The Seasonal Forecast Thread

[knocker]

9 minutes ago, Hocus Pocus said:

II'm referring to just what amount of warming is anthropogenic, no one really knows knocker it could all of the 0.8c rise over 150 years or a fraction of that. 

If it's a fraction of that then another scientific explanation has to be proffered to explain the warming. My breath is bated.

And to add

Quote

There is a new deep minimum of solar cycle 23 may extend through the next 30 year during the coming solar cycles 24, 25, and 26, similar to what occurred during Dalton minimum era (see Fig. 3). Although the solar activity during the last two solar cycle has a deep minimum there is a global warming, the variations in solar activity do not seem to play a major role in determining present-day observed climatic change. Prevalent global warming, caused by building-up of green-house gases in the atmosphere, seems to escalate and hence mask this solar effect. It played a major role in palaeoclimatic changes. The climate cooling during the Maunder minimum and Dalton minimum might be due to the solar activities collapse [20].

Deep solar minimum and global climate changes

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2090123212001002

Edited February 4, 2016 by knocker

[Don]

18 hours ago, iapennell said:

Hi Don; Although I don't think next winter will be bitterly cold the Sun is predicted by  number of solar physicists to enter a prolonged quiet period following the end of the active phase of the current Sunspot Cycle (Schwabe Cycle number 24).  The Sun is due to enter a Maunder Minimum type of period lasting about 40 years and the average annual Solar Constant is likely to drop by about 0.25 percent by 2030. This is not such a big change in itself but it will certainly counter the effect of rising CO2 levels over the next 15 to 20 years, the big impact of such a quiet Sun is that the fall in radiation emitted is not uniform across all wavelengths, in the UV and high-end visible the drop off is two or three percent (in other words that portion of solar radiation that gets through to ground-level unimpeded when skies are clear). As such the cooling effect of such a quiet Sun will be profound at ground level and will considerably overcome any effects of rising CO2 levels over the next twenty years.  The Arctic pack-ice will extend further south and the wintertime Circumpolar Vortex will expand to lower latitudes.  This will lead to weaker westerlies and an increased incidence of blocking-patterns at higher latitudes by about 2030; so that means cold winters. But not yet!

Many thanks for the response Ian!

[Hocus Pocus]

11 hours ago, knocker said:

If it's a fraction of that then another scientific explanation has to be proffered to explain the warming. My breath is bated.

And to add

Deep solar minimum and global climate changes

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2090123212001002

Regardless we've still no way of calculating just what percentage is what, however before this descends into the usual boring climate wars debate I think the anthropogenic effect accounts for at least half of the last 150 years of warming. The interesting bit is what happens next with the  next Solar Cycle and what effects this has.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

On 04/02/2016 at 2:31 AM, iapennell said:

Hi Don; Although I don't think next winter will be bitterly cold the Sun is predicted by  number of solar physicists to enter a prolonged quiet period following the end of the active phase of the current Sunspot Cycle (Schwabe Cycle number 24).  The Sun is due to enter a Maunder Minimum type of period lasting about 40 years and the average annual Solar Constant is likely to drop by about 0.25 percent by 2030. This is not such a big change in itself but it will certainly counter the effect of rising CO2 levels over the next 15 to 20 years, the big impact of such a quiet Sun is that the fall in radiation emitted is not uniform across all wavelengths, in the UV and high-end visible the drop off is two or three percent (in other words that portion of solar radiation that gets through to ground-level unimpeded when skies are clear). As such the cooling effect of such a quiet Sun will be profound at ground level and will considerably overcome any effects of rising CO2 levels over the next twenty years.  The Arctic pack-ice will extend further south and the wintertime Circumpolar Vortex will expand to lower latitudes.  This will lead to weaker westerlies and an increased incidence of blocking-patterns at higher latitudes by about 2030; so that means cold winters. But not yet!

Ian

Compared to previous cycles this 'active' phase is already a lot less than previous cycle peaks and is already on its way down, cycle 25 likely to be first of the 'bottom out' cycles with 26 being the 'one'.  I think the discussion is whether it will be a Dalton or Maunder style minimum?  As regards to offsetting effects of CO2, well of course it will, temps have and always will 'lead' CO2 not the other way round.  Interesting you seem to be suggesting sometime before cold winter effect to take hold.  I think during descent into Grand minimas we experience step down changes rather than a gradual descent...but time will tell but I'm pretty excited that we are a generation that could experience a grand minima.  Yes the base state for next winter will be polar opposite to this one.  Interesting discussions recently on how  composites of pressure pattern anomalies have not had much bearing on this winter, 

 

BFTP

[Nouska]

11 minutes ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

Ian

Compared to previous cycles this 'active' phase is already a lot less than previous cycle peaks and is already on its way down, cycle 25 likely to be first of the 'bottom out' cycles with 26 being the 'one'.  I think the discussion is whether it will be a Dalton or Maunder style minimum?  As regards to offsetting effects of CO2, well of course it will, temps have and always will 'lead' CO2 not the other way round.  Interesting you seem to be suggesting sometime before cold winter effect to take hold.  I think during descent into Grand minimas we experience step down changes rather than a gradual descent...but time will tell but I'm pretty excited that we are a generation that could experience a grand minima.  Yes the base state for next winter will be polar opposite to this one.  Interesting discussions recently on how  composites of pressure pattern anomalies have not had much bearing on this winter, 

 

BFTP

Hi, BFTP - I found this presentation of the newer solar research interesting.  The focus on particle precipitation - suggesting it is not the sunspot number but the geomagnetic and particle activity which has the impact - that aspect been too active recently.

http://www.issibern.ch/teams/interplanetarydisturb/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Mursula_03_2014.pdf

[Hocus Pocus]

1 hour ago, Nouska said:

Hi, BFTP - I found this presentation of the newer solar research interesting.  The focus on particle precipitation - suggesting it is not the sunspot number but the geomagnetic and particle activity which has the impact - that aspect been too active recently.

http://www.issibern.ch/teams/interplanetarydisturb/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Mursula_03_2014.pdf

Bookmarked for future reference.

[Methuselah]

2 hours ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

Ian

 As regards to offsetting effects of CO2, well of course it will, temps have and always will 'lead' CO2 not the other way round.  

BFTP

Which is - as the warm-up following the Snowball Earth well attests - utter nonsense?

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

8 hours ago, Nouska said:

Hi, BFTP - I found this presentation of the newer solar research interesting.  The focus on particle precipitation - suggesting it is not the sunspot number but the geomagnetic and particle activity which has the impact - that aspect been too active recently.

http://www.issibern.ch/teams/interplanetarydisturb/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Mursula_03_2014.pdf

good read Nouska,

BFTP

[Midlands Ice Age]

9 hours ago, Ed Stone said:

Which is - as the warm-up following the Snowball Earth well attests - utter nonsense?

Any charts to  support that attestation Ed?...

I was thinking of charts showing the state of the sun's activity and energy, together with any geophysical developments. Or a graph maybe of the changes in CO2 levels. It certainly is an interesting scientific subject isn't it?

MIA

[Roger J Smith]

This subject interests me also ... and I have divided the CET period of record into two groups, the weak and strong solar periods. The exact boundaries are of course somewhat subjective. I have defined the weak and strong periods to be the following:

Weak A _ Maunder __ 1659 to 1711 _________ Strong A _ 18th century __ 1712 to 1794

Weak B _ Dalton _____ 1795 to 1833 _________ Strong B _ 19th century __ 1834 to 1876

Weak C _ (name?) ___ 1877 to 1911 __________ Strong C _ 20th century __ 1912 to 2007

Weak D _ current ____ 2008 to ???

The boundaries are chosen to fall mid-way between solar cycle peaks. The peaks in the Maunder minimum are from Schove's research but represent just very minor activity within a long period of almost no activity (and sunspot observation in its infancy).

These are the peaks used in my analysis. They are fairly standard but I have seen 1801 as 1804 in other data because of a flat-topped cycle there, and it should be noted that 1882-85, 1905-07 and 1999-2001 are rather flat-topped cycles while 1829-30 had an unusually rapid reload into the 1837 peak. So all of these peaks and subsequent analysis could be tweaked for a smoothing function; consider this report to be a first draft sort of findings.

