The Law Office of Matthew Barry

  • Send Message

Article 15 Process

This Article is meant to address the Article 15 process in the Army.  The Article 15 Process is governed by AR 27-10 , specifically Chapter 3.  Appendix C also has a proposed script for Commanders to use, which further explains the Article 15 Process.

An Article 15 begins when a Soldier, NCO, or Officer is notified by the imposing Commander, or a delegee (sometimes a lower-level Commander or a CSM/1SG).  The Commander will read a notification that is very similar to this: "As your commander, I have disciplinary powers under Article 15 of the UCMJ. I have received a report that you violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and I am considering imposing nonjudicial punishment. This is not a formal trial like a court-martial.  As a record of these proceedings, I will use DA Form 2627 .  I now hand you this form.  Read items 1 and 2.  Item 1 states the offense(s) you are reported to have committed and item 2 lists the rights you have in these proceedings.  Under these provisions of Article 31 of the UCMJ, you are not required to make any statement or provide any information concerning the alleged offense(s).  If you do, it may be used against you in these proceedings or in a trial by court-martial.  You have the right to consult with a lawyer as stated in item 2."

The imposing Commander, or his/her delegee, then gives the Soldier in question the opportunity to read over the Article 15 itself and asks if he/she has any questions and if he/she understands their rights.  The imposing Commander, or his/her delegee, then says something similar to this: "You have to decide whether you want to demand trial by court-martial.  If you demand a court-martial these proceedings will stop.  I then will have to decide whether to initiate court-martial proceedings against you.  If you were to be tried by court-martial for the offense(s) alleged against you, you could be tried by summary court-martial, special court-martial, or general court-martial.  If you were tried by special or general court-martial you would be able to be represented by a military lawyer appointed at no expense to you or by a civilian lawyer of your choosing at no expense to the government. If you do not demand trial by court-martial, you must then decide whether you want to present witnesses or submit other evidence in defense, extenuation, and/or mitigation.  Your decision not to demand trial by court-martial will not be considered as an admission that you committed the offense(s) stated in item 1; you can still submit evidence on your behalf. Evidence in defense is facts showing that you did not commit the offense(s) stated in item 1.  Even if you cannot present any evidence in defense, you can still present evidence in extenuation or mitigation. Evidence in extenuation is circumstances surrounding the offense showing that the offense was not very serious.  Evidence in mitigation is facts about you showing that you are a good Soldier and that you deserve light punishment.  You can make a statement and request to have a spokesperson appear with you and speak on your behalf.  I will interview any available witnesses and consider any evidence you think I should examine. Finally, you must decide whether you wish to request that the proceedings be open to the public. Do you understand the decisions you have to make."

The Soldier in question then is given the opportunity to talk to a lawyer before making the elections that were just explained. Every Soldier in this situation should exercise the opportunity to talk to a lawyer before even making any elections.  One of those elections, demanding a trial by court-martial, is further explained at this link .  The imposing Commander then reads a statement similar to the following: "You will have 48 hours to think about what you should do in this case. You may advise me of your decision at any time within the 48-hour period and waive the remainder of the time if you so desire.  If you do not make a timely demand for trial or if you refused to sign that part of DA Form 2627 indicating your decision on these matters, I (the commander) can continue with these Article 15 proceedings even without your consent. You are dismissed."

At that point, the proceedings are recessed to give the Soldier in question a chance to consult with a lawyer.  This entire process is typically called the "first reading." Typically, more than 48 hours will be provided, because TDS is so slow to meet with the Soldier in question. Furthermore, more time is needed to submit a complete Defense, in most cases.  A lawyer can help request a delay.

After the Soldier in question is given the chance to consult with a lawyer, the "second reading" of the Article 15 is scheduled.  The Soldier should be prepared to make the elections discussed above at the second reading, as well as present a full Defense, and/or matters in mitigation and extenuation.  This could consist of the testimony of the Soldier, written matters signed by the Soldier, live witnesses, sworn statements, memorandums for record, written statements of support, and/or other forms of evidence (text messages, videos, photos, emails, etc.).  What to present at a second reading of an Article 15 should be discussed in detail with an experienced Military Lawyer .

During the second reading, there is no set script for the Commander to follow.  However, typically, the Commander asks the Soldier if he/she has anything to present.  The Soldier then presents what he/she wants to. The Commander then either makes a decision on the spot, or recesses the proceedings to think about a decision.  The Commander sometimes consults the chain of command before making a decision.  He/she then calls the Soldier back in and informs him/her of the decision.  It is important to note that the standard of proof at an Article 15, in the Army, is beyond a reasonable doubt.  That means that a Soldier can only be found guilty if the allegations against them are proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the same legal standard for a Court-Martial and other criminal trials. The Soldier in question has to decide whether to appeal either the findings or the punishment, on the spot.  Article 15 appeals are discussed more at this link .

Article 15s can be career altering.  In addition to a Soldier losing rank, pay, and liberty, the filing of an Article 15 in a Soldier's OMPF currently triggers review under the Army QMP Process . Furthermore, the Command, or HRC in the case of Officers, will often follow up an Article 15 with an administrative separation action.  Click these links to learn more: Army Enlisted Separation Process and Army Officer Separation Process .

Any Soldier facing the Article 15 process will be able to meet with a JAG assigned to Trial Defense Services (TDS).  These JAGs typically have little time to apply to Article 15 clients, because of their otherwise heavy Court-Martial caseload.  Typically, a Soldier is left to prepare their own Defense, with TDS offering to review whatever they come up with. For many reasons, this is usually ill-advised. Soldiers facing an Article 15 have the option to hire a Civilian Attorney to assist in their decisions and response.

This Article was written by Attorney Matthew Barry.

Contact us today for a free consultation .

how to write an article 15

  • Corrective Training
  • Evaluations
  • Inspections
  • Military Women
  • Separations
  • Resource Center
  • Mentoring Resources
  • Meet Our Experts

The Mentor - A Comprehensive Guide to Army Counseling and Leadership

Counseling and Article 15: Leader Responsibilities

The Mentor - A Comprehensive Guide to Army Counseling and Leadership

Receiving an Article 15 is a significant emotional event in a Soldier’s life. Leaders sometimes forget how difficult these times can be for Soldiers and their families. While correcting substandard performance is important, it is equally important to plan for the future.

We must make every effort to ensure Soldiers understand they can overcome this event and become a productive member of the team. Conducting an effective counseling session before and after the Article 15 procedure will help the Soldier understand what has happened, why it happened, and how they can move forward in a positive manner. Each level of leadership is responsible for setting the Soldier up for success. The Soldier is responsible for implementing a positive change. With these thoughts in mind I would like to offer the following guidance for dealing with a Soldier facing an Article 15 proceeding:

Counseling before the Article 15

Counseling after the Article 15

Follow us and never miss a post!


You might be interested in…


You Might Also Like…

how to write an article 15

Disclaimer: Though all content posted on is reviewed by our qualified subject matter experts, you should not make decisions based solely on the information contained in this post. Use information from multiple sources when making important professional decisions. This is not an official government website.


Can a soldier receive an article 15 even if that soldier never received an initial counseling from their first line supervisor?

Mark Gerecht


SGT Rod, Yes a counseling statement is not required to recommend UCMJ. Think about it this way. If a Soldier commits an act punishable by UCMJ there is no requirement to counsel the Soldier. The leader can simply request an Article 15.

Hope this Helps

Leave a Comment

Visit Our Store…

Save 5% off your first order with the Coupon Code ASKTOP05

how to write an article 15

Subscribe to our mailing list

Find out what's new at, new product notifications, and get exclusive offers!

how to write an article 15

AskTOP is a blog that connects you to a net­work of active and retired mil­i­tary lead­ers who answer your Army leadership questions. Do you have a question about Army doctrine? Have you been confronted by an ethical dilemma? Are you looking for an unbiased outside opinion? Submit your question and AskTOP!

Information on AskTOP is categorized into a number of subject areas for convenient browsing. Use the Subject drop-down menu in the main navigation bar to choose from a wide variety of topics including Army Awards, Army Counseling, Army Corrective Training, Army Inspections, Army Leadership, Women in the Army, Army Promotions, Army Training, and Military Justice.

AskTOP is hosted by CSM Mark Gerecht (US Army Retired) and features guest articles authored by a number of qualified Subject Matter Experts .

Recent Articles

Recently Answered

© 2023 – Leader Development for Army Professionals. All rights reserved.

All materials contained on this site are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published, broadcast, or in any way exploited without the prior written permission of Mentor Enterprises, Inc. or in the case of third party materials, the owner of that content. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.

Ask Your Question

What's this.

In contrast to formal courts-martial, Article 15 procedures in the U.S. military are a form of non-judicial discipline conducted by commanders. They do not result in a criminal record and may not affect a service member’s record in the military. These are the most common type of disciplinary proceeding in the armed forces and are usually limited to minor violations. A more serious offense will be handled through a formal court-martial. If a service member does not want to accept Article 15 penalties, they can request a court-martial, but this may result in more severe consequences. You may want to talk to a military law attorney if you are considering requesting a court-martial instead of accepting Article 15 penalties.

Imposing penalties under Article 15 in the Army and the Air Force requires proof of a violation beyond a reasonable doubt. Imposing penalties under Article 15 in the Navy and the Marines requires clear and convincing proof, which is a lesser standard.

A military service member may be able to have their record of an Article 15 violation removed if they do not commit any more violations for a certain time. This might be two years if the Article 15 was filed at the Judge Attorney General office on a military base. Sometimes getting a promotion can wipe out a record of an Article 15 violation as well.

Arrests and Civilian Consequences

If you were arrested during the events that resulted in Article 15 penalties, you may face consequences in your civilian life. This is because arrests may be reported to the FBI. You can ask your commander to help you ask the FBI to remove the record of your arrest, or you can submit a request under privacy laws. As noted above, Article 15 does not result in a criminal record, so you should not face the same types of obstacles that people with convictions in a civilian court often face.

Summary Courts-Martial

An Article 15 case may be referred to a less formal type of court-martial, known as a summary court-martial. If you do not want your case to be decided at a summary court-martial, you have the right to refuse it. You can see the evidence against you before the proceedings begin, as well as the nature of your charge and the names of your accuser and prosecution witnesses. You can ask for a spokesperson or other service members to speak on your behalf. However, a single officer will evaluate the evidence and make a decision. They will question both the accuser and the accused about their version of events, and they can ask for legal advice from a judge advocate if needed.

You do not have a right to a free military defense attorney in a summary court-martial, as you would in other types of courts-martial. However, you can hire a civilian attorney.

Military service members have a basic set of rights at a summary court-martial. They will be allowed to present witnesses and evidence, and they are free to remain silent without an inference of their guilt. They have a right to know the maximum possible sentence before the proceedings begin, and they can plead guilty or not guilty. They also have a right to make a statement or present further evidence to support a reduction in their penalties if they are found guilty. (They can ask to defer any part of their sentence that involves confinement.) They have a right to appeal if they are found guilty, using a copy of the trial record. The Military Rules of Evidence apply in these proceedings, so there are limits on the admissibility of evidence that are similar to the limits in civilian courts.

Last reviewed October 2022

Military Law Center Contents   

Related Areas   

how to write an article 15

How to Write an Article (the Complete Guide)

Did you just launch your new website and want to fill it with content? Or would you like to work as an article writer  and you’re asking yourself, how do I write an article that actually gets results? 

In both cases, you want to know how to write an article. 

This is a step-by-step guide that shows you how to come up with article ideas, get started with writing, and edit after writing. The guide is intended for online articles, but most points also apply to offline, print articles. Also, note that the difference between an article and a blog post is marginal, so most recommendations also apply to blog posts. 

Because it’s crucial that your article ranks in Google, we also cover some basics about search engine optimization (SEO). For more detailed information, I recommend you reading our 25 Point Blog Post Checklist for SEO .

1. Come up with a topic and a focus keyword

Before you start writing, you have to decide what you want to write about. That should be obvious. But what makes a good idea for an article?

Writing an article takes a lot of time and effort. Your articles should help you to generate traffic to your website. One of the most important factors that decide how much traffic you get is Google ranking.

Ideally, you want your article to rank for a high volume keyword. If 10.000 people per month type a specific keyword into Google and your article is the first to come up, many people will click on it and thereby land on your website.

When it comes to ranking, you should not only consider the search volume but also how difficult it is to rank for this keyword. A huge search volume is useless when your article appears on page number 256 of the search results.

It’s best to use a keyword research tool to find out the keyword difficulty (KD). We recommend Ahrefs because it provides you with accurate keyword data and many other functions that help you rank in Google.

how to write an article 15

There are two main ways to come up with article ideas:

The focus keyword reflects the topic of your article. It can consist of one or two words or multiple words. As an example, the focus keyword of this article is “how to write an article.”

If you struggle to find good ideas, I recommend you read my article about how to find blog topics .

2. Find the search intent behind the keyword

When typing keywords into Google, you have a problem that you want to solve. You might want to learn more about a particular topic, you have a specific question, or you are looking for products to buy. The content of your article has to match the user’s search intent behind the keyword.

“How to” keywords make it easy: They phrase a question, and your article should answer this question. When someone searches for “best Italian restaurant in town,” the person doesn’t want to know what an Italian restaurant is, but how to find the best one.

Google knows this and will display local Italian restaurants with the best reviews. Also, rating websites like Tripadvisor make it to the top search results because they deliver the information the user is looking for: A short review about the best Italian restaurants, explaining why they are the best ones.

Because Google has, in most cases, a good idea about the search intent behind keywords, googling the keyword you want to rank for is always a good idea.

how to write an article 15

3. Find out how long your article needs to be

How long your article should be, depends on the topic and the competition. Some topics can be covered comprehensively in a short article. There is always the possibility to write more, but more is not always better. Again, keep the search intent in mind.

If the keywords indicate that the user looks for a simple, short answer, it’s better to keep it short. A long, detailed article would instead repel those readers. Take as an example: “How many strings does a guitar have.” This is a very basic question, and the person typing this into Google expects a short, simple answer. He or she doesn’t want to read a 1000-word article to find out.

But many topics are worth covering in detail. Someone who searches for “How to find the best electric bass guitar” would be thankful for a long, comprehensive article that answers all his questions. For these kinds of topics, you need to find out how long your article should at least be to have a realistic chance to rank for it. Googling your focus keyword is the easiest way to find out. Just check how long the top-ranking articles are and write one that is at least that long.

When you notice that your article is getting much longer than planned, decide if the added points are that important. If they truly add value, keep them. Check if they are highly related to the topic. If not, you can always cover them in a separate article.

4. Read competing articles

Take a close look at the articles that rank for your focus keyword. See if you can find good ideas in there and take some notes. This is not about copying your competition. It’s about getting inspired to make your article better.

5. Research the topic

Do deep research about the topic you want to write about. And simply googling your focus keyword and reading the top-ranking articles does not count as research. Ideally, you should already be knowledgeable about the topic.

The less you know, the more research you have to do. But even if you already know the subject in and out, check if there is new information available. For instance, when you write about CBD oil for anxiety, you may already know that CBD oil can help with anxiety and why. But there may still be a new study that you don’t know about. Covering the latest research that your competition hasn’t written about gives you a leading edge.

6. Brainstorm information to include

Once you know what you want to write about and gathered all the important information, you should do some brainstorming about what you want to cover in the article. There may be many points, likely, you won’t keep all of them. But writing them all down helps you to make sure that you don’t forget any vital information.

how to write an article 15

7. Come up with unique ideas

When you’re done with brainstorming, make sure that you have ideas with unique content that you cannot find anywhere else. If your article summarizes the top 5 ranking articles, you’re not providing value to your readers.

There are many ways to make a text unique, and it depends on the kind of article. If you’re an expert on the topic, you can give an expert opinion with unique insights. When it’s an informational article, try to find information you cannot find anywhere else.

And even if there’s no additional information, you can still provide value. For instance, by explaining a complex problem better than anyone else does. Or by illustrating a point with a story. There are many ways, be creative!

8. Write an outline

Before you start writing, write an outline to give the article some structure. It is not set in stone, and you can change it while writing. But it makes the writing process much more manageable.

No matter what kind of article you write, it should always have an introduction, a body, and a conclusion.

Further, each article should answer three questions in the following order:

Answering these three questions gives your article a logical flow.

First, you have to let your readers know what the article is about. When you write about something that not everybody is familiar with, you’ll also have to explain what it is and give background information. For instance, when you write an article about magnesium, you should first mention that it is an essential mineral and review its role in the body.

The next step is then to explain why it’s important and why people should care. You would mention how common a magnesium deficiency is and what symptoms it causes. 

In the last step, you would address the how and tell your readers how they can prevent a magnesium deficiency.

In how much detail you answer each of these questions is very individual and depends on the kind of article you write. When you write a “How to …” article, like the one you are currently reading, answering the “How” is the main part. Readers looking for “How to do something” already know what it is and why it’s important. So you can briefly answer the first two questions in the introduction and then spend the rest of the article answering the “How.”

But you can also have articles focusing on the “Why.” After briefly answering the “What,” you explain in detail why it is important. The “How” can then be a simple call to action, leading the reader to an article addressing the “How” or to a product that is solving the problem.

If you wrote about the detrimental health consequences of eating too much sugar, this would answer the question, “Why too much sugar is bad for you.” After your readers are convinced that too much sugar is very unhealthy, you can end the article with a call to action to your article about how to eat less sugar.

The What, Why and How questions can serve as a template that you can apply to any article.

9. Follow the rule of one

Following the rule of one is probably the most important advice when writing an article, and most writers don’t follow it. Yet, articles that fulfill this rule are the most successful ones. So when you apply it, you write better articles than most others.

The rule sounds simple but is not easy to follow. It means that you should dedicate the content to one single topic and don’t deviate from it. For instance, in the article you are currently reading, I stick to advice about how to write an article. I don’t tell you how to write an ebook .

You might think that many people who write articles also write ebooks, and this information might be of interest to them. This might be true. But it’s also true that people who don’t know how to get started with an article are probably not ready to write an ebook yet. That’s why I don’t include any advice about ebook writing and instead would link to an article about how to write an ebook.

You have to put yourself into the shoes of your readers. Keep the search intent of your focus keyword in mind. Someone who types these words into Google is looking for specific information. By deviating from it, you risk boring your readers and losing them.

That’s the last thing you want. And the good thing when writing online articles is that linking to other articles is very easy. So if you are not 100% sure if the information is of interest to all article readers, leave it out and simply link to the content with further information.

10. Avoid the curse of knowledge

It’s good to write about something you’re knowledgeable about. In the end, you have something to tell and to teach.

But when you write about a topic that you are very familiar with, you quickly fall into the trap of the curse of knowledge.

This can have two negative consequences, and you should avoid both like the plague.

This is related to the rule of one. Many writers throw too much information at their readers, mostly because they want to demonstrate how much they know about a certain topic. They think that this signals credibility. What it really does is deviating from the subject and boring your readers.

The second danger is that you are using words your audience isn’t familiar with and assume your readers know something they don’t. Simply because you know so much about a certain topic, you cannot imagine how it is not knowing it. As an author, this problem can be very hard to spot. This is why editing is so important (see point 20)

But you’re losing people that way. Your readers might think that you’re smart, but they will nevertheless stop reading your content because they either find it not interesting or because they don’t understand it.

11. Include references from reliable sources

You should try to provide sources for the information you include. This makes you look credible and also gives your readers the chance to find out more. How many references you have to provide largely depends on the kind of article and the topic.

When you write about a personal experience, you won’t have to provide many sources, and even not mentioning any might be fine. When you write about how CBD oil can help with anxiety, you certainly want to link to some scientific studies proving your point.

how to write an article 15

12. Link to further information

No matter how long your article is, there is always more information about this topic. An easy way to provide value to your reader is to link to useful information. This can be to another article on your website or an external source.

Linking internally to other articles is also a valuable tool to stick to the point. When you catch yourself covering something that is not directly related to the topic, write a separate article about it and link to it.

Here’s an example of a link from one article to another.

how to write an article 15

13. Make it “snackable”

People who read online are often looking for quick information. They don’t sit down for three hours to read about a specific topic as they might do with a book. When they click on a Google search result, they skim through the article to see if it provides the information they are looking for. And even if they decide that the article is worth reading, they don’t want to read large text blocks.

For these reasons, you should

how to write an article 15

14. Make it an easy read

This point is related to the advice to make the content “snackable.” Furthermore, you should use uncomplicated language. Try to keep your sentences short and simple. Write in an active voice.

And avoid technical terms unless you’re 100% sure that your audience is familiar with them.

How “easy” the content is, depends, of course, on your audience’s background knowledge. To be precise, it should be an easy read for your audience, not necessarily for everyone.

15. Use the language of your audience

When you write an article for medical doctors, your tone and language differ from when you write for laypeople. Always keep your audience in mind and try to adopt their language. This way, your content relates to them, and it is easier to connect to them and build trust.

16. Write a compelling introduction

The introduction should explain why the article is relevant and how it solves the reader’s problems. You should keep it short and come straight to the point. The intro helps readers decide whether the article answers their question and it’s worth reading or whether they should look further.

For this reason, your introduction should raise the reader’s interest, but it should also reflect the content of the article. If you make false promises in your intro, you’ll disappoint your readers, and you risk that they won’t read your content in the future.

Mentioning a statistic, a quote, or an interesting, relevant fact is also an excellent way to start an article.

I personally prefer to write the introduction after writing the body of the article. I may write some notes before writing the article and then write it out later. Once the article is written, you have a clearer picture of the article’s content and how to lead into it.

17. End with a strong conclusion

It is a good idea to write the conclusion last. But when writing the article, you should already know what the conclusion is so that you can build up to it. As for the introduction, you can write down the points you want to mention and write them out later.

There are many different ways to write the conclusion. In many cases, it’s a good idea to summarize the article and emphasize the main takeaway. A call to action is also an excellent way to end an article.

I n the end, your article has a purpose, and you want your readers to do something after reading it.

You can guide them to further content, your products or ask them to sign-up for your newsletter, enquire about a product, service, or read an article. These are just a few examples; there are many more!

Here’s an example of a clear call to action for ketogenic meal plans.

how to write an article 15

18. Remove non-important and redundant information

Some people say that they try to shorten their text by one third once they are done writing. How much you have to shorten your text depends on your writing style. If you tend to write very wordy, include non-relevant information, and even repeat information, you’ll have to shorten a lot. When you already write concisely, removing a little bit here and there will be enough. But in general, shortening your text during the editing process will make your article a better read.

This doesn’t mean that you cannot write long articles. But they should be packed with information. That means that to fill a long article, you need a lot of information. Take this article as an example. It’s 3,500 words +, but it provides 21 useful tips, and every single one is valuable. So, your article should have substance. The worst thing is reading an article that says nothing. It’s a waste of time for your readers (and also a waste of time writing it).

19. Edit, edit, edit

Once you’re done writing, the editing starts. Editing can take as long as the writing itself or even longer. You often find the advice not to edit while writing because writing and editing are two separate processes. I don’t think this applies to everyone and largely depends on your writing style.

When you try to get everything perfect in the first draft, writing takes much longer, but you save time editing. When you write everything down as fast as possible, you’re done writing in no time, but editing will probably take longer than writing.

20. Ask someone for feedback

Having someone to edit your article and to provide feedback will always improve your article. This person will likely notice a few language flaws, even if you are a native speaker and your grammar and writing is very good.

The person can also tell you if the article’s structure makes sense and if the transitions are easy to follow. Most importantly, the editor can tell you whether everything is easy to understand. For this reason, it can be an advantage to have a non-expert. This is especially important when writing for lay people.

21. Make a final grammar check

Once the article went through some rounds of editing, you should do a final grammar check. Grammarly is a popular choice that detects most grammar flaws, suggests synonyms, and also checks punctuation. This is especially important when you’re not a native English speaker. But even if you’re native, a grammar checking program can make the text better.

how to write an article 15

The bottom line

Writing an article may seem simple, but it involves many steps. It’s not only about the writing; it’s also about finding ideas, doing research, and editing the article. Altogether, they can take more time and effort than the writing itself. 

Outsourcing articles can save you a lot of time and lets you focus on other parts of your business. Writing Studio has expert writers who can take care of all these steps. They know how to write articles that rank in Google and drive high-value traffic to your website.

Don’t forget to share this article!

Related articles

how to write an article 15

10 Best Content Marketing Platforms (2023)

how to write an article 15

10 Places to Hire Online Writers

how to write an article 15

How Much Does Content Marketing Cost?

Top Banner

Article Writing Format: Explore How To Write, Example Topics and Tips

Have some great ideas, opinions and suggestions you wish you could share so that it could reach readers all around the world? One of the best ways to get your thoughts across the globe is by writing an article. There are techniques you can use to write the different types of articles. This piece on article writing will give you all the tips and tricks you need to master before you start writing your article.

Table of Contents

The art of writing an article, how do i write a good article – tips and techniques, article writing samples, faqs on article writing.

An article is a piece of writing which explicates ideas, thoughts, facts, suggestions and/or recommendations based on a particular topic. There are different kinds of articles, namely:

Writing an article takes a lot of effort on the side of the writer. Content writers/creators, bloggers, freelance writers and copywriters are people who have mastered the art of article writing, without which they would not be able to make their mark as a writer of any kind.

In order to be able to write an article that makes sense in the first place, you have to keep a few things in mind.

To help you understand better and practise the art of article writing, read through the articles given below:

Can I write a good article?

If you know all the information about the topic you are going to write about, a good hand over the language, a knack to keep it simple and interesting throughout, you can write a good article.

What is the format of an article?

The article should have a title/heading and a description that states what the article is about. The body of the article can be split into 3 to 5 paragraphs according to the volume of content with respect to the topic you are discussing. You can have subheadings and use bullet points wherever possible. Make sure your introduction makes people want to read the whole article and your conclusion leaves them satisfied.

How many paragraphs should there be in an article?

An article should have a minimum of 3 to 4 paragraphs. The writer is, however, given the choice to present the content in more than four paragraphs, if it would be better for the article.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

how to write an article 15

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

Live Support

What Is an Article 15?

Definition & Examples of an Article 15

The Balance / Bailey Mariner

Stew Smith, CSCS, is a Veteran Navy SEAL Officer, freelance writer, and author with expertise in the U.S. military, military fitness, and its traditions.

Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice allows for a commanding officer to decide the innocence or guilt and administer the punishment to an offender if necessary when a military member gets into trouble for a minor offense that does not require a judicial hearing.

Also known as Non-Judicial Punishment, an Article 15 hearing allows for the immediate chain of command of the UCMJ offender to handle in-house the lesser offenses that do not require a trial or break other local or federal regulations.

The military has its own laws and regulations, all of which can be found in the UCMJ . Not every violation of the rules is serious enough to require a legal hearing, so Article 15 provides an alternative to a court-martial, which is a trial with a jury consisting of military officers, warrant officers, or enlisted members depending upon the rank of the accused.  

The Army and Air Force typically use the term "Article 15 hearing," but the Marines call them "Office Hours," and the Navy refers to them as "Captain's Mast" or "Admiral's Mast," depending on the rank of the member's commanding officer.

An Article 15 hearing is more of a legal proceeding than a trial, and it involves the chain of command with references speaking either for or against the accused. For comparison, an Article 15 hearing is more similar to a misdemeanor court as opposed to a felony court, which would be more comparable to a court-martial.

How an Article 15 Works

To initiate Article 15 action, a commander must have reason to believe that a member of their command has committed an offense under the UCMJ. A minor offense is defined as misconduct normally not more serious than that usually handled at a summary court-martial and where the maximum punishment is 30 days' confinement.

Non-judicial punishment results from an investigation into unlawful conduct and a subsequent hearing to determine whether and to what extent an accused should be punished. Generally, when a complaint is filed with the commanding officer of an accused (or if that commander receives a report of investigation from a military law enforcement source), that commander is obligated to make an inquiry to determine the truth of the matter.

A military member facing an Article 15 hearing has the right to request a full court-martial. However, this carries the risk of more severe penalties if found guilty.

If, after the preliminary inquiry, the commanding officer determines that disposition by NJP is appropriate, the commanding officer must inform the accused that NJP is being considered for the offense, along with the contemplated action, the suspected offense, government evidence, right to refuse NJP, and the right to confer with independent counsel.

Except in the case of a person attached to or embarked in a vessel, an accused may demand a trial by court-martial in lieu of an Article 15.  

Types of Article 15 Punishments

The commanding officer has several options for determining punishment, but none of them may be severe. Limits to punishments can vary based on the rank of the commanding officer and the rank of the accused.

Restrictions to correctional custody, base, or other specified limits typically may last no longer than 30 days, and rank may be reduced no more than one grade. Pay typically can be reduced by no more than half for two consecutive months.

Commanding officers also have the discretion to suspend punishments for up to one year. Effectively, this means the punishment is not carried out unless the accused fails to meet the terms of the suspended sentence.

Punishment also may include extra duties as long as they pose no danger and are not demeaning relative to the individual's rank.

A military member can appeal any punishment that results from an Article 15 hearing in writing to the next highest superior authority. Appeals should be submitted in writing within five days of the Article 15 ruling.  

Key Takeaways

By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.

Best Military Defense | Golden Law

Beating an Article 15, Non-judicial Punishment

Beating an Article 15, Non-judicial Punishment

Should i accept an article 15, nonjudicial punishment.

Art 15 filled

Within that same time, if you decide to accept the Article 15, you will also need to prepare your entire written defense for the commander.  Additionally, you will have the option to make a live personal appearance before the commander to present evidence and make a statement regarding the allegations. The commander will then (theoretically) take all of your responses and evidence into account, along with the evidence against you, as they decide whether you are guilty or not guilty.

What it Means to Accept an Article 15 or Nonjudicial Punishment

pse yes no

When faced with this situation, many service members  wonder whether they should accept an Article 15, and what they should consider before making their decision.  Often, people believe that “accepting” an Article 15 means that they are admitting to the allegations.  However, when you accept an Article 15, you are only accepting the forum — that is, you are saying that you will allow the issuing commander to be judge and jury and decide whether you are guilty or not guilty of the alleged offense(s).  If the commander finds you guilty, they alone will decide your punishment.

If the commander finds you guilty, they will decide your punishment.  You then have the opportunity to appeal your conviction and your punishment with the next higher ranking commander.

