Quantifying non-CO2 contributions to remaining carbon budgets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The IPCC Special Report on 1.5 °C concluded that anthropogenic global warming is determined by cumulative anthropogenic CO 2 emissions and the non-CO 2 radiative forcing level in the decades prior to peak warming. We quantify this using CO 2 -forcing-equivalent (CO 2 -fe) emissions. We produce an observationally constrained estimate of the Transient Climate Response to cumulative carbon Emissions (TCRE), giving a 90% confidence interval of 0.26–0.78 °C/TtCO 2 , implying a remaining total CO 2 -fe budget from 2020 to 1.5 °C of 350–1040 GtCO 2 -fe, where non-CO 2 forcing changes take up 50 to 300 GtCO 2 -fe. Using a central non-CO 2 forcing estimate, the remaining CO 2 budgets are 640, 545, 455 GtCO 2 for a 33, 50 or 66% chance of limiting warming to 1.5 °C. We discuss the impact of GMST revisions and the contribution of non-CO 2 mitigation to remaining budgets, determining that reporting budgets in CO 2 -fe for alternative definitions of GMST, displaying CO 2 and non-CO 2 contributions using a two-dimensional presentation, offers the most transparent approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".