CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 254Atmospheric aerosols and cloudsAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsClimate Change and Geoengineering

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Weak average liquid-cloud-water response to anthropogenic aerosols

Open access
Toll, Velle, Christensen, Matthew, Quaas, Johannes, Bellouin, Nicolas·2019·Nature
DOI 10.1038/s41586-019-1423-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The cooling of the Earth's climate through the effects of anthropogenic aerosols on clouds offsets an unknown fraction of greenhouse gas warming. An increase in the amount of water inside liquid-phase clouds induced by aerosols, through the suppression of rain formation, has been postulated to lead to substantial cooling, which would imply that the Earth's surface temperature is highly sensitive to anthropogenic forcing. Here we provide direct observational evidence that, instead of a strong increase, aerosols cause a relatively weak average decrease in the amount of water in liquid-phase clouds compared with unpolluted clouds. Measurements of polluted clouds downwind of various anthropogenic sources-such as oil refineries, smelters, coal-fired power plants, cities, wildfires and ships-reveal that aerosol-induced cloud-water increases, caused by suppressed rain formation, and decreases, caused by enhanced evaporation of cloud water, partially cancel each other out. We estimate that the observed decrease in cloud water offsets 23% of the global climate-cooling effect caused by aerosol-induced increases in the concentration of cloud droplets. These findings invalidate the hypothesis that increases in cloud water cause a substantial climate cooling effect and translate into reduced uncertainty in projections of future climate.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41586-019-1423-9

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Hobbs, P. et al. Emissions from ships with respect to their effects on clouds. J. Atmos. Sci. 57, 2570–2590 (2000). · DOI
  2. Brenguier, J. et al. Radiative properties of boundary-layer clouds: droplet effective radius versus number concentration. J. Atmos. Sci. 57, 803–821 (2000). · DOI
  3. Ackerman, A. et al. Effects of aerosols on cloud albedo: evaluation of Twomey’s parameterization of cloud susceptibility using measurements of ship tracks. J. Atmos. Sci. 57, 2684–2695 (2000). · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Bounding Global Aerosol Radiative Forcing of Climate Change

    Bellouin, N., Quaas, J., Gryspeerdt, E., Kinne, S., Stier, P., Watson‐Parris, D., Boucher, O., Carslaw, K. S., Christensen, M., Daniau, A. ‐., et al. (2020) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1029/2019rg000660 · Cited by 1,116

    “…although possible in individual1168 clouds, are unlikely to hold on average according to the analyses of ship, volcano, and1169 pollution tracks by Toll et al. (2017, 2019).1170 8.2 Adjustments in cloud cover C1171 The suppression of precipitation may also lead to a change in C, either via…”
    BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citation

  • Scattering and absorbing aerosols in the climate system

    Li, J., Carlson, B. E., Yung, Y. L., Lv, D., Hansen, J. E., Penner, J. E., Liao, H., Ramaswamy, V., Kahn, R. A., Zhang, P., et al. (2022) · Nature Reviews Earth & Environment · doi:10.1038/s43017-022-00296-7 · Cited by 677

    “…et al., 2018 Mulcahy et al., 2018 Petersik et al., 2018 Rémy et al., 2018 Zhou et al., 2018 Hasekamp et al., 2019 Kinne, 2019 Matus et al., 2019 Toll et al., 2019 Yoshioka et al., 2019 Bellouin et al., 2020 Diamond et al., 2020 Dittus et al., 2020 Douglas & Ecuyer, 2020 Gryspeert et al.,…”
    Background

  • Aerosols enhance cloud lifetime and brightness along the stratus-to-cumulus transition

    Christensen, M. W., Jones, W. K., & Stier, P. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1921231117 · Cited by 265

    Self-citation

  • Aerosol-cloud-climate cooling overestimated by ship-track data

    Glassmeier, F., Hoffmann, F., Johnson, J. S., Yamaguchi, T., Carslaw, K. S., & Feingold, G. (2021) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abd3980 · Cited by 205

    “Numerical values for LWP-adjustments dlnLWP/dlnN have been derived from detailed modeling and satellite studies [20, 8, 21, 22, 23, 14, 15, 24, 25, 16, 17].”
    BackgroundMethodResultInfluential

  • Aerosol‐Forced AMOC Changes in CMIP6 Historical Simulations

    Menary, M. B., Robson, J. I., Allan, R. P., Booth, B. B. B., Cassou, C., Gastineau, G., Gregory, J. M., Hodson, D., Jones, C., Mignot, J., et al. (2020) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2020gl088166 · Cited by 186

    “, 2013), and recent observational and cloud‐resolving modeling studies have also suggested that the indirect aerosol effect might have been overestimated in many climate models (Sato et al., 2018; Toll et al., 2019).”
    Background

See all 254

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Toll, V., Christensen, M., Quaas, J., & Bellouin, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Tartu (EE)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Leipzig University (DE)
  • University of Reading (GB)
Corresponding author
Toll, Velle
ORCID
Venue
Nature
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2019-07-31
Volume
572
Issue
7767
Pages
51-55
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
DOI
10.1038/s41586-019-1423-9
OpenAlex
W2965102826
Cited by
254
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 6
FWCI
15.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
correction (2020-01-03)
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Reading
  • Eesti Teadusagentuur (PSG202)
  • Natural Environment Research Council (NE/L013746/1, NE/L013479/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Geoengineering
Keywords
anthropogenic aerosols, cloud water content, aerosol-cloud interactions, cloud droplet number concentration, cloud evaporation, climate cooling effect, global warming, climate sensitivity
MeSH terms
Aerosols, Air Pollution, Human Activities, Models, Theoretical, Rain, Temperature, Water, Greenhouse Effect, Uncertainty, Climate Change

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review