Should I Turn Down My Article 15?

Any person who is offered an Article 15, has the option of “turning it down” and demanding a trial by court-martial.  This is a big decision for many reasons.  First, while you may face punishment at an Article 15 if you are convicted, it does not constitute a criminal conviction.  On the other hand, an Article 15 is the most severe administrative paperwork that you can receive in the military and will almost certainly be filed in your Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) or Unfavorable Information File (UIF) for a significant period of time, if not indefinitely, depending upon your specific rank, the type of Article 15, and other factors.  Furthermore, depending upon the nature of the offense, being found guilty at an Article 15 could automatically require that discharge proceedings be initiated against you.  This is also true if you have prior disciplinary paperwork in your file, even minor things like counselings for being late or missing an appointment.  Finally, while it is not a true conviction, many law enforcement agencies and federal offices ask about Article 15s while in the military which may ultimately result in an inability to secure that type of employment.


On the other hand, we recently had two clients accept an Article 15 (Army E-5 and Army O-4), and both clients were found NOT GUILTY of the allegations by their issuing commander.  Their circumstances were unique, and it is important that you review the individual facts of your case with an attorney before making a decision to accept an Article 15.  However, you should know that it is possible to have success at the Article 15 forum if you have the right case and the right lawyers fighting for you.

Effects of an Article 15

Accepting an Article 15 is a risk management decision for many people.  When you accept an Article 15, you have limited risk in many respects.  In the worst case scenario, you will be convicted, punished, and discharged from the military, but you will not risk going to jail, receiving a punitive discharge such as a Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) or Dishonorable Discharge (DD), or having a federal conviction on your record, all of which are only possible via court-martial.  Although you may be avoiding the criminal aspects associated with a potential conviction in a court-martial, the Article 15 punishment is sure to cause tremendous financial impact.  Lose of a single rank can easily cost you over $3,000 per year.  Forfeiture of pay for two months may also cost you thousands of dollars.  Restriction to barracks and forced extra duty are almost guaranteed punishments that can have a huge impact on your daily routines.

Demanding a Court-Martial


Turning down an Article 15 and going to court-martial often represents your best chance at beating all of the allegations, statistically speaking.  By demanding a court-martial, you will have ample time to prepare your defense, present your case to an impartial panel of members, and review all of the Government’s evidence against you. This decision comes at the risk of receiving confinement time, a punitive discharge, and other punishments as well as having a conviction on your permanent record.  However, even if you are convicted at a court-martial, you will be able to present evidence that the Government initially offered you an Article 15 for the offense.  This typically results in jurors not punishing you more than you would have received at the Article 15 level. (US v. Grill, 48 MJ 131 (CAAF 1998)).  In fact, many military judges will actually instruct the jurors that they are not to punish you solely for deciding to demand trial by court-martial.  Furthermore, if you want to save your military career and clear your name entirely, a court-martial is often the more likely avenue for success.

In a recent case, we represented an outstanding E-4 accused of poor behavior at a local bar.  Command had decided they just didn’t like this young man, and explicitly stated they would do whatever they could to destroy this individual.  He turned down his Article 15 and demanded trial by court-martial.  At trial, he was acquitted of the most serious allegations, and convicted of only military specific offenses.  His punishment was only a single reduction in rank.  Had he accepted the Article 15, he had been told he would have received maximum punishment which could have been a reduction by several ranks, forfeitures, restriction and extra duty.  Command was furious over how light punishment was.  Even more satisfying, we were able to publicly decry the abuses this individual suffered by his command.  This soldier remains in the military to this day because at least one of the members of his jury (a LTC commander) has lobbied on his behalf to retain him in the Army.  The fee for our services in this case has more than paid for itself in under six months.

Article 15, Non-judicial Punishment Lawyers

Whether you decide to accept your Article 15 , or turn it down, we are here to fight for you throughout the entire process.  If you accept the Article 15, it’s important that you get in touch with us as soon as possible so that we can maximize our limited time to pull together the best defense possible.  We’ll immediately interview witnesses, collect favorable statements, and analyze all of the legal issues surrounding the Government’s case against you so that we can explain everything to your commander in a concise manner.

If you decide to turn down your Article 15 and demand a court-martial, we will bring all of the fight that we have.  We will waste no time in preparing for the trial, even if the Government delays in formally bringing charges against you.

Here’s the bottom line — your career is on the line.  If you’re the type of person that doesn’t want to leave anything on the table — if you’ll never forgive yourself for not fighting as hard as you can — then call us to discuss what we can do to fight for you.

Every case is different, and there are certainly situations in which accepting an Article 15 would be the advisable path, depending upon your objectives.  Prior case results should not be used as an indication of how yours will turn out, but it is important to discuss your case with an experienced attorney before you make your final decision.  Remember – you only have a couple of days when served this paperwork, so don’t wait – give us a call.

how to write an article 15

We are former top JAG lawyers and now are the premier military defense law firm.

We handle all ucmj actions:.

In ALL Branches of Service

We offer free consultations on any military disciplinary actions. Call anytime !

Blog Categories

Recent Posts

What It Means to Turn Down or Accept an Article 15

How to Fight a Military Discharge

What Should You Do If You Get An Article 15?

Related Posts

Comments are closed.

The views and opinions on this website are the views and opinions of Golden Law, Inc., as an organization. Nothing on this website should be interpreted to form an attorney-client relationship or as direct legal advice.

Historical results and subjective opinions regarding cases and professional ability are intended to be illustrative of the general capabilities of Golden Law, Inc. The use of adverbs such as “best,” “top,” “premier,” etc. to describe the capabilities of Golden Law, Inc. are subjective opinions of the firm. There are many attorneys qualified and experienced in the law. Every potential client should ensure the qualifications, experience, personality, cost, and other miscellaneous factors are an appropriate match for that individual before choosing an attorney.

Each case is different and presents unique facts and legal issues. Results CAN NEVER be guaranteed.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Firm Information

Golden Law, Inc. is a law firm with attorneys licensed in California, Illinois, and Michigan. Our attorneys handle cases nationally and military matters internationally. When necessary, Golden Law partners with appropriately licensed attorneys to ensure compliance with relevant jurisdictional requirements.

Correspondence address: 667 Madison Ave., 5th Floor New York, New York 10065 Call us: 949-491-1661 Fax: 949-491-1467

© All Rights Reserved, Golden Law, Inc.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

How to Cite Sources | Citation Generator & Quick Guide

Citing your sources is essential in  academic writing . Whenever you quote or paraphrase a source (such as a book, article, or webpage), you have to include a  citation crediting the original author.

Failing to properly cite your sources counts as plagiarism , since you’re presenting someone else’s ideas as if they were your own.

The most commonly used citation styles are APA and MLA. The free Scribbr Citation Generator is the quickest way to cite sources in these styles. Simply enter the URL, DOI, or title, and we’ll generate an accurate, correctly formatted citation.

Generate accurate citations with Scribbr

The Scribbr Citation Generator will automatically create a flawless APA citation

The Scribbr Citation Generator will automatically create a flawless MLA citation

Table of contents

When do you need to cite sources, which citation style should you use, in-text citations, reference lists and bibliographies.

Scribbr Citation Generator

Other useful citation tools

Citation examples and full guides, frequently asked questions about citing sources.

Citations are required in all types of academic texts. They are needed for several reasons:

A citation is needed whenever you integrate a source into your writing. This usually means quoting or paraphrasing:

Citations are needed whether you quote or paraphrase, and whatever type of source you use. As well as citing scholarly sources like books and journal articles, don’t forget to include citations for any other sources you use for ideas, examples, or evidence. That includes websites, YouTube videos , and lectures .

Usually, your institution (or the journal you’re submitting to) will require you to follow a specific citation style, so check your guidelines or ask your instructor.

In some cases, you may have to choose a citation style for yourself. Make sure to pick one style and use it consistently:

If in doubt, check with your instructor or read other papers from your field of study to see what style they follow.

In most styles, your citations consist of:

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

how to write an article 15

In-text citations most commonly take the form of parenthetical citations featuring the last name of the source’s author and its year of publication (aka author-date citations).

An alternative to this type of in-text citation is the system used in numerical citation styles , where a number is inserted into the text, corresponding to an entry in a numbered reference list.

There are also note citation styles , where you place your citations in either footnotes or endnotes . Since they’re not embedded in the text itself, these citations can provide more detail and sometimes aren’t accompanied by a full reference list or bibliography.

A reference list (aka “Bibliography” or “Works Cited,” depending on the style) is where you provide full information on each of the sources you’ve cited in the text. It appears at the end of your paper, usually with a hanging indent applied to each entry.

The information included in reference entries is broadly similar, whatever citation style you’re using. For each source, you’ll typically include the:

The exact information included varies depending on the source type and the citation style. The order in which the information appears, and how you format it (e.g., capitalization, use of italics) also varies.

Most commonly, the entries in your reference list are alphabetized by author name. This allows the reader to easily find the relevant entry based on the author name in your in-text citation.


In numerical citation styles, the entries in your reference list are numbered, usually based on the order in which you cite them. The reader finds the right entry based on the number that appears in the text.

Vancouver reference list example

Because each style has many small differences regarding things like italicization, capitalization , and punctuation , it can be difficult to get every detail right. Using a citation generator can save you a lot of time and effort.

Scribbr offers citation generators for both APA and MLA style. Both are quick, easy to use, and 100% free, with no ads and no registration required.

Just input a URL or DOI or add the source details manually, and the generator will automatically produce an in-text citation and reference entry in the correct format. You can save your reference list as you go and download it when you’re done, and even add annotations for an annotated bibliography .

Once you’ve prepared your citations, you might still be unsure if they’re correct and if you’ve used them appropriately in your text. This is where Scribbr’s other citation tools and services may come in handy:

Plagiarism Checker

Citation Checker

Citation Editing

Plagiarism means passing off someone else’s words or ideas as your own. It’s a serious offense in academia. Universities use plagiarism checking software to scan your paper and identify any similarities to other texts.

When you’re dealing with a lot of sources, it’s easy to make mistakes that could constitute accidental plagiarism. For example, you might forget to add a citation after a quote, or paraphrase a source in a way that’s too close to the original text.

Using a plagiarism checker yourself before you submit your work can help you spot these mistakes before they get you in trouble. Based on the results, you can add any missing citations and rephrase your text where necessary.

Try out the Scribbr Plagiarism Checker for free, or check out our detailed comparison of the best plagiarism checkers available online.

Scribbr Plagiarism Checker

Scribbr’s Citation Checker is a unique AI-powered tool that automatically detects stylistic errors and inconsistencies in your in-text citations. It also suggests a correction for every mistake.

Currently available for APA Style, this is the fastest and easiest way to make sure you’ve formatted your citations correctly. You can try out the tool for free below.

If you need extra help with your reference list, we also offer a more in-depth Citation Editing Service.

Our experts cross-check your in-text citations and reference entries, make sure you’ve included the correct information for each source, and improve the formatting of your reference page.

If you want to handle your citations yourself, Scribbr’s free Knowledge Base provides clear, accurate guidance on every aspect of citation. You can see citation examples for a variety of common source types below:

And you can check out our comprehensive guides to the most popular citation styles:

At college level, you must properly cite your sources in all essays , research papers , and other academic texts (except exams and in-class exercises).

Add a citation whenever you quote , paraphrase , or summarize information or ideas from a source. You should also give full source details in a bibliography or reference list at the end of your text.

The exact format of your citations depends on which citation style you are instructed to use. The most common styles are APA , MLA , and Chicago .

The abbreviation “ et al. ” (Latin for “and others”) is used to shorten citations of sources with multiple authors.

“Et al.” is used in APA in-text citations of sources with 3+ authors, e.g. (Smith et al., 2019). It is not used in APA reference entries .

Use “et al.” for 3+ authors in MLA in-text citations and Works Cited entries.

Use “et al.” for 4+ authors in a Chicago in-text citation , and for 10+ authors in a Chicago bibliography entry.

The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.

You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .

APA format is widely used by professionals, researchers, and students in the social and behavioral sciences, including fields like education, psychology, and business.

Be sure to check the guidelines of your university or the journal you want to be published in to double-check which style you should be using.

MLA Style  is the second most used citation style (after APA ). It is mainly used by students and researchers in humanities fields such as literature, languages, and philosophy.

Is this article helpful?

Other students also liked.

More interesting articles

Scribbr APA Citation Checker

An innovative new tool that checks your APA citations with AI software. Say goodbye to inaccurate citations!

how to write an article 15


Welcome to the   Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository. This repository provides open, global access to the scholarship of Yale Law School faculty and jornals, as well as a selection of unique collections. 

Communities in Yale Law School Open Scholarship Repository

Select a community to browse its collections.

Recently Added


Taking Experience Seriously: A Comment on Professor Zipursky’s Benjamin Cardozo and American Natural Law Theory


Benjamin Cardozo and American Natural Law Theory


Conflict, Consistency and the Role of Conventional Morality in Judicial Decision-Making


Introduction: The Nature of the Judicial Process at 100


In Search of the Public Interest

Export search results.

The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Associated Press Style

OWL logo

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

These resources provide an overview of journalistic writing with explanations of the most important and most often used elements of journalism and the Associated Press style. This resource, revised according to The Associated Press Stylebook 2012 , offers examples for the general format of AP style. For more information, please consult The Associated Press Stylebook 2012 , 47 th edition.


Associated Press style provides guidelines for news writing. Many newspapers, magazines and public relations offices across the United States use AP style. Although some publications such as the New York Times have developed their own style guidelines, a basic knowledge of AP style is considered essential to those who want to work in print journalism.

This Web page is intended to provide an introduction to AP style and a summary of some AP style rules; however, the Associated Press Stylebook includes more than 5,000 entries – far more than can be covered here. For a complete guide to AP style, writers should consult the most recent edition of the Associated Press Stylebook or visit the AP Stylebook website .

The content of newspapers and other mass media is typically the result of many different writers and editors working together. AP style provides consistent guidelines for such publications in terms of grammar, spelling, punctuation and language usage. Some guiding principles behind AP style are:

AP style also aims to avoid stereotypes and unintentionally offensive language.

Common Style Guidelines

The Associated Press Stylebook provides an A-Z guide to issues such as capitalization, abbreviation, punctuation, spelling, numerals and many other questions of language usage. What follows are summaries of some of the most common style rules.

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Some widely known abbreviations are required in certain situations, while others are acceptable but not required in some contexts. For example, Dr., Gov., Lt. Gov., Rep., the Rev. and Sen. are required before a person’s full name when they occur outside a direct quotation. Please note, that medical and political titles only need to be used on first reference when they appear outside of a direct quote. For courtesy titles, use these on second reference or when specifically requested. Other acronyms and abbreviations are acceptable but not required (i.e. FBI, CIA, GOP). The context should govern such decisions.

As a general rule, though, you should avoid what the Associated Press Stylebook calls “alphabet soup.” Consult the Associated Press Stylebook for specific cases.

For numbered addresses, always use figures. Abbreviate Ave., Blvd., and St. and directional cues when used with a numbered address. Always spell out other words such as alley, drive and road . If the street name or directional cue is used without a numbered address, it should be capitalized and spelled out. If a street name is a number, spell out First through Ninth and use figures for 10th and higher. Here are some examples of correctly formatted addresses: 101 N. Grant St., Northwestern Avenue, South Ninth Street, 102 S. 10th St., 605 Woodside Drive.

For ages, always use figures. If the age is used as an adjective or as a substitute for a noun, then it should be hyphenated. Don’t use apostrophes when describing an age range. Examples: A 21-year-old student. The student is 21 years old. The girl, 8, has a brother, 11. The contest is for 18-year-olds. He is in his 20s.

Books, Periodicals, Reference Works, and Other Types of Compositions

Use quotation marks around the titles of books, songs, television shows, computer games, poems, lectures, speeches and works of art. Examples: Author Porter Shreve read from his new book, “When the White House Was Ours.” They sang “The Star-Spangled Banner” before the game.

Do not use quotations around the names of magazine, newspapers, the Bible or books that are catalogues of reference materials. Examples: The Washington Post first reported the story. He reads the Bible every morning.

Do not underline or italicize any of the above.

Dates, Months, Years, Days of the Week

For dates and years, use figures. Do not use st, nd, rd, or th with dates, and use Arabic figures. Always capitalize months. Spell out the month unless it is used with a date. When used with a date, abbreviate only the following months: Jan., Feb., Aug., Sept., Oct., Nov. and Dec.

Commas are not necessary if only a year and month are given, but commas should be used to set off a year if the date, month and year are given. Use the letter s but not an apostrophe after the figures when expressing decades or centuries. Do, however, use an apostrophe before figures expressing a decade if numerals are left out. Examples: Classes begin Aug. 25. Purdue University was founded May 6, 1869. The semester begins in January. The 1800s. The ’90s.

If you refer to an event that occurred the day prior to when the article will appear, do not use the word yesterday. Instead, use the day of the week. Capitalize days of the week, but do not abbreviate. If an event occurs more than seven days before or after the current date, use the month and a figure.

Newspapers use datelines when the information for a story is obtained outside the paper’s hometown or general area of service. Datelines appear at the beginning of stories and include the name of the city in all capital letters, usually followed the state or territory in which the city is located. The Associated Press Stylebook lists 30 U.S. cities that do not need to be followed by the name of a state. See states and cities below. Examples:

When writing about height, weight or other dimensions, use figures and spell out words such as feet, miles, etc. Examples: She is 5-foot-3. He wrote with a 2-inch pencil.

Use figures for any distances over 10. For any distances below 10, spell out the distance. Examples: My flight covered 1,113 miles. The airport runway is three miles long.

Always use a person’s first and last name the first time they are mentioned in a story. Only use last names on second reference. Do not use courtesy titles such as Mr., Mrs., Miss or Ms. unless they are part of a direct quotation or are needed to differentiate between people who have the same last name.

Never begin a sentence with a figure, except for sentences that begin with a year. Examples: Two hundred freshmen attended. Five actors took the stage. 1776 was an important year.

Use roman numerals to describe wars and to show sequences for people. Examples: World War II, Pope John Paul II, Elizabeth II.

For ordinal numbers, spell out first through ninth and use figures for 10th and above when describing order in time or location. Examples: second base, 10th in a row. Some ordinal numbers, such as those indicating political or geographic order, should use figures in all cases. Examples: 3rd District Court, 9th ward.

For cardinal numbers, consult individual entries in the Associated Press Stylebook. If no usage is specified, spell out numbers below 10 and use figures for numbers 10 and above. Example: The man had five children and 11 grandchildren.

When referring to money, use numerals. For cents or amounts of $1 million or more, spell the words cents, million, billion, trillion etc. Examples: $26.52, $100,200, $8 million, 6 cents.


Use a single space after a period.

Do not use commas before a conjunction in a simple series. Example: In art class, they learned that red, yellow and blue are primary colors. His brothers are Tom, Joe, Frank and Pete. However, a comma should be used before the terminal conjunction in a complex series, if part of that series also contains a conjunction. Example: Purdue University's English Department offers doctoral majors in Literature, Second Language Studies, English Language and Linguistics, and Rhetoric and Composition.

Commas and periods go within quotation marks. Example: “I did nothing wrong,” he said. She said, “Let’s go to the Purdue game.”

States and Cities

When the name of a state name appears in the body of a text, spell it out. State abbreviations should also be avoided in headlines where possible. States should be abbreviated when used as part of a short-form political affiliation. Examples: He was travelling to Nashville, Tenn. The peace accord was signed in Dayton, Ohio. The storm began in Indiana and moved west toward Peoria, Ill. Updated guidance to AP style notes that state names can also be abbreviated for the following purposes:

Here is how each state is abbreviated in AP style (with the postal code abbreviations in parentheses):

You will notice that eight states are missing from this list. That is because Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Ohio, Texas and Utah are never abbreviated.

AP style does not require the name of a state to accompany the names of the following 30 cities:

The exact time when an event has occurred or will occur is unnecessary for most stories. Of course, there are occasions when the time of day is important. In such cases, use figures, but spell out noon and midnight . Use a colon to separate hours from minutes, but do not use :00 . Examples: 1 p.m., 3:30 a.m.

Generally, capitalize formal titles when they appear before a person’s name, but lowercase titles if they are informal, appear without a person’s name, follow a person’s name or are set off before a name by commas. Also, lowercase adjectives that designate the status of a title. If a title is long, place it after the person’s name, or set it off with commas before the person’s name. Examples: President Bush; President-elect Obama; Sen. Harry Reid; Evan Bayh, a senator from Indiana; the senior senator from Indiana, Dick Lugar; former President George H.W. Bush; Paul Schneider, deputy secretary of homeland security.

Technological Terms

Here are the correct spelling and capitalization rules for some common technological terms:

How To Write An Article? An Easy Step By Step Guide (2023)

Did you know, as per, the number of newspapers circulated on the day i write this article is 326, 900, 999 (and counting), and the number of blog posts written are 4,941,999 (and counting) those are huge numbers. with those stats, it is impossible to imagine the number of articles written per day. how to write an article how can you stand out when there are so many article writers do newbies stand a chance these are just some questions i would love to answer through this article..

How To Write An Article - An Easy Step By Step Guide

Also, I am excited to share some really cool free tools that make writing fun and easy.

How to write an article? It’s easy, really. Just be yourself. The cardinal rule is “ TO WRITE .” All else comes next. Yes, the trouble starting is real. Even Stephen King admits to the scariest moment being just before you start. But once you overcome that hurdle, the rest of the track is easy.

In an era of infobesity (yes, that is the new word for information overload), where a simple Google search of “how to write an article?” also yields 2,18,00,00,000 results in just about 0.51 seconds, how will you assimilate all the information out there?

The information undoubtedly exceeds our human processing capacity. While we are at it, do you know about IFS?

When too much information becomes noise, it leads to Information Fatigue Syndrome. The fog created by so much information literally impacts, interferes, and hampers with decision-making ability. Not to forget the stress that accompanies the indecisiveness.

Adding to the situation is the fact that the human attention span is a mere eight seconds owing to technology. But if you are still reading this article, congratulations! Your attention span is not compromised.

Learn the fundamental principles of writing with this free Content Writing E-Book!

how to write an article 15

Article Writing FAQs :

We fear that which is unknown to us. But once we know about it, the topic is not so intimidating, at least almost always. Any issue of which we do not know comes with a host of doubts and questions.

Similarly, how to write an article also comes with a host of questions for a newbie. Is it difficult? Am I suited for article writing? Do I need special qualifications to do article writing?

I believe answering the frequently asked questions will help clear a lot of the doubts and apprehensions that you might have.

So stay with me till then end while I attempt to give you all the information on how to write an article in the best possible and most straightforward manner.

In this comprehensive guide, you will find answers to:

What is article writing?

How to write an article.

If you aspire to become a writer, check out the details of the bestselling Content Writing Course .

Other courses to consider from IIM SKILLS

First things first, what is an article? Any written piece of information published in print or on the digital/electronic medium is an article. The purpose could be anything, from news, research papers, analysis, academics, blogs, scientific journal s, marketing articles, etc.

Generally speaking, an article is for a broader audience, and the motive is to make a positive difference. The topics are various. It uses words to express an idea or present facts and solutions for mass consumption.

Today, it is a lot easier to publish articles online. The digital medium is very powerful and easily accessible with good outreach. Anyone can write and post an article online. But remember, only the useful articles see sunny days while the mediocre ones are relegated to the background with hardly any views and read.

The thing that differentiates good articles from the average or bad is good content. An article with good content provides value to people and can influence or change their perception. The keyword here is “providing value.”

Heard about digital marketing? Read through my article on how digital marketing is redefining business success.

The topic of how to write an article also has information overload but worry not. I am here to simplify the process and separate the wheat from the chaff.

All writers start as readers, and this is true of every single writer out there. If it calms your nerves and eases you any, “Every writer I know has trouble writing.” Well, it’s not me who says so, but Joseph Heller (American author) who did. Couldn’t agree more, right?

But hey, there are ways to make the process easy and stress-free. Though ultimately, it is personalized, there are broad ways to go about it, such that writing is fun and not a task.

Of course, your very purpose in reading through this article is to become an article writer. So yes, this article can be your ultimate guide with detailed tips on article writing.

Golden Rules to Article Writing, our Pro Tips:

Rule #1:  select your topic/niche.

Are you a generalist or a specialist? The generalists can write on any topic. They can write about food, travel, pets, etc. With the same finesse, they can even write on marketing, finance, and educational articles.

Specialists, as the name suggests, pick an area of expertise and specialize only in writing about that niche or topic. You will most often come across specialists in the field of finance, academics, and technical writing, as these areas require more in-depth knowledge.

They say the riches are in the niches. To understand this better, let me take an example of the doctor fraternity. How about we consider the generalists as general practitioners or general physicians and the specialists as specialist MDs? Makes sense now?

To choose a niche, you need to start with what you are good at. Each one of us is better at that one thing than others; that could be your niche. It could be something you are passionate about. If you identify opportunities and gaps in the market for your area of expertise, you are good to go.

This is not to say the generalists have no place in article writing. No one is born knowledgeable. Learning is an endless and ceaseless process. One can always learn and earn. Nothing is impossible, and even the word impossible says, I’m possible!

Rule #2:  Create a User Persona to address your target audience’s needs.

Okay, you have your topic ready and also know that good content and providing value are essential. But how do you know what is of value? Simple again.

Before you write, create what we know as the “user persona.” Say, for example, you want to write about gardening tips. You have excellent knowledge, and now you want to share it in the form of an article.

Your user persona is someone who loves gardening and wants to learn more about it. Yet, it is someone who is not a professional in gardening. They do not have the time to skim through detailed technicalities but will definitely appreciate simple, practical tips and tricks.

Another example, say you are great at finance, understand the nuances of the share market and mutual funds and all the important financial stuff that helps make wise investments. You have friends who are not as blessed to understand the nuances of the finance industry. All you have to do is write in simple words; the tips and tricks for wise investments.

You can easily spot your user persona, and when you think of the user persona as your friend, you will have all the information that you know the friend needs and has no access to. Compile all the useful information in simple language, easy for a non-commerce person to understand, and you are good to go. You will have an article that is super relevant and super useful.

Once you have your user persona in place, the rest will fall in place. Producing excellent and valuable articles is that much easier once you know your target audience.

Rule #3: Research, Read, Watch, and Take Notes (most crucial and essential rule)

You have the topic; you have the user persona. Now what? Next is research. I cannot stress enough the importance of research. It is the most significant aspect of article writing and lays the foundation for your article.

With a defined user persona/target audience, it is easy to learn their likes and dislikes, their challenges, the problems they face, etc. Write to provide solutions to their questions, and voila! Your content is highly valuable.

In the opinion of American Journalist, Burton Rascoe, “ A writer is working when he’s staring out of the window .”

True that. Once a writer, something is going on inside your head, even when you appear to be doing nothing.

Well, not all inspiration comes from staring out your window, though. Today, we have a whole lot of information to inspire ideas. For your inspiration, you could read through popular blogs, websites, or even watch videos

In reading and researching well, you can structure out your content and form a skeleton of sorts. Researching will give you all the vital information about an issue, its challenges, and possible solutions.

The more you read and research, the better insights you have on the information you want to provide.

As you keep researching, your brain goes into an autopilot mode and enables you to jot down points for your article quickly. Brainstorm on all the information you have collected. Now organize all your data in a logical outline.


The next and most significant step is to: START WRITING.

Once you through with the warm-up, you are now ready for the main exercise of writing itself.

There are article writers who need more guidance on how to write an article than a newbie. That is because, some articles though very well-crafted, are so difficult to understand that either you have to be highly literate to make sense of it or sit with a dictionary.

If people don’t understand what you write, all your writing loses meaning. Be like the coaching classes (by the way, they earn maximum bucks right now). Keep it simple; easy to read. Break down the concepts into bite-sized, easily digestible nuggets.

Every writer has a unique voice. You will have yours too. Though most of us have authors or writers whom we admire and seek inspiration from, it is imperative to retain our uniqueness. Convey your perspective of things. Your unique style is a reflection of your inherent personality. When you are another, you lose your individuality and, in the bargain, lose your unique writing voice.

Finally, write about actionable content. Validate your writing with facts and statistics. Link the facts to resources to let your audience know; you know what you are writing about. Linking valuable information to the resources is a way to back up your claim.

Make your writing enjoyable. Tell a story. Talk about trivia, or did you know facts that make for exciting tidbits and keep the audience engaged.

Have clarity in writing and your article structure. You can also include anecdotes or incidents as a form of storytelling. Despite our age, we all have a childlike fascination for stories and are ever willing to listen to a good story.

Rule #5:  Read, edit, check your grammar, and proofread again:

Once you are through with the writing aspect, come the editing, grammar, and proofreading parts.

Firstly, fix the grammar and sentence structure. Next on, be absolutely ruthless with editing. Make your article crisp with all the relevant points. Cut out the fluff. Shorter sentences and short paragraphs are the way to go.

Rephrase any complex sentences. There is nothing better than having another pair of eyes read through your article and give you critical feedback. Since this option is not viable in the long term, you should hone your editing skills and be self-reliant.

Avoid repetition. Stay focused on the subject and the solution you wish to offer. Be mindful of the logical flow of information. If it works for you, make a pre-submission checklist.

When you are writing for the digital medium, there are several things you need to consider. Primarily, you have to optimize your article for the SEO or search engine optimization point of view. There are keywords and focus phrases you have to consider. Similarly, different mediums necessitate different requirements. Make sure your article is in total compliance.

Rule #6: Publish

Articles for publications have some guidelines. Follow them implicitly, whether it is the layout, font, font size, or any other aspect. Finally, when the outcome of your article looks satisfactory, pat yourself on the back. Go ahead and publish it or hand it over for publishing.

No article can be perfect. In fact, perfectionism is a myth. So don’t obsess over details. Writing, like most art, gets better with practice.

You will learn more as you write more. Gradually but certainly, you will see a positive difference in your work over a period of time.

The above were some bite-sized tips and rules on how to write an article. Chew on them and assimilate them for efficient and productive article writing.

Basic Article Writing Format:

Now that we have the golden rules in place let us explore the basic format of article writing. Different forms of article writing necessitate different formats, but there is a basic structure of importance.

