Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2654
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2654
20 May 2026
 | 20 May 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).

Recent Modelling Studies Systematically Underestimate the Warming from IMO2020 Shipping Regulations

Josh Smith, Matthew Henry, Masaru Yoshioka, Ben Johnson, and Jim Haywood

Abstract. The 2020 International Maritime Organisation regulations (IMO2020) reduced shipping SO2 emissions by roughly 80%, decreasing the cooling effect of sulphate aerosols on marine clouds, leading to a positive radiative forcing. Recent Global Climate Model (GCM) studies agree on a positive Effective Radiative Forcing (ERF) of ~0.10 W m-2 from IMO2020. However, these studies rely on parameterisations for sub-grid scale emission processes with assumptions on primary sulphate fraction, particle size, and injection altitude, which contradict observational evidence for shipping exhaust plumes. Using the UKESM1.1 climate model, we conduct sensitivity experiments to quantify the impact of these uncertainties. We find that reallocating primary sulphate from the accumulation and coarse modes to the Aitken mode increases the IMO2020 ERF from 0.10 W m-2 to between 0.19 and 0.31 W m-2, and additionally increasing primary sulphate fraction increases this further up to 0.41 W m-2. This sensitivity is driven primarily by the cloud radiative effect (ΔCRE) responding to an order-of-magnitude increase in modelled aerosol number emissions for the same sulphur mass, and is consistent with earlier shipping studies using other GCMs. Because recent GCM estimates rely on the same biased sub-grid emission assumptions, we argue this underestimate is structural across recent studies, and we find that the default-parameter experiment with a 0.10Wm-2 forcing significantly underestimates regional ΔCRE values relative to published satellite observations. An IMO2020 ERF 2 to 4 times the current consensus would explain a larger portion of Earth's energy imbalance since 2020 and of the recent global temperature surge.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Josh Smith, Matthew Henry, Masaru Yoshioka, Ben Johnson, and Jim Haywood

Status: open (until 02 Jul 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Josh Smith, Matthew Henry, Masaru Yoshioka, Ben Johnson, and Jim Haywood

Data sets

Data and Code in support of: Recent Modelling Studies Systematically Underestimate the Warming from IMO2020 Shipping Regulations Josh Smith https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20076407

Josh Smith, Matthew Henry, Masaru Yoshioka, Ben Johnson, and Jim Haywood
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 21 May 2026
Download
Short summary
In 2020, new international rules cut sulphur in shipping fuels by roughly eighty percent, removing particles that had been brightening clouds over the oceans and reflecting sunlight. Using a climate model, we tested how this loss of cooling has been calculated and found that recent studies have 
likely underestimated the resulting warming by a factor of two to four. This means cleaner shipping fuels may be contributing more to recent global warming than previously recognised.
Share