<p>Climate lexical choices are crucial for effective communication and understanding in climate change discussions. Variations in these lexical choices may lead to misunderstandings among scientists, journalists, and policymakers. To reduce potential ambiguities in climate communications, this study aims to provide empirical evidence of the usage patterns of five lexical choices related to climate change, namely, “climate change,” “climate crisis,” “climate emergency,” “global warming,” and “global heating,” in three UK newspapers spanning from 2018-2025. Using Python, we calculate the co-occurrence frequency of the selected lexical choices and construct confidence intervals, then investigate, quantitatively and qualitatively, when and how the lexical choices were used. We found that despite the different political leanings, no clear lexical choice preferences were identified among the three newspapers. Contrary to common perceptions, we discovered an unrecognised common usage pattern in “climate change” and “global warming”―the two are not interchangeable in their applications in the UK newspaper context. In providing this timely empirical assessment of the usage patterns of lexical choices related to climate change, we invite journalists, scientists, and policymakers to reflect on whether the lexical choices, particularly “climate change” and “global warming”, should be used interchangeably in the future.</p>