ETA: To be clear, if true this is just the cherry on the thermonuclear bomb we've set off under our feet. But it's still significant and something we might be able to address.
ETA: To be clear, if true this is just the cherry on the thermonuclear bomb we've set off under our feet. But it's still significant and something we might be able to address.
I think you mean not mentioned?
(The linked article, and the scientific publication that it references, don't mention sulfur.)
The increases they show span decades (see Fig. 2 in the publication), and indeed end at 2020, so this would not seem relevant to their result.
It would be surprising if this kind of point change could have a significant impact on overall ocean heat content, but I'd be interested in your source. The effect of various gases and aerosols to climate forcing can be hard to determine, not just in magnitude, but also in sign (e.g., https://earth.jpl.nasa.gov/emit/science/objectives/).
A couple of other articles: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9307247/
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/Documents/Simons.2021.RiskOfAT...
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/esnt/2022/nasa-study-finds-evid...