Jump to content
Thunder?
Local
Radar
Pollen

How will Solar Minimum affect weather and climate?


JeffC
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
    24 minutes ago, cheeky_monkey said:

    My query is? when is a solar minimum not a solar minimum...seems you have only picked colder months that occurred close to or even close to mid cycle..for example Jan 2010 is 3 years after solar minimum..so what about Jan 2007,2006, or Jan 1998 etc

    My data backs him up. 

    I looked at the CET for winter in top 20 spotless years (that includes 2007 - we are headed for about 15th this year) and the chances of sub 3.6, 3.4 CET in Dec and Jan are 55% and 40% respectively set against 5.6, 5.4 chances of just 20% and 15% (1C above or below the 1981-2010 average).

    Now my list does not include the winters of 2011 or 1963 i should add. The years in question are below..

    1855
    1856
    1867
    1876
    1878
    1879
    1889
    1890
    1901
    1902
    1911
    1912
    1913
    1923
    1933
    1954
    1996
    2007
    2008
    2009

    Interestingly if we do hit 200 sunless days then we actually push 2007 in 20th out of the list and cool the series a little more. 

    Edited by summer blizzard
    • Like 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Spotted a post you think may be an issue? Please help the team by reporting it.
    Posted
  • Location: Coniston, Cumbria 90m ASL
  • Weather Preferences: wintry
  • Location: Coniston, Cumbria 90m ASL
    34 minutes ago, jvenge said:

    When we discuss solar minimum, are we referring to sun spots?

    Captură de ecran din 2018.09.17 la 17.52.28.png

    that was the interpretation I was intending when I started the thread, yes. Obviously there are other metrics, like solar flux etc., but as far as I know the one which is most commonly used is sunspot numbers as it can be reasonably well extrapolated back to when sunspots were first counted, so provides a greater dataset than a more modern measurement could do.

    I think.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Chisinau, Moldova.
  • Location: Chisinau, Moldova.
    27 minutes ago, JeffC said:

    that was the interpretation I was intending when I started the thread, yes. Obviously there are other metrics, like solar flux etc., but as far as I know the one which is most commonly used is sunspot numbers as it can be reasonably well extrapolated back to when sunspots were first counted, so provides a greater dataset than a more modern measurement could do.

    I think.

    I guess cheeky monkey has a point, then. Sunspot levels low, suggesting a minimum somewhere between 3 months ago and next summer, but would this year be the minimum( unknown for now) or next year? Also, is there a threshold for when it kicks in? How low does it need to go and for how long? For 3 consecutive years to make it in would seem a bit generous ?

    I'm not so well read on the subject, but I'm assuming this is impacting the strat and thus steering the polar arm of the jet stream away from Europe, allowing cold from the Arctic and Russia to cool the continent.

    • Like 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
    3 hours ago, jvenge said:

    I guess cheeky monkey has a point, then. Sunspot levels low, suggesting a minimum somewhere between 3 months ago and next summer, but would this year be the minimum( unknown for now) or next year? Also, is there a threshold for when it kicks in? How low does it need to go and for how long? For 3 consecutive years to make it in would seem a bit generous ?

    I'm not so well read on the subject, but I'm assuming this is impacting the strat and thus steering the polar arm of the jet stream away from Europe, allowing cold from the Arctic and Russia to cool the continent.

    In theory this minimum should be as deep as any in recorded record.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Manchester Deansgate.
  • Weather Preferences: Heavy disruptive snowfall.
  • Location: Manchester Deansgate.
    20 minutes ago, summer blizzard said:

    In theory this minimum should be as deep as any in recorded record.

    Blimey!   Its just such a pity then that the planet has been so warm the last few years then, I read at one point that this cycle and last was following closely with 5 and 6, although deviated somewhat recently, we could have been practically heading into a mini ice age in the next couple of years with such low activity, the only thing stopping us I can think of is it is coinciding with the warmest the planet has been since about the 13th century.

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Coniston, Cumbria 90m ASL
  • Weather Preferences: wintry
  • Location: Coniston, Cumbria 90m ASL
    54 minutes ago, feb1991blizzard said:

    Blimey!   Its just such a pity then that the planet has been so warm the last few years then, I read at one point that this cycle and last was following closely with 5 and 6, although deviated somewhat recently, we could have been practically heading into a mini ice age in the next couple of years with such low activity, the only thing stopping us I can think of is it is coinciding with the warmest the planet has been since about the 13th century.