Peaks of solar activity are:

Weak A 1659,1675,1685,1693,1705 ___ Strong A 1718,1727,1738,1750,1761,1769,1778,1787

Weak B 1801,1816,1829 _____ Strong B 1837,1848,1860,1870

Weak C 1883,1893,1906 _____ Strong C 1917,1928,1937,1947,1957,1968,1979,1989,2000

Weak D 2014

From that timetable I have constructed the following two tables of winter mean CET aligned with solar peaks in the weak and the strong phases. Any given winter is assigned to the column that is closest to a peak, for example 1823 is peak minus 6 as the alternative would have been peak plus 7. No winter appears twice and if the choices are equal (e.g. 1952 is peak plus 5 or peak minus 5) the assignment is always to the plus column.

This is the analysis (P stands for peak as listed above, 1659* has only Jan-Feb):

WEAK SOLAR INTERVALS ... MEAN WINTER CET Dec-Feb vs POSITION IN SOLAR CYCLE

P-7 _P-6 _P-5 _P-4 _P-3 _P-2 _P-1 _Peak _ P+1 _P+2 _P+3 _P+4 _P+5 _P+6 _P+7 _P+8

_________ (no data before 1659) ___  3.5* _ 2.0 _ 5.0 _ 5.7 _ 1.7 _ 4.7 _ 2.0 _ 3.7 _ 2.3

4.3 _ 3.3 _ 2.0 _ 3.5 _ 2.3 _ 3.7 _ 2.5 _ 2.8 _ 5.0 _ 2.0 _ 1.8 _ 1.0 _ 3.2

_______________ 1.0 _ 3.7 _ 3.8 _-1.2 _ 2.7 _ 6.3 _ 4.7 _ 3.7 _ 2.7

____________________ 4.3 _ 2.2 _ 1.8 _ 3.8 _ 2.7 _ 0.7 _ 4.7 _ 1.3 _ 1.0 _ 3.4

__________3.3 _ 3.2 _ 5.1 _ 3.5 _ 3.5 _ 3.4 _ 3.8 _ 3.7 _ 4.5 _ 1.2 _ 3.2 _ 4.8

____ 0.5 _ 6.2 _ 2.6 _ 4.1 _ 2.0 _  2.1 _ 4.2 _ 2.3 _ 2.9 _ 4.4 _ 2.8 _ 4.0 _ 4.4 _ 2.4

3.3 _ 3.3 _ 3.1 _3.7 _ 3.1 _ 0.4 _ 3.7 _ 2.4 _ 4.7 _ 3.2 _ 4.1 _ 1.4 _ 3.5 _ 5.8

____ 1.5 _ 4.6 _ 4.3 _ 3.8 _ 2.7 _ 5.7 _ 4.0 _ 1.1 _ 2.7 _ 4.1 _ 4.0

____ 5.9 _ 5.0 _ 0.7 _ 2.5 _ 2.3 _ 5.1 _ 4.8 _ 5.5 _ 4.4 _ 2.4 _ 2.7 _ 2.5

_______________ 3.7 _ 4.0 _ 1.5 _ 3.3 _ 2.9 _ 4.4 _ 1.2 _ 4.4 _ 3.8 _ 5.4 _ 5.8

____ 3.1 _ 4.3 _  3.2 _ 5.3 _ 3.6 _ 4.2 _ 4.4 _ 3.1 _ 4.1 _ 3.4 _ 4.2 _ 5.0

____ 5.6 _ 3.5 _ 2.4 _ 3.1 _ 5.1 _ 3.8 _ 6.1 _ 4.5 _ 6.6

Means:

3.8 _ 3.3 _ 4.0 _ 2.8 _ 3.8 _ 2.8 _ 3.1 _ 3.7 _ 3.8 _ 3.4 _ 3.9 _ 2.4 _ 3.1 _ 4.4 _ 3.1 _ 2.3

As this post is getting rather long, I will post the analysis of strong solar intervals in a new post and then compare the two profiles. Note, the value of 6.6 for this current winter is based on 4.6 for February, the value may be anywhere from 6.0 to 7.0.