Succinctly put, the components or article writing framework includes:

Heading/Title/Headline : How to write an article headline?

The heading or title is the most crucial part of an article. It decides in a fraction of seconds whether your article is worthy of reading or not. Even a great article with a drab title will go unnoticed and unread.

The main heading and the subheadings help organize the contents and allow the reader to skim through the article to find out how relevant it is for them.

Some things to keep in mind with headings are to keep them concise and use them to enhance, not replace information in your article. Also, never overdo the titles as not all paragraphs require one.

Main headings are typically short, whereas the subheadings can be a little longer.

Intro : How to write an article introduction?

Writing intriguing introductions sure is an art that not everyone is blessed with, but again, you can be observant and cultivate it. If the heading captivates your reader to glance at your article, it is the introduction that persuades them to give you writing a read-through.

If the introduction is not convincing enough, does not grab the reader’s attention, you will lose the audience.

Smart writers write engaging introductions such that it piques the reader’s curiosity, and he/she wants to read further.

Some great ways to writing introductions that matter is to ask the readers a question, tell a story, use some interesting quotes or statistics and facts, or simply be descriptive and ask the reader to imagine.

The inroduction does not stop with a brilliant first line. Speak of something unique and exciting to keep the reader with you. And finally, introduce the content and importance of your article.

Body : How to write an article text/body?

Now that you managed the herculean task of attracting the audience’s interest with your headline, keeping them curious through the introduction, it is time to have them hooked with the body of text as well.

Your article headline and intro have done their work. But your article body has nothing important to convey, does not share the message you intend to, and does not focus on the key topic; then, your reader will just shut your article or flip over to the next article with a catchy headline.

Even though the body of the article is the longest portion and consists of all the essential points you wish to convey, a structured presentation helps.

A logical flow of ideas, well-researched content, using sub-headings, writing smaller paragraphs, not straying away from the main point, and even using bullet points where required, all go a long way visually and from the readability perspective.

Conclusion : How to write an article conclusion?

When you exercise, a cool-down is as essential as a warm-up. Similarly, a proper conclusion is as vital to a good article as is its introduction.

An appealing conclusion either summarizes the article or explains the significance of the article.

Reiterate the main points, summarize succinctly, focusing on the main point, and wrap it up. In many instances, you can talk about the benefits of the topic, or circle back to your opening lines, or end it with a quote.

Suggesting further reads or motivating readers to take action are also great ways to a great conclusion.

Moving on to our next FAQ, are the article writing types.

Article Writing Types

Moving on, there is a multitude of article types. Each comes with a different set of rules to write. Overall, the golden rules and format apply to any form of article writing.

The skeleton of topic selection, research, write, edit, and publish are common to any form of article writing. There are, however, subtle other nuances that you need to adhere to when writing for different mediums. Writing on each medium is a vast topic in itself, but I can surely give you a gist of what it looks like.

Let me walk you through the different article writing types:

How to write an article for a newspaper/news? News, whether on the digital medium or the newspaper, requires you to be up-to-date with current affairs. These articles are either of recent events or something that is going to happen shortly. Essentially, every news article has details of the five Ws and the H; who, what, where, why, when, and how.

Most news articles are crisp, include all details, create an impact, and involve emotional elements to humanize the story and help readers/listeners relate to it.

Often it necessitates an interaction with first-hand witnesses or people with expert opinions that adds to the credibility of the information. Remember, though, that news articles carry immense social responsibility of presenting nothing but accurate information. So research well before you present the masses with the facts.

A news article format consists of a headline, byline (name and position of the writer), lead/lede (includes all the Ws and H), body, and conclusion.

How to write an article for a feature story? A feature is more creative and descriptive than a news article, and a longer piece at that. Feature articles find a place in newspapers, magazines, and even online. It is all about covering one issue in greater depth and usually has an angle/focus to it. Maybe it is a recent trending story but from a different angle/perspective.

Now, feature articles could be something that:

Furthermore, a feature need not be a current or recent issue/event, is like an anecdote, and contains various angles and sources.

The feature article format follows pretty standard guidelines and includes The headline, the deck (subhead, a second chance to entice your readers), the introduction, the body, and the conclusion.

Editorial :

How to write an article for an editorial? An editorial is more a writer’s/individual’s opinion on an event, current topic, or social issue. It influences the readers to think from the writer’s perspective. An editorial advocates for a cause with the audience and raises awareness.

The goal of an editorial is persuasion. Most often than not, editorials are about controversial topics with very different viewpoints and create a discussion of sorts.

The editorials can be interpretive (information on an event or issue), critical (causes of a problem with solution), persuasive (influencing the masses encouraging them to take action), praising (appreciation of a person or organization).

The standard outline of an editorial will have an introduction, an argument, evidence, counterargument, refutation, and a conclusion.

How to write an article for a profile? This form of article writing includes all information on a person. You can compare it to a portrait of a person, a written portrait at that. It is a non-fiction narrative. The profile story revolves and includes facts discovered through research and previous interviews of the subject.

Profile stories are highly informative about a single subject and blend stories, photographs, and quotes. It involves very very thorough research on the subject.

Some pro tips for writing profile stories are:

A great profile article format includes a compelling introduction, facts and bibliographic information, quotations, visuals, and observation or quote about the person as a conclusion.

Now, people, this is self-explanatory, or is it what I am currently doing? Well, coming to the how-to articles, these are articles that give clear instructions on how to accomplish a task. The thing about how-to articles is that they are always solution-oriented articles.

How-to articles are an excellent way to share your expertise with people. Depending on the topic, the how-to articles can have varying tones, serious, funny, specific, or casual. There are no set rules for that.

A good how-to article helps the target audience solve a problem or accomplish a task. So first and foremost, identify the problem or task and then set about providing a solution for it. The do-it-yourself or DIYs fall under the category of how-to articles.

One important thing to keep in mind with the how-to articles is to keep your information easily understandable. You should have the ability to break up the intricate pieces of information into more manageable bits. It requires an in-depth understanding of the topic to be able to do so.

The article format for how-to articles is almost standard and includes the headline, dividing the body into step-by-step or smaller points, and conclude.

So, these were the types of article writing and article writing formats. Now, if you intend to become an article writer, there is another aspect to be aware of; the article writing styles. No doubt, each writer has their individual, distinct style. But there are some standard writing styles that you should know. Let’s move onto that now.

Writing Styles

How to write an article is a HUGE subject, and since it is not possible to cover all information in one article, I am attempting to cater to the frequently asked questions about how to write an article.

Amongst the various FAQs is a question about writing styles. Did you know there are four main types of writing styles?

From novels to textbooks, billboards to poetry, to scholarly journals, all writing essentially falls under one of the four styles, which are expository, descriptive, narrative, and persuasive.

As an article writer, you should know when to use which style of writing to better connect with your audience.

Expository :

If you look up the meaning of expository, it is “an intention to explain or describe something.” Defining a particular subject to the readers is one of the most common styles of writing. It is a descriptive process, with information organized sequentially and logically for better understanding.

Where would you find such a writing style?

Textbooks, cookbooks, how-to articles, business writing, technical writing, scientific writing, self-help articles, manuals, etc., all fall under the category of expository writing style.

The main goal here is to explain and inform readers. This style of writing is long on facts and never includes storytelling. It contains facts, citations, charts, links, and other such data to validate the information.

Summing up, tips for expository writing include researching and citing sources, no personal opinion, no persuasion, use quotes, and illustrations.

Descriptive :

Descriptive writing takes the expository style a notch higher. While expository will give you bare facts and instructions, the descriptive writing style uses various elements to evoke your senses.

It uses metaphors, adjectives, adverbs, appreciating details, and activating the reader’s senses with vivid images. Descriptive writing always includes a lot more information. It is more profound than expository writing and also makes readers feel they are experiencing it all.

Some examples of descriptive writing, as you can guess, include poetry, personal journals, screenplays, nature writing, travelogues, etc.

Tips or descriptive writing include similes and metaphors, attention to even small details, and evoking the senses to make the readers feel they are experiencing it all.

Narrative :

The narrative writing style is nothing but storytelling, complete with a plot, a beginning, middle, and end. It may contain descriptive writing as well with portions describing the setting or appearance etc.

This is one of the most versatile styles of writing, and in this writing style, the plot is central, not the facts, not the descriptions.

Narrative writing style finds uses in novels, short stories, memoirs, myths and fables, and even historical accounts.

Achieve the narrative style of writing with a plot, timeline sequence of events, giving readers an insight into the elements of your story, all while conveying an important moral or lesson.

Persuasive :

Lastly, the persuasive writing style, as the name suggests, has the purpose of influencing the reader. Here, the writer opines and gives justification, reasons, and arguments supporting his viewpoint and tries to convince the reader to agree

It attempts to persuade readers, make an emotional connection with the audience, and goads them into taking action.

Some examples of persuasive writing are academic papers, advertising copy or copywriting, editorials, company brochures, political speeches, and even business proposals.

You can achieve the persuasive style of writing by connecting with your readers at an emotional level and subtly making them take a decisive and actionable step.

Understanding the different writing styles can enhance your writing abilities.

Writing Skills and Habits of Successful Writers

If you have it in you to express ideas through the written word, you can become a writer. But not every writer has an inborn skill to write well. It is an art, yes. It is a skill, yes, but one that you can acquire through perseverance and loads of practice.

As you set out on the journey of becoming a writer, it is not unnatural for you to try to ape your idol writer. At least one great writer inspires most of us, and in our endeavor to become a writer, we think aping their habits will get us there.

There are newbie writers who will stand and write, just because many famous writers did and do so. Some believe that being morning larks or night owls, like their favorite authors, will get them there for sure.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but nothing can be further than the truth. You have your focus on the wrong habits to ape. It is the discipline and other characteristics like a daily writing habit that you need to copy from great writers.

Let me outline some writing habits that will slowly but surely help you become a good writer over a period of time. These writing skills will not just help you become a good writer but also increase your productivity.

Of course, all of these writing skills are also habits of great authors and writers, but ape-worthy, if I may say so.

Tip#1: Write-A lot-write everyday

Famous author Jodi Picoult opines there is no such thing as writer’s block. Instead, it is having too much time on your hands, and I, for one, completely agree with that. The only way to become a good writer is to first get started.

Make it a habit to write every day, even if it is just 500 words. Think of yourself as a literary laborer who has to work on writing every single day, no matter what.

Tip#2: Set teeny-weeny goals

Tiny goals are achievable and motivating. One step at a time is what takes you distances. As a newbie, set smaller goals such that you have no excuse to skip them. Gradually increase them to reach your goal. Say write for 15 minutes for a few days and gradually increase the duration.

Tip#3: Read

When you are a writer, you consume everything like a writer. It means you read like a writer, and you watch TV like a writer, you even watch movies like a writer. Read voraciously. It is the next big tool for enhancing your writing abilities.

The more you read, the more you learn, and the more you can write. There is no dearth of good content in the form of books, blogs, eBooks, and more. Make it a habit to read every day, and it will help you write every day.

Tip#4: Research, Record and Write Things Down

Before any project or article, be thorough with your research. As you research, note down all the relevant points, and you can further elaborate when you write.

You can even cultivate the habit of carrying a notepad with you for jotting down ideas that strike at moments you are not at your desk. Just make a note of it and take action when writing.

Tip#5: Create a Distraction-Free Zone

This one is essential, as well. A quiet and calm zone, free from distractions, allows your thought process to flow uninterrupted.

When I say distraction-free zone, it is more talking about the biggest distraction in the modern world. Yes, I am speaking of the mobile. Put it in a silent mode or do not disturb mode and concentrate on writing.

Tip#6:  Have a routine

This one is a no-brainer. A disciplined routine always leads to improved productivity and efficiency.

Tip#7: Maintain a calendar

Keeping a calendar helps you stay focused and complete your writing tasks on time.

Try to incorporate these tips and enhance your writing skills.

Speaking of skills, the jewels in the crown for an article writer are adaptability, research, originality, time management, communication, and proofreading and editing.

Article Writing Tools

Whether you are writing for a living or as a hobby, a writer’s life is much like a rollercoaster. Some days it is as easy as a walk in the park, and other days it is like the dip of the rollercoaster.

It sure takes hard work, a lot of practice, and being consistent and disciplined with your daily routine to get the productivity rolling.

But thankfully, there are a plethora of tools to make your writing work and organization a smooth sail. I will outline some of the free article writing tools to boost your creative energy and amplify your writing skills. And yes, I personally use all of them and swear by their benefits.

Article writing tool #1: CoSchedule Headline Analyser

This is a brilliant tool to analyze your headlines. It tells you about the optimum word count, the sentiment, power words, etc., and gives you a score for every headline you create, allowing you to choose the best.

Article writing tool #2: Grammarly

Never skip this one. Irrespective of how good you are with the English language, Grammarly always shows you, you can do better. Again, an extremely easy-to-use tool that helps edit your article, provides suggestions, indicates passive voice, punctuations, and other grammatical errors in a fuss-free fashion.

Article writing tool #3: Hemingway Editor

The Hemingway Editor is splendid and intelligent. Writing simple sounds easy, but it is a complicated task to achieve. Writer’s in their enthusiasm, many times incorporate words that make sentences complex. The Hemingway Editor suggests spots complexities and prompts you to change or do away with them to make your content more reader-appealing.

Article writing tool #4: Wordcounter

Word Counter is yet another simple, no-fuss tool that does just what it says. Paste in your content to get your word count. Also, if you think you have a crutch word syndrome (words we tend to use often), it allows you to keep a check on that.

Article writing tool #5: Canva

For visual appeal and graphics, Canva is the way to go. It has a straightforward user interface. You don’t have to be a pro to use this tool, and the thing that makes it even better is that it has a massive library of free templates and designs. Whether it is images, infographics, headers/banners, you can effortlessly customize and give wings to your creativity on Canva.

This is one topic that can be an article in itself. But, some more additions that I would undoubtedly not want to skip are:

Did you know even digital marketing tools that work great ?

Wrapping it up:

The FAQs answered here are just some of the more common ones. I am sure all the information on how to write an article clears a lot of your doubts and apprehensions.

There is no one particular formula for writing an article. If you can clearly articulate your ideas to the reader through the written word, then you have it in you to become a successful article writer.

I hope that the information in this article empowers you to believe you are capable of doing much more than you give yourself credit for. I also hope it has inspired and motivated you to find the strength to flip the page of your life and take that step towards becoming an article writer.

Choose your area of expertise, combine it with a specific style of writing you love, and grab the potential market opportunities to boost your writing career.

So, all you aspiring closet writer’s out there, stop stressing and start writing .

1. How can I make my articles more engaging for the target audience?

To make your article more engaging, use storytelling, and always include examples when you can. Use headings, subheadings, leave white space between paragraphs otherwise it looks cluttered.  use images, gifs when necessary and proofread your article for grammatical errors.

2. What are some common mistakes to avoid in article writing?

Grammatical errors, duplicate content, ambiguity, grammatical mistakes, poor formatting and structure, use of complex words are some common mistakes to do away with while writing articles.

3. How important is proofreading and editing while writing articles?

they are a fundamental part of any write-up. They help identify mistakes, enhance readability and help you to make the article more reader friendly.

For a Career in Writing:

For all the wannabe article writers, I would highly recommend you take a course in writing to help you take off. Yes, there are numerous resources, blogs, articles, and tools out there that give you a feeling you can become a successful writer without a formal course.

On the personal front, cutting a long story short, I went from being a wannabe writer to a good writer after taking the Content Writing Course at IIM SKILLS .

The institute beyond doubt helps you transition from Learning to Earning , helping you remove the L and empowering you with the knowledge that no free resources can provide.

Many subtle intricacies play a significant role in writing. It depends on the type of writing as well. For example, writing on the digital medium requires knowledge of keywords, SEO, and optimizing your writing. Similarly, copywriting requires a sales tone, and articles on product descriptions are quite different.

If you intend to have a career as an article writer, take up a course and maybe do some internships as well. It pays to showcase your work portfolio when looking at the freelancing market or taking up a job.

Have I missed anything? Let me know in the comments below of your preferred writing tools, and what works for you as a writer.

how to write an article 15

Author: Aarti Kalra

Hello. I want to thank you for this post first of all. It was a wonderful and informative read. I was pretty interested in this article. Though it took me a while to complete reading this article, but I quite enjoyed the process throughout. I completed a writing course a few months ago and I am starting to write a blog, so I guess I was pretty nervous. I need a bit push and encouragement. This article really did it all. I am really glad I read this article. Thanks a lot sir for posting this. I hope to read more posts like this.

Hi. I am interested in this course. I am in my second year at college, studying English literature. I wanted to start my own blog but I came to realize it so difficult to do. I need guidance. Seriously and desperately. And not only that I was never a writer myself so I can just jot down points and all, but having to write an article or story that everyone would be interested in reading is difficult. I came to your blog after seeing your article headline. And I have gone through a lot of same article in the past. They are not much different. I learnt many new things once again. Thanks for this article really.

Hey. Thanks for this post. It was indeed a worth time reading it. I am interested in writing, but I didn’t know where to start. I need to write three articles on different topics for my college project work, and those are to be submitted and posted online. I was very nervous about this whole process. But this article has made things so easier for me. And thanks to your easy writing style I could easily understand these things. There are many good articles out there on guides but only few of them are written so well, and this is definitely one of them.

Thanks, Dibesh,

Glad to know this you found our article helpful.

Hello. I read your article after someone’s recommendation. I am a second year student and I have been in look out for new subjects of online courses. And I wanted to do something with writing. This article provides such easy tips and informations on article writing, that I really really liked it. it was super easy to understand too. Someone recommended this article when I was looking for writing courses And I guess I am now ready to learn about all there is to article writing. And needless to say that you can go for so many different lines or professions based on writing articles. mostly every company needs a really good writer nowadays.

Hi. I saw your article on the social page when I was searching for tips on article writing. I saw that this article itself speaks of the way of writing very well. I loved to read this post. The more easy and up to the point a article is the more people finds it easier to read. I have done article writing in the past, but I haven’t started one recently. And suddenly my college is demanding so. I was wondering where I would find a perfect tip for this, and then I came across your article. Its not only perfect but it’s the best on the tips I have read till now. I would like to share my experience after writing it. So you can also guide me in the right path. Thanks for this. And also good work!

Hi. I am a teacher. I joined this year. I always wanted to do something as a part time job or something. And I wanted do it with the help of writing. Article writing is something that is always in need and so I totally agree to this point with the rest. It’s interesting and perfect for me. Even if I work I can still manage some time for this. writing has always been my passion, but I didn’t know what to do with it alone. And I just went with the flow and ended as a teacher. I love my profession but it would be great to work on my writing skills once again. I am looking forward to start writing again. Thanks for this. It was very encouraging.

Hey. I want to start writing articles. I have always sbeen interested in trying writing, so I think this may be the best time to start. I have always been pending this. So I got started when I saw your article on a social media page. Thanks for this truly. I am a little weak on writing. So I was thinking that after reading this article it would be best to be enrolled in a short writing program, online, where they will give opportunities and exercises for practices. Can you suggest some of the best writing programs available online? I would like to take your suggestion. I am not sure which program I should choose. I researched once. So I want to hear from you this time.

I think I found your article quite easily as I was searching for how to write an article step by step guide. Your article stood out to me, as it was practically the same thing that I was searching for. Also I took a few classes on it before too. But that was a long time ago. And I wanted to read an article to note down a few points if they have any. But after reading this whole piece, I found more information than I found in any previous blogs. Thanks for this great update. I did read a few article from your blog in the past too, so I recognized your blog at a glance. Good work on this one and all of the other articles too. Thanks once again.

Hello sir. I am a high school student and I was told to write an article on a topic. So I was looking into articles where they have given a few pointers on this topic. Your article’s title made me quite interested to read this whole piece. What I would be writing is not totally an article but it would rather be a feature writer. I have read in previous sections that both feature writing and article writing are different but I want to ask if we can use these tips in feature writing too? would that be helpful or should I look for it separately. Till now I have been searching for this only, but later did I know that both have different formats of writing.

Hey. I want to know if there are any institutes that offer courses which I can attend at any given time. Because I have noticed that no matter how many articles you continue reading on this topic, there are just way too many. And then again there are a horde of writing courses, all with different institutes, names, training months and so on. I am currently a second year English lit student. And I am interested in writing. And not to just specially article, but mostly every type. Personally I do like article writing. And I think this can be considered as the final article to read. I have found answers and additional info after reading this. So good job done here.

Hi sir. Thank you so much for this wonderful article really. I also had a project coming along and I had to present it ad upload it online for viewers, so honestly I was very nervous. My friend recommended me this article. she also went through this article and was very satisfied with it. It piqued my interest no doubt after I heard from her. You are doing a very nice job in writing articles like these. These are kind of short term tips and tricks on writing, which I really needed badly. So thank you so much for writing this. I wish more of readers go through your article. Good luck.

thanks, Akarshita Sharma, glad you found this helpful.

Hey. Thanks for this article. I am interested in writing courses and trainings. So I started to read about the most basic forms of writing. I am still in high school. And I write stories and features sometimes. I like to read a lot too. I don’t know much about article writing, so I wanted to take up this form of writing. And I loved your article so far. Its great and it has very valuable informations and tips on writing. I read a few articles on this and I also think that combining all these knowledge from the internet, anyone can start up and write an amazing article.

Hey. I read your article. I have been wanting to polish up my writing skills a bit in these days. And I thought that may be I could go for some article writing sessions. And here I was looking for article writing short crash courses when I found your article in the mean while. Its been so long since I enjoyed an article and read it from the starting to the finishing point in a go. So I must say you definitely have some talent in all these. I hope I can be as good as you later on. And I wish you all the best for your future articles.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Need Help? Chat Via WhatsApp

You May Also Like To Read

List of the top 11 sop writers in india (updated), social media tools for successful marketing in 2023, your ultimate guide to ebook writing, resume writing: key features and elements, 8 skills you need to master to improve content writing skills, how to write your cv vs resume (best advices), top 9 content writing courses in delhi with placements, top 10 freelance writing websites to grab gigs in 2023, top 10 skills for a content writer to master in 2023, share your contact details.

Download Course Brochure (.pdf)

Request for online demo.

Download Mock Test

Request to speak with mba advisor, take first online coaching, download course brochure, download course brochure (.pdf) & also speak with our expert advisors.

how to write an article 15

Talk To Our Agent

Request for a callback.

how to write an article 15

South Korean people marching holding red and black signs.

Why so many South Korean women are refusing to date, marry or have kids

how to write an article 15

Postdoctoral Fellow, Indiana University

Disclosure statement

Min Joo Lee does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Indiana University provides funding as a member of The Conversation US.

View all partners

South Korea finds itself embroiled in an all-out gender war – and it keeps getting worse.

The animosity between Korean men and women has reached a point where some women are outright refusing to date, marry and have kids with men – a phenomenon known as the 4B movement .

As a Korean feminist scholar living in the U.S., I’ve followed this gender war from afar as I conducted research on contemporary Korean gender politics.

However, I also became embroiled in it myself after my research on Korean masculinity was published by CNN .

The article described foreign women who traveled to Korea after becoming enamored of the idea of dating Korean men from watching Korean television dramas. I pointed out that since the tourists’ fantasies were based on fictional characters, some of them ended up disappointed with the Korean men they dated in real life.

The article was about racial politics and the masculine ideals. But some Korean readers thought that I was simply criticizing Korean men for not being romantic and handsome enough. One enraged Korean man commented that I was an “ugly feminist.”

But this was tame in comparison to what women living in South Korea have endured in recent years.

Extreme misogyny and a feminist backlash

Over the past couple of decades, there have been flash points in this gender war.

In 2010, Ilbe, a right-wing website that traffics in misogyny, started attracting users who peppered the forums with vulgar posts about women.

Then in 2015, an online extremist feminist group named Megalia arose. Its goal was to fight back by demeaning Korean men in ways that mirrored the rhetoric on sites like Ilbe.

A year later, a man who had professed his hatred of women murdered a random woman in a public bathroom near a Seoul subway station. He was eventually sentenced to decades in prison, but the lines were quickly drawn. On one side were feminists, who saw misogyny as the underlying motive. On the other side were men who claimed that it was merely the isolated actions of a mentally ill man. The two groups violently clashed during competing protests at the site of the murder.

A backdrop of digital sex crimes

However, none of these events have elicited as much public controversy as the steep rise in digital sex crimes. These are newer forms of sexual violence facilitated by technology: revenge porn ; upskirting , which refers to surreptitiously snapping photos under women’s skirts in public; and the use of hidden cameras to film women having sex or undressing.

In 2018, there were 2,289 reported cases of digital sex crimes; in 2021, the number snowballed to 10,353 .

In 2019, there were two major incidents that involved digital sex crimes.

In one, a number of male K-pop stars were indicted for filming and circulating videos of women in group chatrooms without their consent .

A few months later, Koreans were shocked to learn about what became known as the “ Nth Room Incident ,” during which hundreds of perpetrators – mostly men – committed digital sex crimes on dozens of women and minors.

They tended to target poorer women – sex workers, or women who wanted to make a few bucks by sharing anonymous nude photos of themselves. The perpetrators either hacked into their social media accounts or approached these women and offered them money, but asked for their personal information so they could transmit the funds. Once they obtained this information, they blackmailed the women by threatening to reveal their sex work and their nudes to their friends and family.

Since sex work and posting nude images of yourself online are illegal in Korea, the women, fearing arrest or being ostracized by friends and family, complied with the perpetrators’ demands to send even more compromising images of themselves. The men would then swap these images in chatrooms.

Protester holds sign that reads 'Korea is from top to bottom the rape cartel itself.'

And yet a 2019 survey conducted by the Korean government found that large swaths of the population blamed women for these sex crimes: 52% said that they believed sexual violence occurs because women wear revealing clothes, while 37% thought if women experienced sexual assault while drunk, they are partly to blame for their victimization.

In other words, a significant percentage of the Korean population believes that female sexuality is the problem – not the sexual violence.

Government policy lays the groundwork

Digital sex crimes are too widespread to lay the blame at the feet of a handful of bad actors.

To me, part of the problem stems from the long history of “gendered citizenship.”

Korean feminist scholar Seungsook Moon has written about the ways in which the government created one track for men and another for women as the country sought to modernize in the second half of the 20th century:

“Men were mobilized for mandatory military service and then, as conscripts, utilized as workers and researchers in the industrializing economy. Women were consigned to lesser factory jobs, and their roles as members of the modern nation were defined largely in terms of biological reproduction and household management.”

Although these policies are no longer officially carried out, the underlying attitudes about gender roles remain embedded in Korean life and culture. Women who veer from being mothers and housewives expose themselves to public and private backlash.

The government has created gender quotas in certain industries to try to unravel this system of gendered citizenship.

For instance, some government jobs have minimum gender quotas for new hires, and the government encourages the private sector to implement similar policies . In historically male-dominant industries, such as construction, there are quotas for female hires, while in historically female-dominant industries, such as education, there are male quotas .

In some ways, this has only made things worse. Each gender feels as if the other is receiving special treatment due to these affirmative action policies. Resentment festers.

‘The generation that has given up’

Today, the sense of competition between young men and women is exacerbated by the soaring cost of living and rampant unemployment.

Called the “ N-Po Generation ,” which roughly translates as “the generation that has given up,” many young South Koreans don’t think they can achieve certain milestones that previous generations took for granted: marriage, having kids, finding a job, owning a home and even friendships.

Two women in purple jackets hand out stickers.

Although all genders find themselves discouraged, the act of “giving up” has caused more problems for women. Men see women who forgo marriage and having kids as selfish. And when they then try to compete against men for jobs, some men become incensed.

Many of the men who have become radicalized commit digital sex crimes to take revenge on women who, in their view, have abandoned their duties.

Ultimately, the competitive dynamic created by the Korean government’s embrace of gendered citizenship has stoked the virulent gender war between Korean men and women, with digital sex crimes used as ammunition.

The 4B movement, whereby Korean women forego heterosexual dating, marriage, and childbirth, represents a radical escalation of the gender war by seeking to create an online and offline world devoid of men. Rather than engaging in altercations, these women are refusing to interact with men, period.

Digital sex crimes are a global problem

To be sure, digital sex crimes are not unique to Korea.

When I teach my college class on digital sex crimes in the U.S., I’m surprised by how many of my students admit that they’ve been victims of digital sex crimes, or knew of it happening at their high schools. And at the National Women’s Studies Association’s annual conference in 2022 , I watched feminist activists and scholars from all over the world present their findings about digital sex crimes back home.

Since each country has its own cultural context for the rise in digital sex crimes, there isn’t a single solution to solve the problems. But in South Korea, continuing to unravel the system of gendered citizenship could be part of the solution.

how to write an article 15

Senior Lecturer in Endodontics

how to write an article 15

Project Manager, Research Domain

how to write an article 15

Sydney Horizon Fellowships (Climate Change, Health and Sustainability)

how to write an article 15

Dean, School of Engineering, Design and Built Environment

how to write an article 15

Head of School, Humanities

How To Write A Good Eulogy For A Funeral

Senior Reporter, HuffPost Life

Kieran Culkin as Roman Roy in the ninth episode of "Succession" Season 4.

The latest episode of HBO’s “Succession” saw the Roy children struggling with their grief while attending the funeral of their media mogul father.

After an unscheduled eulogy from Logan Roy’s brother, the late magnate’s youngest son, Roman, takes to the lectern to deliver prepared remarks ― only to completely fall apart. Stepping in for “the Grim Weeper,” Roman’s brother Kendall and his sister, Shiv, proceed to share their own reflections on Logan’s life and legacy as a businessperson and father.

It’s one of the most emotional episodes of the series. Although most viewers cannot relate to the lavish lifestyles and ruthless business dealings portrayed on “Succession,” the experience of mourning a loved one is much more universal. And grief is often felt more intensely when a eulogy or some other public tribute is involved.

“Eulogies are enormously difficult because they typically need to be written on short notice amid intense pain, numbness, exhaustion, confusion or lack of focus,” said Alexandra Levine, the founder of speech ghostwriting business The Toastess . “There’s also the pressure of wanting whatever you say to ‘do justice’ to the person you’re remembering.”

As with other deeply poignant and personal endeavors, the best approach to giving a eulogy is to be thoughtful and genuine.

