Forbes: Simon Constable reviews Nature’s Third Cycle: A Story of Sunspots by Arnab Rai Choudhuri.
But what has become more apparent based on more recent research from NASA is that we are now in a period of very few or no sunspots. This has coincided with the brutal winter we are going through now.
The question is whether we will enter another grand solar minimum just like the Maunder minimum which if history is a guide would mean a period of much colder weather winters and summers. More than a few experts with whom I speak regularly believe that we shall enter such a grand minimum along with the resulting bone-chilling weather.
If that happens, then there will be profound influences on the economy, including possible crop failures and rising energy use for home and workplace heating. Or in other words, expect bigger bills for food and energy. After a period in which the supply of both has been increasingly abundant then this change will likely come as a shock to many people and likely the broader global economy as well.
Read the full article HERE.
Prof Henrik Svensmark & Jacob Svensmark discuss the connection between cosmic rays, clouds and climate with the GWPF’s Benny Peiser and Jonny Bairstow from Energy Live News after his recent presentation in London. Video and slideshow follow.
H/T to Watts Up With That
Why has global temperature been increasing since 1980 while solar activity has been decreasing?
A paper by Javier, edited by Andy May at WUWT.
The answer is that solar variability has multiple effects on climate with different time lags. Total Solar Irradiation variability has a direct effect on temperature within 0-2 years of ~ 0.2 °C (Tung & Camp, 2008) for the 11-year solar cycle. This is the effect accepted by all. The stratospheric effect of UV solar variability influences the North Atlantic oscillation that is lagged by 2-4 years (Scaife et al., 2013). Kobashi et al. 2015 describe a 10-40-year lag on Greenland temperature from ice cores that they attribute to the slowdown of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation and correlates with changes in the wind stress curl in the North Atlantic with a lag of 38 years in solar variability. Several studies correlating changes in tree-ring width and solar variability document a 10-20-year lag (Eichler et al., 2009; Breitenmoser et al., 2012; Anchukaitis et al., 2017).
The existence of multiple lags means that for the full effect of solar variability to be felt on climate there is a delay of ~ 20 years. The delay is due to the recruitment of slower changing atmospheric and oceanic climatic responses.
This means two things:
- Changes over the 11-year cycle are too fast to have much impact on climate.
- The general decline in solar activity since 1980 has been felt on climate from ~ 2000, and the low solar activity of SC24 should have a maximum effect on climate ~ 2035.
The evidence suggests that solar variability strongly influences climate change. The solar-hypothesis makes very clear predictions that are the opposite of predictions from the CO2-hypothesis. Regardless of changes in CO2 levels and emissions, the world should not experience significant warming for the period 2000-2035, and might even experience some cooling. If the prediction is correct we can assume that the solar contribution to climate is stronger than the CO2 contribution. Then more warming should take place afterwards.
Full Paper and Comments HERE.
Cosmic rays are bad–and they’re getting worse. That’s the conclusion of a new paper just published in the research journal Space Weather. The authors, led by Prof. Nathan Schwadron of the University of New Hampshire, show that radiation from deep space is dangerous and intensifying faster than previously predicted.
Full Article is here.
How does this affect us? Cosmic rays penetrate commercial airlines, dosing passengers and flight crews so much that pilots are classified by the International Commission on Radiological Protection as occupational radiation workers. Some research shows that cosmic rays can seed clouds and trigger lightning, potentially altering weather and climate. Furthermore, there are studies […] linking cosmic rays with cardiac arrhythmias in the general population.
Cosmic rays will intensify even more in the years ahead as the sun plunges toward what may be the deepest Solar Minimum in more than a century. Stay tuned for updates.
If cosmic rays increase cloud cover, this could be how the cooling takes place during grand minimums. We are going to have an opportunity to observe one. Your thoughts?
A study by the University of California San Diego has claimed that by 2050, the Sun is expected to become cool. You might think “what’s the big deal,” but remember that this means the solar activities that create the heat of the Sun to sustain life on Earth may diminish. And the last time it happened was in the 17th century when the Thames River froze. Scientists call this the “Maunder Minimum”.
Physicist Dan Lubin at the university and his team studied the past event and concluded that we are in for a worse case. The Sun is expected to get much dimmer than last time and, in scientific terms, it is a “grand minimum” — a time period in the 11-year solar cycle when the solar activities are at the lowest point.
According to the study, titled Ultraviolet Flux Decrease Under a Grand Minimum from IUE Short-wavelength Observation of Solar Analogs and published in the journal Astrophysical Journal Letters, this grand minimum will be 7 percent cooler than such periods from the past. [Emphasis added]
Scientists also said that the Sun might have another cooling period in a decade.
However, predicting a solar minimum or maximum is a challenge to scientists because of the non-linear characteristic of solar activities that happens every day. During a minimum cycle, though solar cycles still occur, the intensity is very low, while during a maximum cycle, solar flares go up and sun spews out billion-ton clouds of electrified gas into space. These two extremes can bring about some major global and regional climate changes.