 

 

Edited February 8, 2016 by Roger J Smith

[Roger J Smith]

STRONG SOLAR INTERVALS ... MEAN WINTER CET Dec-Feb vs POSITION IN SOLAR CYCLE

P-7 _P-6 _P-5 _P-4 _P-3 _P-2 _P-1 _Peak _ P+1 _P+2 _P+3 _P+4 _P+5 _P+6 _P+7 _P+8

____ 3.8 _ 4.2 _ 4.5 _ 4.3 _ 0.8 _ 3.3 _ 3.2 _ 3.8 _ 4.0 _ 3.8 _ 4.5

_______________ 3.1 _ 5.2 _ 3.7 _ 3.1 _ 3.7 _ 3.3 _ 1.7 _ 4.6 _ 2.5 _ 4.7

_________ 5.0 _ 6.1 _ 4.1 _ 5.0 _ 5.6 _ 4.7 _ 5.6 _-0.4 _ 2.8 _ 3.1 _ 3.4 _ 3.1

_________ 3.2 _ 2.2 _ 4.8 _ 3.2 _ 5.0 _ 5.1 _ 3.2 _ 3.1 _ 3.3 _ 3.5 _ 2.3 _ 4.3

______________ 2.4 _ 3.2 _ 5.2 _ 2.7 _ 5.8 _ 4.4 _ 2.6 _ 4.6 _ 2.7

___________________ 1.4 _ 2.9 _ 3.0 _ 3.3 _ 4.4 _ 2.6 _ 2.9 _ 3.8

______________ 2.9 _ 4.7 _ 2.2 _ 2.9 _ 2.6 _ 5.6 _ 1.4 _ 3.4 _ 4.2

______________ 3.2 _ 1.2 _ 1.4 _ 3.0 _ 4.1 _ 3.8 _ 2.1 _ 5.7 _ 4.4 _ 2.6 _ 3.9 _ 4.8

______________ 6.5 _ 4.7 _ 3.4 _ 3.8 _ 1.4 _ 3.6 _ 3.8 _ 1.6 _ 3.1 _ 4.4

______________ 4.3 _ 1.5 _ 5.8 _ 1.7 _ 4.1 _ 5.1 _ 3.5 _ 5.0 _ 4.8 _ 4.5 _ 3.1

_________ 1.9 _ 3.8 _ 3.8 _ 4.2 _ 5.1 _ 2.3 _ 2.7 _ 4.3 _ 5.7 _ 3.7 _ 2.7

______________ 5.3 _ 4.7 _ 4.5 _ 6.8 _ 3.0 _ 2.4 _ 5.2 _ 4.1 _ 4.9 _ 2.8 _ 4.1

_________ 5.1 _ 5.3 _ 5.2 _ 4.3 _ 5.5 _ 1.5 _ 4.2 _ 3.9 _ 5.6 _ 5.4 _ 4.9

_________ 5.7 _ 3.9 _ 5.8 _ 4.7 _ 4.2 _ 4.4 _ 1.7 _ 4.6 _ 3.8 _ 4.8

______________ 4.1 _ 3.2 _ 6.1 _ 3.0 _ 5.4 _ 4.6 _ 4.7 _ 1.5 _ 2.6 _ 2.2

______________ 5.9 _ 4.3 _ 3.7 _ 4.5 _ 1.1 _ 5.1 _ 5.6 _ 5.1 _ 2.9 _ 3.9

______________ 3.5 _ 4.1 _ 3.5 _ 2.9 _ 5.5 _ 4.2 _ 3.6 _ 4.6 _ 4.9 _ 3.6

________ -0.3 _ 3.5 _ 3.3 _ 4.4 _ 5.1 _ 3.5 _ 3.2 _ 3.3 _ 4.4 _ 4.9 _ 4.9

________ 5.4 _ 6.4 _ 5.2 _ 3.3 _ 4.1 _ 1.6 _ 4.6 _ 4.5 _ 2.6 _ 4.3 _ 4.2

_____________ 2.7 _ 2.9 _ 3.5 _ 5.3 _ 6.5 _ 6.2 _ 3.0 _ 4.6 _ 4.7 _ 4.7

________ 5.9 _ 3.0 _ 4.0 _ 6.1 _ 5.4 _ 5.4 _ 4.5 _ 5.4 _ 4.7 _ 5.1 _ 5.2 _ 4.1 _ 6.4

Means:

___ 3.8 _ 4.0 _ 4.1 _ 4.0 _ 4.0 _ 4.0 _ 3.6 _ 4.0 _ 3.5 _ 4.0 _ 4.0 _ 3.8 _ 3.8 _ 5.6

 

Analysis

First we could compare the profiles of the strong solar intervals and the weak solar intervals:

STRONG ___ 3.8 _ 4.0 _ 4.1 _ 4.0 _ 4.0 _ 4.0 _ 3.6 _ 4.0 _ 3.5 _ 4.0 _ 4.0 _ 3.8 _ 3.8 _ (5.6)

WEAK _(3.8)_3.3 _ 4.0 _ 2.8 _ 3.8 _ 2.8 _ 3.1 _ 3.7 _ 3.8 _ 3.4 _ 2.9 _ 2.4 _ 3.1 _ 4.4 _ (3.1) _ (2.3)

The values in brackets are based on very few cases and can be largely ignored. The main point of comparison is that the winters during the weak solar activity show a tendency to be colder about 2-4 years before and after the solar cycle peaks, when compared to periods of strong activity. The comparison of peak years (also P+1 and P+2) are very similar. Also quite similar would be the cases from quiet years between peaks in either weak or strong activity.

It is interesting to note that colder winters in the active phase tend to cluster near sunspot peaks, with the notable exceptions of 1784 and 1963 (the -0.3 value that starts the fourth last row of strong data). All of these notable cold winters occurred in peak sunspot years: 1838, 1917, 1947, 1979. Other notable cold winters in strong periods were a bit after sunspot peaks such as 1740 (+3) and 1929 (+1).

Overall, I think what this tells us is that intervals of lower solar activity tend towards colder winters but these will cluster away from the weak solar activity peaks that might occur, more than during them or for that matter at furthest points from them. The differences are barely significant for the numbers of cycles involved. It can be seen from the above comparisons that years from 4 to 1 year before cycles peak average 0.9 C deg colder in the weak intervals, and again from years that are 3 to 5 years after these peaks, the difference averages 1.1 C deg colder.

It should be noted that weak activity was assigned to a total of 136 years out of 357.

It might be worth keeping track of this too -- the most similar data to 2016 appear to be from 1834 which turned out to be a transition from weak to strong activity. While most forecasts are calling for a prolonged downturn in solar activity, what happened after 1834 was a sudden surge in activity and a very short period between two peaks (1829-30 then 1837-38).

We could also speculate that if there is in fact very much cause and effect involved in these linkages beyond random variability, the first of the three active periods (1712 to 1794) appeared to "short circuit" after a few strong cycles and the signature of cycles from 1738 to 1787 rather closely resembles the signature of weak periods more than strong intervals. Perhaps what happened was that the warming induced by the solar activity could not be sustained after such a long cold interval as the Maunder (and the associated locations of ice boundaries to the north of Britain) and eventually (1739-40) the rather strong warming ongoing then quicjkly reverted to the Maunder style cold which then did not entirely leave the scene for the rest of this active phase (a more variable climate 1750s to 1790s) before the Dalton weak signal re-established more consistently still, the generally cold signature. The 19th century strong cycles seemed to be quite unreliable too for sustained warmth and one could argue that the Dalton and the later weak cycles around 1883 to 1906 merged into one very long cold interval without much interruption with only a few mild winters such as 1846 and 1869.

The lack of sustained winter cold after the period 2009-13 may be an opposite case where the solar forcing could not overcome the climate controlling large scale signature of the long warm period before the solar downturn. We may be seeing the opposite of 1740 happening this winter (in this case, reversal of an unsustainable cold signal).

 

 

Edited February 8, 2016 by Roger J Smith

[Midlands Ice Age]

A fantastically detailed analysis Roger.