“There are no mistakes in eulogies,” Levine said. “What the speaker chooses to say as they cope will always vary based on their relationship to the person lost, the circumstances of the death and other factors. That said, there are some things to remember.”

I asked Levine as well as other etiquette and speech experts to share their advice for writing and delivering a nice eulogy for a loved one.

Start by jotting down all your thoughts.

“When it comes to the beginning, my number-one tip would be to sit down somewhere quiet and gather your thoughts together,” said Aubrey Bauer of Eulogies by Aubrey .

“When you allow yourself that sacred time, so many memories ― some that you haven’t thought of in years ― are likely to come flooding back to you. Write these down, along with any other thoughts and memories you happen to think of. It doesn’t have to be pretty yet ― just get it all out on paper.”

Rather than putting pressure on yourself to craft a workable draft, grab a notebook or some loose paper and engage in a free-writing session.

“My advice is to scribble down all your feelings and remembrances on a piece of paper ― writing sideways and in the margins,” said Molly-Ann Leikin, a speechwriter at Anything With Words . “Keep all your scribbles. Don’t erase anything. I recommend writing longhand first. That way, your feelings come down from your heart, through your fingers to your pen, and it’s much more personal than typing on a computer or texting.”

Your scribbles can include big ideas, descriptions and emotions, as well as the little things you recall about the deceased.

“Remembering small details about a person’s life ― even if they seem mundane or inconsequential ― are key to helping you paint a large and vivid portrait of who they were,” Levine said. “What were your loved one’s favorite things? The occasions they’d never miss? That saying they used to always say? Their biggest quirks? The things that made them tick? The more concrete, the better. These memories may even draw a smile.”

Take time to process your emotions and memories.

“Before you agree to give a eulogy, though, take stock of your own emotions,” said JP Reynolds , a wedding and memorial ceremony officiant and business communications coach. “Are you emotionally strong enough to offer words that truly honor the deceased? You do not want to be Roman, who wanted to eulogize his father so as to puff up his own stature. His emotional unawareness had embarrassing consequences for him.”

Make sure you’re giving yourself the space to grieve. Set aside private time to remember your lost loved one and how they impacted your life.

“If you’ve ever interviewed or recorded your loved one, try listening again and don’t hesitate to lean on that footage,” Levine said. “The things they’ve said in the past may take on new meaning in mourning, and including their voice through direct quotes can be incredibly powerful.”

For example, when I delivered a eulogy at my grandmother’s funeral, I drew on a voicemail she had left me during a hard time in my life. She quoted a specific Bible verse to bring me comfort, which I shared with everyone who gathered to mourn her at the service.

“Gather thoughts, memories and stories from others in your loved one’s circle that may be represented in the eulogy as well,” Bauer advised.

“Remembering small details about a person’s life ― even if they seem mundane or inconsequential ― are key to helping you paint a large and vivid portrait of who they were.” - Alexandra Levine, speech ghostwriter at The Toastess

Use questions as a guide.

If you’re still having trouble coming up with the words to fill your eulogy, approach it as a series of answers to prompts.

“Here are some questions to ask yourself,” said Darcey Peterson, a professional speechwriter at Lasting Eulogies . “What three words most define your loved one? What made your loved one special? What’s your favorite story to share about them? What was their favorite story to share? What made them happy? What were they passionate about? What important lessons did you learn from them?”

Put yourself in the deceased person’s shoes and imagine what they might have wanted their eulogy to express. Also ask yourself who the audience for this eulogy will be.

“Consider who your loved one was in life, and consider the circle of people who will be there honoring that life,” Bauer said. “If the person was fun-loving and a partyer, and someone who never played by the rules, you are free to have a little more fun with your wording. If the person was older, more conservative or religious, consider your audience and what they are expecting to hear.”

As you answer these questions, look for themes that might help inform the format of the eulogy. You can craft a general outline and sprinkle memories and anecdotes throughout the middle before turning it into a rough draft. Write an opening in which you introduce yourself and your relationship to the deceased, and offer some concluding thoughts at the end. Once you feel good about your draft, ask someone else to review it.

Remember that a eulogy is different from an obituary.

“A eulogy is not a recitation of life accomplishments ― that is an obituary,” said Thomas P. Farley , an etiquette expert who goes by Mister Manners.

“It is a way of bringing the deceased’s legacy to life. Share stories that are delightful, inspiring, funny, impressive, touching. By providing insights that are not commonly known, you will be doing your part to create a complete picture of a life well led. You are also helping establish the legacy of a person whom younger generations may not have known as well, if at all.”

Instead of listing the events of the person’s life, focus on the relationships they had and the way they made others feel. After all, there will be a lot of emotions in the room.

“At a funeral, and particularly at the burial, the goal is for closure,” Leikin said. “It’s also for gathering the rest of our families and friends together to bond together, so the loss doesn’t feel so devastating. We’re still here. We’re here for each other. Hug, cry, reconnect. Stay connected.”

You don’t have to pretend your loved one was perfect, but do your best to keep the tone positive yet personal.

“Try not to give a eulogy filled with just platitudes and adjectives,” Peterson said. “Tell your funny story. Tell your bittersweet story. The stories you share that demonstrate a quality are so much more powerful than just a list of qualities and accomplishments.”

For example, she recommended turning a sentence like “Aunt Jane was kind and she loved animals” into a specific memory.

“Consider instead: ‘I still remember summer vacations and overnights with Aunt Jane. I always loved helping her with her evening ritual of feeding the dogs and the birds, and even the stray neighborhood cats ― all before we even sat down for our own dinner!’” Peterson said.

Resist the urge to make it about you.

“It’s imperative to remember that the person you’re eulogizing ― not you ― is the protagonist of the story,” said Victoria Wellman, the founder of The Oratory Laboratory and author of the book “Before You Say Anything.”

“A lot of people can’t see beyond themselves when they’re speaking about someone they love ― it’s a frustrating irony. There is a fine but indelible line between talking about your experiences with someone and talking from your experience of them. The former should always serve a larger narrative than simply providing an opportunity to wax poetic about an experience no one else in the room can relate to.”

She recommended focusing on the specific things about the deceased that you will miss, rather than the fact that you will miss them. You’re the narrator of the story, not the co-star.

“If this seems hard to calculate, just read through what you’ve written and tally up how many times you wrote ‘I’ versus their name or pronoun,” Wellman added.

Don’t shy away from moments of humor.

“Don’t be afraid to use bits of well-placed humor,” Peterson said. “Humor is as universal as sadness. Humor and laughter can help us process grief very much in the same way as crying can.”

Some jokes might not be as appropriate as others, but comedy might actually match the tone of the event, depending on the person and circumstances of their death.

“Don’t forget that a eulogy is a celebration of someone’s life,” Wellman said. “Humor is incredibly unifying, so you should aim to bring a smile to the faces in the audience at least once.”

But don’t turn your eulogy into a standup routine or roast.

“Even professional comedians understand you need to know your audience,” said Jodi R.R. Smith, the president of Massachusetts-based Mannersmith Etiquette Consulting . “This is not your chance to try out new material. It is completely acceptable to share a funny story, but be wary of a joke at the deceased’s expense.”

“Don’t forget that a eulogy is a celebration of someone’s life.” - Victoria Wellman, author and founder of The Oratory Laboratory

Talk about the future, as well as the past.

“A eulogy can reflect on the future as much as on the past,” Levine said. “In addition to talking about who this person was and their life well lived, keep an eye toward the future by talking about what you will carry forward from this person and how you will honor them. You can highlight which of their traditions you’ll pass on, the values you’ll uphold, and the sayings or pieces of advice you’ll hold dear.”

She recommended sharing any signs that make you feel like they’re still with you. For example, Levine said she believes that ladybugs indicate her late grandmother’s presence.

“Let your eulogy be guided by your answer to two questions,” Reynolds said. “What is it you want people to remember and carry with them of this deceased person? What do you want them to do with that memory going forward in their own lives?”

He said the best way you can honor the dead is to be for others what that person was for you.

“End with what your commitment is to how you will honor the deceased,” Reynolds said. “People want to believe the everlasting hope: that life is good and worthy of our best.”

Don’t go on for too long.

“Common mistakes include going on and on and on too long,” Leikin said. “Less is more. If there’s only one speaker, keep it to three minutes. You can say a lot in that time. If there are several speakers, keep it to two minutes each.”

She recommended that each speaker address a different part of the deceased’s life or share their own personal remembrances.

Other experts suggested that three to five minutes or even as long as 10, could be appropriate as well. Just don’t risk losing people’s attention.

“Do not try to do too much in the eulogy,” Reynolds said. “No person’s life can be summed up in one eulogy. No one eulogy can capture the fullness, complexity and nuance of the deceased.”

Above all, make sure to prepare and practice.

“The most important thing is that a eulogy ― as with any speech ― requires preparation,” Wellman said. “Kendall’s improvised remarks about his father as a titan of industry were terrific, but no one pulls off a speech like that on the spot ― it’s the work of weeks in the HBO writers room.”

She emphasized that preparing a written speech is not inauthentic. It will give you enough time to think about what you’d like to include and then work that into a logical narrative framework. And once you’ve written your eulogy, you don’t have to completely memorize it. But you should take some time to practice your delivery.

“When you’re finished, read it out loud several times,” Peterson said. “Go slow; don’t rush through. Leave room for pauses when tender moments come up and you need to take a deep breath. It’s OK to get emotional. People expect that you will, so plan for it. There’s great power in a thoughtful pause. It shows your willingness to be genuine and vulnerable, and it will connect you to your audience.”

She suggested having a plan ready in case you become too overwhelmed by emotion to continue.

“Ask a trusted friend or family member if they could take over if that happens,” Peterson said. “Have a version of the eulogy written in the third person for them to read.”

Caroline Bologna - Senior Reporter, HuffPost Life

Caroline Bologna

You may like, more in wellness, more in life.

how to write an article 15

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.


how to write an article 15

Indicators of Global Climate Change 2022: annual update of large-scale indicators of the state of the climate system and human influence

Piers m. forster, christopher j. smith, tristram walsh, william f. lamb, robin lamboll, mathias hauser, aurélien ribes, debbie rosen, nathan gillett, matthew d. palmer, joeri rogelj, karina von schuckmann, sonia i. seneviratne, blair trewin, xuebin zhang, myles allen, robbie andrew, arlene birt, alex borger, jiddu a. broersma, lijing cheng, frank dentener, pierre friedlingstein, josé m. gutiérrez, johannes gütschow, bradley hall, masayoshi ishii, stuart jenkins, june-yi lee, colin morice, christopher kadow, john kennedy, rachel killick, jan c. minx, vaishali naik, glen p. peters, anna pirani, julia pongratz, carl-friedrich schleussner, sophie szopa, peter thorne, robert rohde, maisa rojas corradi, dominik schumacher, russell vose, kirsten zickfeld, valérie masson-delmotte, panmao zhai.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessments are the trusted source of scientific evidence for climate negotiations taking place under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), including the first global stocktake under the Paris Agreement that will conclude at COP28 in December 2023. Evidence-based decision-making needs to be informed by up-to-date and timely information on key indicators of the state of the climate system and of the human influence on the global climate system. However, successive IPCC reports are published at intervals of 5–10 years, creating potential for an information gap between report cycles.

We follow methods as close as possible to those used in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) Working Group One (WGI) report. We compile monitoring datasets to produce estimates for key climate indicators related to forcing of the climate system: emissions of greenhouse gases and short-lived climate forcers, greenhouse gas concentrations, radiative forcing, surface temperature changes, the Earth's energy imbalance, warming attributed to human activities, the remaining carbon budget, and estimates of global temperature extremes. The purpose of this effort, grounded in an open data, open science approach, is to make annually updated reliable global climate indicators available in the public domain ( , Smith et al., 2023a). As they are traceable to IPCC report methods, they can be trusted by all parties involved in UNFCCC negotiations and help convey wider understanding of the latest knowledge of the climate system and its direction of travel.

The indicators show that human-induced warming reached 1.14 [0.9 to 1.4]  ∘ C averaged over the 2013–2022 decade and 1.26 [1.0 to 1.6]  ∘ C in 2022. Over the 2013–2022 period, human-induced warming has been increasing at an unprecedented rate of over 0.2  ∘ C per decade. This high rate of warming is caused by a combination of greenhouse gas emissions being at an all-time high of 54  ±  5.3 GtCO 2 e over the last decade, as well as reductions in the strength of aerosol cooling. Despite this, there is evidence that increases in greenhouse gas emissions have slowed, and depending on societal choices, a continued series of these annual updates over the critical 2020s decade could track a change of direction for human influence on climate.


Forster, P. M., Smith, C. J., Walsh, T., Lamb, W. F., Lamboll, R., Hauser, M., Ribes, A., Rosen, D., Gillett, N., Palmer, M. D., Rogelj, J., von Schuckmann, K., Seneviratne, S. I., Trewin, B., Zhang, X., Allen, M., Andrew, R., Birt, A., Borger, A., Boyer, T., Broersma, J. A., Cheng, L., Dentener, F., Friedlingstein, P., Gutiérrez, J. M., Gütschow, J., Hall, B., Ishii, M., Jenkins, S., Lan, X., Lee, J.-Y., Morice, C., Kadow, C., Kennedy, J., Killick, R., Minx, J. C., Naik, V., Peters, G. P., Pirani, A., Pongratz, J., Schleussner, C.-F., Szopa, S., Thorne, P., Rohde, R., Rojas Corradi, M., Schumacher, D., Vose, R., Zickfeld, K., Masson-Delmotte, V., and Zhai, P.: Indicators of Global Climate Change 2022: annual update of large-scale indicators of the state of the climate system and human influence, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 2295–2327,, 2023.

Increased greenhouse gas concentrations combined with reductions in aerosol pollution have led to rapid increases in human-induced effective radiative forcing, which has in turn led to atmosphere, land, cryosphere and ocean warming (Gulev et al., 2021). This in turn has led to an intensification of many weather and climate extremes, particularly more frequent and more intense hot extremes, and heavy precipitation across most regions of the world (Seneviratne et al., 2021). Given the speed of recent change, and the need for evidence-based decision-making, this Indicators of Global Climate Change (IGCC) update assembles the latest scientific understanding on the current state and evolution of the climate system and of human influence to support policymakers whilst the next Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment is under preparation. This first annual update is focused on indicators related to heating of the climate system, building from greenhouse gas emissions towards estimates of human-induced warming and the remaining carbon budget. In future years, this effort could be expanded to encompass other indicators, including global precipitation changes and related extremes.

We adopt the Global Carbon Budget ethos of a community-wide inclusive effort that synthesises work from across a large and diverse global scientific community in a timely fashion (Friedlingstein et al., 2022a). Like the Global Carbon Budget, this initiative arises from the international science community to establish a knowledge base to support policy debate and action to meet the Paris Agreement temperature goal.

This update complements other international efforts under the auspices of the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Annual state-of-the-climate reports are released by the WMO which use much of the same data analysed here for surface temperature and energy budget trends. The Bulletin of American Meteorological Society (BAMS) releases annual state-of-the-climate reports covering many essential variables including temperature and greenhouse gas concentrations.  However, these reports focus on statistics from the previous year and make slightly different choices over datasets and analysis compared to the IPCC (see Sect. 5). The Global Carbon Project publishes updated carbon dioxide datasets which are used directly in this report. There is no similarly structured activity that provides all the necessary datasets to update the assessment of human influence on global surface temperature annually.

The update is based on methodologies for key climate indicators assessed by the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) of the physical science basis of climate change (Working Group One (WGI) report; IPCC, 2021a) as well as Chap. 2 of the WGIII report (Dhakal et al., 2022) and is aligned with the efforts initiated in AR6 to implement FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles for reproducibility and reusability (Pirani et al., 2022; Iturbide et al., 2022). IPCC reports make a much wider assessment of the science and methodologies – we do not attempt to reproduce the comprehensive nature of these IPCC assessments here.

The IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5  ∘ C (SR1.5), published in 2018, provided an assessment of the level of human-induced warming and cumulative emissions to date (Allen et al., 2018) and the remaining carbon budget (Rogelj et al., 2018) to support the evidence base on how the world is progressing in terms of meeting aspects of the Paris Agreement. The AR6 WGI Report, published in 2021, assessed past, current and future changes of these and other key global climate indicators, as well as undertaking an assessment of the Earth's energy budget. It also updated its approach for estimating human-induced warming and global warming level. In AR6 WGI and here, reaching a level of global warming is defined as the global surface temperature change, averaged over a 20-year period, exceeding a particular level of global warming, for example, 1.5  ∘ C global warming. Given the current rates of change and the likelihood of reaching 1.5  ∘ C of global warming in the first half of the 2030s (Lee et al., 2021, 2023; Riahi et al., 2022), it is important to have robust, trusted and also timely climate indicators in the public domain to form an evidence base for effective science-based decision-making.

When making their assessments, authors of IPCC reports assess published literature but also apply established published analysis methods to assessed datasets, such as the dataset produced by the latest climate model intercomparison projects (Lee et al., 2021). The authors combine and analyse both model and observational data as part of their expert assessment, making assessments of the trustworthiness and error characteristics of different datasets. It is this synthetic analysis by IPCC authors that derives the estimates of key climate indicators. Wherever possible, these same assessed methodological approaches are implemented here to provide the updates with variations clearly flagged and documented. The same approach, using the same datasets (updated by 2 years) and methods as employed in WGI, was used in the AR6 Synthesis Report (2023) (AR6 SYR; Lee et al., 2023) to provide an updated assessment of the latest atmospheric well-mixed greenhouse gas concentrations (up to 2021) and decadal average change in global surface temperature ( + 1.15  ∘ C [1.00–1.25  ∘ C] in 2013–2022 for global surface temperature). However, the assessment of human-induced warming was not updated (and therefore only covers warming up to the decade 2010–2019), nor was the remaining carbon budget updated, so the related information in the AR6 SYR report remained based on data up to the end of 2019.

The indicators in this first annual update give important insights into the magnitude and the pace of global warming. This paper provides the basis for a dashboard of climate indicators grounded in IPCC methodologies and directly traceable to reports published as part of the AR6 cycle. We employ datasets that can be updated on a regular basis between the publication of IPCC reports. Note that there are other similar initiatives underway to update other AR6 cycle products; for example, the evolution of the WGI Interactive Atlas (Gutiérrez et al., 2021) is being developed under the Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) and has potential connections and synergies with this initiative that will be explored in the future.

Our longer-term ambition is to rigorously track both climate system change and methodological improvements between IPCC report cycles, thereby building consistency and awareness. An example of why tracking methodological change is important was the updated estimate for historic warming (the increase in global surface temperature from 1850–1900 to 1986–2005). This was 0.08 [ −0.01 to 0.12]  ∘ C higher in the AR6 than in the fifth assessment report (AR5) and SR1.5. Datasets and methods of evaluating global temperature changes altered between the AR5 and AR6, leading to a small shift in the historical temperature. This was reflected in changes between AR5 and AR6, whereas SR1.5 mostly relied on methodologies from AR5 (see AR6 WGI Cross Chap. Box 2.3, Gulev et al., 2021). Annual updates provide indications of possible future methodological shifts that subsequent IPCC reports may make as science advances and can detail their impact on perceived trends.

The update is organised as follows: emissions (Sect. 2) and greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations (Sect. 3) are used to develop updated estimates of effective radiative forcing (Sect. 4). Observations of global surface temperature change (Sect. 5) and Earth's energy imbalance (Sect. 6) are key global indicators of a warming world. The global surface temperature change is formally attributed to human activity in Sect. 7, which tracks human-induced warming. Section 8 updates the remaining carbon budget to policy-relevant temperature thresholds. Section 9 gives an example of global-scale indicators associated with climate extremes of maximum land surface temperatures.

An important purpose of the exercise is to make these indicators widely available and understood. Plans for a web dashboard are discussed in Sect. 10 and code and data availability in Sect. 11, and conclusions are presented in Sect. 12. Data are available at (Smith et al., 2023a).

Historic emissions from human activity were assessed in both AR6 WGI and WGIII. Chapter 5 of WGI assessed CO 2 and CH 4 emissions in the context of the carbon cycle (Canadell et al., 2021). Chapter 6 of WGI assessed emissions in the context of understanding the climate and air quality impacts of short-lived climate forcers (Szopa et al., 2021). Chapter 2 of WGIII, published 1 year later (Dhakal et al., 2022), looked at the sectoral sources of emissions and gave the most up-to-date understanding of the current level of emissions. This section bases its methods and data on those employed in this WGIII chapter.

2.1  Methods of estimating greenhouse gas emissions changes

Like in AR6 WGIII, net GHG emissions in this paper refer to releases of GHGs from anthropogenic sources minus removals by anthropogenic sinks, for those species of gases that are reported under the common reporting format of the UNFCCC. This includes CO 2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry (CO 2 -FFI); net CO 2 emissions from land use, land-use change and forestry (CO 2 -LULUCF); CH 4 ; N 2 O; and fluorinated gas (F-gas) emissions. CO 2 -FFI mainly comprises fossil-fuel combustion emissions, as well as emissions from industrial processes such as cement production. This excludes biomass and biofuel use by industry. CO 2 -LULUCF is mainly driven by deforestation but also includes anthropogenic removals on land from afforestation and reforestation, emissions from logging and forest degradation, and emissions and removals in shifting cultivation cycles, as well as emissions and removals from other land-use change and land management activities, including peat burning and drainage. The non-CO 2 GHGs – CH 4 , N 2 O and F-gas emissions – are linked to the fossil-fuel extraction, agriculture, industry and waste sectors.

Global regulatory conventions have led to a twofold categorisation of F-gas emissions (also known as halogenated gases). Under UNFCCC accounting, countries record emissions of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) – hereinafter “UNFCCC F-gases”. However, national inventories tend to exclude halons, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) – hereinafter “ODS (ozone-depleting substance) F-gases” – as they have been initially regulated under the Montreal Protocol and its amendments. In line with the WGIII assessment, ODS F-gases and other substances, including ozone and aerosols, are not included in our GHG emissions reporting but are included in subsequent assessments of concentrations, effective radiative forcing, human-induced warming, carbon budgets and climate impacts in line with the WGI assessment.

There are also varying conventions used to quantify CO 2 -LULUCF fluxes. These include the use of bookkeeping models, dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) and the national inventory approach (Pongratz et al., 2021). Each differs in terms of their applied system boundaries and definitions and is not directly comparable. However, efforts to “translate” between bookkeeping estimates and national inventories using DGVMs have demonstrated a degree of consistency between the varying approaches (Friedlingstein et al., 2022a; Grassi et al., 2023).

Each category of GHG emissions included here is covered by varying primary sources and datasets. Although many datasets cover individual categories, few extend across multiple categories, and only a minority have frequent and timely update schedules. Notable datasets include the Global Carbon Budget (GCB; Friedlingstein et al., 2022b), which covers CO 2 -FFI and CO 2 -LULUCF; the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR; Crippa et al., 2022) and the Potsdam Real-time Integrated Model for probabilistic Assessment of emissions Paths (PRIMAP-hist; Gütschow et al., 2016; Gütschow and Pflüger 2023), which cover CO 2 -FFI, CH 4 , N 2 O and UNFCCC F-gases; and the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS; O'Rourke et al., 2021), which covers CO 2 -FFI, CH 4 , and N 2 O. As detailed below, not all these datasets were employed in this update.

In AR6 WGIII, total net GHG emissions were calculated as the sum of CO 2 -FFI, CH 4 , N 2 O and UNFCCC F-gases from EDGAR and net CO 2 -LULUCF emissions from the GCB. Net CO 2 -LULUCF emissions followed the GCB convention and were derived from the average of three bookkeeping models (Hansis et al., 2015; Houghton and Nassikas, 2017; Gasser et al., 2020). Version 6 of EDGAR was used (with a fast-track methodology applied for the final year of data – 2019), alongside the 2020 version of the GCB (Friedlingstein et al., 2020). CO 2 -equivalent emissions were calculated using global warming potentials with a 100-year time horizon from AR6 WGI Chap. 7 (Forster et al., 2021). Uncertainty ranges were based on a comparative assessment of available data and expert judgement, corresponding to a 90 % confidence interval (Minx et al., 2021): ± 8 % for CO 2 -FFI, ± 70 % for CO 2 -LULUCF, ± 30 % for CH 4 and F-gases, and ± 60 % for N 2 O (note that the GCB assesses 1 standard deviation uncertainty for CO 2 -FFI as ± 5 % and for CO 2 -LULUCF as ± 2.6 GtCO 2 ; Friedlingstein et al., 2022a). The total uncertainty was summed in quadrature, assuming independence of estimates per species/source. Reflecting these uncertainties, AR6 WGIII reported emissions to two significant figures only. Uncertainties in GWP100 metrics were not applied (Minx et al., 2021).

This analysis tracks the same compilation of GHGs as in AR6 WGIII. We follow the same approach for estimating uncertainties and CO 2 -equivalent emissions. We also use the same type of data sources but make important changes to the specific selection of data sources to further improve the quality of the data, as suggested in the knowledge gap discussion of the WGIII report (Dhakal et al., 2022). Instead of using EDGAR data (which are now available as version 7), we use GCB data for CO 2 -FFI, PRIMAP-hist data for CH 4 and N 2 O, and atmospheric concentrations with best-estimate lifetimes for UNFCCC F-gas emissions (Hodnebrog et al., 2020). As in AR6 WGIII we use GCB for net CO 2 -LULUCF emissions, taking the average of three bookkeeping models.

There are three reasons for these specific data choices. First, national greenhouse gas emissions inventories tend to use improved, higher-tier methods for estimating emissions fluxes than global inventories such as EDGAR or CEDS (Dhakal et al., 2022; Minx et al., 2021). As GCB and PRIMAP-hist integrate the most recent national inventory submissions to the UNFCCC, selecting these databases makes best use of country-level improvements in data-gathering infrastructures. Second, comprehensive reporting of F-gas emissions has remained challenging in national inventories and may exclude some military applications (see Minx et al., 2021; Dhakal et al., 2022). However, F-gases are entirely anthropogenic substances, and their concentrations can be measured effectively and reliably in the atmosphere. We therefore follow the AR6 WGI approach in making use of direct atmospheric observations. Third, the choice of GCB data for CO 2 -FFI means we can integrate its projection of that year's CO 2 emissions at the time of publication (i.e. for 2022). No other dataset except GCB provides projections of CO 2 emissions on this time frame. At this point in the publication cycle (mid-year), the other chosen sources provide data points with a 2-year time lag (i.e. for 2021). While these data choices inform our overall assessment of GHG emissions, we provide a comparison across datasets for each emissions category, as well as between our estimates and an estimate derived from AR6 WGIII-like databases (i.e. EDGAR for CO 2 -FFI and non-CO 2 GHG emissions, GCB for CO 2 -LULUCF).

2.2  Updated global greenhouse gas emissions

Total global GHG emissions reached 55  ±  5.2 GtCO 2 e in 2021. The main contributing sources were CO 2 -FFI (37  ±  3 GtCO 2 ), CO 2 -LULUCF (3.9  ±  2.8 GtCO 2 ), CH 4 (8.9  ±  2.7 GtCO 2 e), N 2 O (2.9  ±  1.8 GtCO 2 e) and F-gas emissions (2  ±  0.59 GtCO 2 e). GHG emissions rebounded in 2021, following a single-year decline during the COVID-19-induced lockdowns of 2020. Prior to this event in 2019, emissions were 55  ±  5.4 GtCO 2 e – i.e. almost the same level as in 2021. Initial projections indicate that CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel and industry and land-use change remained similar in 2022, at 37  ±  3 and 3.9  ±  2.8 GtCO 2 , respectively (Friedlingstein et al., 2022a). Note that ODS F-gases such as chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons are excluded from national GHG emissions inventories. For consistency with AR6, they are also excluded here. Including them here would increase total global GHG emissions by 1.6 GtCO 2 e in 2021.

Average GHG emissions for the decade 2012–2021 were 54  ±  5.3 GtCO 2 e. Average decadal GHG emissions have increased steadily since the 1970s across all major groups of GHGs, driven primarily by increasing CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel and industry but also rising emissions of CH 4 and N 2 O. UNFCCC F-gas emissions have grown more rapidly than other greenhouse gases reported under the UNFCCC but from low levels. By contrast, ODS F-gas emissions have declined substantially since the 1990s. Both the magnitude and trend of CO 2 emissions from land-use change remain highly uncertain, with the latest data indicating an average net flux between 4–5 GtCO 2  yr −1 for the past few decades.

AR6 WGIII reported total net anthropogenic emissions of 59  ±  6.6 GtCO 2 e in 2019 and decadal average emissions of 56  ±  6.0 GtCO 2 e from 2010–2019. By comparison, our estimates here for the AR6 period sum to 55  ±  5.4 GtCO 2 e in 2019 and 53  ±  5.3 GtCO 2 e for the same decade (2010–2019). The difference between these figures, including the reduced relative uncertainty range, is partly driven by the substantial revision in GCB CO 2 -LULUCF estimates between the 2020 version (used in AR6 WGIII) of 6.6 GtCO 2 and the 2022 version (used here) of 4.6 GtCO 2 . The main reason for this downward revision comes from updated estimates of agricultural areas by the FAO and uses multi-annual land-cover maps from satellite remote sensing, leading to lower emissions from cropland expansion, particularly in the tropical regions. It is important to note that this change is not a reflection of changed and improved methodology per se but an update of the resulting estimation due to updates in the available input data. Second, there are relatively small changes resulting from improvements in datasets since AR6, with the direction of changes depending on the considered gases. CH 4 accounts for the largest of these at −1.8  GtCO 2 e in 2019, which is related to the switch from EDGAR in AR6 to PRIMAP-hist in this study. EDGAR estimates considerably higher CH 4 emissions – from fugitive fossil sources, as well as the livestock, rice cultivation and waste sectors – compared to country-reported data using higher tier methods, as compiled in PRIMAP-hist. Generally, uncertainty in these sectors is relatively high as calculations are based on activity data and assumed emissions factors which are hard to determine and vary greatly over countries. Differences in the remaining gases for 2019 are relatively small in magnitude (increases in N 2 O ( + 0.18 GtCO 2 e) and UNFCCC-F-gases ( + 0.48 GtCO 2 e) and decreases in CO2-FFI ( −0.8  GtCO 2 e)). Overall, excluding the change due to CO 2 -LULUCF and CH 4 , they impact the total GHG emissions estimate by −0.14  GtCO 2 e.