    Agreed, that said, if the inference from that is that the climate was, for a period at least, as warm as it is now,or even warmer, then maybe this is a turning point in the cycle...?

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Redhill, Surrey
  • Weather Preferences: Southerly tracking LPs, heavy snow. Also 25c and calm
  • Location: Redhill, Surrey

    Guys, Schwabe cycle approx 11years....now let’s not get caught up in this.  We are entering a A Grand Minima = all bets off.  So look at 11years... 2007 had 152 spotless days 2008 250 ish.... and 09 the same....we saw the winters that followed.  Now we are Sept 17th...11 years on entering next Schwabe minima...but also entering Grand Minima.  This year equivalent to 07 we have ALREADY 146 spotless days....with 3.5 months to go.  On this rate and basis we should see next year exceed 300 spotless days.  A MAJOR Winter beckons...and we head even deeper around 2030/2.  

     

    I am convinced a winter to match 20th century great is on the cusp....and then beyond even bigger....Of interest we had US weathermen bleating how they never seen such active Hurricane activity...suddenly it’s sooooooo quiet....it doesn’t match any CO2 forecast....at all

     

    BFTP

    • Like 6
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Redhill, Surrey
  • Weather Preferences: Southerly tracking LPs, heavy snow. Also 25c and calm
  • Location: Redhill, Surrey
    1 hour ago, feb1991blizzard said:

    Blimey!   Its just such a pity then that the planet has been so warm the last few years then, I read at one point that this cycle and last was following closely with 5 and 6, although deviated somewhat recently, we could have been practically heading into a mini ice age in the next couple of years with such low activity, the only thing stopping us I can think of is it is coinciding with the warmest the planet has been since about the 13th century.

    So where was manmade coal fired power stations and car generated CO2 in 13th century...please tell me

     

    BFTP

    • Like 7
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Manchester Deansgate.
  • Weather Preferences: Heavy disruptive snowfall.
  • Location: Manchester Deansgate.
    1 minute ago, JeffC said:

    Agreed, that said, if the inference from that is that the climate was, for a period at least, as warm as it is now,or even warmer, then maybe this is a turning point in the cycle...?

    Yes, there is this constant talk about sea ice loss every summer but the record in 2012 hasn't been breached and shouldn't be in our lifetimes and the sea ice will be growing again soon as we head towards the next LIA.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Manchester Deansgate.
  • Weather Preferences: Heavy disruptive snowfall.
  • Location: Manchester Deansgate.
    3 minutes ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

    So where was manmade coal fired power stations and car generated CO2 in 13th century...please tell me

     

    BFTP

    Agreed Blast - your preaching to the converted, i merely stated that the earth has been very warm the last few years which is factual, i don't believe its going to stay that way at all, climate change isn't a new phenomenon, it has occurred since this planet has existed and will continue to until our star becomes a red dwarf, regardless of what man does or doesn't do.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Coniston, Cumbria 90m ASL
  • Weather Preferences: wintry
  • Location: Coniston, Cumbria 90m ASL

    Precisely what I've said, ever since I saw Al Gore's inconvenient truth. There is a cycle to things, and we just don't have enough reliable data to say overall this is a catastrophic unstoppable inevitable upwards spiral.

    Mind you I'm not convinced that should give us Carte Blanche to pump all sorts of gunk into the atmosphere or fill the sea with plastic bottles, I think most folk would agree with that?!

    • Like 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Manchester Deansgate.
  • Weather Preferences: Heavy disruptive snowfall.
  • Location: Manchester Deansgate.
    14 minutes ago, JeffC said:

    Precisely what I've said, ever since I saw Al Gore's inconvenient truth. There is a cycle to things, and we just don't have enough reliable data to say overall this is a catastrophic unstoppable inevitable upwards spiral.

    Mind you I'm not convinced that should give us Carte Blanche to pump all sorts of gunk into the atmosphere or fill the sea with plastic bottles, I think most folk would agree with that?!

    That's my point, there has only been a few recorded cycles of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, so how can you have enough analogues of all the various teleconnections aligning in certain ways, plus how do we know that there aren't teleconnections on a several thousand year cycle that we simply don't know about yet, plus when does weather supersede climate and visa versa.