Thank you for all this work...

I think it will take me longer to take in the implications than it clearly took you to produce it.

Brilliant.

Worthwhile keeping this data for analysis for the future. 

MIA

[Catacol]

On 08/02/2016 at 5:07 PM, Roger J Smith said:

We may be seeing the opposite of 1740 happening this winter (in this case, reversal of an unsustainable cold signal).

 

Thanks Roger. On the back of such miserable recent winters your final comment is not welcome. :-( If the cooler spell of 09-13 was a mere blip in a longer term drive towards greater warmth - whether AGW or not - then the UK will truly become an awful place to be for 25% or more of each year. I was rather hoping that the move to a more pronounced sunspot minimum might actually override other signals. Hey ho - no offence... but I'll be hoping you're wrong on this bit of the analysis.

[Roger J Smith]

I understand your point, but what I had in mind was more isolated to this winter. If you look at 1739-40 you see a case where it suddenly reverted to the Maunder climate after quite a warm decade and three active solar cycles. There, I was thinking perhaps winter 1739-40 had the right setup to take advantage of the lingering closer boundaries of ice and open water, so that the long hiatus from severe cold was quickly overcome. Conversely in 2015-16 the synoptics were favourable for a mild start to winter and so the circulation managed to over-ride the recent slight downturn in the ongoing "climate change" period of steady increases. Although solar activity now favours colder winters, this opportunity for a return to the mild days was easily taken (and in terms of Nov-Dec, gobbled down with glee). But I don't think this means future winters will face the same fate necessarily, these longer-term considerations about solar activity will tend to dig in, and looking at 1740, it wasn't too long before some quite mild winters showed up again as they often did in the 1730s.

I think we are in a similar position in solar terms to about 1804-06, which is a good place to be for cold fanciers, there were several outstanding cold winters in the two decades that followed. It's all a question of how much the human signal will interfere with these solar dynamics. My personal opinion is that the modification will remain slight, in the 0.5 to 1.0  C deg range. If a winter is going to be a good one, warming it by 0.5 to 1.0 will not destroy the end result (as we saw at both ends of 2010).

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Roger

That is really some work my friend, and thanks for sharing it.  I agree as reversal either way isn't immediate....my analogy is an aging good team doesn't become a bad team overnight and still produce great games....but they do run out of steam eventually to become overrun by the opposition...

 

best regards

BFTP

  

[Lettucing Gutted]

On ‎30‎/‎03‎/‎2016 at 10:05 PM, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

Roger

That is really some work my friend, and thanks for sharing it.  I agree as reversal either way isn't immediate....my analogy is an aging good team doesn't become a bad team overnight and still produce great games....but they do run out of steam eventually to become overrun by the opposition...

 

best regards

BFTP

  

In terms of the CET what are the first things you are looking for in the new grand minima?  A proper cold spring last seen in 2013?  A proper cold summer last seen in 2011?  A proper cold autumn last seen in 1993?  A proper cold winter last seen in 2010/2011?  Or a combination of the above or a proper cold year last seen in 2010.  Also do you still expect any of these changes in 2016?  Also do you expect a proper global response to the minima unlike the mere "plateauing" of temps from 1998 through 2011 and the Bob Beamon warming of 2012 through 2015?

Edited April 3, 2016 by Lettucing Gutted

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

For me the 'mere plateauxing' is part of the long term response but also I don't think it will be turning 'always cooler/or cold' but that we should IMO start experiencing more frequent incursions of colder weather thus overall a colder regime sets in.  Will be interesting to see the rebound into La Nina this year from such a strong Nino

 

BFTP

[Roger J Smith]

Here's brief summary of what I expect for summer 2016.

Temperatures will be close to 1981-2010 normal values and in specific terms, CET around 14.7 for June, 16.8 for July and 16.2 for August (summer mean 15.9). If there is any regional trend it would be towards lower anomalies in the south and higher in the north (of the UK and Ireland) meaning less difference than usual. This would be due to expected persistent frontal zone over northern France which would spread more frequent cloud and rain into south coast regions and promote more frequent dry spells further north. Thus I would expect rainfall to be above normal south of central Wales to east Anglia and near normal in much of north Wales, Ireland and northern England, trending to below normal in Scotland.