New literature not available at the time of the AR6 suggests that increases in atmospheric methane concentrations are also driven by methane emissions from wetland changes resulting from climate change (e.g. Basu et al., 2022; Peng et al., 2022; Nisbet et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2023). Such carbon cycle feedbacks are not considered here, as we focus on estimates of emissions resulting directly from human activities.

Figure 1 Annual global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by source, 1970–2021. Refer to Sect. 2.1 for a list of datasets. Datasets with an asterisk (*) indicate the sources used to compile global total greenhouse gas emissions in (a) . CO 2 -equivalent emissions in (a) and (f) are calculated using global warming potentials (GWPs) with a 100-year time horizon from the AR6 WGI Chap. 7 (Forster et al., 2021). F-gas emissions in (a) comprise only UNFCCC F-gas emissions (see Sect. 2.1 for a list of species).

Table 1 Global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by source and decade.

how to write an article 15

All numbers refer to decadal averages, except for annual estimates in 2021 and 2022. CO 2 -equivalent emissions are calculated using GWP with a 100-year time horizon from AR6 WGI Chap. 7 (Forster et al., 2021). Projections of non-CO 2 GHG emissions in 2022 remain unavailable at the time of publication. Uncertainties are ± 8 % for CO 2 -FFI, ± 70 % for CO 2 -LULUCF, ± 30 % for CH 4 and F-gases, and ± 60 % for N 2 O, corresponding to a 90 % confidence interval. ODS F-gases are excluded, as noted in Sect. 2.1.

Download Print Version | Download XLSX

2.3  Non-methane short-lived climate forcers

In addition to GHG emissions, we provide an update of anthropogenic emissions of non-methane short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs) (SO 2 , black carbon (BC), organic carbon (OC), NO x , volatile organic compounds (VOCs), CO and NH 3 ). HFCs are considered in Sect. 2.2. Updating emissions of many short-lived climate forcing agents to 2022 based on established datasets is not possible as compiling global data can take several years. Yet, as SLCF emissions are needed in this paper to update effective radiative forcing (ERF) estimates through 2022, updated emission datasets, where they are available, are combined with projected data to make SLCF emission time series complete.

As in Dhakal et al. (2022), sectoral emissions of SLCFs are derived from two sources. For fossil fuel, industrial, waste and agricultural sectors, we use the CEDS dataset that provided SLCF emissions for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) (Hoesly et al., 2018). CEDS provides global emissions totals from 1750 to 2019 in its most recent version (O'Rourke et al., 2021). No CEDS emissions data are available yet beyond 2019. As a first estimate, the SLCF emissions time series are extrapolated to 2022 using the “two-year blip” scenario (Forster et al., 2020) of global emissions suppressed by the economic slowdown due to COVID-19. These projections are proxy estimates from Google and Apple mobility data over 2020 and assume a slow return to pre-pandemic emissions activity levels by 2022. Other near-real-time emissions estimates covering the COVID-19 pandemic era tend to show less of an emissions reduction than the two-year blip scenario (Guevara et al., 2023). It should be stressed that accurate quantification of SLCF emissions during this period is not possible.

We do not explicitly account for the introduction of strict fuel sulfur controls brought in by the International Maritime Organization on 1 January 2020, which was expected to reduce SO 2 emissions from the global shipping sector by 8.5 Tg against a pre-COVID baseline (around 10 % of 2019 total SO 2 emissions). SO 2 reductions from shipping are partly accounted for in the proxy activity dataset, and including a specific shipping adjustment may double-count emissions reductions.

For biomass-burning SLCF emissions, we follow AR6 WGIII (Dhakal et al., 2022) and use the Global Fire Emissions Dataset (GFED; Randerson et al., 2017) for 1997 to 2022, with the dataset extended back to 1750 for CMIP6 (van Marle et al., 2017). Estimates from 2017 to 2022 are provisional. The potential for both sources of emissions data to be updated in future versions exists, particularly in light of a forthcoming update to CEDS and quantification of shipping sector SO 2 reductions. Other natural emissions, which are important for gauging some SLCF concentrations, are considered as constant in the context of calculating concentrations and ERF.

Estimated emissions used here are based on a combination of GFED emissions for biomass-burning emissions and CEDS up until 2019 extended with the two-year blip scenario for fossil, agricultural, industrial and waste sectors. Under this scenario, emissions of all SLCFs are reduced in 2022 relative to 2019 (Table 2). As described in Sect. 4, this has implications for several categories of anthropogenic radiative forcing. Trends in SLCFs emissions are spatially heterogeneous (Szopa et al., 2021), with strong shifts in the geographical distribution of emissions over the 2010–2019 decade. Very different lockdown measures have been applied for COVID around the world, resulting in various lengths and intensities of activity reductions and effects on air pollutant emissions (Sokhi et al., 2021). SLCF emissions have been seen to return to their pre-COVID levels by 2022 in some regions, sometimes with a rebound effect, but not in all (Putaud et al., 2023; Lonsdale and Sun, 2023), but quantification at the global scale is not yet available.

Table 2 Emissions of the major SLCFs in 1750, 2019 and 2022.

how to write an article 15

Emissions of SO 2 + SO 4 2 - use SO 2 molecular weights. Emissions of NO x use NO 2 molecular weights. VOCs are for the total mass.

Uncertainties associated with these emission estimates are difficult to quantify. From the non-biomass-burning sectors they are estimated to be smallest for SO 2 ( ± 14 %), largest for black carbon (BC) (a factor of 2) and intermediate for other species (Smith et al., 2011; Bond et al., 2013; Hoesly et al., 2018). Uncertainties are also likely to increase both backwards in time (Hoesly et al., 2018) and again in the most recent years. The estimates of non-biomass-burning emissions for 2020, 2021 and 2022 are highly uncertain, owing to the use of proxy activity data, scenario extension and the impact of sulfur controls in the shipping sector. Future updates of CEDS are expected to include uncertainties (Hoesly et al., 2018). Even though trends over recent years are uncertain, the general decline in some SLCF emissions derived is supported by aerosol optical depth measurements (e.g. Quaas et al., 2022).

AR6 WGI assessed well-mixed GHG concentrations in Chap. 2 (Gulev et al., 2021) and additionally provided a dataset of concentrations of 52 well-mixed GHGs from 1750 to 2019 in its Annex III (IPCC, 2021c). Footnotes in AR6 SYR updated CO 2 , CH 4 and N 2 O concentrations to 2021 (Lee et al., 2023). In this update, we extended the record to 2022 for all 52 gases.

Ozone is an important greenhouse gas with strong regional variation both in the stratosphere and troposphere (Szopa et al., 2021). Its ERF arising from its regional distribution is assessed in Sect. 4 but following AR6 convention is not included with the GHGs discussed here. Other non-methane SLCFs are heterogeneously distributed in the atmosphere and are also not typically reported in terms of a globally averaged concentration. Globally averaged concentrations for these are normally model-derived, supplemented by local monitoring networks and satellite data (Szopa et al., 2021).

As in AR6, CO 2 concentrations are taken from the NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (GML) and updated through 2022 (Lan et al., 2023a). Here, CO 2 is reported on the updated WMO-CO2-X2019 scale, whereas in AR6, values were reported on the WMO-CO2-X2007 scale. This improved calibration increases CO 2 concentrations by around 0.2 ppm (Hall et al., 2021). In AR6, CH 4 and N 2 O were reported as the average from NOAA and the Advanced Global Atmospheric Gases Experiment (AGAGE) global networks. For 2022, as updated AGAGE data are not currently available, we used only NOAA data (Lan et al., 2023b) and multiplied N 2 O by 1.0007 to be consistent with a NOAA–AGAGE average. NOAA CH 4 in 2022 was used without adjustment since the NOAA and AGAGE global CH 4 means are consistent within 2 ppb. Mixing ratio uncertainties for 2022 are assumed to be similar to 2019, and we adopt the same uncertainties as assessed in AR6 WGI.

Many halogenated greenhouse gases are reported on a global mean basis from NOAA and/or AGAGE until 2020 or 2021 (SF 6 is available in the NOAA dataset up to 2022). Where both NOAA and AGAGE data are used for the same gas, we take a mean of the two datasets. Where both networks are used and the last full year of data availability is different, the difference between the dataset mean and the dataset with the longer time series in this last year is used as an additive offset to the dataset with the longer time series. Some obvious inconsistencies are removed such as sudden changes in concentrations when missing data are reported as zero.

Some of the more minor halogenated gases are not part of the NOAA or AGAGE operational network and are currently only reported in literature sources until 2019 or possibly 2015 (Droste et al., 2020; Laube et al., 2014; Schoenenberger et al., 2015; Simmonds et al., 2017; Vollmer et al., 2018). Concentrations of gases where 2022 data are not yet available are extrapolated forwards to 2022 using the average growth rate over the last 5 years of available data. These assumptions have an imperceptible effect on the total ERF assessed in Sect. 4, whereas excluding these gases would have an impact.

The global surface mean mixing ratios of CO 2 , CH 4 and N 2 O in 2022 were 417.1 [ ± 0.4] ppm, 1911.9 [ ± 3.3] ppb and 335.9 [ ± 0.4] ppb. Concentrations of all three major GHGs have increased from 2019 values reported in AR6 WGI, which were 410.1 [ ± 0.36] ppm for CO 2 , 1866.3 [ ± 3.2] ppb for CH 4 and 332.1 [ ± 0.7] ppb for N 2 O. CO 2 concentrations in 2019 are updated to 410.3 ppm using the new WMO-CO2-X2019 scale adopted here. Concentrations of most categories of halogenated GHGs have increased from 2019 to 2022: from 109.4 to 114.2 ppt on a CF 4 -equivalent scale for PFCs, 237.1 to 287.2 ppt on an HFC-134a-equivalent scale for HFCs, 9.9 to 11.0 ppt for SF 6 and 2.1 to 2.8 ppt for NF 3 . Only Montreal Protocol halogenated GHGs have decreased in concentration, from 1031.9 ppt in 2019 to 1016.6 ppt in 2022 on a CFC-12-equivalent scale, demonstrating the continued success of the Montreal Protocol. Although even here, concentrations of some minor CFCs are rising (see also Western et al., 2023). In this update we employ AR6-derived uncertainty estimates and do not perform a new assessment. Table S1 in Sect. S3 of the Supplement shows specific updated concentrations for all the GHGs considered.

ERFs were principally assessed in Chap. 7 of AR6 WGI (Forster et al., 2021). Chapter 7 focussed on assessing ERF from changes in atmospheric concentrations; it also supported estimates of ERF in Chap. 6 that attributed forcing to specific precursor emissions (Szopa et al., 2021) and also generated the time history of ERF shown in AR6 WGI Fig. 2.10 and discussed in Chap. 2 (Gulev et al., 2021). Only the concentration-based estimates are updated this year. The emission-based estimates relied on specific chemistry climate model integrations, and a consistent method of applying updates to these would need to be developed in the future.

Each IPCC report has successively updated both the method of calculation and the time history of different warming and cooling contributions, measured as ERFs. Both types of updates have contributed to a significantly changed forcing estimate between successive reports. For example, Forster et al. (2021) updated the methodology to exclude adjustments related to land surface temperature from the forcing calculation, which generally increased estimates. At the same time GHG levels increased, and the time history of aerosol forcing was revised, overall leading to a higher total ERF estimate in AR6 compared to AR5. These IPCC updates flow from an assessment of varied literature and also rely on updates to concentrations and/or emissions.

There is no published regularly updated total ERF indicator outside of the IPCC process, although the European Copernicus programme has trialled such a product (Bellouin et al., 2020). For radiative forcing, NOAA annually updates estimates for the main GHGs, calculating radiative forcing (RF) using the set of formulas to estimate RFs from concentrations (Montzka, 2022). Updated RF formulas were employed in AR6 (Forster et al., 2021), and these updated expressions are also employed here in the Supplement, Sect. S4.

The ERF calculation follows the methodology used in AR6 WGI (Smith et al., 2021). For each category of forcing, a 100 000-member probabilistic Monte Carlo ensemble is sampled to span the assessed uncertainty range in each forcing. All uncertainties are reported as 5 %–95 % ranges and provided in square brackets. The only significant methodological change compared to AR6 is for the volcanic ERF estimate. Firstly, the pre-industrial baseline data have been improved by switching to a new longer record of stratospheric aerosol optical depth before 1750 (Sigl et al., 2022). Secondly, choices have also been made to include the January 2022 eruption of Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha'apai as an exceptional positive ERF perturbation from the increase in stratospheric water vapour (Millán et al., 2022; Sellito et al., 2022; Jenkins et al., 2023). The methods are all detailed in the Supplement, Sect. S4.

The summary results for the anthropogenic constituents of ERF and solar irradiance in 2022 relative to 1750 are shown in Fig. 2a. In Table 3 these are summarised alongside the equivalent ERFs from AR6 (1750–2019) and AR5 (1750–2011). Figure 2b shows the time evolution of ERF from 1750 to 2022.

Table 3 Contributions to anthropogenic effective radiative forcing (ERF) for 1750–2022 assessed in this section.

how to write an article 15

All values are in watts per square metre (W m −2 ), and 5 %–95 % ranges are in square brackets. As a comparison, the equivalent assessments from AR6 (1750–2019) and AR5 (1750–2011; Myhre et al., 2013) are shown. Solar ERF is included and unchanged from AR6, based on the most recent solar cycle (2009–2019), thus differing from the single-year estimate in Fig. 2a. Volcanic ERF is excluded due to the sporadic nature of eruptions.

Figure 2 Effective radiative forcing from 1750–2022. (a) 1750–2022 change in ERF, showing best estimates (bars) and 5 %–95 % uncertainty ranges (lines) from major anthropogenic components to ERF, total anthropogenic ERF and solar forcing. (b) Time evolution of ERF from 1750 to 2022. Best estimates from major anthropogenic categories are shown along with solar and volcanic forcing (thin coloured lines), total (thin black line), and anthropogenic total (thick black line). The 5 %–95 % uncertainty in the anthropogenic forcing is shown by grey shading. Note that solar forcing in 2022 is a single-year estimate.

Total anthropogenic ERF has increased to 2.91 [2.19 to 3.63] W m −2 in 2022 relative to 1750, compared to 2.72 [1.96 to 3.48] W m −2 for 2019 relative to 1750 in AR6. The main contributions to this increase are from increases in greenhouse gas concentrations and a reduction in the magnitude of aerosol forcing. Decadal trends in ERF have increased markedly and are now over 0.6 W m −2 per decade. These are discussed further in the discussion and conclusions (Sect. 12).

The ERF from well-mixed GHGs is 3.45 [3.14 to 3.75] W m −2 for 1750–2022, of which 2.25 W m −2 is from CO 2 , 0.56 W m −2 from CH 4 , 0.22 W m −2 from N 2 O and 0.41 W m −2 from halogenated gases. This is an increase from 3.32 [3.03 to 3.61] W m −2 for 1750–2019 in AR6. ERFs from CO 2 , CH 4 and N 2 O have all increased since the AR6 WG1 assessment for 1750–2019, owing to increases in atmospheric concentrations.

The total aerosol ERF (sum of the ERF from aerosol–radiation interactions (ERFari) and aerosol–cloud interactions (ERFaci)) for 1750–2022 is −0.98 [ −1.58 to −0.40 ] W m −2 compared to −1.06 [ −1.71 to −0.41 ] W m −2 assessed for 1750–2019 in AR6 WG1. This continues a trend of weakening aerosol forcing due to reductions in precursor emissions. Most of this reduction is from ERFaci, which is determined to be −0.77 [ −1.33 to −0.23 ] W m −2 compared to −0.84 [ −1.45 to −0.25 ] W m −2 in AR6 for 1750–2019. ERFari for 1750–2022 is −0.21 [ −0.42 to 0.00] W m −2 , marginally weaker than the −0.22 [ −0.47 to 0.04] W m −2 assessed for 1750–2019 in AR6 WG1 (Forster et al., 2021). The largest contributions to ERFari are from SO 2 (primary source of sulfate aerosol; −0.21  W m −2 ), BC ( + 0.12 W m −2 ), OC ( −0.04  W m −2 ) and NH 3 (primary source of nitrate aerosol; −0.03  W m −2 ). ERFari is not weakening as fast as ERFaci due to reductions in the warming influence of BC cancelling out some of the reduced sulfate cooling. ERFari also includes terms from CH 4 , N 2 O and NH 3 which are small but have all increased.

Ozone ERF is determined to be 0.48 [0.24 to 0.72] W m −2 for 1750–2022, similar to the AR6 assessment of 0.47 [0.24 to 0.71] W m −2 for 1750–2019. Land-use forcing and stratospheric water vapour from methane oxidation are unchanged (to two decimal places) since AR6. The decline in BC emissions from 2019 to 2022 has reduced ERF from light-absorbing particles on snow and ice from 0.08 [0.00 to 0.18] W m −2 for 1750–2019 to 0.06 [0.00 to 0.14] W m −2 for 1750–2022. We determine from provisional data that aviation activity in 2022 had not yet returned to pre-COVID levels. Therefore, ERF from contrails and contrail-induced cirrus is lower than AR6, at 0.05 [0.02 to 0.09] W m −2 in 2022 compared to 0.06 [0.02 to 0.10] W m −2 in 2019.

The headline assessment of solar ERF is unchanged, at 0.01 [ −0.06 to + 0.08] W m −2 from pre-industrial to the 2009–2019 solar cycle mean. Separate to the assessment of solar forcing over complete solar cycles, we provide a single-year solar ERF for 2022 of 0.06 [ −0.02 to + 0.14] W m −2 . This is higher than the single-year estimate of solar ERF for 2019 (a solar minimum) of −0.02 [ −0.08 to 0.06] W m −2 .

For volcanic ERF, updating of the pre-industrial dataset for stratospheric aerosol optical depth (sAOD) increased the sAOD over 500 BCE to 1749 CE, resulting in a larger difference to post-1750 sAOD and resulting in a volcanic ERF difference of + 0.015 W m −2 compared to AR6 (see Sect. S4 in the Supplement). In addition, the earlier Holocene was more volcanically active than the period after 500 BCE, further increasing the mean sAOD baseline. Taking the longer baseline period into account in the new pre-industrial dataset, post-1750 ERF is further increased by 0.031 W m −2 . The net effect is that volcanic forcing after 1750 has increased by + 0.046 W m −2 compared to AR6 due to dataset updates and by account of the fact that the post-1750 period was less volcanically active on average than the Early Holocene, which is now used in the ERF calculation.

AR6 WGI Chap. 2 assessed the 2001–2020 globally averaged surface temperature change above an 1850–1900 baseline to be 0.99 [0.84 to 1.10]  ∘ C and 1.09 [0.95 to 1.20]  ∘ C for 2011–2020 (Gulev et al., 2021). Updated estimates to 2022 were also given in AR6 SYR (Lee et al., 2023). The AR6 SYR estimates match those given here. We describe the update in detail and provide further quantification and comparisons.

There are choices around the methods used to aggregate surface temperatures into a global average, how to correct for systematic errors in measurements, methods of infilling missing data, and whether surface measurements or atmospheric temperatures just above the surface are used. These choices, and others, affect temperature change estimates and contribute to uncertainty (IPCC AR6 WGI Chap. 2, Cross Chap. Box 2.3, Gulev et al., 2021). The methods chosen here closely follow AR6 WGI and are presented in the Supplement, Sect. S5. Confidence intervals are taken from AR6 as only one of the employed datasets regularly updates ensembles (see Supplement, Sect. S5).

Based on the updates available as of February 2023 (which were reported in the AR6 SYR), the change in global surface temperature from 1850–1900 to 2013–2022, using the same underlying datasets and methodology as AR6, is 1.15 [1.00–1.25]  ∘ C, an increase of 0.06  ∘ C within 2 years from the 2011–2020 value reported in AR6 WGI (Table 4). The change from 1850–1900 to 2003–2022 was 1.03 [0.87–1.13]  ∘ C, 0.04  ∘ C higher than the earlier value reported in AR6 WGI. These changes are broadly consistent with typical warming rates over the last few decades, which were assessed in AR6 as 0.76  ∘ C over the 1980–2020 period (using ordinary-least-square linear trends) or 0.019  ∘ C per year (Gulev et al., 2021). They are also broadly consistent with projected warming rates from 2001–2020 to 2021–2040 reported in AR6, which are in the order of 0.025  ∘ C per year under most scenarios (Lee et al., 2021).

Table 4 Estimates of global surface temperature change from 1850–1900 [ very likely (90 %–100 % probability) ranges] for IPCC AR6 and the present study.

how to write an article 15

Figure 3 Annual (thin line) and decadal (thick line) means of global surface temperature (expressed as a change from the 1850–1900 reference period).

Note that the temperatures for single years include considerable variability and are influenced by natural forcings such as the El Niño–Southern Oscillation and sporadic volcanic eruptions that might either cool or warm the climate for short periods (Jenkins et al., 2023). At current warming rates, individual years may exceed warming of 1.5  ∘ C several years before a long-term mean exceeds this level (Trewin, 2022).

The Earth energy imbalance (EEI), assessed in Chap. 7 of AR6 WGI (Forster et al., 2021), provides a measure of accumulated additional energy (heating) in the climate system and hence plays a critical role in our understanding of climate change. It represents the difference between the radiative forcing acting to warm the climate and Earth's radiative response, which acts to oppose this warming. On annual and longer timescales, the Earth heat inventory changes associated with EEI are dominated by the changes in global ocean heat content (OHC), which accounts for about 90 % of global heating since the 1970s (Forster et al., 2021). This planetary heating results in changes to the Earth system such as sea level rise, ocean warming, ice loss, rise in temperature and water vapour in the atmosphere, and permafrost thawing (e.g. Cheng et al., 2022; von Schuckmann et al., 2023a), with adverse impacts for ecosystems and human systems (Douville et al., 2021; IPCC, 2022).

On decadal timescales, changes in global surface temperatures (Sect. 5) can become decoupled from EEI by ocean heat rearrangement processes (e.g. Palmer and McNeall, 2014; Allison et al., 2020). Therefore, the increase in the Earth heat inventory provides a more robust indicator of the rate of global change on interannual-to-decadal timescales (Cheng et al., 2019; Forster et al., 2021; von Schuckmann et al., 2023a). AR6 WGI found increased confidence in the assessment of changes in the Earth heat inventory compared to previous IPCC reports due to observational advances and closure of the energy and global sea level budgets (Forster et al., 2021; Fox-Kemper et al., 2021).

AR6 estimated with that EEI increased from 0.50 [0.32–0.69] W m −2 during the period 1971–2006 to 0.79 [0.52–1.06] W m −2 during the period 2006–2018 (Forster et al., 2021). The contributions to increases in the Earth heat inventory throughout 1971–2018 remained stable: 91 % for the full-depth ocean, 5 % for the land, 3 % for the cryosphere and about 1 % for the atmosphere (Forster et al., 2021). The increase in EEI (Fig. 4) has also been reported by Cheng et al. (2019), von Schuckmann et al. (2020, 2023a), Loeb et al. (2021), Hakuba et al. (2021), Kramer et al. (2021) and Raghuraman et al. (2021). Drivers for the most recent period (i.e. past 2 decades) are both the increases in effective radiative forcing (Sect. 4) and climate feedbacks, such as cloud and sea ice changes. The degree of contribution from the different drivers is uncertain and still under active investigation.

Figure 4 (a) Observed changes in the Earth heat inventory for the period 1971–2020, with component contributions as indicated in the figure legend. (b) Estimates of the Earth energy imbalance for IPCC AR6 assessment periods, for consecutive 20-year periods and the most recent decade. Shaded regions indicate the very likely range (90 % to 100 % probability). Data use and approach are based on the AR6 methods and further described in Sect. 6.

While changes in EEI have been effectively monitored at the top of the atmosphere by satellites since the mid-2000s, we rely on estimates of OHC change to determine the absolute magnitude of EEI and its evolution on inter-annual to multi-decadal time series. The AR6 assessment of ocean heat content change for the 0–2000 m layer was based on global annual mean time series from five ocean heat content datasets: IAP (Cheng et al., 2017), Domingues et al. (2008), EN4 (Good et al., 2013), Ishii et al. (2017) and NCEI (Levitus et al., 2012). Four of these datasets routinely provide updated OHC time series for the BAMS State of the Climate report, and all are used for the GCOS Earth heat inventory (von Schuckmann et al., 2020, 2023a) and the annual WMO global state of the climate. The uncertainty assessment for the 0–2000 m layer used the ensemble method described by Palmer et al. (2021) that separately accounts for parametric and structural uncertainty. The OHC change > 2000  m and associated uncertainty were assessed based on trend analysis of the available hydrographic data following Purkey and Johnson (2010). All five of the datasets used for the 0–2000 m OHC assessment are now updated at least annually and should in principle support an AR6 assessment time series update within the first few months of each year. There is potential to increase the observational ensemble used in the assessment by supplementing this set with additional data products that are also available annually for future updates. There is also a potential to update the uncertainty estimate after a more comprehensive understanding of the error sources.

Estimates of EEI should also account for the other elements of the Earth heat inventory, i.e. the atmospheric warming, the latent heat of global ice loss and heating of the continental land surface (Forster et al., 2021; Cuesta-Valero et al., 2021, 2023a; Steiner et al., 2020; Nitzbon et al., 2022a; Vanderkelen et al., 2020; Adusumilli et al., 2022). Some of these components of the Earth heat inventory are routinely updated by a community-based initiative reported in von Schuckmann et al. (2020, 2023a). However, in the absence of annual updates to all heat inventory components, a pragmatic approach is to use recent OHC change as a proxy for EEI, scaling the value up as required based on historical partitioning between Earth system components.

We carry out an update to the AR6 estimate of changes in the Earth heat inventory based on updated observational time series for the period 1971–2020 (Table 5 and Fig. 4). Time series of heating associated with loss of ice and warming of the atmosphere and continental land surface are obtained from the recent Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) initiative (von Schuckmann et al., 2023b; Adusumilli et al., 2022; Cuesta-Valero et al., 2023b; Vanderkelen and Thiery, 2022; Nitzbon et al., 2022b; Kirchengast et al., 2022). We use the original AR6 time series ensemble OHC time series for the period 1971–2018 and then switch to a smaller four-member ensemble for the period 2019–2022. We “splice” the two sets of time series by adding an offset as needed to ensure that the 2018 values are identical. The AR6 heating rates and uncertainties for the ocean below 2000 m are assumed to be constant through the period. The time evolution of the Earth heat inventory is determined as a simple summation of time series of atmospheric heating; continental land heating; heating of the cryosphere; and heating of the ocean over three depth layers, 0–700, 700–2000 and below 2000 m (Fig. 4a). While von Schuckmann et al. (2023a) have also quantified heating of permafrost and inland lakes and reservoirs, these additional terms are very small and are omitted here for consistency with AR6 (Forster et al., 2021).

Table 5 Estimates of the Earth energy imbalance (EEI) for AR6 and the present study.

how to write an article 15

A full propagation of uncertainties across all heat inventory components depends on the specific choice of time period, and different estimates are not directly comparable. Therefore, we take a simple pragmatic approach, using the total ocean heat content uncertainty as a proxy for the total uncertainty, since this term is 2 orders of magnitude larger than the other terms (Forster et al., 2021). To provide estimates of the EEI up to the year 2022, we scale up the values of OHC change in 2021 and 2022 to reflect the about 90 % contribution of the ocean to changes in the Earth heat inventory. The EEI is then simply computed as the difference in global energy inventory over each period, converted to units of watts per square metre (W m −2 ) using the surface area of the Earth and the elapsed time. The uncertainties in the global energy inventory for the end-point years are assumed to be independent and added in quadrature, following the approach used in AR6 (Forster et al., 2021).

In our updated analysis, we find successive increases in EEI for each 20-year period since 1973, with an estimated value of 0.44 [0.05 to 0.83] W m −2 during 1973–1992 that almost doubled to 0.82 [0.60 to 1.04] W m −2 during 2003–2022 (Fig. 4b). In addition, there is some evidence that the warming signal is propagating into the deeper ocean over time, as seen by a robust increase of deep (700–2000 m) ocean warming since the 1990s (Cheng et al., 2019, 2022). The model simulations qualitatively agree with the observational evidence (e.g. Gleckler et al., 2016; Cheng et al., 2019), further suggesting that more than half of the OHC increase since the late 1800s occurs after the 1990s. For 1973–1992, the contribution by ocean vertical layer was 66 %, 28 % and 1 % for 0–700, 700–2000 and > 2000  m, respectively. During 2013–2022, the corresponding layer contributions were 50 %, 33 % and 8 %.

The update of the AR6 assessment periods to end in 2022 results in systematic increases of EEI of 0.08 W m −2 for 1975–2022 relative to 1971–2018 and 0.10 W m −2  for 2010–2022 relative to 2006–2018 (Table 5).

Human-induced warming, also known as anthropogenic warming, refers to the component of observed global surface temperature increase over a specific period (for instance, from 1850–1900 as a proxy for pre-industrial climate to the last decade) attributable to both the direct and indirect effects of human activities, which are typically grouped as follows: well-mixed greenhouse gases (consisting of CO 2 , CH 4 , N 2 O and F-gases) and other human forcings (consisting of aerosol–radiation interaction, aerosol–cloud interaction, black carbon on snow, contrails, ozone, stratospheric H 2 O and land use) (Eyring et al., 2021). While total warming , the actual observed temperature change potentially resulting from both natural climate variability (internal variability of the climate system and the climate response to natural forcing) and human influences, is the quantity directly related to climate impacts and therefore relevant for adaptation, mitigation efforts focus on human-induced warming as the more relevant indicator for tracking progress against climate stabilisation targets. Further, as the attribution analysis allows human-induced warming to be disentangled from possible contributions from solar and volcanic forcing and internal variability (e.g. related to El Niño/La Nina events), it avoids misperception about short-term fluctuations in temperature. An assessment of human-induced warming was therefore provided in two reports within the IPCC's 6th assessment cycle: first in SR1.5 in 2018 (Chap. 1 Sect. and Fig. 1.2 (Allen et al., 2018), summarised in the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) Sect. A.1 and Fig. SPM.1 (IPCC, 2018)) and second in AR6 in 2021 (WGI Chap. 3 Sect. and Fig. 3.8 (Eyring et al., 2021), summarised in WGI SPM A.1.3 and Fig. SPM.2 (IPCC, 2021b)).