    Whilst it shouldn't give us  carte blanche do do what we want, we also have to recognise that one of the main reasons for pollution is the over population of the world and until people stop having 9 kids then nothing will change, to me 1 person driving a 4 litre Ferrari that doesn't have children has a lower carbon footprint than someone who has 5 kids that all drive a 1.4 litre Toyota Yaris, but because of religious reasons your not allowed to state that.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Back in Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)
  • Location: Back in Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)
    5 minutes ago, feb1991blizzard said:

    That's my point, there has only been a few recorded cycles of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, so how can you have enough analogues of all the various teleconnections aligning in certain ways, plus how do we know that there aren't teleconnections on a several thousand year cycle that we simply don't know about yet, plus when does weather supersede climate and visa versa.

    Whilst it shouldn't give us  carte blanche do do what we want, we also have to recognise that one of the main reasons for pollution is the over population of the world and until people stop having 9 kids then nothing will change, to me 1 person driving a 4 litre Ferrari that doesn't have children has a lower carbon footprint than someone who has 5 kids that all drive a 1.4 litre Toyota Yaris, but because of religious reasons your not allowed to state that.

    Bit like people like Bono preaching on Climate change..but then has a private Jet to fly to his concerts all over the world...hypocrite

    • Like 5
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Coniston, Cumbria 90m ASL
  • Weather Preferences: wintry
  • Location: Coniston, Cumbria 90m ASL

    God imagine if this was the MOD thread, you'd be well off topic now! ?

    Feel free, interesting debate!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Wendover, Buckinghamshire
  • Weather Preferences: Cold Snowy Winters, Hot Thundery Summers
  • Location: Wendover, Buckinghamshire
    13 hours ago, feb1991blizzard said:

    Blimey!   Its just such a pity then that the planet has been so warm the last few years then, I read at one point that this cycle and last was following closely with 5 and 6, although deviated somewhat recently, we could have been practically heading into a mini ice age in the next couple of years with such low activity, the only thing stopping us I can think of is it is coinciding with the warmest the planet has been since about the 13th century.

    Any evidence to back that up? Just because Western European winters were mild doesn't mean the rest of the world was. 2010 saw notable cold weather across much of western Europe during the winter months yet global temperatures were the warmest on record at the time. 

    12 hours ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

    Guys, Schwabe cycle approx 11years....now let’s not get caught up in this.  We are entering a A Grand Minima = all bets off.  So look at 11years... 2007 had 152 spotless days 2008 250 ish.... and 09 the same....we saw the winters that followed.  Now we are Sept 17th...11 years on entering next Schwabe minima...but also entering Grand Minima.  This year equivalent to 07 we have ALREADY 146 spotless days....with 3.5 months to go.  On this rate and basis we should see next year exceed 300 spotless days.  A MAJOR Winter beckons...and we head even deeper around 2030/2.  

     

    I am convinced a winter to match 20th century great is on the cusp....and then beyond even bigger....Of interest we had US weathermen bleating how they never seen such active Hurricane activity...suddenly it’s sooooooo quiet....it doesn’t match any CO2 forecast....at all

     

    BFTP

    1) Can't say for sure we are entering a grand minimum yet so you shouldn't be so confident.

    2) You can't say a major winter beckons just because solar activity is low. The only conclusions that have been made from the available data is that solar minimums slightly increase the chances of a severely cold winter across western Europe but it is no way a guarantee given the multiple factors that impact UK climate. The 1910s also saw little solar activity yet the winters during that time were generally very zonal and mild. 1868/69 also occurred during a solar minimum.

    am convinced a winter to match 20th century great is on the cusp....and then beyond even bigger....Of interest we had US weathermen bleating how they never seen such active Hurricane activity...suddenly it’s sooooooo quiet....it doesn’t match any CO2 forecast....at all

    This sentence could well be the biggest load of tosh I have ever read on Netweather. Hurricane activity has increased dramatically in the North Atlantic in recent decades. 2017 had the 3rd highest ACE total since 1880. 2018 is currently above average and we had 3 hurricanes in the Atlantic at the same time during last week. Are you saying that a few days of a lull in Atlantic Hurricane activity invalidates the GHG effect? despite what 97% of scientists think?

    12 hours ago, feb1991blizzard said:

    Yes, there is this constant talk about sea ice loss every summer but the record in 2012 hasn't been breached and shouldn't be in our lifetimes and the sea ice will be growing again soon as we head towards the next LIA.