The full article is HERE.
Looks like we are going to need all the anthropogenic global warming we can generate!
I found this very interesting paper on Jo Nova’s blog. Not sure I understand the details, but want to share with readers. I have always been puzzled by the apparent step function in global temperatures like the one that occurred in 1977. Is delay the answer?
Figure 1: Global temperature and 11-year delayed TSI, both 11-year smoothed, have mainly trended together. (For the composite TSI from standard sources replaced by Leif Svalgaard’s reconstruction)
For decades, people have been looking to see if the Sun controlled our climate but the message was perplexingly muddy. In the long run, solar activity appears linked to surface temperatures on Earth. (Solar activity was at a record high during the second half of the 20th century when temperatures were also high.) But when we look closely, firstly the solar peaks don’t exactly coincide with the surface temperature peaks, and secondly, the extra energy supplied during the solar peaks is far too small to do much warming. So how could changes in surface temperature be due to the Sun?
A few researchers noted an esoteric correlation of long solar cycles with lower temperatures in the next solar cycle, but mostly those papers were left on the shelf, ignored. Dr David Evans’ notch-delay solar delay theory can explain this odd pattern.
To unravel the connections David took a new approach which cleared out the dead-end complexity of the current climate research. Instead of trying to predict everything from a bottom up detailed approach, he worked “top-down”, treating the Earth as a black box, as a simple Energy-In-Energy-Out type problem, and used the kind of maths that makes modern electronics work. It was an odd combination of factors that came together: David would have to be the only professional modeller on Earth who has a high level PhD in Fourier transforms, experience in electrical engineering in Silicon Valley, and a science blogger as a wife to focus him on this problem (and raise barely enough funds to pay the bills while he worked — it’s been three years full time work now).
This was an Oooh-look-at-that moment. Eleven Years?!
The light in the darkness was this extraordinary pattern that turned up in the Fourier analysis. It lit up a strange path, and following it uncovered the papers that had been largely ignored. Suddenly the disparate observations which had made no sense in conventional models fitted the new theory.
The light on the new path was finding a “notch” filter (it’s a common garden-thing for an electrical engineer, but probably unknown to climate scientists). That notch filter was published here 18 months ago. With one minor proviso, almost all that work there remains intact, and stronger. The proviso is that at the time we thought the notch guaranteed a delay, but we now know that while notch filters can work with a delay, it’s not obligatory. That difference is mostly immaterial now, because the evidence found for a delay turned out to be so strong.
Full paper and discussion are HERE.
James A. Marusek has a long, long quest post at Watts Up With That on the future of solar cycle 25 HERE. I found some of the comments on the post most interesting and deserve your attention. Not everyone agrees with the author.
I predict that the intensity of Solar Cycle 25 will be fairly similar to Solar Cycle 24. I base this prediction on two observations:
1. The pattern seen in Solar Cycles 22 through 25 matches fairly close to the historical pattern seen in Solar Cycles 3 through 6. Refer to Figure 3. Solar Cycle 4 to Solar Cycle 7 corresponded to a period known as the Dalton Minimum. The Dalton Minimum was a time of minimal sunspots, a series of weak solar cycles; but it is not weak enough to be described as a Solar Grand Minima.
2. Solar cycles come in pairs. A solar cycle is in reality a half cycle. It takes two solar cycles to complete one full cycle. In one solar cycle, the magnetic polarity of the sun faces north and in the next it faces south. At the end of 2 solar cycles the sun is back to its original starting point. So they are two different sides of the same coin. The intensity of each half cycle is approximately equal.
In my opinion, the most interesting part of the upcoming solar cycle is the period of minimal sunspotsÅ rather than the period of maximum sunspots because the minimum represents the extreme, the primary actor that foreshadows weather events. When I compared this upcoming period of minimal sunspots with the corresponding period of minimal sunspots during the Dalton Minimum (between solar cycle 5 and 6), I made the following predictive observation. The upcoming period of minimal sunspots will extend from the winter of 2016/17 to the winter of 2024/25. This period is analogous to the similar Dalton Minimum timeframe from the winter of 1806/07 to the winter of 1814/15.
I predict this upcoming period of minimal sunspots shall be longer and deeper than the last one. The changes during this solar minimum shall be more pronounced than during the last solar minimum. These parameters include sunspot numbers, Average Magnetic Planetary Index (Ap index), Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) flux rates, heliosphere volume, the sun’s interplanetary magnetic field strength, solar wind pressure, solar Ultra Violet (UV) flux rate, Earth’s thermosphere volume, solar radio flux per unit frequency at a wavelength of 10.7 cm, and the latitude of Noctilucent Clouds (NLC) sightings.
The full scope of this long article is HERE.