Correction to: Nature Geoscience https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0227-0, published 17 September 2018.

In the version of this Article originally published, data given for total exceedance budgets of CO2 for 1.5 °C and 2 °C targets were incorrect in the main text, although the correct values were given in Supplementary Table 1. These errors also resulted in an incorrect estimation of the percentage difference between the authors’ results and estimates by the IPCC. These errors have now been corrected in the online versions. The original and corrected statements are shown below.

Original

When permafrost carbon is ignored, we estimated total exceedance budgets of 2,320 (2,260–2,450) Gt CO2 for the 1.5 °C target and 3,230 (3,080–3,530) Gt CO2 for 2 °C, with 1870 as the preindustrial reference year (Supplementary Table 1, which also contains budgets for 2.5 °C and 3 °C). (Uncertainties are the minimum-to-maximum range across the permafrost models and scenarios.) Our results are ~2% different from the IPCC estimates based on complex models.

Corrected

When permafrost carbon is ignored, we estimated total exceedance budgets of 2,350 (2,290–2,480) Gt CO2 for the 1.5 °C target and 3,260 (3,110–3,550) Gt CO2 for 2 °C, with 1870 as the preindustrial reference year (Supplementary Table 1, which also contains budgets for 2.5 °C and 3 °C). (Uncertainties are the minimum-to-maximum range across the permafrost models and scenarios.) Our results are ~3% different from the IPCC estimates based on complex models.