    2009 saw a recovery from 2007 higher then what we see now and then 2012 smashed that record. We have got lucky in recent years and still the Arctic sea ice during the summer has still struggled to recover much and is still over 1 standard deviation below the 1981-2010 climatological average.

    image.thumb.png.8d7eb91f78eea33ffbbe4f55a9bad900.png

    And with the arctic warming faster then anywhere in the world and CO2 emissions always increasing I don't see much scope for a drop do you? The arctic sea ice is forecast to be ice free during the summer by the 2030s/

    12 hours ago, feb1991blizzard said:

    Agreed Blast - your preaching to the converted, i merely stated that the earth has been very warm the last few years which is factual, i don't believe its going to stay that way at all, climate change isn't a new phenomenon, it has occurred since this planet has existed and will continue to until our star becomes a red dwarf, regardless of what man does or doesn't do.

    Climate has changed over many thousands of years due to Milankovitch cycles. The changes we are seeing are far greater and those have taken place over the last 100. Even the previous 'rapid' warming event, the PETM, still took much longer.

    11 hours ago, JeffC said:

    Precisely what I've said, ever since I saw Al Gore's inconvenient truth. There is a cycle to things, and we just don't have enough reliable data to say overall this is a catastrophic unstoppable inevitable upwards spiral.

    Mind you I'm not convinced that should give us Carte Blanche to pump all sorts of gunk into the atmosphere or fill the sea with plastic bottles, I think most folk would agree with that?!

    But what we do have is an undisputed theory of the Ghg effect and a temperature record which shows an undeniable warming trend which hasn't been matched when looking further back with proxies either.

     

    Edited by Paul
    • Like 5
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

    I think the discussion about low-sunspot years that fell between the peaks in 19th and 20th century is more or less irrelevant to this discussion since what we are really talking about here is the similarity between the longer-term downturn of the Dalton and the current situation. We are probably around 1819 in terms of an analogue to the Dalton, following the weak 1815-16 peak.

    So there's a fairly good chance if these patterns are matching up that a very cold winter such as 1820 or 1823 is in our near future. Whether it comes this winter or one of the next few is really guesswork, but other factors at play suggest at least some optimism for this winter. The central arctic and more recently central North America have turned anomalously cold, a signal that often leads to a cold winter in the plains states and Midwest. If the next ridge downstream favours about 40-50 W then western Europe could see intervals of cold trough upper level steering patterns. If also the jet within that roller coaster is depressed somewhat by the weaker solar forcing, then the blocking episodes could be potent like they were late last winter. 

    I ran part of my analogue technique a bit early (normally I do this LRF for winter around mid-October), and I certainly see better than average chances for cold in all of the main winter months, with the mean of analogues running a full degree below the overall mean of the data set. 

    As others have stated, the blend of low solar and background AGW signals is difficult to model or address with analogue forecasting, and the common sense answer is that you're going to be dealing with two opposing stresses on the same complex mechanism. It should in theory lead to volatile conditions. I would argue we have seen this in slow motion for many years now, perhaps if climate was a faster running system we would notice it more easily, but we keep going from one extreme to the other, as for example record cold in early March, record warmth in mid April of this past year, or the contrast from March 2013 to summer 2013. One time when the feedback processes lock in some major cold will become more sustained, I think it almost set in this past March but didn't quite set to record breaking proportions. A plunge into record cold closer to the minimum point for the radiation balance (late Jan into early Feb factoring in advection) might be required to create sufficient snow on ground for the feedback loop to lock in. 

     

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Crewe, Cheshire
  • Weather Preferences: Snow, storms and other extremes
  • Location: Crewe, Cheshire

    One does get the sense we're on a destination to a real bone chiller of a winter in the next few years. We've had a few 'false starts' over the past few years which IMO have acted as a warning shot. Put that together with some of the insane cold outbreaks over the pond and I think the scene has been set. What we've seen over the past few years is the weather get stuck in ruts for extended periods...we saw it in the UK between April and August with that spell of summery weather. Chances are we'll align a cold pattern at some point that sticks around throughout the winter months. It's a shame that the strong Nina scuppered 2010/2011. Had January come out as a substantially cold month it would have been a truly legendary winter, up there with the 1947's and 1963's of this world.

