Deep Sea



Will the temperature stop when the emissions are stopped ?


This may be the most important question in the whole climate debate

because the whole climate policy stands or falls on the outcome.


Climate experts Rodrigo Caballero and Thorsten Mauritsen assure us that the temperature will stop and that

Zero Emissions 2045 will work - if only emissions are reduced fast enough.


The evidence is based on the way the oceans behave and the interaction between surface and deep waters.


It is with great excitement and gratitude that I make an attempt to build on their email as well as their reference documents that can further explain the connections. A great joy and relief to all if this can work.


Many thanks to Rodrigo Caballero and Thorsten Mauritsen et al.

Click on the names below to unfold the corresponding emails


Rodrigo Caballero:



Thorsten Mauritsen



Answer from Bengt Ovelius


Rodrigo Caballero writes: Two factors..........

One is that the surface oceans are already close to thermal equilibrium with the current level of greenhouse gas forcing.


Thermal equilibrium is interpreted as if the surface temperature of the world's oceans does not differ much

from global average atmospheric temperature OK ?

So it is the atmosphere that drives the surface temperature ?











If you keep this forcing fixed (by stopping new emissions) the deep oceans will continue to warm,

but the surface will warm very little.


Isn't the fault already here?? It is not the emissions that are driving.

Thus, when new emissions are stopped, the drift is not stopped.


It is 413 ppm CO2 that is already there or 3000 Gt "too much" in the ocean and air.


The rough rule of thumb for expected global temperature:

t=1.443*cs*ln(ppmCO2/275)=21C cs=36 ppmCO2=413



The model implies that the Earth is in an oven with a temperature of +21C.

Since the Earth is there right now, we know that 413 ppm CO2 gives 0.035C/year rate of increase.

This continues for 700 years and the target is +21C.


The annual emissions are only 1% of what is already there and its effect is distributed 700 years ahead.

Emissions are almost irrelevant in this context.




Assuming climate sensitivity = 3   then the expected global temperature is


t=1.443*cs*ln(ppmCO2/275)= +1.7 C cs=3 ppmCO2=413.


Then the time constant between CO2 and temp shrinks down to almost zero.

Could this be where the trap lies ?


The cloud=Vostok

The stick is NASA last 100 years.


See more about climate sensitivity here.





Rodrigo Caballero writes: Two factors.......... The second Click for more....


Thorsten Mauritsen writes





The rough rule of thumb for expected global temperature:

t=1.443*cs*ln(ppmCO2/275)=21C cs=36 ppmCO2=413





So the oven is maintaining +21 C

A bowl of water, +1.1 C corresponds to the oceans.


What is claimed is that the surface water in the bowl stays at +1.1C

for hundreds of years due to circulation in the bowl and transport

of CO2 to the bottom water - even though the furnace is always at +21C.




Can you say that all these 4 scientific reports say the same thing when you drill down to the very core?


"The surface water in the bowl stays at +1.1C for hundreds of years thanks to circulation in the bowl and transport

of CO2 to the bottom water - even though the furnace is constantly at +21C."


IPCC_AR6_WGI_Full_Report See chapter 5



Short-lived climate pollution


If the answer is yes, the NetZero policy works

If the answer is no, the NetZero policy falls apart


This is probably the most important question in the whole climate debate.


It would be gratifying if the bowl stays cold. This physical phenomenon will then be our salvation.


Grateful if a united climate expert can confirm


1. that temperatures are continuing to rise,

when emissions are stopped, (so that climate policy can be corrected)


2. alternatively, explain so that everyone can understand why a bowl of cold water

can stay cold for 100's of years in a hot oven.



Mauritsen_Pincus_2017 :


Due to the lifetime of CO2 , the thermal inertia of the oceans,

and the temporary impacts of short-lived aerosols  and

reactive greenhouse gases, the Earth’s climate is not

equilibrated with anthropogenic forcing.


As a result, even

if fossil-fuel emissions were to suddenly cease, some level

of committed warming is expected due to past emissions as

studied previously using climate models 6–11 .


All links and references are basically part of this reasoning:




The flaw with this IPCC figure (above) is that it is calculated with the wrong climate sensitivity cs=3.



It is OK to create a theoretical world with a set of properties.

In the world painted by the IPCC with climate sensitivity = 3, this is the expected,

stabilized temperature t=1.443*cs*ln(ppmCO2/275)=+1.8C cs=3 ppmCO2=413


Our unique climate calculator, which can handle all values of climate sensitivity, shows

that the time constant in the IPCC's world must be 25 years for their world to  

meet NASA real temperature measurements (black graph below).






In the IPCC world, if you turn off all emissions, when we are now at +1.1 C

then committed warming will  end up at t=1.443*cs*ln(ppmCO2/275)=+1.8C

and stabilisation will occur in 25 years.



Compared with pre-industrial levels, we find a

committed warming of 1.5K (0.9–3.6, 5th–95th percentile) at

equilibrium,andof1.3K(0.9–2.3) within this century.However,

when assuming that ocean carbon uptake cancels remnant

greenhouse gas-induced warming on centennial timescales,

committed warming is reduced to 1.1K (0.7–1.8). In the

latter case there is a 13% riskt hat committed warming already

exceeds the1.5K targetset in Paris 15 .


All this shows that all the reports have made the same mistake: they have counted on

wrong climate sensitivity=3


The direct mathematical consequence is that the temperature stops when emissions stop.

All this is quite correct under cs=3


The problem is that the true climate sensitivity is around cs=36

and the time constant around 700 years.


Then the earth's temperature continues upwards just as fast when emissions are stopped.

This is simple mathematics.


It is serious.

All the authors seem to have fallen into the same trap !

Feel free to confirm or refute in a way that everyone can understand !





Our entire climate policy hinges on getting this right --- fast !!!!!!



I worked with a scientist in 2008 who was very clear

that temperatures don't stop at zero emissions.


Together we submitted this info and the curves below

to the IPCC senior management in May 2008. The IPCC responded and took this seriously

and promised to discuss with colleagues.



The IPCC continues to make the same errors 14 years later which may  

cause the end of civilization.


14 years would have been enough time to steer towards a workable climate policy.

Or explain why NetZero works anyway.


Please look at further discussion here at Thorsten_Mauritsen.