(PREDICTED SUMMER RANK for CET if my monthly averages verify would be tied 79th with five others, out of 358 -- recent summers with the same average of 15.90 were in 2014, 1999 and 1982 ... further back the ties were 1950 and 1852 ... of course that's a very narrow validation band, if you want to consider all recent summers between 15.80 and 16.00 (the math places them in groups of .0, .3 and .7), then since 1950 we find the following in chronological order, including the ones already mentioned: 1950, 1970, 1982, 1996, 1999,  2002  2009, 2010, 2014 -- oddly, there are no recent summers from 15.93 to 16.07, so those listed are all cases from 15.8 to 15.9).

This is a list of recent summers that were warmer than I am predicting to give you an idea of how 79th out of 358 looks in modern data:

(WARMER THAN MY PREDICTION FOR 2016 -- 15.9 C -- (since 1949) --

1976 (17.77) -- ranked 1st all years

1995 (17.37) -- ranked 3rd

2003 (17.33) -- ranked 4th

2006 (17.23) -- ranked 5th

1983 (17.07) -- ranked 7th

1975 (16.93) -- ranked 12th

1959, 1997 (16.57)

1955 (16.53)

1949 (16.5)

1989 (16.47)

1984 (16.33)

2013 (16.27)

2004 (16.23)

2005 (16.20)

1990, 1994 (16.17)

2001 (16.1)

So that would rank it 19th warmest  of the 68 summers since I was born anyway (granted I have missed most of them and my summers of return are a horror story having managed to pick 1965, 1972 and 1988 as well as 2007 briefly).

For comparison, the coldest summer since 1949 was 1954 at 14.07 closely followed by 1956 at 14.13 ... my parents emigrated in 1957 and now I am starting to see why that may be the case.

I don't expect long intervals of strong blocking rather, some weeks of weak blocking tendency alternating with periods of rather sluggish Atlantic dominated weather. There could be one or two decent warm spells in this mixture as well as one or two wet intervals. My best bet for a warm spell or heat wave would be around first third of July, second best looking index values come in very late July and first week of August. Mid-July and late August appear more likely to have the wet spells. June in general looks rather bland and with some tendency to warm spells might be a fairly decent June compared to some recently.

In North America I am expecting to see a rather normal pattern too, the slowly dissipating El Nino signal over the eastern Pacific combined with a long-term trough tendency over the east will not entirely dissipate so that western regions may have a relatively hot and dry summer while central and eastern regions might come in close to average with an equal mixture of warm and cool spells. I would expect the hurricane season to be a more active one than the last several, so will be predicting 18 named storms, 11 hurricanes and 4 major hurricanes. The recent average is 14, 7 and 3.

My hunch would be that if my forecast busts, it will be warmer rather than colder than I am predicting. The appearance of both 1983 and 1975 in the warm list suggests that you can get a decent summer after a fading El Nino event and after a record warm December so that those two drivers are not automatically to be considered contra-indications for a warm summer. Summer 1935 (after the other previously tied for warmest December 1934) was 16.27, also a fairly warm summer.

I tend to be conservative with my seasonal forecasts so perhaps I should say about equal chances of near normal and 1 deg above normal, and a slight chance of a top 20 contender. I think we'll beat last summer's 15.27 (would have been 15.17 without 1st of July so if you were away that day, you missed the main event of summer 2015).

If last summer could produce that 6th hottest day ever in the CET record (going by memory) then this summer should be watched for another blast since we are seeing rather frequent blocking.

I do suspect that there will be some heavy rain at times in the south since some index values in my research are suggesting split flow and frequent frontal zone set-up across northern France or the Channel. And I would not be surprised if there were drought issues in parts of Scotland.

 

 

 

 

[Summer Sun]

An early look at winter from Matt Hugo

Quote

Early indications suggest the coming winter may be significantly different to the last one. The combination of lower solar activity, a weak La Nina and an easterly QBO phase may favour a less cyclonic pattern and perhaps increase the risk of colder outbreaks.

http://www.theweatheroutlook.com/twoother/twocontent.aspx?type=hpnews&id=3300&title=Winter+2016/17

[Jackfrost]

For me, this was the most interesting paragraph in Matt Hugo's analysis:

Quote

Sunspot activity has been declining since a peak around the winter of 2014/2015. It is no surprise that the severe winters around 2009 and 2010 did coincide with a particularly noteworthy solar minimum, as can be seen on the below graphic. Whilst the connection between solar activity and winter weather is a vague one the general decline in solar activity is set to continue through this coming winter period.

It will be revealing how the current lack of activity (read: silence) from the sun coincides with our upcoming winter, given how little is know about the links between solar activity and our climate. Hopefully some evidence is forthcoming.

[Jakehainton]

19 hours ago, Jackfrost said:

For me, this was the most interesting paragraph in Matt Hugo's analysis:

It will be revealing how the current lack of activity (read: silence) from the sun coincides with our upcoming winter, given how little is know about the links between solar activity and our climate. Hopefully some evidence is forthcoming.

Are you feeling excited? 

 

 

I am...

 

Is it too early?

 

Probably

 

Haha

[Norway Nut]

On ‎08‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 16:41, Roger J Smith said:

The boundaries are chosen to fall mid-way between solar cycle peaks

You must have been a mathematician in a previous life Roger, I was a radio/radar engineer and wannabe radio ham.  Sunspot cycles start and finish on specific dates. The peaks, double peaks or plateau generally do not align to the absolute centre of the sunspot cycle.

So you already know that sunspots vary on an 11 year cycle very roughly speaking. I forget the actual range over which the basic 11 year cycle fluctuates but believe me it does. Next in frequency comes the 22 year Solar Polarity change. This is just the Sun flipping the North seeking pole for the South seeking pole and vice versa, so one could argue that the time it takes for the Sun to be in one orientation i.e. North Pole "up" and sunspots at a minimum until the next time is in the same configuration is the true length of the Solar cycle.

This may or may not have an effect on your calculations. Be aware also that one cycle can start while the previous cycle is still ongoing ( the Sun produces sunspots with opposite polarity around the time of the start of every second cycle) but we are just given one number.

By the way, there are also longer time scale cycles in operation. There is a 79 or 80 year cycle of low sunspot peaks, a 100 or 101 year cycle of high sunspot peaks and this forms a 179/180 year cycle ( one cycle of low peaks followed by a high peak cycle). I think the scientists have recently reported that there might be a 360/400 year cycle too.

Happy Correlating!

Edited July 5, 2016 by Norway Nut
Correction

[Norway Nut]

On ‎08‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 18:07, Roger J Smith said:

It is interesting to note that colder winters in the active phase tend to cluster near sunspot peaks

Remember reading a book in mid 80's that quite specifically said when the sunspot numbers go above 150 ( this is the old method of counting sunspots) or go below 50, then cold winters generally dominate. Does this help your analysis? The books title was "Future Weather" but I can't remember the author.

[virtualsphere]

5 hours ago, Norway Nut said:

Remember reading a book in mid 80's that quite specifically said when the sunspot numbers go above 150 ( this is the old method of counting sunspots) or go below 50, then cold winters generally dominate. Does this help your analysis? The books title was "Future Weather" but I can't remember the author.

This one by John Gribbin? https://www.amazon.co.uk/Future-Weather-Dioxide-Climate-Greenhouse/dp/0140224599/

[Summer Sun]

ukweatherforecast - winter forecast update 1

Quote

 

Starting with December using the air temperatures at 1000mb (close to the surface) there is a very clear signal for much cooler than average temperatures during early winter. This signal was present when we ran the data using all La Nina years as a base, however, after adding the low solar factor the signal became much stronger. This signal is one to monitor very closely in the coming months.

January and February signal a fairly average outlook with temperatures near average across the UK but January does show hints of warmer temperatures to the south of the UK but looking a February the hints are for Europe to return to a colder pattern, with Greenland looking rather warm, perhaps indicating a block here.

 

Full forecast here: http://www.null/uk-winter-weather-forecast-201617/