7.1  Definitions

7.1.1  warming period definitions in the ipcc sixth assessment cycle.

AR6 defined the current human-induced warming relative to the 1850–1900 baseline as the decade average of the previous 10-year period (see AR6 WGI Chap. 3). This paper provides an update of the 2010–2019 period used in the AR6 to the 2013–2022 decade. SR1.5 defined current human-induced warming as the average of a 30-year period centred on the current year, assuming the recent rate of warming continues (see SR1.5 Chap. 1). This definition is currently almost identical to the present-day single-year value of human-induced warming, differing by about 0.01  ∘ C (see results in Sect. 7.4); the attribution assessment in SR1.5 was therefore provided as a single-year warming. This section also updates the SR1.5 single-year approach by providing a year 2022 value.

7.1.2  Estimates of global surface temperature: GMST and GSAT

AR6 WGI (Chap. 2 Cross-Chap. Box 2.3, Gulev et al., 2021) described how global mean surface air temperature (GSAT), as is typically diagnosed from climate models, is physically distinct from the global mean surface temperature (GMST) estimated from observations, which generally combine measurements of near-surface temperature over land and in some cases over ice, with measurements of sea surface temperature over the ocean. Based on conflicting lines of evidence from climate models, which show stronger warming of GSAT compared to GMST, and observations, which tend to show the opposite, Gulev et al. (2021) assessed with high confidence that long-term trends in the two indicators differ by less than 10 % but that there is low confidence in the sign of the difference in trends. Therefore, with medium confidence, in AR6 WGI Chap. 3 (Eyring et al., 2021), the best estimates and likely ranges for attributable warming expressed in terms of GMST were assessed to be equal to those for GSAT, with the consequence that the AR6 warming attribution results can be interpreted as both GMST and GSAT. While, based on the WGI Chap. 2 (Gulev et al., 2021) assessment, WGI Chap. 3 (Eyring et al., 2021) treated estimates of attributable warming in GSAT and GMST from the literature together, without any rescaling, we note that climate-model-based estimates of attributable warming in GSAT are expected to be systematically higher than corresponding estimates of attributable warming in GMST (see e.g. Cowtan et al., 2015; Richardson et al., 2018; Beusch et al., 2020; Gillett et al., 2021). Therefore, given an opportunity to update these analyses from AR6, it is more consistent and more comparable with observations of GMST to report attributable changes in GMST using all three methods (described in Sect. 7.2). The SR1.5 assessment of attributable warming was given in terms of GMST, which is continued here. In line with Sect. 2 and AR6 WGI, we adopt GMST as the estimate of global surface temperature.

7.2  Methods

Both SR1.5 and AR6 drew on evidence from a range of literature for their assessments of human-induced warming, before selecting results from a smaller subset to produce a quantified estimate. While both the SR1.5 and AR6 assessments used the latest Global Warming Index (GWI) results (Haustein et al., 2017), AR6 also incorporated results from two other methods, regularised optimal fingerprinting (ROF) (as in Gillett et al., 2021) and kriging for climate change (KCC) (as in Ribes et al., 2021). In AR6, all three methods gave results consistent not only with each other but also results from AR6 WGI Chap. 7 (see WGI Chap. 7 Supplementary Material (Smith et al., 2021) and Fig. 3.8 of AR6 WGI Chap. 3 (Eyring et al., 2021) and Supplement, Sect. S7 and Fig. S2), though the results from Chap. 7 were not included in the AR6 WGI final calculation because they were not statistically independent. Of the methods used, two (Gillett et al., 2021; Ribes et al., 2021) relied on CMIP6 DAMIP (Gillett et al., 2016) simulations which ended in 2020 and hence require modifications to update to the most recent years. The other two methods (Haustein et al., 2017; Smith et al., 2021) are updatable and can also be made consistent with other aspects of the AR6 assessment and methods. The three methods used in the final assessment of contributions to warming in AR6 are used again with revisions for this annual update and are presented in the Supplement, Sect. S7, with any updates to their approaches described in Sect. 7.2.

Table 6 Updates to assessments in the IPCC 6th assessment cycle of warming attributable to multiple influences. Estimates of warming attributable to multiple influences, in ∘ C, relative to the 1850–1900 baseline period. Results are given as best estimates, with the likely range in brackets, and reported as global mean surface temperature.

how to write an article 15

Results from the IPCC 6th assessment cycle, for both AR6 and SR1.5, are quoted in columns labelled (i) and are compared with repeat calculations in columns labelled (ii) for the same period using the updated methods and datasets to see how methodological and dataset updates alone would change previous assessments. Assessments for the updated periods are reported in columns labelled (iii). * Updated GMST observations, quoted from Sect. 5 of this update, are marked with an asterisk, with “very likely” ranges given in brackets. ** In AR6 WGI, best-estimate values were not provided for warming attributable to well-mixed greenhouse gases, other human forcings and natural forcings (though they did receive a “likely” range, as discussed in Sect. 7.3.1); for comparison, best estimates (marked with two asterisks) have been retrospectively calculated in an identical way to the best estimate that AR6 provided for anthropogenic warming. NA: not available.

7.3  Updated estimates of human-induced warming to date

7.3.1  updated estimate using the ar6 wgi methodology.

Factoring in results from all three methods, AR6 WGI Chap. 3 (Erying et al., 2021) defined the likely (66 %–100 % probability interval) range for each warming component as the smallest 0.1  ∘ C precision range that enveloped the 5th to 95th percentile ranges of each method. In addition, a best estimate was provided for the human-induced (Ant) warming component, calculated as the mean of the 50th percentile values for each method. Best estimates were not provided in AR6 for the other components (well-mixed greenhouse gases (GHGs), other human forcings (OHFs) and natural forcings (Nat)), with their values in AR6 WGI Fig. SPM.2(b) simply being given as the midpoint between the lower and upper bound of the likely range and therefore not directly comparable with the central values given for human-induced and observed warming. In order to make a meaningful and consistent comparison, and provide meaningful insight into interannual changes, an improvement is made in this update: the multi-method-mean best-estimate approach is extended for all warming components.

7.3.2  Updated estimate using the SR1.5 methodology applied to the AR6 WGI datasets

While a variety of literature was drawn upon for the assessment of human-induced warming in SR1.5 Chap. 1 (Allen et al., 2018), only one method, the Global Warming Index (GWI), was used to provide a quantitative assessment of the 2017, “present-day”, level of human-induced warming. The latest results for this method were provided by Haustein et al. (2017), who gave a central estimate for human-induced warming in 2017 of 1.01  ∘ C with a 5 %–95 % range of (0.87 to 1.22  ∘ C). SR1.5 then accounted for methodological uncertainty by rounding this value to 0.1  ∘ C precision for its final assessment of 1.0  ∘ C and assessing the 0.8 to 1.2  ∘ C range as a likely range. No assessment of the contributions from other components was provided due to limitations in the GWI approach at the time.

While it is possible to continue the SR1.5 assessment approach of using a single method (GWI) rounded to 0.1  ∘ C precision, for the purpose of providing annual updates this is insufficient; (i) 0.1  ∘ C precision is too coarse to capture meaningful inter-annual changes to the level of present-day warming, (ii) using different selections of methods prevents meaningful comparison between the results for decadal mean and present-day warming calculations, and (iii) using the mean of multiple methods increases the robustness of the results. These points are simultaneously addressed in this update by adopting the latest multi-method assessment approach, as established in WGI AR6, for both the AR6 decadal mean warming update and the SR1.5 present-day single-year warming update. Further, where SR1.5 only provided an assessment for human-induced warming, updates in available attribution methods since SR1.5 mean that it is now also possible to provide a fully consistent assessment for all warming components. As with the attribution assessment in SR1.5, this update reports values in Table 6b for single-year present-day attributable warming (as discussed in Sect. 7.1.1), with a comparison to results calculated using the SR1.5 trend-based definition also provided below in Sect. 7.4.

Figure 5 Updated assessed contributions to observed warming relative to 1850–1900; see AR6 WGI SPM.2. Results for all time periods in this figure are calculated using updated datasets and methods. The 2010–2019 decade-average -assessed results repeat the AR6 2010–2019 assessment, and the 2017 single-year -assessed results repeat the SR1.5 2017 assessment. For each double bar, the lighter and darker shading refers to the earlier and later period, respectively. The 2013–2022 decade-average and 2022 single-year results are the updated assessments for AR6 and SR1.5, respectively. Panel (a) shows updated observed global warming from Sect. 5, expressed as total GMST, due to both anthropogenic and natural influences. Whiskers give the very likely range. Panels (b) and (c) show updated assessed contributions to warming, expressed as global mean surface temperature, from natural forcings and total human-induced forcings, which in turn consist of contributions from well-mixed greenhouse gases and other human forcings. Whiskers give the likely range.

7.4  Results

Results are summarised in Table 6 and Fig. 5. WGI AR6 results for 2010–2019 are quoted in Table 6a, compared with a repeat calculation using updated methods and datasets, and finally updated for the 2013–2022 period. Results from SR1.5 are quoted in Table 6b for the 2017 level of human-induced warming, compared with a repeat calculation using the updated selection of methods and datasets (see Sect. 7.2) and the WGI AR6 multi-method assessment approach (see Sect. 7.3.2), and finally updated for 2022. Method-specific contributions to the assessment results, along with time series, are given in the Supplement, Sect. S7.

The repeat calculations for attributable warming in 2010–2019 exhibit good correspondence with the results in WGI AR6 for the same period (see also Supplement, Sect. S7), with an exact correspondence in the best estimate and likely (66 % to 100 % probability) range of human-induced warming (Ant).

The repeat calculation for the level of attributable anthropogenic warming in 2017 is about 0.1  ∘ C larger than the estimate provided in SR1.5 for the same period, resulting from changes in methods and observational data (see above). The updated results for warming contributions in 2022 are also higher than in 2017 due to 5 additional years of anthropogenic forcing. A repeat assessment using the SR1.5 trend-based definition (see Sect. 7.1.1) leads to results that are very similar to the single-year results reported in Table 6b, with 0.02  ∘ C differences at most (Supplement, Sect. S7).

The attribution assessment in WGI AR6 concluded that, averaged for the 2010–2019 period, all observed warming was human-induced, with solar and volcanic drivers and internal climate variability estimated not to make a contribution. This conclusion remains the same for the 2013–2022 period. Generally, whatever methodology is used, the best estimate of the human-induced warming to date is (within small uncertainties) equal to the observed warming to date.

AR6 assessed the remaining carbon budget (RCB) in Chap. 5 of its WGI report (Canadell et al., 2021) for 1.5, 1.7 and 2  ∘ C thresholds (see Table 7). They were also reported in its Summary for Policymakers (Table SPM.2, IPCC, 2021b). These are updated in this section using the same method with transparently described updates.

Table 7 Updated estimates of the remaining carbon budget for 1.5, 1.7 and 2.0  ∘ C, for five levels of likelihood, considering only uncertainty in TCRE.

how to write an article 15

Estimates start from AR6 WGI estimates (first row for each warming level), updated with the latest scenario information from AR6 WGIII (from second row for each warming level), and an update of the anthropogenic historical warming, which is estimated for the 2013–2022 period (third row for each warming level). Estimates are expressed relative to either the start of the year 2020 or 2023. The probability includes only the uncertainty in how the Earth immediately responds to carbon, not long-term committed warming or uncertainty in other emissions. All values are rounded to the nearest 50 GtCO 2 .

AR5 (IPCC, 2013) assessed that global surface temperature increase is close to linearly proportional to the total amount of cumulative CO 2 emissions (Collins et al., 2013). The most recent AR6 report reaffirmed this assessment (Canadell et al., 2021). This near-linear relationship implies that for keeping global warming below a specified temperature level, one can estimate the total amount of CO 2 that can ever be emitted. When expressed relative to a recent reference period, this is referred to as the remaining carbon budget (Rogelj et al., 2018).

The RCB is estimated by application of the WGI AR6 method described in Rogelj et al. (2019), which involves the combination of the assessment of five factors: (i) the most recent decade of human-induced warming, (ii) the transient climate response to cumulative emissions of CO 2 (TCRE), (iii) the zero emissions commitment (ZEC), (iv) the temperature contribution of non-CO 2 emissions and (v) an adjustment term for Earth system feedbacks that are otherwise not captured through the other factors. AR6 WGI reassessed all five terms (Canadell et al., 2021). The incorporation of factor (v) was further considered by Lamboll and Rogelj (2022).

Of these factors, only factor (i) (human-induced warming), where AR6 WGI used the decade-long period, 2010–2019, lends itself to a regular and systematic annual update. Historical CO 2 emissions from the middle of this period until the start of the RCB are required to have an as up-to-date RCB estimate as possible.

Other factors can be updated but depend on new evidence and insights being published rather than an additional year of observational data becoming available. Factor (iv) (temperature contribution of non-CO 2 emissions) depends both on the available mitigation scenario evidence and the assessment of non-CO 2 warming. Additional scenario evidence has become available through the publication of the scenario database supporting the AR6 WGIII report (Byers et al., 2022), which is taken into account in this update.

The RCB for 1.5, 1.7 and 2  ∘ C warming levels is re-assessed based on the most recent available data. Estimated RCBs are reported below. They are expressed both relative to 2020 to compare to AR6 and relative to the start of 2023 for estimates based on the 2013–2022 human-induced warming update. Note that between the start of 2020 and the end of 2022, about 122 GtCO 2 has been emitted (Sect. 2). Based on the variation in non-CO 2 emissions across the scenarios in AR6 WGIII scenario database, the estimated RCB values can be higher or lower by around 200 GtCO 2 depending on how deeply non-CO 2 emissions are reduced. The impact of non-CO 2 emissions on warming includes both the warming effects of other greenhouse gases such as methane and the cooling effects of aerosols such as sulfates. The impacts of these are assessed using a climate emulator (MAGICC; Meinshausen et al., 2011), which was updated to capture recent updates more accurately from the AR6 WGIII report but whose results were not captured in the AR6 WGI carbon budget estimates. This emulator update increased the estimate of the importance of aerosols, which are expected to decline with time in low emissions pathways (Rogelj et al., 2014), causing a net warming and decreasing the remaining carbon budget. The AR6 WGIII version of MAGICC is used here. If instead, the FaIR emulator were used, this would give reduced non-CO 2 warming and a larger carbon budget (Lamboll and Rogelj, 2022). For example, using non-CO 2 warming from the FaIR emulator to estimate the 1.5  ∘ C remaining carbon budget results in 350 GtCO 2 for a 50 % likelihood with a 17 %–83 % range of 200–700 GtCO 2 . The variation between the different estimates reflects the structural uncertainty in estimating future non-CO 2 warming contributions and highlights inherent limits to the precision with which remaining carbon budgets can be quantified. Such variation in remaining carbon budget estimates illustrates that most of the total carbon budget for limiting warming to 1.5  ∘ C has already been emitted and emphasises the robust insight that the 1.5  ∘ C compatible budget is very small in light of continuing high global CO 2 emissions.

Updated RCB estimates presented in Table 7 for 1.5, 1.7 and 2.0  ∘ C of global warming are smaller than AR6, and geophysical and other uncertainties therefore have become larger in relative terms. This is a feature that will have to be kept in mind when communicating budgets. The estimates presented here differ from those presented in the annual Global Carbon Budget (GCB) publications (Friedlingstein et al., 2022a). The GCB updates have previously started from the AR6 WGI estimate and subtracted the latest estimates of historical CO 2 emissions. The RCB estimates presented here consider the same updates in historical CO 2 emissions from the GCB as well as the latest available quantification of human-induced warming to date and a reassessment of non-CO 2 warming contributions.

If the single-year human-induced warming until 2022 (Sect. 7) were used directly in the RCB calculation, this would lead to similar remaining carbon budgets estimates to those from the decadal average approach used here; the 50 % likelihood estimates would be unchanged although other likelihoods alter somewhat because the spread due to TCRE uncertainty starts 5 years later. However, we choose to only show the decadal calculation as this was assessed to be the best estimate for human-induced warming and the method adopted in AR6 WGI.

The RCB for limiting warming to 1.5  ∘ C is becoming very small. It is important, however, to correctly interpret this information. RCB estimates consider projected reductions in non-CO 2 emissions that are aligned with a global transition to net zero CO 2 emissions. These estimates assume median reductions in non-CO 2 emissions between 2020–2050 of CH 4 (50 %), N 2 O (25 %) and SO 2 (77 %). If these non-CO 2 greenhouse gas emission reductions are not achieved, the RCB will be smaller (see Supplement, Sect. S8). Note that the 50 % RCB is expected to be exhausted a few years before the 1.5  ∘ C global warming level is reached due to the way it factors future warming from non-CO 2 emissions into its estimate.

Climate and weather extremes are among the most visible human-induced climate changes. Within AR6 WGI, a full chapter was dedicated to the assessment of past and projected changes in extremes on continents (Seneviratne et al., 2021), and the chapter on ocean, cryosphere and sea level changes also provided assessments on changes in marine heatwaves (Fox-Kemper et al., 2021). Global indicators related to climate extremes include averaged changes in climate extremes, for example, the mean increase of annual minimum and maximum temperatures on land (AR6 WGI Chap. 11, Fig. 11.2, Seneviratne et al., 2021) or the area affected by certain types of extremes (AR6 WGI Chap. 11, Box 11.1, Fig. 1, Seneviratne et al., 2021; Sippel et al., 2015). In contrast to global surface temperature, extreme indicators are less established. They are therefore expected to be subject to improvements, reflecting advances in understanding and better data collection. Indeed, such efforts are planned within the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) Grand Challenge on Weather and Climate Extremes, which will likely inform the next iteration of this study.

As part of this first update, we provide an upgraded version of the analysis in Fig. 11.2 from Seneviratne et al. (2021) (Fig. 6). Like the analysis of global mean temperature, the choice of datasets is based on a compromise on the length of the data record, the data availability, near-real-time updates and long-term support. As the indicator (in its current form) averages over all available land grid points, the spatial coverage should be high to obtain a meaningful average, which further limits the choice of datasets. The HadEX3 dataset (Dunn et al., 2020), which is used for Fig. 11.2 in Seneviratne et al. (2021), is static and does not cover years after 2018. We therefore additionally include the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature dataset (building off Rohde et al., 2013) and the fifth-generation ECMWF atmospheric reanalysis of the global climate (ERA5; Hersbach et al., 2020). Berkeley Earth data currently enable an analysis of annual indices up to 2021, while ERA5 is updated daily with a latency of about 5 d (and the final release occurs after 2–3 months).

Figure 6 Time series of observed temperature anomalies for land average annual maximum temperature (TXx) for ERA5 (1950–2022), Berkeley Earth (1955–2021) and HadEX3 (1961–2018), with respect to 1850–1900. Note that the datasets have different spatial coverage and are not coverage-matched. All anomalies are calculated relative to 1961–1990, and an offset of 0.53  ∘ C is added to obtain TXx values relative to 1850–1900. Note that while the HadEX3 numbers are the same as shown in Seneviratne et al. (2021) Fig. 11.2, these numbers were not specifically assessed.

Our proposed climate indicator of changes in temperature extremes consists of land average annual maximum temperatures (TXx) (excluding Antarctica). For HadEX3, we select the years 1961–2018, to exclude years with insufficient data coverage, and require at least 90 % temporal completeness, thus applying the same criteria as for Fig. 11.2 (Seneviratne et al., 2021). Berkeley Earth provides daily maximum temperatures, and we require more than 99 % data availability for each individual year and grid, such that years with more than 4 missing days are removed. Based on this criterion, Berkeley Earth covers at least 95 % of the global land area from 1955 onwards. ERA5, on the other hand, has full spatio-temporal coverage by design, and hence the entire currently available period of 1950 to 2022 is used. The annual maximum temperature is then computed for each grid cell, and a global area-weighted average is calculated for all grid cells with at least 90 % temporal completeness in the respective available period (1955–2021 and 1961–2018 for Berkeley Earth and HadEX3, while ERA5 is again not affected by this criterion). We thus enforce high data availability to adequately calculate global land averaged TXx across all three datasets, but their coverage is not identical, which introduces minor deviations in the estimated global land averages. The resulting TXx time series are then computed as anomalies with respect to a baseline period of 1961–1990.

To express the TXx as anomalies with respect to 1850–1900, we add an offset to all three datasets. The offset is based on the Berkeley Earth data and is derived from the linear regression of land mean TXx to the annual mean global mean air temperature over the period 1955 to 2020. The offset is then calculated as the slope of the linear regression times the global mean temperature difference between the reference periods 1850–1900 and 1961–1990 (see Supplement, Fig. S4).

Our climate has warmed rapidly in the last few decades, which also manifests in changes in the occurrence and intensity of climate and weather extremes. We visualise this with land average annual maximum temperatures (TXx) from three different datasets (ERA5, Berkeley Earth and HadEX3), expressed as anomalies with respect to the pre-industrial baseline period of 1850–1900 (Fig. 6). From about 1980 onwards, all employed datasets point to a strong TXx increase, which coincides with the transition from global dimming, associated with aerosol increases, to brightening, associated with decreases (Wild et al., 2005). Together with strongly increasing greenhouse gas emissions (Sect. 2), this explains why human-induced climate change has emerged at an even greater pace in the last 4 decades than previously. For example, land average annual maximum temperatures have warmed by more than 0.5  ∘ C in the past 10 years (1.72  ∘ C with respect to pre-industrial conditions) compared to the first decade of the millennium (1.22  ∘ C; Table 8). Since the offset relative to our pre-industrial baseline period is calculated relative to 1961–1990, within the latter period, temperature anomalies align by construction but can diverge afterwards. In an extensive comparison of climate extreme indices across several reanalyses and observational products, Dunn et al. (2022) point to an overall strong correspondence between temperature extreme indices across reanalysis and observational products, with ERA5 exhibiting especially high correlations to HadEX3 among all regularly updated datasets. This suggests that both our choice of datasets and approach to calculate anomalies does not affect our conclusion – the intensity of heatwaves across all land areas has unequivocally increased since pre-industrial times.

Table 8 Anomalies of land average annual maximum temperature (TXx) for recent decades based on HadEX3 and ERA5.

how to write an article 15

Table 9 Summary of headline results and methodological updates from the Indicators of Global Climate Change (IGCC) initiative.

how to write an article 15

Figure 7 Infographic associated with headline results in Table 9. “AR6” refers to approximately 2019, and “Now” refers to 2022. The AR6 period total emissions are our re-evaluated assessment for 2010–2019. For details and uncertainties, see Table 9.

The anomalies with respect to 1850–1900 are derived by adding an offset of 0.53  ∘ C. Note that while the HadEX3 numbers are the same as shown in Seneviratne et al. (2021) Fig. 11.2, these numbers were not specifically assessed.

The Climate Change Tracker ( , last access: 2 June 2023), a platform hosting a range of publicly available climate data, aims to provide a range of audiences with a reliable, user-friendly means of tracking and understanding climate change and its progression.

Building on the existing platform, a bespoke “dashboard” places several of the updated IPCC-consistent indicators of climate change set out above in the public domain. This bespoke dashboard is primarily aimed at policymakers involved in UNFCCC negotiations, but the ultimate intention is to reach and inform a much wider audience.

The dashboard initially focuses on three key indicator sets: greenhouse gas emissions (Sect. 2), human-induced global warming (Sect. 7) and the remaining global carbon budget (Sect. 8), bringing together and presenting up-to-date information crucial to effective climate decision-making in a findable, accessible, traceable and reproducible way. In addition, the Climate Change Tracker provides standardised application programming interfaces (APIs), dashboards and charts to embed in third-party apps and websites. All data are traceable to the GitHub repository employed for this paper (Sect. 11).

In time, and with feedback from the user community, the initial set of indicators displayed by the dashboard may be expanded to include others alongside their rates of change.

Figure 8 The causal chain from emissions to resulting warming of the climate system. Emissions of GHGs have increased rapidly over recent decades (a) . These emissions have led to increases in the atmospheric concentrations of several GHGs including the three major well-mixed GHGs (b) . The global surface temperature (shown as annual anomalies from an 1850–1900 baseline) has increased by around 1.15  ∘ C since 1850–1900 (c) . The human-induced warming estimate over the last decade is a close match to the observed warming (d) . Whiskers show 5 % to 95 % ranges. Figure is modified from AR6 SYR with a zoomed-in view of the period 2000 to 2022 for the upper two panels (Fig. 2.1, Lee et al., 2023).

The carbon budget calculation is available from (Lamboll and Rogelj, 2023). The code and data used to produce other indicators are available in repositories under (Smith et al., 2023b). All data are available from (Smith et al., 2023a). Data are provided under the CC-BY 4.0 Licence.

HadEX3 [3.0.4] data were obtained from (Dunn et al., 2023) on 5 April 2023 and are © British Crown Copyright, Met Office, 2022, provided under an Open Government Licence; (last access: 2 June 2023).

The first year of the Global Climate Change (IGCC) initiative has built on the AR6 report cycle to provide a comprehensive update of the climate change indicators required to estimate the human-induced warming and the remaining carbon budget. Table 9 and Fig. 7 present a summary of the headline figures from each section compared to those given in the AR6 assessment. The main substantive dataset change since AR6 is that land-use CO 2 emissions have been revised down by around 2 GtCO 2 (Table 9). However, as CO 2 ERF and human-induced warming estimates depend on concentrations, not emissions, this does not affect most of the other findings. Note it does slightly increase the remaining carbon budget, but this is only by 5 GtCO 2 , less than the 50 GtCO 2 rounding precision.

Figure 8 summarises contributions to warming, repeating Fig. 2.1 of the AR6 Synthesis Report (Lee et al., 2023). It highlights changes since the assessment period in AR6 WGI. Table 9 also summarises methodological updates.

It is hoped that this update can support the science community in its collection and provision of reliable and timely global climate data. In future years we are particularly interested in improving SLCF updating methods to get a more accurate estimate of short-term ERF changes. The work also highlights the importance of high-quality metadata to document changes in methodological approaches over time. In future years we hope to improve the robustness of the indicators presented here but also extend the breadth of indicators reported through coordinated research activities. For example, we could begin to make use of new satellite data inversion techniques to infer recent emissions. We are particularly interested in exploring how we might update indicators of regional climate extremes and their attribution, which are particularly relevant for supporting actions on adaptation and loss and damage.

Generally, scientists and scientific organisations such as the WMO and IPCC have an important role as “watchdogs” to critically inform evidence-based decision-making. This annual update traced to IPCC methods can provide a reliable, timely source of trustworthy information. As well as helping inform decisions, we can use the update to track changes in dataset homogeneity between their use in one IPCC report and the next. We can also provide information and testing to motivate updates in methods that future IPCC reports might choose to employ.

Figure 9 shows decadal trends for the attributed warming and ERF. The most recent trends were unprecedented at the time of AR6 and have increased further since then (red markers), showing that human activities are consistently causing global warming recently of more than 0.2  ∘ C per decade. As nations and businesses forge climate policies and take meaningful action, the latest available evidence shows that global actions are not yet at the scale to manifest a substantive shift in the direction of global human influence on the Earth's energy imbalance and the resulting global warming. Indeed, our results point to the opposite: the evidence shows continued increase in cumulative CO 2 emissions, increased emissions of other GHGs and gains in air quality at the expense of the loss of the cooling effect from aerosols. Both AR6 WGI and WGIII reports highlighted the benefits of short-term reductions in methane emissions to counter the loss of aerosol cooling and further improve air quality – however, at the global scale, methane emissions are at their highest level and rising (see Table 1). Policymakers, civil society and the scientific community require monitoring data and analyses from rigorous, robust assessments available on a regular basis. These results illustrate how assessments such as ours provide a strong “reality check” based on science and real-world data.

Figure 9 Decadal trends in human-induced warming on the left axis and anthropogenic effective radiative forcing (ERF) on the right axis. These are computed from the Global Warming Index human-induced warming estimate shown in the Supplement, Sect. S7 and Fig. 2b, respectively. The red points mark 3 additional years since the AR6 time series for these indicators ended in 2019.

This is a critical decade: human-induced global warming rates are at their highest historical level, and 1.5  ∘ C global warming might be expected to be reached or exceeded within the next 10 years in the absence of cooling from major volcanic eruptions (Lee et al., 2021). Yet this is also the decade that global greenhouse gas emissions could be expected to peak and begin to substantially decline. The indicators of global climate change presented here show that the Earth's energy imbalance has increased to around 0.9 W m −2 , averaged over the last 12 years. This also has implications for the committed response of slow components in the climate system (glaciers, deep ocean, ice sheets) and committed long-term sea level rise, but this is not part of the update here. However, rapid and stringent GHG emission decreases could halve warming rates over the next 20 years (McKenna et al., 2021). Table 1 shows that global GHG emissions are at a long-term high, yet there are signs that their rate of increase has slowed. Depending on the societal choices made in this critical decade, a continued series of these annual updates could track a change in direction for the human influence on climate.

The supplement related to this article is available online at: .

PMF, CJS, MA, PF, JR, MRC and AP developed the concept of an annual update in discussions with the wider IPCC community over many years. CJS led the work of the data repositories. ABo and JAB led the website development with visualisation support from DR, JMG and ABi. VMD, PZ, SS, JM, CFS, SIS, VN, AP, JYL, NG, FD, GP, BT, MSP, MRC, JR, PF, MA and PT provided important IPCC and UNFCCC framing. PMF coordinated the production of the manuscript with support from DR. WFL led Sect. 2 with contributions from CJS, JM, PF, GP, JG, JP and RA. CJS led Sects. 3 and 4 with contributions from BH, FD, SS, VN and XL. BT led Sect. 5 with contributions from PT, CM, CK, JK, RR, RV and LC. KvS and MDP led Sect. 6 with contributions from LC, MI, TB and RK. TW led Sect. 7 with contributions and calculations from AR, NG and MR. JR led Sect. 8 with contributions from RL and KZ. Section 9 was led by SIS and XC with calculations by MH and DS. All authors either edited or commented on the manuscript.

