Climate Warming Faster Than We Planned For?
- Gregory Andrews
- 15 hours ago
- 3 min read
Will 2026 be the hottest year ever recorded, or merely the second hottest? The answer will depend on which global temperature dataset is used. Some datasets place the projected 2026 temperature just above the 2024 record; others put it a few hundredths of a degree below. That distinction matters to climate scientists. But it means little to us, the communities confronting heatwaves, fires and floods, nor to ecosystems already being pushed towards collapse.
A more important warning is that the climate now appears to be warming much faster than governments, institutions and communities have planned for.
The warning behind the numbers
Several indicators are now moving in the same dangerous direction. Earth is retaining substantially more heat than it releases into space, with about 90 per cent of that excess entering the oceans. The latest global climate indicators assessment estimates that human-induced warming reached 1.37°C above pre-industrial levels in 2025 and is rising at around 0.27°C per decade.
At the same time, the world is reducing sulphur pollution from industry and shipping. This is essential for human health, but sulphate aerosols reflect sunlight and brighten clouds. So as that pollution declines, some of the artificial cooling that previously masked the greenhouse effect is disappearing. That’s not an argument for keeping dirty air. It’s an argument for cutting fossil-fuel emissions much faster. Scientists are also discovering that changes in clouds and declining planetary reflectivity caused by climate change are allowing Earth to absorb still more solar energy.
Then on top of all this, a powerful El Niño is developing. El Niños transfer heat from the ocean into the atmosphere, and this one’s greatest effect on annual global temperature will likely be felt in 2027.
What science has not yet resolved
The central question is whether recent temperature surges reflect the established warming trend amplified by natural variability, or whether the underlying warming rate itself is now accelerating sharply. The more concerning explanation points to the possibility that the climate is more sensitive to greenhouse gases than estimates have previously assumed.
One record year can’t settle that question. Even an extraordinary 2026 or 2027 could be produced by a very strong El Niño superimposed on relentless human-caused warming. The more revealing evidence will come after El Niño fades. If temperatures stay high during neutral or La Niña years, the case for a major acceleration will become much stronger.
But here’s the thing, with climate chaos already wreaking havoc on communities and ecosystems, waiting for scientific certainty would be reckless. Climate policy is risk management, not a criminal trial. When an outcome is both credible and potentially catastrophic, uncertainty is a reason for precaution - not an excuse for delay.
Australia can’t sit this out
Australia is acutely exposed. A strong El Niño means increased likelihood of extreme heat, drought and dangerous fire weather this coming summer. Country is changing faster than many species, landscapes and cultural practices can adapt - my recent post on Gang-gang cockatoos is just one example. First Nations communities, regional communities and people with the fewest resources are also exposed first and worst.
And let’s be honest. Australia is directly and significantly contributing to the danger. We can’t celebrate renewable-energy progress at home while approving new coal and gas projects whose exported emissions heat the same atmosphere. The possibility of faster warming makes every new fossil-fuel development more reckless and less defensible.
The wrong benchmark
A single year at 1.7°C above pre-industrial temperatures may not formally breach the Paris Agreement’s long-term threshold. But people and ecosystems experience actual heat, not a 20-year statistical average. The resulting crop damage, heat deaths and species losses will be catastrophic.
The danger isn’t that one dataset might rank 2026 first while another ranks it second. It’s that our policies and preparedness are based on a climate changing much more gradually than the one now emerging.
The rational response is to cut emissions faster, stop expanding coal and gas, prepare communities for worsening extremes and give ecosystems the best possible chance to survive. If the more moderate interpretation proves correct, all of those actions will still be necessary. If the more dangerous interpretation is right, every year of delay will be devastating.
This resonates with my seven years discussing climate change on ABC Radio. Scientists often told me privately that their public conclusions had been tempered, not by the evidence, but by institutional caution about appearing alarmist. Perhaps the uncomfortable irony is that, by making the science more socially palatable, we also made the consequences more surprising.
I’ve noticed the climate denialists are starting to hit the comments section of your page Gregory. Good work. You’re disrupting them.👍🏽
And it'a not just ecosystems that are suffering, Gregory. How many deaths from heatstroke have already occurred due to the high temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere this year? How many people have died due to the fires that are currently burning? Who will take responsibility for those deaths? And will governments ever be held to account?