Jump to content
Holidays
Local
Radar
Windy?
JeffC

How will Solar Minimum affect weather and climate Take 2?

Recommended Posts

Right, let's try again! 

As we approach solar minimum in this solar cycle, which has, relatively speaking, been less active than previous ones in recent history, there are also forecasts that the next cycle could be even less active. 

Given the improvements in science, techniques and general awareness, this is an excellent opportunity to develop science and extrapolate implications. 

Feel free to discuss but keep it as relevant as possible, oh, and civil! 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The effects on the weather is very much an area of uncertainty and debate, but it does seem, anecdotally at least, like low solar tends to promote cooler winters in our part of the world.

Unfortunately, there's not much evidence to suggest that even a grand minimum would do much to the global climate given the pace of global warming.
https://skepticalscience.com/grand-solar-minimum-mini-ice-age-intermediate.htm

Edited by BornFromTheVoid
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I know, as we approach the solar minimum of a solar cycle, interactions with the stratosphere can influence the polar arm of the jet stream. (from memory I think it is something to do with ozone).  This seems to happen irrespective of ENSO conditions. There have been a few papers on the subject over the years. A quick google finds this from Nature https://www.nature.com/news/2010/100414/full/news.2010.184.html

Influencing the polar arm of the jet will undoubtedly influence the temperature of Europe. It is pretty much how every cold spell comes to Western Europe. You can constantly observe this. That happens to Europe irrespective of what the co2 concentrations are. EUROPE, I said.

But we almost go onto another topic now. Because a solar minimum within a solar cycle is one thing. This is widely accepted. It is not yet clear if this year will be the minimum or if it will be next year.

The issue is then people tend to try and predict how future solar cycles will be and it gets quite murky. The last solar cycle (or the one we are in) is a long way from a Maunder Minimum type scenario. In a Maunder Minimum type scenario you would have every winter (just about) giving you what a current solar minimum does in the 11 year cycle. There isn't anything assured that SC25 will be lower than SC24 and even if it was, that it would be low enough to influence each European winter. Observational evidence of the current cycle (recent history shows it to be quite low) would point that it isn't low enough to radically change winters outside of the usual minimums. Put simply, a weak SC24 (by recent historical standards) wasn't weak enough.

You will find different scientists predicting different things for the next solar cycle. Quite honestly, I'd say its pure speculation to say another Maunder Minimum is imminent. So, even if you got a SC25 weaker than current SC24, it isn't clear if it would be sufficiently weak enough. Added to that, many scientists will take a punt on it being a little stronger than SC24.

In general, in the last thread especially, the thread became overwhelmed by people talking about different subjects (past, current and future) that it became a mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, the last 2 predictions I saw predicted a SC25 solar the same as or slightly higher than SC24. One was based on polar field reversal, and the other was a precursor method allied with some statistical extrapolation. Given how widely predictions varied for SC24 max, I wouldn't put too much store into any of them albeit those based on physical arguments fared better. 

Who knows though, maybe we are entering into a Sporer, Wolf, or even Maunder-type minimum. It's a part of our star's "normal" behaviour on the scale of centuries. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Yarmy said:

For what it's worth, the last 2 predictions I saw predicted a SC25 solar the same as or slightly higher than SC24. One was based on polar field reversal, and the other was a precursor method allied with some statistical extrapolation. Given how widely predictions varied for SC24 max, I wouldn't put too much store into any of them albeit those based on physical arguments fared better. 

Who knows though, maybe we are entering into a Sporer, Wolf, or even Maunder-type minimum. It's a part of our star's "normal" behaviour on the scale of centuries. 

 

Yes, it will be a good test of the prediction theories, should be a very educational period that might help us understand more about the interactions between solar activity, weather and climate.

It may even help us to establish better understanding of greenhouse gas effects and how the climate changes naturally in the cycleof things...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, jvenge said:

From what I know, as we approach the solar minimum of a solar cycle, interactions with the stratosphere can influence the polar arm of the jet stream. (from memory I think it is something to do with ozone).  This seems to happen irrespective of ENSO conditions. There have been a few papers on the subject over the years. A quick google finds this from Nature https://www.nature.com/news/2010/100414/full/news.2010.184.html

Influencing the polar arm of the jet will undoubtedly influence the temperature of Europe. It is pretty much how every cold spell comes to Western Europe. You can constantly observe this. That happens to Europe irrespective of what the co2 concentrations are. EUROPE, I said.

But we almost go onto another topic now. Because a solar minimum within a solar cycle is one thing. This is widely accepted. It is not yet clear if this year will be the minimum or if it will be next year.