    Will it be this year? I personally don't think so (Atlantic SSTs all wrong) but I believe it's coming.

    Edited by CreweCold
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Manchester Deansgate.
  • Weather Preferences: Heavy disruptive snowfall.
  • Location: Manchester Deansgate.
    14 minutes ago, CreweCold said:

    One does get the sense we're on a destination to a real bone chiller of a winter in the next few years. We've had a few 'false starts' over the past few years which IMO have acted as a warning shot. Put that together with some of the insane cold outbreaks over the pond and I think the scene has been set. What we've seen over the past few years is the weather get stuck in ruts for extended periods...we saw it in the UK between April and August with that spell of summery weather. Chances are we'll align a cold pattern at some point that sticks around throughout the winter months. It's a shame that the strong Nina scuppered 2010/2011. Had January come out as a substantially cold month it would have been a truly legendary winter, up there with the 1947's and 1963's of this world.

    Will it be this year? I personally don't think so (Atlantic SSTs all wrong) but I believe it's coming.

    Thing is although I believe one is coming, I actually am not that greedy, 86-87 or 90-91 would do me, a winter with 2 huge dumpings (8in to 1ft+) in it is fine.for me.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The simple fact is that solar forcing during the varying solar cycles is now overwhelmed by other factors - primarily greenhouse gases, aided currently by AMO phase. Since solar cycle (SC) 20 global temperatures have been rising counter to solar activity and SC 22 and 23 (1986-95 and 1996-2007) the solar/temperature correlation has broken down completely (see "On the Relationship Between Global Land-Ocean Temperature and Various Descriptors of Solar-Geomagnetic Activity and Climate" https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20140006389.pdf). Remember according to Solheim et al in this current cycle 24, Svalbard was supposed to be 6°C colder in winter than the last cycle - complete fail, it is warmer and they ignored other influences such as the ice retreat through Arctic amplification and the favourable AMO.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Weston-S-Mare North Somerset
  • Weather Preferences: Hot sunny , cold and snowy, thunderstorms
  • Location: Weston-S-Mare North Somerset

    Love this thread, nice to discuss the climate without having man made global warming rammed down your throat.

    It's only logical to look at other factors that could affect our weather, and solar minimum or maximum is certainly a contributing factor.

    Just so happens we are indeed in a low sunspot cycle, and colder snowier winters should become more prevalent in the next 10yrs if you go on previous cycles. 

    • Like 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
    35 minutes ago, SteveB said:

    Love this thread, nice to discuss the climate without having man made global warming rammed down your throat.

    It's only logical to look at other factors that could affect our weather, and solar minimum or maximum is certainly a contributing factor.

    Just so happens we are indeed in a low sunspot cycle, and colder snowier winters should become more prevalent in the next 10yrs if you go on previous cycles. 

    If only the planet was at the same temperature as it was in 1819, I would agree...Unfortunately, for all those who've been steadfastly hyping an imminent snowmageddon (since at least as far back as 2002) it isn't. 

    A truly severe winter is bound to happen again. Eventually! The only question that remains is: will any of us still be around to see it??

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Coniston, Cumbria 90m ASL
  • Weather Preferences: wintry
  • Location: Coniston, Cumbria 90m ASL

    Keep it nice people, civilised debate please! ?

    I take all the comments re warming planet and GHG etc. on board, BUT if what we are about to experience is a GRAND minimum, rather than just a standard lull in between solar cycles then surely we can anticipate a greater than usual effect?

    As I posted earlier, I read some time ago, can't recall where, that there have been times when atmospheric CO2 has been higher, presumably from natural factors like volcanic activity, yet that was during an ice age, so either that fact was incorrect - possible, or something was overriding the GHG effect from the CO2, possibly again volcanic activity blocking sunlight?

    The problem is that until we have actual data from the next 5-10 years then it's impossible to say what definitely will, or will not happen. Mother nature stands to make all of us either prophets or fools, so for me, it's great to have the debate and to try to distil out of the various factors what might, or indeed might not happen.

    So - the scientific basis for AGW stands up to scrutiny, but so does the correlation between reduced solar activity and a more meandering jet stream, locked in patterns and the tendency for cooler winters  - certainly where we are situated on the globe at the moment. What's not yet clear is which of those factors will win out, or indeed if there is some strange interaction or other factor which may come into play to knock the whole of reasoned thinking off it's perch.

