Invisible Gas Clouds Are Warming the Poles Faster Than We Predicted

This is actually science, not science fiction.

A white square sits on top of a sea so dark it could be black. Light wispy clouds adorn it.

Iceberg A-23A, drifting northward across the Weddell Sea. NASA Earth/Zuma

This story was originally published by Wired and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

If you had lived some 50 million years ago and taken a trip to the poles, you would have found lush forests and creatures like crocodiles instead of miles-thick ice sheets. That’s because during the Eocene, greenhouse gas concentrations were much higher than they are today, leading to a natural period of global warming. Levels of methane, which is 80 times as potent a planet-warmer as carbon dioxide, were especially high, ratcheting up temperatures and allowing plants and animals to migrate toward the poles—just as they’re slowly doing once again.

Methane may have been heating the Eocene poles in another more subtle, fascinating way: by creating a blanket of invisible clouds that trapped warmth against the surface. That alone could have boosted warming at the poles by 7 degrees Celsius during the coldest winter months, according to a paper recently published in Nature Geoscience. “We know that when methane is in the atmosphere, it gets oxidized, and then it produces water vapor,” says climate scientist and lead author Deepashree Dutta, who’s now at the University of Cambridge but did the research at the University of New South Wales. “This water vapor then travels upward into the stratosphere, and helps to form polar stratospheric clouds,” or PSCs for short.

The Arctic is today warming up to four times faster than the rest of the planet due in part to gnarly feedback loops: Ice melts, which exposes darker water or land underneath, which heats up faster, which leads to more warming and more melting. Scientists call this polar amplification.

Predictive climate models consistently underestimate polar warming; scientists’ actual observations tend to be more grim than what models expect. And this disagreement is even larger for past climates like the Eocene. PSCs may be a missing piece that explains why. They’re currently less common in the Arctic compared to Antarctica, but with greenhouse gas emissions rising, scientists are wondering weather these clouds could become more prevalent over both poles in the future.

“If we don’t have projections—that are realistic—of the warming that’s coming, then we’re probably going to get our understanding of how the system is going to shift quite wrong,” says ecologist Isla Myers-Smith of the University of British Columbia and the University of Edinburgh, who studies the Arctic but wasn’t involved in the new research. “With the recent warming that’s been going on in the Arctic, the observed temperatures are now much higher than the models have predicted.”

Clouds are a major source of uncertainty in climate science: In September, a revelation about how trees seed clouds in more temperate regions also suggested that climate models—of the preindustrial world, and of the future—might need retooling. But clouds aren’t always included in simulations. Models can only handle so much detail, given the limits of computing power.

In the Arctic and Antarctica, PSCs appear anywhere between 15 and 25 kilometers (9.3 and 15.5 miles) in the sky during cold winter conditions. They’re most often invisible, but they can be sighted when the sun is angled just right. In these cases, they’re known as mother-of-pearl clouds, on account of their wild coloration: swirls of purple, teal, and yellow. Just like high clouds do elsewhere, they form an insulating layer over the poles, which prevents rapid temperature drops.

In the Eocene, the formation of these clouds was enhanced by the positions of the Earth’s continents and mountains. For instance, the Himalayas hadn’t fully formed yet, and the lack of miles-thick ice in Greenland meant lower land elevations. That led to the proliferation of waves of pressure in the atmosphere, which deflected more energy toward the tropics. Less energy reached the Arctic stratosphere, so it cooled, forming a blanket of PSCs. Things on land got … balmy.

Luckily, continental shift in the past 50 million years has changed the topography and atmospheric circulation in a way that thins this blanket. While PSCs still form and trap heat, they aren’t as abundant as they were before. But things can heat back up: If humanity continues to spew methane into the atmosphere, that could provide the stratospheric water vapor needed to form more of these invisible clouds. “I need to be very clear: The magnitude of PSCs won’t be as high as the Eocene,” says Dutta. “And that’s probably the good news for us.”

Better understanding clouds will be supremely important as the poles continue to rapidly transform. “The intensity of the feedbacks involving clouds remains those with the greatest uncertainties,” says atmospheric chemist Sophie Szopa, who has studied the Eocene climate at France’s Laboratory for the Sciences of the Climate and Environment, but wasn’t involved in the new paper. “It is therefore necessary to compare the results of different climate models, including polar stratospheric clouds, in order to understand the importance of this feedback on polar amplification for the coming century.”

Learning how the Eocene stratosphere influenced the climate will help scientists get a better handle on what to expect next. “Basically, these past climates provide us a testbed to check our models,” says Dutta. Polar scientists can then tease apart the potential warming from natural fluctuations in Earth’s climate versus the contribution of our civilization’s gas emissions.

Improved models can also help predict how the Arctic’s ecosystems will continue to transform. The region is greening, for instance, as higher temperatures allow plant species to spread north. That, in turn, changes how the landscape absorbs or reflects the sun’s energy: If more shrubs grow, they trap a layer of snow, preventing chilly wintertime air from penetrating the ground. That could accelerate the thawing of Arctic permafrost, releasing both carbon dioxide and methane—yet another climate-warming feedback loop.

Like the rest of the world this summer, the Arctic was extremely hot. At her research site, Myers-Smith recalls temperatures reaching 77 degrees Fahrenheit. “I hadn’t ever experienced that at the site,” she says. It’s yet more evidence that the region is undergoing monumental change, and that scientists need models that can precisely track it. “Even when you work in these systems, and think you have a pretty good understanding of how things go,” she says, “you can still get surprised.”

More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with the Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with the Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate