MENU

Social Channels

SEARCH ARCHIVE


Additional Options
Topic

Date Range

Receive a Daily or Weekly summary of the most important articles direct to your inbox, just enter your email below:

ARCTIC
14 March 2016 16:00

Cuts in Europe’s air pollution have boosted Arctic warming by 0.5C

Robert McSweeney

Robert McSweeney

03.14.16
Icebergs in Disko Bay
© Paul Souders/Corbis
Robert McSweeney

Robert McSweeney

14.03.2016 | 4:00pm
ArcticCuts in Europe’s air pollution have boosted Arctic warming by 0.5C

Tackling air pollution in Europe since its peak in the 1970s could have magnified Arctic warming by half a degree celsius, a new study suggests.

Lower levels of air pollution have seen a decrease in the cooling effect from tiny particles emitted when fossil fuels are burned, the study says.

But it’s not a reason to hold off from cutting pollution further, the researchers tell Carbon Brief, as accumulating greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will continue to be the dominant force behind Arctic warming.

Warming Arctic

Temperatures in the Arctic are increasing more than twice as fast as the global average – a phenomenon known as Arctic amplification.

One of the main causes is the loss of sea ice in the region. As Arctic sea ice melts, energy from the sun that would have been reflected away is instead absorbed by the ocean.

Now a new study, published in Nature Geoscience, suggests that a reduction in air pollution over Europe has also been contributing to rapid Arctic warming in recent decades.

The study looks specifically at sulphur dioxide, which is emitted from power stations, vehicle exhausts and industrial processes, such as extracting metals from ore.

Sulphur dioxide reacts in the atmosphere to form tiny particles called sulphate aerosols. These have a cooling effect by scattering sunlight and stimulating clouds to form, preventing sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface.

Sulphur emissions in Europe peaked in the 1970s and have declined to around a quarter of that level as governments have tackled air pollution. This decline has meant a reduction of the aerosol cooling effect, the researchers say, magnifying Arctic warming by 0.5C since 1980.

Impact on temperature

So, how do cuts to air pollution in Europe cause an increase in temperatures many miles north in the Arctic?

There are two factors in play, the paper says. First, some of these aerosols will be blown over to the Arctic, where they have a direct cooling effect, as described above. Fewer aerosols means less cooling.

Second, reduced cooling over Europe causes an increase in the amount of heat that ocean and air currents carry northwards to the Arctic. This happens particularly during summer, the researchers say, where the influx of heat contributes to the melting of Arctic sea ice.

The researchers used an Earth system model to quantify how much the reduction in aerosols has affected surface temperatures.

They ran their model for the years 1980 to 2005, both with and without the reduction in sulphur emissions seen in Europe since 1980. The results suggest the Arctic is 0.54C warmer because of those emissions cuts, while Europe is 0.13C warmer.

To put that in context, measurements taken between October 2014 and September 2015 on land north of 60°N latitude showed the Arctic was 2.3C warmer than it was during the 1970s.

The researchers didn’t simulate the impact on the Arctic of emissions from other regions of the northern hemisphere. However, co-author Prof Annica Ekman, deputy head of the department of meteorology at Stockholm University, tells Carbon Brief that sulphur emissions from the US could also be affecting Arctic temperatures, but on a smaller scale than Europe:

“Sulphur dioxide emission changes in the US have not been as large as over Europe; the emissions were higher over Europe in the 1980s and the cuts have also been larger. But the emission reductions over the US could potentially also have added one or a few tenths of a degree to the amplified Arctic warming.”

Meanwhile, sulphur emissions over Asia have increased in recent decades, notes Ekman:

“This could, to some extent, have resulted in some masking of the warming…Our calculations indicate that the effect of changes in Asian sulphur emissions on Arctic temperatures has not been significant.”
Cyclist passes Tata Steel Factory Blast Furnaces

28 Oct 2013 — Cyclist passes the Tata Steel factory blast furnaces in Ijmuiden, Netherlands. © Frans Lemmens/Corbis.

‘Compelling evidence’

Prof Jennifer Francis from Rutgers University, who wasn’t involved in the study, but conducts research into Arctic amplification, says the paper identifies air pollution as an important factor in the loss of Arctic sea ice. She tells Carbon Brief:

“This paper presents compelling evidence that reductions in emissions of sulphate particles in Europe have contributed to amplified warming trends in the Arctic.”

However, as the study is only based on one model, the actual amount of warming could be quite a lot more or less than 0.5C, notes Dr James Screen, a senior research fellow at the University of Exeter who also wasn’t involved in the study. He tells Carbon Brief:

“Whilst the sign of the response seems robust, I would be more cautious about putting too much confidence in a number on the amount of warming. I would expect the response to vary considerably between models…so I would expect quite large errors bars around the 0.5C figure.”

‘Dominant driver’

Although tackling European air pollution has accelerated Arctic warming, that isn’t a reason to hold off from further cuts, says Ekman:

“First, millions of people die prematurely every year due to high aerosol particle levels, making it necessary to abate air pollution. Second, the anthropogenic greenhouse effect is now so large, and the current aerosol particle emissions are comparatively low, so a further reduction of the aerosol particle emissions will most likely not have a huge impact on future warming.”

Screen also emphasises that it’s greenhouse gases that are still the principal cause of Arctic warming, not aerosols:

“This warming due to aerosol reductions is temporary, and, looking longer term, one cannot get past the fact that the dominant driver of Arctic warming – in the past and future – is the increase in greenhouse gases.”
Main image: 10 Jun 2010, Ilulissat, Greenland — Setting midnight sun lights melting icebergs from Jakobshavn Isfjord along Disko Bay on summer evening.

Acosta Navarro, J. C. et al. (2016) Amplification of Arctic warming by past air pollution reductions in Europe, Nature Geoscience, doi:10.1038/ngeo2673.

Sharelines from this story
  • Cuts in Europe's air pollution have boosted Arctic warming by 0.5C

Related Articles

THE BRIEF

Expert analysis directly to your inbox.

Get a Daily or Weekly round-up of all the important articles and papers selected by Carbon Brief by email.

THE BRIEF

Expert analysis directly to your inbox.

Get a Daily or Weekly round-up of all the important articles and papers selected by Carbon Brief by email.