    In the meantime, lets get back to glass milk bottles, deposit on pop & beer bottles and taking aluminium foil to school so they can flog it and get some cash. Oh and having veg in brown paper bags...

     

    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Reigate, Surrey
  • Location: Reigate, Surrey
    18 hours ago, cheeky_monkey said:

    My query is? when is a solar minimum not a solar minimum...seems you have only picked colder months that occurred close to or even close to mid cycle..for example Jan 2010 is 3 years after solar minimum..so what about Jan 2007,2006, or Jan 1998 etc

    What a great thread - great discussion and kept friendly and constructive.  I'll be honest here - I pulled that list of years by simply reviewing (eye balling) the solar cycle graphs - so it was somewhat subjective; you have a point.

    I think Summer Blizzard's idea of using the sunspot counts per year has merit, but it's hard to get this perfect as a 12 month minimum may run between 2 years meaning that each of the years has a relatively high count; some minimums are longer than others too - such as the last minimum.  We're all agreed (I think) that we have to take these analogues with a pinch of salt, but they're always fun to play around with and there's definitely a blocking signal given off in these analogues for minimum years. We can't conclude it means we're about to repeat 1962 or 1947 (for any Express Journos reading this) only that there's an implied signal for more blocking than normal this coming winter. 

    Anyway, to try and be a bit more scientific, I have used the following years which all had a count <30 - should I use 30 or 10 or 40 - I have no idea - so I stuck with 30.

    Here's my dataset:

    http://www.sidc.be/silso/yearlyssnplot

    1953.5 20.1
    2008.5 4.2
    2009.5 4.8
    1954.5 6.6
    1996.5 11.6
    2007.5 12.6
    1986.5 14.8
    1964.5 15
    1976.5 18.4
    1985.5 20.6
    2017.5 21.7
    1965.5 22
    1975.5 22.5
    2006.5 24.7
    2010.5 24.9
    1995.5 25.1
    1997.5 28.9

    Here's the surface pattern analogue for January - still a blocked signal - although maybe a tendency to cold and dry on average.

    1893873545_Jansunspotsunder30.thumb.png.5918b1d0cb11f6e56f83422f1d7166a1.png

     

    By the way, according to the data at SIDC, 2018 is currently averaging 8.55 sunspots, so we can get an idea of where it fits with the years above.

    Edited by beng
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Near King's Lynn 13.68m ASL
  • Weather Preferences: Hoar Frost, Snow, Misty Autumn mornings
  • Location: Near King's Lynn 13.68m ASL
    17 minutes ago, JeffC said:

    Keep it nice people, civilised debate please! ?

    I take all the comments re warming planet and GHG etc. on board, BUT if what we are about to experience is a GRAND minimum, rather than just a standard lull in between solar cycles then surely we can anticipate a greater than usual effect?

    As I posted earlier, I read some time ago, can't recall where, that there have been times when atmospheric CO2 has been higher, presumably from natural factors like volcanic activity, yet that was during an ice age, so either that fact was incorrect - possible, or something was overriding the GHG effect from the CO2, possibly again volcanic activity blocking sunlight?

    The problem is that until we have actual data from the next 5-10 years then it's impossible to say what definitely will, or will not happen. Mother nature stands to make all of us either prophets or fools, so for me, it's great to have the debate and to try to distil out of the various factors what might, or indeed might not happen.

    So - the scientific basis for AGW stands up to scrutiny, but so does the correlation between reduced solar activity and a more meandering jet stream, locked in patterns and the tendency for cooler winters  - certainly where we are situated on the globe at the moment. What's not yet clear is which of those factors will win out, or indeed if there is some strange interaction or other factor which may come into play to knock the whole of reasoned thinking off it's perch.

    In the meantime, lets get back to glass milk bottles, deposit on pop & beer bottles and taking aluminium foil to school so they can flog it and get some cash. Oh and having veg in brown paper bags...

     

     

    Not sure about that:

    24_co2-graph-021116-768px.jpg

    https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/

    There is clearly a cycle though on the scale of 10s of thousands of years. I assume this is because of CO2 becoming sequestered in ice during the ice age epochs caused by the orbital variations of the Earth (Milankovitch cycles).

     

     

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
     Share

    ×
    ×
    • Create New...