The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.

Publisher’s note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This research has been supported by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme, H2020 Excellent Science (grant nos. 820829 and 821003), the H2020 European Research Council (grant no. 951542) and the Natural Environment Research Council (grant no. NE/T009381/1). Matthew D. Palmer, Colin Morice and Rachel Killick were supported by the Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme funded by BEIS.

This paper was edited by David Carlson and reviewed by Albertus J. (Han) Dolman, Martin Heimann, Matthew Jones, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, and one anonymous referee.

Adusumilli, S., Straneo, F., Hendricks, S., Korosov, A., Lavergne, T., Lawrence, I., Marzeion, B., Otosaka, I., Schweiger, A., Shepherd, A., Slater, D., Slater, T., Timmermanns, M.-L., and Zemp, M.: GCOS EHI 1960–2020 Cryosphere Heat Content, World Data Center for Climate (WDCC) at DKRZ [data set], , 2022. 

Allen, M. R., Dube, O. P., Solecki, W., Aragón-Durand, F., Cramer, W., Humphreys, S., Kainuma, M., Kala, J., Mahowald, N., Mulugetta, Y., Perez, R., Wairiu, M., and Zickfeld, K.: Framing and Context, in: Global Warming of 1.5  ∘ C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5  ∘ C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D., Skea, J., Shukla, P. R., Pirani, A., Moufouma-Okia, W., Péan, C., Pidcock, R., Connors, S., Matthews, J. B. R., Chen, Y., Zhou, X., Gomis, M. I., Lonnoy, E., Maycock, T., Tignor, M., and Waterfield, T., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 49–92, , 2018. 

Allison, L. C., Palmer, M. D., Allan, R. P., Hermanson, L., Liu, C., and Smith, D. M.: Observations of planetary heating since the 1980s from multiple independent datasets, Environ. Res. Commun., 2, 101001, , 2020. 

Basu, S., Lan, X., Dlugokencky, E., Michel, S., Schwietzke, S., Miller, J. B., Bruhwiler, L., Oh, Y., Tans, P. P., Apadula, F., Gatti, L. V., Jordan, A., Necki, J., Sasakawa, M., Morimoto, S., Di Iorio, T., Lee, H., Arduini, J., and Manca, G.: Estimating emissions of methane consistent with atmospheric measurements of methane and δ 13 C of methane, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 15351–15377, , 2022. 

Bellouin, N., Davies, W., Shine, K. P., Quaas, J., Mülmenstädt, J., Forster, P. M., Smith, C., Lee, L., Regayre, L., Brasseur, G., Sudarchikova, N., Bouarar, I., Boucher, O., and Myhre, G.: Radiative forcing of climate change from the Copernicus reanalysis of atmospheric composition, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 1649–1677, , 2020. 

Beusch, L., Gudmundsson, L., and Seneviratne, S. I.: Crossbreeding CMIP6 Earth System Models With an Emulator for Regionally Optimized Land Temperature Projections, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2019GL086812, , 2020. 

Bond, T. C., Doherty, S. J., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Berntsen, T., DeAngelo, B. J., Flanner, M. G., Ghan, S., Kärcher, B., Koch, D., Kinne, S., Kondo, Y., Quinn, P. K., Sarofim, M. C., Schultz, M. G., Schulz, M., Venkataraman, C., Zhang, H., Zhang, S., Bellouin, N., Guttikunda, S. K., Hopke, P. K., Jacobson, M. Z., Kaiser, J. W., Klimont, Z., Lohmann, U., Schwarz, J. P., Shindell, D., Storelvmo, T., Warren, S. G., and Zender, C. S.: Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: A scientific assessment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 5380–5552, , 2013. 

Byers, E., Krey, V., Kriegler, E., Riahi, K., Schaeffer, R., Kikstra, J., Lamboll, R., Nicholls, Z., Sandstad, M., Smith, C., van der Wijst, K., Lecocq, F., Portugal-Pereira, J., Saheb, Y., Stromann, A., Winkler, H., Auer, C., Brutschin, E., Lepault, C., Müller-Casseres, E., Gidden, M., Huppmann, D., Kolp, P., Marangoni, G., Werning, M., Calvin, K., Guivarch, C., Hasegawa, T., Peters, G., Steinberger, J., Tavoni, M., van Vuuren, D., Al -Khourdajie, A., Forster, P., Lewis, J., Meinshausen, M., Rogelj, J., Samset , B., and Skeie, R.: AR6 Scenarios Database, Zenodo [data set], , 2022. 

Canadell, J. G., Monteiro, P. M. S., Costa, M. H., Cotrim da Cunha, L., Cox, P. M., Eliseev, A. V., Henson, S., Ishii, M., Jaccard, S., Koven, C., Lohila, A., Patra, P. K., Piao, S., Rogelj, J., Syampungani, S., Zaehle, S., and Zickfeld, K.: Global Carbon and other Biogeochemical Cycles and Feedbacks, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 673–816, , 2021. 

Cheng, L., Trenberth, K. E., Fasullo, J., Boyer, T., Abraham, J., and Zhu, J.: Improved estimates of ocean heat content from 1960 to 2015, Sci. Adv., 3, e1601545, , 2017. 

Cheng, L., Abraham, J., Hausfather, Z., and Trenberth, K. E.: How fast are the oceans warming?, Science, 363, 128–129, , 2019. 

Cheng, L., Von Schuckmann, K., Abraham, J. P., Trenberth, K. E., Mann, M. E., Zanna, L., England, M. H., Zika, J. D., Fasullo, J. T., Yu, Y., Pan, Y., Zhu, J., Newsom, E. R., Bronselaer, B., and Lin, X.: Past and future ocean warming, Nat. Rev. Earth. Environ., 3, 776–794, , 2022. 

Collins, M., Knutti, R., Arblaster, J., Dufresne, J.-L., Fichefet, T., Friedlingstein, P., Gao, X., Gutowski, W. J., Johns, T., Krinner, G., Shongwe, M., Tebaldi, C., Weaver, A. J., and Wehner, M.: Long-term Climate Change: Projections, Commitments and Irreversibility, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G. K., Tignor, M., Allen, S. K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., and Midgley, P. M., Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, Cambridge University Press, 1029–1136, 2013. 

Cowtan, K., Hausfather, Z., Hawkins, E., Jacobs, P., Mann, M. E., Miller, S. K., Steinman, B. A., Stolpe, M. B., and Way, R. G.: Robust comparison of climate models with observations using blended land air and ocean sea surface temperatures, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 6526–6534, , 2015. 

Crippa, M., Guizzardi, D., Banja, M., Solazzo, E., Muntean, M., Schaaf, E., Pagani, F., Monforti-Ferrario, F.,  Olivier, J. G. J., Quadrelli, R., Risquez Martin, A., Taghavi-Moharamli, P., Grassi, G.,  Rossi, S., Oom, D., Branco, A.,  San-Miguel, J., and Vignati, E.: CO 2 emissions of all world countries: JRC/IEA/PBL 2022 report, Publications Office, LU, , 2022. 

Cuesta-Valero, F. J., García-García, A., Beltrami, H., González-Rouco, J. F., and García-Bustamante, E.: Long-term global ground heat flux and continental heat storage from geothermal data, Clim. Past, 17, 451–468, , 2021. 

Cuesta-Valero, F. J., Beltrami, H., García-García, A., Krinner, G., Langer, M., MacDougall, A. H., Nitzbon, J., Peng, J., von Schuckmann, K., Seneviratne, S. I., Thiery, W., Vanderkelen, I., and Wu, T.: Continental heat storage: contributions from the ground, inland waters, and permafrost thawing, Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 609–627, , 2023a. 

Cuesta-Valero, F. J., Beltrami, H., García-García, A., Krinner, G., Langer, M., MacDougall, A., Nitzbon, J., Peng, J., von Schuckmann, K., Seneviratne, S., Thiery, W., Vanderkelen, I., and Wu, T.: GCOS EHI 1960–2020 Continental Heat Content (Version 2), World Data Center for Climate (WDCC) at DKRZ, , 2023b. 

Dhakal, S., Minx, J. C., Toth, F. L., Abdel-Aziz, A., Figueroa Meza, M. J., Hubacek, K., Jonckheere, I. G. C., Kim, Y.-G., Nemet, G. F., Pachauri, S., Tan, X. C., and Wiedmann, T.: Emissions Trends and Drivers, in: IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Shukla, P. R., Skea, J., Slade, R., Al Khourdajie, A., van Diemen, R., McCollum, D., Pathak, M., Some, S., Vyas, P., Fradera, R., Belkacemi, M., Hasija, A., Lisboa, G., Luz, S., and Malley, J., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, , 2022. 

Domingues, C. M., Church, J. A., White, N. J., Gleckler, P. J., Wijffels, S. E., Barker, P. M., and Dunn, J. R.: Improved estimates of upper-ocean warming and multi-decadal sea-level rise, Nature, 453, 1090–1093, , 2008. 

Douville, H., Raghavan, K., Renwick, J., Allan, R. P., Arias, P. A., Barlow, M., Cerezo-Mota, R., Cherchi, A., Gan, T. Y., Gergis, J., Jiang, D., Khan, A., Pokam, Mba, W. P., Rosenfeld, D., Tierney, J., and Zolina, O.: Water Cycle Changes, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1055–1210, , 2021. 

Droste, E. S., Adcock, K. E., Ashfold, M. J., Chou, C., Fleming, Z., Fraser, P. J., Gooch, L. J., Hind, A. J., Langenfelds, R. L., Leedham Elvidge, E. C., Mohd Hanif, N., O'Doherty, S., Oram, D. E., Ou-Yang, C.-F., Panagi, M., Reeves, C. E., Sturges, W. T., and Laube, J. C.: Trends and emissions of six perfluorocarbons in the Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 4787–4807, , 2020. 

Dunn, R. J. H., Alexander, L. V., Donat, M. G., Zhang, X., Bador, M., Herold, N., Lippmann, T., Allan, R., Aguilar, E., Barry, A. A., Brunet, M., Caesar, J., Chagnaud, G., Cheng, V., Cinco, T., Durre, I., Guzman, R., Htay, T. M., Wan Ibadullah, W. M., Bin Ibrahim, M. K. I., Khoshkam, M., Kruger, A., Kubota, H., Leng, T. W., Lim, G., Li-Sha, L., Marengo, J., Mbatha, S., McGree, S., Menne, M., Milagros Skansi, M., Ngwenya, S., Nkrumah, F., Oonariya, C., Pabon-Caicedo, J. D. , Panthou, G., Pham, C., Rahimzadeh, F., Ramos, A., Salgado, E., Salinger, J., Sané, Y., Sopaheluwakan, A., Srivastava, A., Sun, Y., Timbal, B., Trachow, N., Trewin, B., Schrier, G., Vazquez-Aguirre, J., Vasquez, R., Villarroel, C., Vincent, L., Vischel, T., Vose, R., and Bin Hj Yussof, M. N.: Development of an updated global land in situ-based data set of temperature and precipitation extremes: HadEX3, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2019JD032263, , 2020. 

Dunn, R. J. H., Donat, M. G., and Alexander, L. V.: Comparing extremes indices in recent observational and reanalysis products, Front. Clim., 4, 98905, , 2022. 

Dunn, R. J. H., Alexander, L., Donat, M., Zhang, X., Bador, M., Herold, N., Lippmann, T., Allan, R. J., Aguilar, E., Aziz, A., Brunet, M., Caesar, J., Chagnaud, G., Cheng, V., Cinco, T., Durre, I., de Guzman, R., Htay, T. M., Wan Ibadullah, W. M., Bin Ibrahim, M. K. I., Khoshkam, M., Kruge, A., Kubota, H., Leng, T. W., Lim, G., Li-Sha, L., Marengo, J., Mbatha, S., McGree, S., Menne, M., de los Milagros Skansi, M., Ngwenya, S., Nkrumah, F., Oonariya, C., Pabon-Caicedo, J. D., Panthou, G., Pham, C., Rahimzadeh, F., Ramos, A., Salgado, E., Salinger, J., Sane, Y., Sopaheluwakan, A., Srivastava, A., Sun, Y., Trimbal, B., Trachow, N., Trewin, B., van der Schrier, G., Vazquez-Aguirre, J., Vasquez, R., Villarroel, C., Vincent, L., Vischel, T., Vose, R., and Bin Hj Yussof, M. N. A.: HadEX3: Global land-surface climate extremes indices v3.0.4 (1901–2018), NERC EDS Centre for Environmental Data Analysis [data set], (last access: 5 June 2023), 2023. 

Eyring, V., Gillett, N. P., Achuta Rao, K. M., Barimalala, R., Barreiro Parrillo, M., Bellouin, N., Cassou, C., Durack, P. J., Kosaka, Y., McGregor, S., Min, S., Morgenstern, O., and Sun, Y.: Human Influence on the Climate System, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 423–552, , 2021. 

Forster, P. M., Forster, H. I., Evans, M. J., Gidden, M. J., Jones, C. D., Keller, C. A., Lamboll, R. D., Le Quéré, C., Rogelj, J., Rosen, D., Schleussner, C. F., Richardson, T. B., Smith, C. J., and Turnock, S. T.: Current and future global climate impacts resulting from COVID-19, Nature Clim. Chang, 10, 913–919, , 2020. 

Forster, P., Storelvmo, T., Armour, K., Collins, W., Dufresne, J.-L., Frame, D., Lunt, D. J., Mauritsen, T., Palmer, M. D., Watanabe, M., Wild, M., and Zhang, H.: The Earth's Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks, and Climate Sensitivity, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 923–1054, , 2021. 

Fox-Kemper, B., Fox-Kemper, B., Hewitt, H. T., Xiao, C., Aðalgeirsdóttir, G., Drijfhout, S. S., Edwards, T. L., Golledge, N. R., Hemer, M., Kopp, R. E., Krinner, G., Mix, A., Notz, D., Nowicki, S., Nurhati, I. S., Ruiz, L., Sallée, J.-B., Slangen, A. B. A., and Yu, Y.: Ocean, Cryosphere and Sea Level Change, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L. , Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1211–1362, , 2021. 

Friedlingstein, P., O'Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Hauck, J., Olsen, A., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Sitch, S., Le Quéré, C., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S., Aragão, L. E. O. C., Arneth, A., Arora, V., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Benoit-Cattin, A., Bittig, H. C., Bopp, L., Bultan, S., Chandra, N., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Evans, W., Florentie, L., Forster, P. M., Gasser, T., Gehlen, M., Gilfillan, D., Gkritzalis, T., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Harris, I., Hartung, K., Haverd, V., Houghton, R. A., Ilyina, T., Jain, A. K., Joetzjer, E., Kadono, K., Kato, E., Kitidis, V., Korsbakken, J. I., Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lenton, A., Lienert, S., Liu, Z., Lombardozzi, D., Marland, G., Metzl, N., Munro, D. R., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O'Brien, K., Ono, T., Palmer, P. I., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Skjelvan, I., Smith, A. J. P., Sutton, A. J., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., van der Werf, G., Vuichard, N., Walker, A. P., Wanninkhof, R., Watson, A. J., Willis, D., Wiltshire, A. J., Yuan, W., Yue, X., and Zaehle, S.: Global Carbon Budget 2020, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 3269–3340, , 2020. 

Friedlingstein, P., O'Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Gregor, L., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., Luijkx, I. T., Olsen, A., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Schwingshackl, C., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Alkama, R., Arneth, A., Arora, V. K., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Bittig, H. C., Bopp, L., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Evans, W., Falk, S., Feely, R. A., Gasser, T., Gehlen, M., Gkritzalis, T., Gloege, L., Grassi, G., Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö., Harris, I., Hefner, M., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Jain, A. K., Jersild, A., Kadono, K., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lindsay, K., Liu, J., Liu, Z., Marland, G., Mayot, N., McGrath, M. J., Metzl, N., Monacci, N. M., Munro, D. R., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O'Brien, K., Ono, T., Palmer, P. I., Pan, N., Pierrot, D., Pocock, K., Poulter, B., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rodriguez, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Shutler, J. D., Skjelvan, I., Steinhoff, T., Sun, Q., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Takao, S., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, X., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tsujino, H., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., Walker, A. P., Wanninkhof, R., Whitehead, C., Willstrand Wranne, A., Wright, R., Yuan, W., Yue, C., Yue, X., Zaehle, S., Zeng, J., and Zheng, B.: Global Carbon Budget 2022, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 4811–4900, , 2022a. 

Friedlingstein, P., O'Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Gregor, L., Hauck, L., Le Quéré, C., Luijkx, I. T., Olsen, A., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Schwingshackl, C., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S., Alkama, R., Arneth, A., Arora, V. K., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Bittig, H. C., Bopp, L., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Evans, W., Falk, S., Feely, R. A., Gasser, T., Gehlen, M., Gkritzalis, T., Gloege, L., Grassi, G, Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö, Harris, I., Hefner, M., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Jain, A. T., Jersild, A., Kadono, K., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lindsay, Keith., Liu, J., Marland, G., Mayot, N., McGrath, M. J., Metzl, N., Monacci, N. M., Munro, D. R., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O'Brien, K., Ono, T., Palmer, P. I., Pan, N., Pierrot, D., Pocock, K., Poulter, B., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rodriguez, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Shutler, J. D., Skjelvan, I., Steinhoff, T., Sun, Q., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Takao, S., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, X., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tsujino, H., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., Walker, A. P., Wanninkhof, R., Whitehead, C., Wranne, A., Wright, R. M., Yuan, W., Yue, C., Yue, X., Zaehle, S., Zeng, J., Zheng, B., and Zhu, L.: Supplemental data of the Global Carbon Budget 2022, ICOS-ERIC Carbon Portal [data set], , 2022b. 

Gasser, T., Crepin, L., Quilcaille, Y., Houghton, R. A., Ciais, P., and Obersteiner, M.: Historical CO 2 emissions from land use and land cover change and their uncertainty, Biogeosciences, 17, 4075–4101, , 2020. 

Gillett, N. P., Shiogama, H., Funke, B., Hegerl, G., Knutti, R., Matthes, K., Santer, B. D., Stone, D., and Tebaldi, C.: The Detection and Attribution Model Intercomparison Project (DAMIP v1.0) contribution to CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3685–3697, , 2016. 

Gillett, N. P., Kirchmeier-Young, M., Ribes, A., Shiogama, H., Hegerl, G. C., Knutti, R., Gastineau, G., John, J. G., Li, L., Nazarenko, L., Rosenbloom, N., Seland, Ø., Wu, T., Yukimoto, S., and Ziehn, T.: Constraining human contributions to observed warming since the pre-industrial period, Nat. Clim. Chang., 11, 207–212, , 2021. 

Gleckler, P. J., Durack, P. J., Stouffer, R. J., Johnson, G. C., and Forest, C. E.: Industrial-era global ocean heat uptake doubles in recent decades, Nat. Clim. Chang., 6, 394–398, , 2016. 

Good, S. A., Martin, M. J., and Rayner, N. A.: EN4: Quality controlled ocean temperature and salinity profiles and monthly objective analyses with uncertainty estimates, THE EN4 DATA SET, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 118, 6704–6716, , 2013. 

Grassi, G., Schwingshackl, C., Gasser, T., Houghton, R. A., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Cescatti, A., Ciais, P., Federici, S., Friedlingstein, P., Kurz, W. A., Sanz Sanchez, M. J., Abad Viñas, R., Alkama, R., Bultan, S., Ceccherini, G., Falk, S., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Knauer, J., Korosuo, A., Melo, J., McGrath, M. J., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Poulter, B., Romanovskaya, A. A., Rossi, S., Tian, H., Walker, A. P., Yuan, W., Yue, X., and Pongratz, J.: Harmonising the land-use flux estimates of global models and national inventories for 2000–2020, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 1093–1114, , 2023. 

Guevara, M., Petetin, H., Jorba, O., Denier van der Gon, H., Kuenen, J., Super, I., Granier, C., Doumbia, T., Ciais, P., Liu, Z., Lamboll, R. D., Schindlbacher, S., Matthews, B., and Pérez García-Pando, C.: Towards near-real time air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions: lessons learned from multiple estimates during the COVID-19 Pandemic, EGUsphere [preprint], , 2023. 

Gulev, S. K., Thorne, P. W., Ahn, J., Dentener, F. J., Domingues, C. M., Gerland, S., Gong, D., Kaufman, D. S., Nnamchi, H. C., Quaas, J., Rivera, J. A., Sathyendranath, S., Smith, S. L., Trewin, B., von Schuckmann, K., and Vose, R. S.: Changing State of the Climate System, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 287–422, , 2021. 

Gutiérrez, J. M., Jones, R. G., Narisma, G. T., Alves, L. M., Amjad, M., Gorodetskaya, I. V., Grose, M., Klutse, N. A. B., Krakovska, S., Li, J., Martínez-Castro, D., Mearns, L. O., Mernild, S. H., Ngo-Duc, T., van den Hurk, B., and Yoon, J.-H.: Atlas, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1927–2058, , 2021 (Note: The companion Interactive Atlas is available at , last access: 2 June 2023). 

Gütschow, J. and Pflüger, M.: The PRIMAP-hist national historical emissions time series (1750–2021) v2.4.1 (2.4.1), Zenodo [data set], , 2023. 

Gütschow, J., Jeffery, M. L., Gieseke, R., Gebel, R., Stevens, D., Krapp, M., and Rocha, M.: The PRIMAP-hist national historical emissions time series, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 8, 571–603, , 2016. 

Hakuba, M. Z., Frederikse, T., and Landerer, F. W.: Earth's energy imbalance from the ocean perspective (2005–2019), Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL093624, , 2021. 

Hall, B. D., Crotwell, A. M., Kitzis, D. R., Mefford, T., Miller, B. R., Schibig, M. F., and Tans, P. P.: Revision of the World Meteorological Organization Global Atmosphere Watch (WMO/GAW) CO 2 calibration scale, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 3015–3032, , 2021. 

Hansis, E., Davis, S. J., and Pongratz, J.: Relevance of methodological choices for accounting of land use change carbon fluxes, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 29, 1230–1246, , 2015. 

Haustein, K., Allen, M. R., Forster, P. M., Otto, F. E. L., Mitchell, D. M., Matthews, H. D., and Frame, D. J.: A real-time Global Warming Index, Sci. Rep., 7, 15417, , 2017. 

Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Abdalla, S., Abellan, X., Balsamo, G., Bechtold, P., Biavati, G., Bidlot, J., Bonavita, M., De Chiara, G., Dahlgren, P., Dee, D., Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A., Haimberger, L., Healy, S., Hogan, R. J., Hólm, E., Janisková, M., Keeley, S., Laloyaux, P., Lopez, P., Lupu, C., Radnoti, G., de Rosnay, P., Rozum, I., Vamborg, F., Villaume, S., and Thépaut, J.-N.: The ERA5 global reanalysis, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 146, 1999–2049, , 2020. 

Hodnebrog, Ø., Aamaas, B., Fuglestvedt, J. S., Marston, G., Myhre, G., Nielsen, C. J., Sandstad, M., Shine, K. P., and Wallington, T. J.: Updated Global Warming Potentials and Radiative Efficiencies of Halocarbons and Other Weak Atmospheric Absorbers, Rev. Geophys., 58, e2019RG000691, , 2020. 

Hoesly, R. M., Smith, S. J., Feng, L., Klimont, Z., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Pitkanen, T., Seibert, J. J., Vu, L., Andres, R. J., Bolt, R. M., Bond, T. C., Dawidowski, L., Kholod, N., Kurokawa, J.-I., Li, M., Liu, L., Lu, Z., Moura, M. C. P., O'Rourke, P. R., and Zhang, Q.: Historical (1750–2014) anthropogenic emissions of reactive gases and aerosols from the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS), Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 369–408, , 2018. 

Houghton, R. A. and Nassikas, A. A.: Global and regional fluxes of carbon from land use and land cover change 1850–2015, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 31, 456–472, , 2017. 

IPCC: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S. K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley P. M., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp., https:// , 2013. 

IPCC: Summary for Policymakers, in: Global Warming of 1.5  ∘ C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5  ∘ C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D., Skea, J., Shukla, P. R., Pirani, A., Moufouma-Okia, W., Péan, C., Pidcock, R., Connors, S., Matthews, J. B. R., Chen, Y., Zhou, X., Gomis, M. I., Lonnoy, E., Maycock, T., Tignor, M., and Waterfield, T., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 3–24, , 2018. 

IPCC: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, , 2021a. 

IPCC: Summary for Policymakers, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 3–32, , 2021b. 

IPCC: Annex III: Tables of historical and projected well-mixed greenhouse gas mixing ratios and effective radiative forcing of all climate forcers, edited by: Dentener, F. J., Hall, B., and Smith, C., in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 2139–2152, , 2021c. 

IPCC: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D. C., Tignor, M., Poloczanska, E. S., Mintenbeck, K., Alegría, A., Craig, M., Langsdorf, S., Löschke, S., Möller, V., Okem, A., and Rama, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 3056 pp., , 2022. 

Ishii, M., Fukuda, Y., Hirahara, S., Yasui, S., Suzuki, T., and Sato, K.: Accuracy of Global Upper Ocean Heat Content Estimation Expected from Present Observational Data Sets, SOLA, 13, 163–167, , 2017. 

Iturbide, M., Fernández, J., Gutiérrez, J. M., Pirani, A., Huard, D., Al Khourdajie, A., Baño-Medina, J., Bedia, J., Casanueva, A., Cimadevilla, E., Cofiño, A. S., De Felice, M., Diez-Sierra, J., García-Díez, M., Goldie, J., Herrera, D. A., Herrera, S., Manzanas, R., Milovac, J., Radhakrishnan, A., San-Martín, D., Spinuso, A., Thyng, K. M., Trenham, C., and Yelekçi, Ö.: Implementation of FAIR principles in the IPCC: the WGI AR6 Atlas repository, Sci. Data, 9, 629, , 2022. 

Jenkins, S., Smith, C., Allen, M., and Grainger, R.: Tonga eruption increases chance of temporary surface temperature anomaly above 1.5  ∘ C, Nature Clim. Chang., 13, 127–129, , 2023. 

Kirchengast, G., Gorfer, M., Mayer, M., Steiner, A. K., and Haimberger, L.: GCOS EHI 1960–2020 Atmospheric Heat Content, World Data Center for Climate (WDCC) at DKRZ [data set], , 2022. 

Kramer, R. J., He, H., Soden, B. J., Oreopoulos, L., Myhre, G., Forster, P. M., and Smith, C. J., Observational evidence of increasing global radiative forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2020GL091585, , 2021. 

Lamboll, R. D. and Rogelj, J.: Code for estimation o f remaining carbon budget in IPCC AR6 WGI, Zenodo [code], , 2022. 

Lamboll, R. and Rogelj, J.: Carbon Budget Calculator, 2023, Github [code], , last access: 2 June 2023. 

Lan, X., Tans, P., and Thoning, K. W.: Trends in globally-averaged CO 2 determined from NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory measurements, Version 2023-04, , 2023a. 

Lan, X., Thoning, K. W., and Dlugokencky, E. J.: Trends in globally-averaged CH4 N2O, and SF6 determined from NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory measurements, Version 2023-04, NOAA Earth System Research Laboratories Global Monitoring Laboratory, , 2023b. 

Laube, J., Newland, M., Hogan, C., Brenninkmeijer, A. M., Fraser, P. J., Martinerie, P., Oram, D. E., Reeves, C. E., Röckmann, T., Schwander, J., Witrant, E., and Sturges, W. T.: Newly detected ozone-depleting substances in the atmosphere, Nat. Geosci., 7, 266–269, , 2014. 

Lee, H., Calvin, K., Dasgupta, D., Krinner, G., Mukherji, A., Thorne, P., Trisos, C., Romero, J., Aldunce, P., Barrett, K., Blanco, G., Cheung, W. W. L., Connors, S. L., Denton, F., Diongue-Niang, A., Dodman, D., Garschagen, M., Geden, O., Hayward, B., Jones, C., Jotzo, F., Krug, T., Lasco, R., Lee, J.-Y., Masson-Delmotte, V., Meinshausen, M., Mintenbeck, K., Mokssit, A., Otto, F. E. L., Pathak, M., Pirani, A., Poloczanska, E., Pörtner, H.-O., Revi, A., Roberts, D. C., Roy, J., Ruane, A. C., Skea, J., Shukla, P. R., Slade, R., Slangen, A., Sokona, Y., Sörensson, A. A., Tignor, M., van Vuuren, D., Wei, Y.-M., Winkler, H., Zhai, P., and Zommers, Z.: Synthesis Report of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6): Summary for Policymakers, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [accepted], available at (last access: 2 June 2023), 2023. 

Lee, J.-Y., Marotzke, J., Bala, G., Cao, L., Corti, S., Dunne, J. P., Engelbrecht, F., Fischer, E., Fyfe, J. C., Jones, C., Maycock, A., Mutemi, J., Ndiaye, O., Panickal, S., and Zhou, T.: Future Global Climate: Scenario-Based Projections and Near-Term Information, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 553–672, , 2021. 

Levitus, S., Antonov, J. I., Boyer, T. P., Baranova, O. K., Garcia, H. E., Locarnini, R. A., Mishonov, A. V., Reagan, J. R., Seidov, D., Yarosh, E. S., and Zweng, M. M.: World ocean heat content and thermosteric sea level change (0–2000 m), 1955–2010, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L10603, , 2012. 

Loeb, N. G., Johnson, G. C., Thorsen, T. J., Lyman, J. M., Rose, F. G., and Kato, S.: Satellite and ocean data reveal marked increase in Earth's heating rate, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL093047, , 2021. 

Lonsdale, C. R. and Sun, K.: Nitrogen oxides emissions from selected cities in North America, Europe, and East Asia observed by TROPOMI before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, EGUsphere [preprint], , 2023. 

McKenna, C. M., Maycock, A. C., Forster, P. M., Smith, C. J., and Tokarska, K. B.: Stringent mitigation substantially reduces risk of unprecedented near-term warming rates, Nature Climate Change, 11, 126–131, , 2021. 

