbacks in contemporary climate models. Nature Geosci. 7, 181–184 (2014).

  9. 9.

    Near-Term Climate Protection and Clean Air Benefits: Actions for Controlling Short-Lived Climate Forcers (UNEP, 2011); .

  10. 10.

    et al. Simultaneously mitigating near-term climate change and improving human health and food security. Science 335, 183–189 (2012).

  11. 11.

    et al. Improved representation of investment decisions in assessments of CO2 mitigation. Nature Clim. Change 5, 436–440 (2015).

  12. 12.

    et al. Short-lived pollutants in the Arctic: Their climate impact and possible mitigation strategies. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 8, 1723–1735 (2008).

  13. 13.

    & Soot climate forcing via snow and ice albedos. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 423–428 (2004).

  14. 14.

    Climate response of fossil fuel and biofuel soot, accounting for soot’s feedback to snow and sea ice albedo and emissivity. J. Geophys. Res. 109, D21201 (2004).

  15. 15.

    , , & Present-day climate forcing and response from black carbon in snow. J. Geophys. Res. 112, 2156–2202 (2007).

  16. 16.

    et al. Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: A scientific assessment. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 118, 5380–5552 (2013).

  17. 17.

    & Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics: From Air Pollution to Climate Change 2nd edn (Wiley, 2006).

  18. 18.

    & Climate response to regional radiative forcing during the twentieth century. Nature Geosci. 2, 294–300 (2009).

  19. 19.

    Evaluation of the absolute regional temperature potential. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 12, 7955–7960 (2012).

  20. 20.

    et al. Global and regional temperature-change potentials for near-term climate forcers. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 13, 2471–2485 (2013).

  21. 21.

    Arctic climate sensitivity to local black carbon. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 118, 1840–1851 (2013).

  22. 22.

    et al. The Arctic response to remote and local forcing of black carbon. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 13, 211–224 (2013).

  23. 23.

    et al. ECLIPSE v4a: Global Emission Data Set Developed with the GAINS Model for the Period 2005 to 2050: Key Features and Principal Data Sources (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), 2013); .

  24. 24.

    et al. Evaluating the climate and air quality impacts of short-lived pollutants. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 15, 10529–10566 (2015).

  25. 25.

    , & Attribution of Arctic temperature change to greenhouse-gas and aerosol influences. Nature Clim. Change 5, 246–249 (2015).

  26. 26.

    (ed.) Future Emissions of Air Pollutants in Europe–Current Legislation Baseline and the Scope for Further Reductions TSAP Report No. 1, version 1.0 (DG-Environment of the European Commission, 2012).

  27. 27.

    et al. Aerosol indirect effects—general circulation model intercomparison and evaluation with satellite data. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 9, 8697–8717 (2009).

  28. 28.

    et al. Stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations at low levels: An assessment of reduction strategies and costs. Climatic Change 81, 119–159 (2007).

  29. 29.

    , & Scenarios of long-term socio-economic and environmental development under climate stabilization. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 74, 887–935 (2007).

  30. 30.

    Global Warming Gridlock: Creating More Effective Strategies for Protecting the Planet (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011).

  31. 31.

    et al. Climate simulations for 1880–2003 with GISS modelE. Clim. Dynam. 29, 661–696 (2007).

  32. 32.

    , & The evolution of climate sensitivity and climate feedbacks in the Community Atmosphere Model. J. Clim. 25, 1453–1469 (2012).

  33. 33.

    & Climate trade-off between black carbon and carbon dioxide emissions. Energy Policy 36, 193–200 (2008).

Download references


This paper was developed as part of the Arctic Monitoring Assessment Programme (AMAP). The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under grant agreement no 282688—ECLIPSE. M.S. was supported by The Norwegian Research Council by grant number 235548/E10, CRAICC and through the NOTUR/Norstore project. K.v.S. acknowledges support by NSERC through the Canadian NETCARE research network. M.G.F. was also supported by NSF ARC-1253154. Contributions by SMHI were funded by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency under contract NV-09414-12 and through the Swedish Clean Air and Climate Research Program (Scac).

Author information


  1. Center for International Climate and Energy Research—Oslo (CICERO), 1129 Blindern, 0318 Oslo, Norway

    • M. Sand
    •  & T. K. Berntsen
  2. Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, 1047 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway

    • T. K. Berntsen
  3. Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis, Environment Canada, Victoria, British Columbia V8W 3R4, Canada

    • K. von Salzen
  4. Climate and Space Sciences and Engineering, 2455 Hayward Street, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA

    • M. G. Flanner
  5. Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, 601 76 Norrköping, Sweden

    • J. Langner
  6. School of Global Policy and Strategy, University of California at San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, California 92093, USA

    • D. G. Victor


  1. Search for M. Sand in:

  2. Search for T. K. Berntsen in:

  3. Search for K. von Salzen in:

  4. Search for M. G. Flanner in:

  5. Search for J. Langner in:

  6. Search for D. G. Victor in:


M.G.F., K.v.S., J.L., T.K.B. and M.S. conceived, designed and performed the model simulations and analysed the data; M.S. made the figures and led the writing of the paper. All authors contributed to the writing of the paper.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Sand.

Supplementary information

About this article

Publication history






Further reading