The issue is then people tend to try and predict how future solar cycles will be and it gets quite murky. The last solar cycle (or the one we are in) is a long way from a Maunder Minimum type scenario. In a Maunder Minimum type scenario you would have every winter (just about) giving you what a current solar minimum does in the 11 year cycle. There isn't anything assured that SC25 will be lower than SC24 and even if it was, that it would be low enough to influence each European winter. Observational evidence of the current cycle (recent history shows it to be quite low) would point that it isn't low enough to radically change winters outside of the usual minimums. Put simply, a weak SC24 (by recent historical standards) wasn't weak enough.

You will find different scientists predicting different things for the next solar cycle. Quite honestly, I'd say its pure speculation to say another Maunder Minimum is imminent. So, even if you got a SC25 weaker than current SC24, it isn't clear if it would be sufficiently weak enough. Added to that, many scientists will take a punt on it being a little stronger than SC24.

In general, in the last thread especially, the thread became overwhelmed by people talking about different subjects (past, current and future) that it became a mess.

It would appear therefore that the most accurate predictions regarding SC 25 will be available somewhere around 2025-6 as semi-hindcasts?

Again it's a case of insufficient data to be reliable, but it would be interesting to get the data spoken about on the  BBC yesterday where scientists are getting trees out of Scottish lochs and are dating them and establishing some climactic data based on growth. These trees are in some cases over 1000 years old and may show a bit more cyclicality (is that a word?!) Thank we currently understand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, from the solar activity thread if we carry on as we are then 58% would equate to 212 days blank...104 in 2017, about 35 in 2016 that's quite a cliff edge...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting times from a cold winter perspective. As a weather enthusiast, cold winters are the holy grail, and the link with solar minimums gets my juices flowing for the next few years.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/09/2018 at 11:41, SteveB said:

Interesting times from a cold winter perspective. As a weather enthusiast, cold winters are the holy grail, and the link with solar minimums gets my juices flowing for the next few years.

Indeed, and it will be interesting to overlay theory onto reality and draw conclusions

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im sure many have seen this graph before.  which illustrates the top 25 spotless years since 1849.   very interesting    slighty out of date however as this year already we are ranked aboved 25

Also  the top spotless days on the bounce.  something to keep an eye on

SC25_year.png            SC25_periods.png

Edited by weirpig
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, weirpig said:

Im sure many have seen this graph before.  which illustrates the top 25 spotless years since 1849.   very interesting    slighty out of date however as this year already we are ranked aboved 25

Also  the top spotless days on the bounce.  something to keep an eye on

SC25_year.png            SC25_periods.png

The SIDC spotless day count for 2018 is still only 145 for 2018 (up to and including the 26th) which is what the above bar chart and table are based on (the International Sunspot Number). Spaceweather shows the NOAA Boulder count. Overall SIDC has counted about 25 fewer spotless days than the NOAA observers for 2016/2017/2018. 

 

Edited by Yarmy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Yarmy said:

The SIDC spotless day count for 2018 is still only 145 for 2018 (up to and including the 26th) which is what the above bar chart and table are based on (the International Sunspot Number). Spaceweather shows the NOAA Boulder count. Overall SIDC has counted about 25 fewer spotless days than the NOAA observers for 2016/2017/2018. 

 

Yes i jumped the gun  maybe if id have posted this next week?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎25‎/‎09‎/‎2018 at 07:57, JeffC said:

It would appear therefore that the most accurate predictions regarding SC 25 will be available somewhere around 2025-6 as semi-hindcasts?

Again it's a case of insufficient data to be reliable, but it would be interesting to get the data spoken about on the  BBC yesterday where scientists are getting trees out of Scottish lochs and are dating them and establishing some climactic data based on growth. These trees are in some cases over 1000 years old and may show a bit more cyclicality (is that a word?!) Thank we currently understand

There's been a lot of previous work on this subject, if you've got the time, have a look around for research on Beryllium 10 and Carbon 14. Here's a couple to start with:

https://www.nature.com/news/2001/011220/full/news011220-9.html

http://www.pnas.org/content/109/16/5967

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, weirpig said:

Yes i jumped the gun  maybe if id have posted this next week?.

Yeah, probably. Notice that before 2007/08/09 you have to go back to 1996 (163) and then 1954 (241) to find years with more than 150 spotless days.

Keep an eye on the link at the start of October, as the guy seems to update every 3 months and the last one was the 2nd July:

http://sidc.oma.be/silso/spotless

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jethro said:

There's been a lot of previous work on this subject, if you've got the time, have a look around for research on Beryllium 10 and Carbon 14. Here's a couple to start with:

https://www.nature.com/news/2001/011220/full/news011220-9.html

http://www.pnas.org/content/109/16/5967

Thanks for that, Jethro...If only Captain Bob were still here and posting; he was pretty hot on beryllium 10, if I recall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ed Stone said:

Thanks for that, Jethro...If only Captain Bob were still here and posting; he was pretty hot on beryllium 10, if I recall?