Meinshausen, M., Raper, S. C. B., and Wigley, T. M. L.: Emulating coupled atmosphere-ocean and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC6 – Part 1: Model description and calibration, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 1417–1456, , 2011. 

Millán, L., Santee, M. L., Lambert, A., Livesey, N. J., Werner, F., Schwartz, M. J., Pumphrey, H. C., Manney, G. L., Wang, Y., Su, H., Wu, L., Read, W. G., and Froidevaux, L.: The Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai Hydration of the Stratosphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., 49, e2022GL099381, , 2022. 

Minx, J. C., Lamb, W. F., Andrew, R. M., Canadell, J. G., Crippa, M., Döbbeling, N., Forster, P. M., Guizzardi, D., Olivier, J., Peters, G. P., Pongratz, J., Reisinger, A., Rigby, M., Saunois, M., Smith, S. J., Solazzo, E., and Tian, H.: A comprehensive and synthetic dataset for global, regional, and national greenhouse gas emissions by sector 1970–2018 with an extension to 2019, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 5213–5252, , 2021. 

Montzka, S: The NOAA Annual Greenhouse Gas Index (AGGI), NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory, Boulder Colorado, USA, (last access: 2 June 2023), 2022. 

Myhre, G., Shindell, D., Bréon, F.-M., Collins, W., Fuglestvedt, J., Huang, J., Koch, D., Lamarque, J.-F., Lee, D., Mendoza, B., Nakajima, T., Robock, A., Stephens, G., Takemura, T., and Zhang, H.: Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S. K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P. M., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, , 2013. 

Nisbet, E. G., Manning, M. R., Dlugokencky, E. J., Michel, S. E., Lan, X., Roeckmann, T., Gon, H. A. D. V. D., Palmer, P., Oh, Y., Fisher, R., Lowry, D., France, J. L., and White, J. W. C.: Atmospheric methane: Comparison between methane's record in 2006–2022 and during glacial terminations, ESS Open Archive [preprint], , 2023. 

Nitzbon, J., Krinner, G., von Deimling, T. S., Werner, M., and Langer, M.: Quantifying the Permafrost Heat Sink in Earth's Climate System, ESS Open Archive [preprint], , 2022a. 

Nitzbon, J., Krinner, G., and Langer, M.: GCOS EHI 1960–2020 Permafrost Heat Content, World Data Center for Climate (WDCC) at DKRZ, , 2022b. 

O'Rourke, P. R., Smith, S. J., Mott, A., Ahsan, H., McDuffie, E. E., Crippa, M., Klimont, Z., McDonald, B., Wang, S., Nicholson, M. B., Feng, L., and Hoesly, R. M.: CEDS v_2021_04_21 Release Emission Data (v_2021_02_05), Zenodo [data set], , 2021. 

Palmer, M. D. and McNeall, D. J.: Internal variability of Earth's energy budget simulated by CMIP5 climate models, Environ. Res. Lett., 9, 034016, , 2014. 

Palmer, M. D., Domingues, C. M., Slangen, A. B. A., and Dias, F. B.: An ensemble approach to quantify global mean sea-level rise over the 20th century from tide gauge reconstructions, Environ. Res. Lett., 16, 044043, , 2021. 

Peng, S., Lin, X., Thompson, R. L., Xi, Y., Liu, G., Hauglustaine, D., Lan, X., Poulter, B., Ramonet, M., Saunois, M., Yin, Y., Zhang, Z., Zheng, B., and Ciais, P.: Wetland emission and atmospheric sink changes explain methane growth in 2020, Nature, 612, 477–482, , 2022. 

Pirani, A., Alegria, A., Khourdajie, A. A., Gunawan, W., Gutiérrez, J. M., Holsman, K., Huard, D., Juckes, M., Kawamiya, M., Klutse, N., Krey, V., Matthews, R., Milward, A., Pascoe, C., Van Der Shrier, G., Spinuso, A., Stockhause, M., and Xing, X.: The implementation of FAIR data principles in the IPCC AR6 assessment process, Zenodo, , 2022. 

Pongratz, J., Schwingshackl, C., Bultan, S., Obermeier, W., Havermann, F., and Guo, S.: Land Use Effects on Climate: Current State, Recent Progress, and Emerging Topics, Curr. Clim. Change Rep., 7, 99–120, , 2021. 

Purkey, S. G. and Johnson, G. C.: Warming of Global Abyssal and Deep Southern Ocean Waters between the 1990s and 2000s: Contributions to Global Heat and Sea Level Rise Budgets, J. Climate, 23, 6336–6351, , 2010. 

Putaud, J.-P., Pisoni, E., Mangold, A., Hueglin, C., Sciare, J., Pikridas, M., Savvides, C., Ondracek, J., Mbengue, S., Wiedensohler, A., Weinhold, K., Merkel, M., Poulain, L., van Pinxteren, D., Herrmann, H., Massling, A., Nordstroem, C., Alastuey, A., Reche, C., Pérez, N., Castillo, S., Sorribas, M., Adame, J. A., Petaja, T., Lehtipalo, K., Niemi, J., Riffault, V., de Brito, J. F., Colette, A., Favez, O., Petit, J.-E., Gros, V., Gini, M. I., Vratolis, S., Eleftheriadis, K., Diapouli, E., Denier van der Gon, H., Yttri, K. E., and Aas, W.: Impact of 2020 COVID-19 lockdowns on particulate air pollution across Europe, EGUsphere [preprint], , 2023. 

Quaas, J., Jia, H., Smith, C., Albright, A. L., Aas, W., Bellouin, N., Boucher, O., Doutriaux-Boucher, M., Forster, P. M., Grosvenor, D., Jenkins, S., Klimont, Z., Loeb, N. G., Ma, X., Naik, V., Paulot, F., Stier, P., Wild, M., Myhre, G., and Schulz, M.: Robust evidence for reversal of the trend in aerosol effective climate forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12221–12239, , 2022. 

Raghuraman, S. P., Paynter, D., and Ramaswamy, V.: Anthropogenic forcing and response yield observed positive trend in Earth's energy imbalance, Nat. Commun., 12, 4577, , 2021. 

Randerson, J. T., van der Werf, G. R., Giglio, L., Collatz, G. J., and Kasibhatla, P. S.: Global Fire Emissions Database, Version 4.1 (GFEDv4), ORNL Distributed Active Archive Center [data set], , 2017. 

Riahi, K., Schaeffer, R., Arango, J., Calvin, K., Guivarch, C., Hasegawa, T., Jiang, K., Kriegler, E., Matthews, R., Peters, G. P., Rao, A., Robertson, S., Sebbit, A. M., Steinberger, J., Tavoni, M., van Vuuren, D. P.: Mitigation pathways compatible with long-term goals, in: IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Shukla, P. R., Skea, J., Slade, R., Al Khourdajie, A., van Diemen, R., McCollum, D., Pathak, M., Some, S., Vyas, P., Fradera, R., Belkacemi, M., Hasija, A., Lisboa, G., Luz, S., and Malley, J., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, , 2022. 

Ribes, A., Qasmi, S., and Gillett, N. P.: Making climate projections conditional on historical observations, Sci. Adv., 7, eabc0671, , 2021. 

Richardson, M., Cowtan, K., and Millar, R. J.: Global temperature definition affects achievement of long-term climate goals, Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 054004, , 2018. 

Rogelj, J., Rao, S., McCollum, D. L., Pachauri, S., Klimont, Z., Krey, V., and Riahi, K.: Air-pollution emission ranges consistent with the representative concentration pathways, Nature Clim. Chang., 4, 446–450, , 2014. 

Rogelj, J., Shindell, D., Jiang, K., Fifita, S., Forster, P., Ginzburg, V., Handa, C., Kheshgi, H., Kobayashi, S., Kriegler, E., Mundaca, L., Séférian, R., and Vilariño, M. V.: Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5  ∘ C in the Context of Sustainable Development, in: Global Warming of 1.5  ∘ C, An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5  ∘ C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D., Skea, J., Shukla, P. R., Pirani, A., Moufouma-Okia, W., Péan, C., Pidcock, R., Connors, S., Matthews, J. B. R., Chen, Y., Zhou, X., Gomis, M. I., Lonnoy, E., Maycock, T., Tignor, M., and Waterfield, T., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 93–174, , 2018. 

Rogelj, J., Forster, P. M., Kriegler, E., Smith, C. J., and Séférian, R.: Estimating and tracking the remaining carbon budget for stringent climate targets, Nature, 571, 335–342, , 2019. 

Rohde, R., Muller, R., Jacobsen, R., Perlmutter, S., Rosenfeld, A., Wurtele, J., Curry, J., Wickham, C., and Mosher, S.: Berkeley Earth Temperature Averaging Process, Geoinfor. Geostat.: An Overview, 1, , 2013. 

Schoenenberger, F., Vollmer, M. K., Rigby, M., Hill, M., Fraser, P. J., Krummel, P. B., Langenfelds, R. L., Rhee, T. S., Peter, T., and Reimann, S.: First observations,trends, and emissions of HCFC-31 (CH2ClF) in the global atmosphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 7817–7824, , 2015. 

Sellitto, P., Podglajen, A., Belhadji, R., Boichu, M., Carboni, E., Cuesta, J., Duchamp, C., Kloss, C., Siddans, R., Bègue, N., Blarel, L., Jegou, F., Khaykin, S., Renard, J.-B., and Legras, B.: The unexpected radiative impact of the Hunga Tonga eruption of 15th January 2022, Commun. Earth Environ., 3, 288, , 2022. 

Seneviratne, S. I., Zhang, X., Adnan, M., Badi, W., Dereczynski, C., Di Luca, A., Ghosh, S., Iskandar, I., Kossin, J., Lewis, S., Otto, F., Pinto, I., Satoh, M., Vicente-Serrano, S. M., Wehner, M., and Zhou, B.: Weather and Climate Extreme Events in a Changing Climate, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1513–1766, , 2021. 

Sigl, M., Toohey, M., McConnell, J. R., Cole-Dai, J., and Severi, M.: Volcanic stratospheric sulfur injections and aerosol optical depth during the Holocene (past 11 500 years) from a bipolar ice-core array, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 3167–3196, , 2022. 

Simmonds, P. G., Rigby, M., McCulloch, A., O'Doherty, S., Young, D., Mühle, J., Krummel, P. B., Steele, P., Fraser, P. J., Manning, A. J., Weiss, R. F., Salameh, P. K., Harth, C. M., Wang, R. H. J., and Prinn, R. G.: Changing trends and emissions of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and their hydrofluorocarbon (HFCs) replacements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 4641–4655, , 2017. 

Sippel, S., Zscheischler, J., Heimann, M., Otto, F. E. L., Peters, J., and Mahecha, M. D.: Quantifying changes in climate variability and extremes: Pitfalls and their overcoming, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 9990–9998, , 2015. 

Smith, C., Nicholls, Z. R. J., Armour, K., Collins, W., Forster, P., Meinshausen, M., Palmer, M. D., and Watanabe, M.: The Earth's Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks, and Climate Sensitivity Supplementary Material, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., IPCC, (last access: 2 June 2023), 2021. 

Smith, C., Walsh, T., Forster, P. M., Gillett, N., Hauser, M., Lamb, W., Lamboll, R., Palmer, M., Ribes, A., Schumacher, D., Seneviratne, S., Trewin, B., and von Schuckmann, K.: Indicators of Global Climate Change 2022 (v2023.06.02), Zenodo [data set], , 2023a. 

Smith, C., Walsh, T., Forster, P. M., Gillett, N., Hauser, M., Lamb, W., Lamboll, R., Palmer, M., Ribes, A., Schumacher, D., Seneviratne, S., Trewin, B., and von Schuckmann, K.: Github Climate Indicator Repository, Github [code], , last access: 2 June 2023b. 

Smith, S. J., van Aardenne, J., Klimont, Z., Andres, R. J., Volke, A., and Delgado Arias, S.: Anthropogenic sulfur dioxide emissions: 1850–2005, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 1101–1116, , 2011. 

Sokhi, R. S., Singh, V., Querol, X., Finardi, S., Targino, A. C., Andrade, M. de F., Pavlovic, R., Garland, R. M., Massagué, J., Kong, S., Baklanov, A., Ren, L., Tarasova, O., Carmichael, G., Peuch, V.-H., Anand, V., Arbilla, G., Badali, K., Beig, G., Belalcazar, L. C., Bolignano, A., Brimblecombe, P., Camacho, P., Casallas, A., Charland, J.-P., Choi, J., Chourdakis, E., Coll, I., Collins, M., Cyrys, J., Silva, C. M. da, Giosa, A. D. D., Leo, A. D., Ferro, C., Gavidia-Calderon, M., Gayen, A., Ginzburg, A., Godefroy, F., Gonzalez, Y. A., Guevara-Luna, M., Haque, S. M., Havenga, H., Herod, D., Hõrrak, U., Hussein, T., Ibarra, S., Jaimes, M., Kaasik, M., Khaiwal, R., Kim, J., Kousa, A., Kukkonen, J., Kulmala, M., Kuula, J., Violette, N. L., Lanzani, G., Liu, X., MacDougall, S., Manseau, P. M., Marchegiani, G., McDonald, B., Mishra, S. V., Molina, L. T., Mooibroek, D., Mor, S., Moussiopoulos, N., Murena, F., Niemi, J. V., Noe, S., Nogueira, T., Norman, M., Pérez-Camaño, J. L., Petäjä, T., Piketh, S., Rathod, A., Reid, K., Retama, A., Rivera, O., Rojas, N. Y., Rojas-Quincho, J. P., José, R. S., Sánchez, O., Seguel, R. J., Sillanpää, S., Su, Y., Tapper, N., Terrazas, A., Timonen, H., Toscano, D., Tsegas, G., Velders, G. J. M., Vlachokostas, C., Schneidemesser, E. von, VPM, R., Yadav, R., Zalakeviciute, R., and Zavala, M.: A global observational analysis to understand changes in air quality during exceptionally low anthropogenic emission conditions, Environ. Int., 157, 106818, , 2021. 

Steiner, A. K., Ladstädter, F., Randel, W. J., Maycock, A. C., Fu, Q., Claud, C., Gleisner, H., Haimberger, L., Ho, S.-P., Keckhut, P., Leblanc, T., Mears, C., Polvani, L. M., Santer, B. D., Schmidt, T., Sofieva, V., Wing, R., and Zou, C.-Z.: Observed Temperature Changes in the Troposphere and Stratosphere from 1979 to 2018, J. Climate, 33, 8165–8194, , 2020. 

Szopa, S., Naik, V., Adhikary, B., Artaxo, P., Berntsen, T., Collins, W. D., Fuzzi, S., Gallardo, L., Kiendler-Scharr, A., Klimont, Z., Liao, H., Unger, N., and Zanis, P.: Short-Lived Climate Forcers, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 817–922, , 2021. 

Trewin, B.: Assessing Internal Variability of Global Mean Surface Temperature From Observational Data and Implications for Reaching Key Thresholds, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 127, e2022JD036747, , 2022. 

Vanderkelen, I. and Thiery, W.: GCOS EHI 1960–2020 Inland Water Heat Content, World Data Center for Climate (WDCC) at DKRZ [data set], , 2022. 

Vanderkelen, I., van Lipzig, N. P. M., Lawrence, D. M., Droppers, B., Golub, M., Gosling, S. N., Janssen, A. B. G., Marcé, R., Schmied, H. M., Perroud, M., Pierson, D., Pokhrel, Y., Satoh, Y., Schewe, J., Seneviratne, S. I., Stepanenko, V. M., Tan, Z., Woolway, R. I., and Thiery, W.: Global Heat Uptake by Inland Waters, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL087867, , 2020. 

van Marle, M. J. E., Kloster, S., Magi, B. I., Marlon, J. R., Daniau, A.-L., Field, R. D., Arneth, A., Forrest, M., Hantson, S., Kehrwald, N. M., Knorr, W., Lasslop, G., Li, F., Mangeon, S., Yue, C., Kaiser, J. W., and van der Werf, G. R.: Historic global biomass burning emissions for CMIP6 (BB4CMIP) based on merging satellite observations with proxies and fire models (1750–2015), Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3329–3357, , 2017. 

Vollmer, M. K., Young, D., Trudinger, C. M., Mühle, J., Henne, S., Rigby, M., Park, S., Li, S., Guillevic, M., Mitrevski, B., Harth, C. M., Miller, B. R., Reimann, S., Yao, B., Steele, L. P., Wyss, S. A., Lunder, C. R., Arduini, J., McCulloch, A., Wu, S., Rhee, T. S., Wang, R. H. J., Salameh, P. K., Hermansen, O., Hill, M., Langenfelds, R. L., Ivy, D., O'Doherty, S., Krummel, P. B., Maione, M., Etheridge, D. M., Zhou, L., Fraser, P. J., Prinn, R. G., Weiss, R. F., and Simmonds, P. G.: Atmospheric histories and emissions of chlorofluorocarbons CFC-13 (CClF 3 ), ΣCFC-114 (C 2 Cl 2 F 4 ), and CFC-115 (C 2 ClF 5 ), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 979–1002, , 2018. 

von Schuckmann, K., Cheng, L., Palmer, M. D., Hansen, J., Tassone, C., Aich, V., Adusumilli, S., Beltrami, H., Boyer, T., Cuesta-Valero, F. J., Desbruyères, D., Domingues, C., García-García, A., Gentine, P., Gilson, J., Gorfer, M., Haimberger, L., Ishii, M., Johnson, G. C., Killick, R., King, B. A., Kirchengast, G., Kolodziejczyk, N., Lyman, J., Marzeion, B., Mayer, M., Monier, M., Monselesan, D. P., Purkey, S., Roemmich, D., Schweiger, A., Seneviratne, S. I., Shepherd, A., Slater, D. A., Steiner, A. K., Straneo, F., Timmermans, M.-L., and Wijffels, S. E.: Heat stored in the Earth system: where does the energy go?, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2013–2041, , 2020. 

von Schuckmann, K., Minière, A., Gues, F., Cuesta-Valero, F. J., Kirchengast, G., Adusumilli, S., Straneo, F., Ablain, M., Allan, R. P., Barker, P. M., Beltrami, H., Blazquez, A., Boyer, T., Cheng, L., Church, J., Desbruyeres, D., Dolman, H., Domingues, C. M., García-García, A., Giglio, D., Gilson, J. E., Gorfer, M., Haimberger, L., Hakuba, M. Z., Hendricks, S., Hosoda, S., Johnson, G. C., Killick, R., King, B., Kolodziejczyk, N., Korosov, A., Krinner, G., Kuusela, M., Landerer, F. W., Langer, M., Lavergne, T., Lawrence, I., Li, Y., Lyman, J., Marti, F., Marzeion, B., Mayer, M., MacDougall, A. H., McDougall, T., Monselesan, D. P., Nitzbon, J., Otosaka, I., Peng, J., Purkey, S., Roemmich, D., Sato, K., Sato, K., Savita, A., Schweiger, A., Shepherd, A., Seneviratne, S. I., Simons, L., Slater, D. A., Slater, T., Steiner, A. K., Suga, T., Szekely, T., Thiery, W., Timmermans, M.-L., Vanderkelen, I., Wjiffels, S. E., Wu, T., and Zemp, M.: Heat stored in the Earth system 1960–2020: where does the energy go?, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 1675–1709, , 2023a.  

von Schuckmann, K., Minière, A., Gues, F., Cuesta-Valero, F. J., Kirchengast, G., Adusumilli, S., Straneo, F., Ablain, M., Allan, R. P., Barker, P. M., Beltrami, H., Blazquez, A., Boyer, T., Cheng, L., Church, J., Desbruyeres, D., Dolman, H., Domingues, C. M., García-García, A., Giglio, D., Gilson, J. E., Gorfer, M., Haimberger, L., Hakuba, M. Z., Hendricks, S., Hosoda, S., Johnson, G. C., Killick, R., King, B., Kolodziejczyk, N., Korosov, A., Krinner, G., Kuusela, M., Landerer, F. W., Langer, M., Lavergne, T., Lawrence, I., Li, Y., Lyman, J., Marti, F., Marzeion, B., Mayer, M., MacDougall, A. H., McDougall, T., Monselesan, D. P., Nitzbon, J., Otosaka, I., Peng, J., Purkey, S., Roemmich, D., Sato, K., Sato, K., Savita, A., Schweiger, A., Shepherd, A., Seneviratne, S. I., Simons, L., Slater, D. A., Slater, T., Steiner, A. K., Suga, T., Szekely, T., Thiery, W., Timmermans, M.-L., Vanderkelen, I., Wjiffels, S. E., Wu, T., and Zemp, M.: GCOS EHI 1960–2020 Earth Heat Inventory Ocean Heat Content (Version 2), World Data Center for Climate (WDCC) at DKRZ [data set], , 2023b. 

Western, L. M., Vollmer, M. K., Krummel, P. B., Adcock, K. E., Fraser, P. J., Harth, C. M., Langenfelds, R. L., Montzka, S. A., Mühle, J., O'Doherty, S., Oram, D. E., Reimann, S., Rigby, M., Vimont, I., Weiss, R. F., Young, D., and Laube, J. C.: Global increase of ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons from 2010 to 2020, Nat. Geosci., 16, 309–313, , 2023. 

Wild, M., Gilgen, H., Roesch, A., Ohmura, A., Long, C. N., Dutton, E. G., Forgan, B., Kallis, A., Russak, V., and Tsvetkov, A.: From Dimming to Brightening: Decadal Changes in Solar Radiation at Earth's Surface, Science, 308, 847–850, , 2005. 

Zhang, Z., Poulter, B., Feldman, A. F., Ying, Q., Ciais, P., Peng, S., and Xin, L.: Recent intensification of wetland methane feedback, Nat. Clim. Chang., 13, 430–433, , 2023. 


  1. Article 15

    how to write an article 15

  2. U.S. Army Trial Defense Service

    how to write an article 15

  3. &pictures is all set to premiere Article 15 on 19th October

    how to write an article 15

  4. ¿Qué es un artículo 15?

    how to write an article 15

  5. An Article 15 Short Story

    how to write an article 15

  6. 👍 Article 15 4. UCMJ. 2019-02-05

    how to write an article 15


  1. Article Writing Tutorial for Beginners 2021: How to Write Quality Articles (Tips)

  2. چطوری اینتروداکشن مقاله رو زیر یک ساعت بنویسیم؟ (بدون مشابهت ادبی)

  3. The Legacy of Ada Lovelace: The First Computer Programmer

  4. Article Writing!!Article Writing Format!!Article/Paragraph Writing in English!!Class12th!!

  5. How to Write Article with chatgpt using Aiprm

  6. how to use chat gpt to write an article


  1. Article 15 Process

    An Article 15 begins when a Soldier, NCO, or Officer is notified by the imposing Commander, or a delegee (sometimes a lower-level Commander or a CSM/1SG). The Commander will read a notification that is very similar to this: "As your commander, I have disciplinary powers under Article 15 of the UCMJ.


    1 ARTICLE 15 GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE Overview 3 1. The Offense3 2. Coordination with the Base Legal Office3 3. Service of the Article 154 3.1 Timeliness 4 3.2 Serving the Member 4 4.

  3. Nonjudicial Punishment

    There are three types of nonjudicial punishment established by Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The first type is the Summarized Article 15 which is normally imposed by a company grade officer. The maximum punishment allowed with a Summarized Article 15 is 14 days extra duty and/or restriction, admonition or oral reprimand ...

  4. Counseling and Article 15: Leader Responsibilities

    Ask the Soldier to think about a punishment they believe would be appropriate (if found guilty). Soldiers can be very hard on themselves and be very inventive with punishments that are meaningful. Talk to the Soldier about preparing a statement to read at the Article 15 proceeding.


    Procedure: The Soldier must indicate his decision regarding appeal in block 5 of the DA Form 2627. If the Soldier elects not to appeal at the time the punishment is imposed, the appeal may be...

  6. How to Write a Good Article—Quickly

    Writing How to Write a Good Article—Quickly Written by MasterClass Last updated: Sep 3, 2021 • 3 min read Bloggers, freelance writers, copywriters, and other content creators are often faced with a seemingly impossible task: producing a great article under a tight deadline.

  7. Article 15 Disciplinary Procedures Under Military Law

    An Article 15 case may be referred to a less formal type of court-martial, known as a summary court-martial. If you do not want your case to be decided at a summary court-martial, you have the right to refuse it.

  8. PDF Article 15 Fact Sheet

    Article 15 Fact Sheet . Article 15s are considered nonjudicial punishment under the UCMJ. Article 15s ... etc.) on your own behalf. Often it is best to write . 3 . out your side of the story for presentation to the Commander. This statement will be permanently attached to the Article 15 if it is included in your records. If you desire, and

  9. About Article 15

    About Article 15. Within the UCMJ is a provision for punishing misconduct through judicial proceedings like a court-martial. The UCMJ also gives commanders the authority to impose nonjudicial punishment, described in the UCMJ under Article 15. Article 15 provides commanders an essential tool in maintaining discipline.

  10. How to Write an Article (Step-by-Step)

    1. Come up with a topic and a focus keyword Before you start writing, you have to decide what you want to write about. That should be obvious. But what makes a good idea for an article? Writing an article takes a lot of time and effort. Your articles should help you to generate traffic to your website.

  11. How To Write an Article in 7 Easy Steps

    1. Select a topic to write about Make a list of topics that you want to write about before you start writing. This gives you the chance to find out what you're passionate about. If you're writing an article for your company, brainstorm ideas with the rest of your team to see which topic can evoke interest from potential customers.

  12. Article Writing Format: Explore How To Write, Example Topics and Tips

    - Tips and Techniques Article Writing Samples FAQs on Article Writing The Art of Writing an Article An article is a piece of writing which explicates ideas, thoughts, facts, suggestions and/or recommendations based on a particular topic. There are different kinds of articles, namely:

  13. PDF Summarized Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ

    I appeal and submit additional matters A summarized Article 15 may only be used for enlisted personnel. The punishments that may be imposed are limited to: extra duty for 14 days or less,...

  14. Write a How-to Article in 6 Easy Steps

    STEP 3: RESEARCH. Research will ground your article in fact. Good details to include with your how-to are: Statistics. Quotes by well-known people. Definitions. Anecdotes (short, illustrative stories about yourself or someone else) Quotes and examples from people like the reader, or from popular books on the subject.

  15. Article 15: What Is It?

    Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice allows for a commanding officer to decide the innocence or guilt and administer the punishment to an offender if necessary when a military member gets into trouble for a minor offense that does not require a judicial hearing.

  16. Beating an Article 15, Non-judicial Punishment

    If you are offered an Article 15, you will be read the charges against you by your commander and you are then presented with the limited amount of evidence that the Government has against you at that time. You will then have the opportunity to talk to an attorney before deciding how you want to proceed.

  17. How to write a good article

    How to write a successful article First of all, there's no such a thing as 'a good paper.' This is because a good article is defined not just by its content, but more specifically by a writing approach geared ... around 15% and the conclusion to a maximum of 10% of the entire paper. The main body

  18. How to Cite Sources

    To quote a source, copy a short piece of text word for word and put it inside quotation marks. To paraphrase a source, put the text into your own words. It's important that the paraphrase is not too close to the original wording. You can use the paraphrasing tool if you don't want to do this manually.

  19. The Unconstitutional Burden of Article 15: A Rebuttal

    B. Jackson and the Article 15 Waiver Procedure The Note attempted to construct an argument that Article 15 un-necessarily encourages a waiver of Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. First, it attempts to equate the serviceman's election of an Article 15 proceeding to a waiver of those rights. It argues that the election

  20. Article 15

    Article 15 may refer to: . Article 15 (Democratic Republic of the Congo), a humorous French idiom common in the Democratic Republic of the Congo Article 15 of the Constitution of India, prohibiting religious, racial, sexual, casteist and birth place discrimination . Article 15, a 2019 Indian thriller film by Anubhav Sinha based on the article; Article 15 of the Constitution of Singapore, which ...

  21. AP Style

    The content of newspapers and other mass media is typically the result of many different writers and editors working together. AP style provides consistent guidelines for such publications in terms of grammar, spelling, punctuation and language usage. Some guiding principles behind AP style are: Consistency. Clarity.

  22. How To Write An Article? An Easy Step By Step Guide

    Rule #5: Read, edit, check your grammar, and proofread again: Once you are through with the writing aspect, come the editing, grammar, and proofreading parts. Firstly, fix the grammar and sentence structure. Next on, be absolutely ruthless with editing. Make your article crisp with all the relevant points.

  23. How to Write an Article in 15 Minutes or Less: Including research

    How to Write an Article in 15 Minutes or Less: Including research, proofreading and editing 86. by Barringham. View More. No rating value average rating value is 0.0 of 5. Read 0 Reviews Same page link. (0) Write a review . Add to Wishlist How to Write an Article in 15 Minutes or Less: Including research, proofreading and editing ...

  24. Article 15 (film)

    Article 15 is a 2019 Indian Hindi-language crime drama film directed and produced by Anubhav Sinha, who co-wrote the screenplay with Gaurav Solanki.The film stars Ayushmann Khurrana as a police detective who investigates the disappearance of three girls from a small village, uncovering a history of caste-based oppression along the way.The supporting cast includes Nassar, Manoj Pahwa, Kumud ...

  25. Why so many South Korean women are refusing to date, marry or have kids

    Disclosure statement. Min Joo Lee does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant ...

  26. How To Write A Good Eulogy For A Funeral

    Hug, cry, reconnect. Stay connected.". You don't have to pretend your loved one was perfect, but do your best to keep the tone positive yet personal. "Try not to give a eulogy filled with just platitudes and adjectives," Peterson said. "Tell your funny story.

  27. Coinbase Sued by SEC for Breaking US Securities Rules

    The SEC's civil lawsuit stands out because of Coinbase's high profile in the US, and its status as a publicly traded company. The stock fell 12% to close at $51.61 in New York trading. At one ...

  28. ESSD

    Based on the updates available as of February 2023 (which were reported in the AR6 SYR), the change in global surface temperature from 1850-1900 to 2013-2022, using the same underlying datasets and methodology as AR6, is 1.15 [1.00-1.25] ∘ C, an increase of 0.06 ∘ C within 2 years from the 2011-2020 value reported in AR6 WGI (Table 4).