Zeke Hausfather

Sea Level Mis-information from DOE Here in the USA, the Department of Energy (DOE) has issued a report titled “A Critical Review of the Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate.” It is a product of the &#8…

Is sea level around the US accelerating? If you actually do the analysis, instead of just repeating talking points from decades ago, the answer is yes.
tamino.wordpress.com/2025/08/03/s...

"To use current policy scenarios in order to justify the repeal of current policies (as the EPA is attempting to do) rests on a fundamentally flawed premise. If the world actively repeals climate policies – which the US proposes doing – it would potentially push us to a higher emissions scenario."

How the DOE and EPA used and misused my research Elevating contrarian views while burying the actual science

I have a new post over at The Climate Brink on how the recent DOE report on climate science and the EPA's proposed overturning of the endangerment finding used and misused my research: www.theclimatebrink....

Nothing every changes except the climate When I became a climate scientist nearly 22 years ago, I started accumulating books on the subject. One of the first was called something1 like “Global Warming: Apocalypse or Hot Air?” …

Nothing ever changes but the climate

Thorts on a repought.

diagrammonkey.wordpress.com/2025/08/01/n...

Ahh, didn't realize DMs here required mutual follows.

Traveling at the moment on a family vacation so I might be slow to respond, but feel free to send me a DM.

Scientists Say New Government Climate Report Twists Their Work A new Department of Energy report “fundamentally misrepresents” climate research and leaves out key context, multiple scientists cited in the report tell WIRED.

NEW: i spoke to nine (!) scientists across several disciplines whose work was cited in the new Department of Energy report that downplays the severity of climate change. all of them say their work was misrepresented, cherry picked, and/or lacked context —

Note that the range here is relative to preindustrial. If we look at warming since 1990 the upper bound of plausible values would be closer to 3.4C.

Yeh, in retrospect I could have made the title of the graph clearer. It’s explained better in the article!

With six months behind us, I estimate that there is a less than 1% chance of 2025 being the warmest year, 51% chance of second warmest, and 49% chance of third warmest. There is a roughly 9% chance that 2025 annual temperatures will exceed 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

2025 has seen the second warmest first half of the year on record after 2024 – and is on track to be the second or third warmest year since records began in 1850. My latest State of the Climate report over at Carbon Brief: www.carbonbrief.org/...

It would be nice to have, though it’s a 100 page Gish gallop of claims that would take weeks of work to properly address. I for one am traveling on vacation for the next week and I think my wife might kill be if I worked on it before I get back… 😉

Its only the high end warming outcomes of >4C that have become increasingly unlikely as the world has moved toward lower emissions scenarios. The wide range of climate sensitivity and carbon cycle feedbacks still makes it impossible to rule out up to 4C: journals.sagepub.com...

Specifically, in our paper we argue that RCP4.5 or RCP6.0 are more realistic representations of 2100 warming under current policy than the increasingly implausible RCP8.5 scenario. But the lower of those two – RCP4.5 – gives a 2100 warming range of around 1.8C to 4C!

The EPA cited my paper in their argument against the endangerment finding today. However, their point is completely backwards: my paper actually supports the EPA's 2009 range of 1.8C to 4C warming by 2100. www.nature.com/artic...

Bike man meme. Riding the bike: we need energy dominance and affordability! Putting a stick through the spikes: OBBB, permitting restrictions, red tape, cancelling a transmission line On the ground, hurt: but, but, but blackouts are coming

I got to be a guest host on the Open Curcuit podcast with @stephenlacey.bsky.social & @cleangridview.bsky.social this week, & here’s how we talked about the One Big Beautiful Bill & what it does to raise costs, raise emissions, & reduce reliability. 🔌💡 Listen: www.latitudemedia.com/news/open-ci...

Global emissions from heating are about 4x those from cooling.

Air conditioning is an important and lifesaving adaptation to climate change.

Decarbonize the grid.

I think Jane meant to say that it’s warming more rapidly than it has in the past, and that 2023/2024 were unusually warm relative to the prior years.

And no, I'm not only saying that because of this bit 😉

Opinion | Is Decarbonization Dead? Trump just shredded America’s most ambitious climate policy. Jane Flegal and Jesse Jenkins discuss what this means for the future of renewable energy in the U.S.

Great Ezra Klein interview with Jane Flegal and Jesse Jenkins this week on the emissions impacts of the partial repeal of the Biden administration's signature climate law and the path forward for decarbonization: www.nytimes.com/2025...

Alas, I have too many ongoing peer-reviewed publications on my plate to do anything here (and the p=0.125 is not strong enough to put too much faith in!), so it will probably live on Substack for the time being. I do wish there were an interim space between quick analyses and peer-reviewed pubs...

Not sure what you are saying, but I think the content of that Politico piece holds up pretty well 5 years later (even if the headline is crap).

Here was the thread at the time: x.com/hausfath/sta...

And its a rather different thing to oppose an immediate ban on fracking vs supporting further gas expansion.

Nope, its pretty much universally true that the publication picks the article title for op-eds, not the author. I was a bit annoyed at the time and posted about it on twitter (RIP) 😛

Biofuel demand to soak up more than half of US soyoil production next year, USDA says U.S. biofuel makers will consume more than half of all soybean oil produced in the United States next year as a recent flurry of federal policy moves has transformed the sector, including higher blending mandates and curbs on foreign biofuel imports and feedstocks, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said on Friday.

People disagree about nearly everything in the climate space.

EXCEPT BIOFUELS.

Absolutely everybody thinks using corn & soy for fuel is a terrible idea - except the people who stand to gain from it, and the people who want those folks' votes.

www.reuters.com/sustainabili...

Hah, that piece is a classic example of why op-ed writers should get to pick their own headlines... 🤦‍♂️

There was a bug in my original code involving a "total" line in the EIA data being counted as a generation type and resulting in too small non-hydro renewable % numbers (H/T to @richardmeyer.bsky.social). Its now fixed in the article, though it doesn't change the overall conclusion:

Has renewable energy reduced electricity prices? As I discuss over at The Climate Brink, empirical evidence over the past 24 years in the US points to yes: www.theclimatebrink....

Here is the change in non-hydro utility scale renewables and electricity prices for each state.

Climate change has increased the odds of extreme regional forest fire years globally - Nature Communications The authors show that extreme fire years in global forests align with rare fire weather extremes. Climate change has made such extremes 88-152% more probable. These findings highlight the need for act...

🌳 🔥 🌎 Our new paper: The extreme fire-prone #weather underpinning some of the worst #wildfire episodes this century has become more than twice as likely due to #climate change—a trend now evident across much of the world's tropical and mid-latitude #forests.

www.nature.com/articles/s41...

Time series of Earth's global average temperature over time, between 1850 and 2024, as calculated by the Berkeley Earth research group. It depicts the Earth's average temperature as having risen to near or above 1.5C above the late 1800s average by 2023-2024.

And now: A thread regarding my thoughts on "1.5°C"--not only as a Paris Agreement target, but also re: relevance to recent #climate events & overlaps (or not) w/geophysical realities. (This was originally written as a response to a journalist, who used excerpts in their article.)