Aye, me and Captain did loads of research on the topic but that was quite a while ago, I expect it's moved on a bit since then. You have to be a bit careful with the topic though, tree rings don't just reflect temps but moisture too - cold and dry and hot and dry give similar results in growth rings. But as I said, the science has probably advanced in recent years, I haven't the time to keep up with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jethro said:

Aye, me and Captain did loads of research on the topic but that was quite a while ago, I expect it's moved on a bit since then. You have to be a bit careful with the topic though, tree rings don't just reflect temps but moisture too - cold and dry and hot and dry give similar results in growth rings. But as I said, the science has probably advanced in recent years, I haven't the time to keep up with it.

Indeed. Science does that. So much so, that I'm starting to feel somewhat antediluvian!😱

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/09/2018 at 09:16, JeffC said:

Right, from the solar activity thread if we carry on as we are then 58% would equate to 212 days blank...104 in 2017, about 35 in 2016 that's quite a cliff edge...

More than that, the deep minima has been called for some time.  This cycle is well below the last....to match (11 yrs Schwabe cycle) look at 2007....we are way lower than then and we saw what 08/09 Brought re sunspot numbers....next year if it goes as expected....seriously quiet.  There is a crossroads right upon us...VERY happy to see NASA send a probe to the sun

 

BFTP

Edited by BLAST FROM THE PAST
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that many folks want to see a repeat of 1963 asap (it might happen and it might not) but, who's to say that the meandering jet won't cause an increase in the frequency of long, hot summers, instead?

IMO, the dice may well be not loaded in the same was as they were in the run-up to the last Grand Minimum...🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember rightly the winter of 47 was followed by a long hot summer perhaps the two go together

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jonboy said:

If I remember rightly the winter of 47 was followed by a long hot summer perhaps the two go together

I think it was also at or around a time of very high sunspot activity?:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jonboy said:

If I remember rightly the winter of 47 was followed by a long hot summer perhaps the two go together

I think a lot of people presume a quiet sun will result in cold winters, it may well do but if you look at historical weather in this country during previous quiet sun periods, it hasn't always followed. What does appear to show up in the records is 'abnormal' weather. By that I mean unusual for this country, abnormally hot, abnormally cold, ditto wet and dry. If past records are anything to go by in what we can expect from a prolonged, deep minimum, it is expect the unexpected. Don't be surprised if that includes very wet summers and unusually mild winters too. It seems to knock our maritime climate out of kilter, leading to almost a continental climate instead.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, jethro said:

I think a lot of people presume a quiet sun will result in cold winters, it may well do but if you look at historical weather in this country during previous quiet sun periods, it hasn't always followed. What does appear to show up in the records is 'abnormal' weather. By that I mean unusual for this country, abnormally hot, abnormally cold, ditto wet and dry. If past records are anything to go by in what we can expect from a prolonged, deep minimum, it is expect the unexpected. Don't be surprised if that includes very wet summers and unusually mild winters too. It seems to knock our maritime climate out of kilter, leading to almost a continental climate instead.

What I think tends to happen is that because the jet stream tends to meander much more at times of reduced solar output, due possibly to fractionally smaller temperature gradients, you tend to end up with locked patterns rather than more mobile ones.

This can lead to elongated periods of one type of weather, be it wet or dry, cool or warm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JeffC said:

What I think tends to happen is that because the jet stream tends to meander much more at times of reduced solar output, due possibly to fractionally smaller temperature gradients, you tend to end up with locked patterns rather than more mobile ones.

This can lead to elongated periods of one type of weather, be it wet or dry, cool or warm

Indeed. Although I think (if senile memory serves me correctly) it's thought to be changes in the UV levels that have the impact upon the jet stream. Can't remember which winter it was in recent times, possibly 2009/10, (it was the one which was coldest winter in a century) Mike Lockwood did a study on the causes and showed it to be UV, rather than temperature changes due to the sun. Interestingly, UV changes due to the quiet sun are currently cooling the troposphere so presumably if it caused the cold, blocked winter back then, we should stand a fighting chance of having the same again, possibly this year.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jethro said:

Indeed. Although I think (if senile memory serves me correctly) it's thought to be changes in the UV levels that have the impact upon the jet stream. Can't remember which winter it was in recent times, possibly 2009/10, (it was the one which was coldest winter in a century) Mike Lockwood did a study on the causes and showed it to be UV, rather than temperature changes due to the sun. Interestingly, UV changes due to the quiet sun are currently cooling the troposphere so presumably if it caused the cold, blocked winter back then, we should stand a fighting chance of having the same again, possibly this year.

For me its about the total energy available in the system. Whether it's IR, UV or anything else if the energy put in is reduced then the system cannot use that energy and therefore will cool.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×