How will Solar Minimum affect weather and climate Take 2?

[Rambo]

6 hours ago, Ed Stone said:

Absolutely I do...I've been hoping we would see one, since about 1968!

That's very specific lol

[Seasonality]

6 hours ago, Minus 10 said:

Also some harrowing stories too...

But any modern reoccurrence would be mitigated by climate change, so the temperatures presumably wouldn't drop as low. Plus now we have modern farming methods, global supply chains and governments that would act to address problems in a more effective and decisive manner than the during the LIA.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Seasonality

[Minus 10]

1 hour ago, Seasonality said:

But any modern reoccurrence would be mitigated by climate change, so the temperatures presumably wouldn't drop as low. Plus now we have modern farming methods, global supply chains and governments that would act to address problems in a more effective and decisive manner than the during the LIA.

I thought it would be worse due to climate change...or do you mean global warming?

[Seasonality]

2 minutes ago, Minus 10 said:

I thought it would be worse due to climate change...or do you mean global warming?

Well the base global temperature is higher so the temperature drop would lead to an end result that is higher than the LIA which had a lower starting point. 

[Minus 10]

Just now, Seasonality said:

Well the base global temperature is higher so the temperature drop would lead to an end result that is higher than the LIA which had a lower starting point. 

I agree, not every grand minimum is the same, nor will they in the future. It wont go without consequences to the earth.

[jethro]

2 hours ago, Seasonality said:

But any modern reoccurrence would be mitigated by climate change, so the temperatures presumably wouldn't drop as low. Plus now we have modern farming methods, global supply chains and governments that would act to address problems in a more effective and decisive manner than the during the LIA.

Yes and no. Looking at past weather during Grand Minimums the overall impression is one of erratic weather, periods of long 'locked in' weather patterns seemed to be common - hot, cold, dry, wet. Globally, I really doubt even a deep, prolonged minimum would have much affect on global temperatures, but locally, it could have a huge impact on a seasonal basis.

The NH seems to have been the most dramatically affected by past minimums, if the same follows this time (if it happens) it's likely to be the same. If it causes longer, colder winters, later, colder springs then that will have an impact upon growing seasons. Ditto if it causes long, hot summers and droughts. The temperature changes seen so far due to climate change will be irrelevant and wiped out (seasonally) by arctic plunges to lower than usual latitudes. Putting it into perspective, in this country the 'Beast from the East' earlier this year had a dramatic impact upon crops, they were very late to grow due to the cold. The long, hot, dry summer that followed had a further large negative impact to the extent that there wasn't enough grass to feed livestock and their diet had to be supplemented with hay/silage that normally would be used for winter feed. Currently our farmers face going into winter with dwindled stores of feed to over winter the cattle (most cattle in this country are housed during the winter months as they don't cope well with the cold and wet) plus there's no new grass to eat. If we have a cold winter this year, followed by another cold, late spring it will have serious ramifications for farmers, they will run out of feed for their animals. Profit margins are so tight in agriculture that it wouldn't take more than a year or two to put large numbers of farmers out of business if they have to buy in winter feed. We'll then have to import even more of our meat and milk, problematic when lots of what we already import comes from areas of the globe also likely to suffer consequences from a Grand Minimum.

When it comes to us and what we eat, leaving aside meat, the vast majority of our food is imported, most of our fruit and veg is grown elsewhere. Quite a lot of it comes from Africa but an even larger proportion comes from countries like Spain and Holland, both of which were also badly affected by past Grand Minimums. The likelihood is that our supply chain from those countries would be compromised too - if there's less food available, there's less food to export. This summer alone led to some crops such as lettuce failing completely in Spain. As a whole, we import around 50% of our food and the figure is rising, most of it is imported from other NH countries who are likely to see their weather shortening the growing season or long spells of cold & wet/hot & dry weather too. Post Brexit, I cannot see the EU rushing to help a compromised food supply chain in this country if the drop in production is producing problems in their own countries.

[Seasonality]

54 minutes ago, jethro said:

Yes and no. Looking at past weather during Grand Minimums the overall impression is one of erratic weather, periods of long 'locked in' weather patterns seemed to be common - hot, cold, dry, wet. Globally, I really doubt even a deep, prolonged minimum would have much affect on global temperatures, but locally, it could have a huge impact on a seasonal basis.

The NH seems to have been the most dramatically affected by past minimums, if the same follows this time (if it happens) it's likely to be the same. If it causes longer, colder winters, later, colder springs then that will have an impact upon growing seasons. Ditto if it causes long, hot summers and droughts. The temperature changes seen so far due to climate change will be irrelevant and wiped out (seasonally) by arctic plunges to lower than usual latitudes. Putting it into perspective, in this country the 'Beast from the East' earlier this year had a dramatic impact upon crops, they were very late to grow due to the cold. The long, hot, dry summer that followed had a further large negative impact to the extent that there wasn't enough grass to feed livestock and their diet had to be supplemented with hay/silage that normally would be used for winter feed. Currently our farmers face going into winter with dwindled stores of feed to over winter the cattle (most cattle in this country are housed during the winter months as they don't cope well with the cold and wet) plus there's no new grass to eat. If we have a cold winter this year, followed by another cold, late spring it will have serious ramifications for farmers, they will run out of feed for their animals. Profit margins are so tight in agriculture that it wouldn't take more than a year or two to put large numbers of farmers out of business if they have to buy in winter feed. We'll then have to import even more of our meat and milk, problematic when lots of what we already import comes from areas of the globe also likely to suffer consequences from a Grand Minimum.

When it comes to us and what we eat, leaving aside meat, the vast majority of our food is imported, most of our fruit and veg is grown elsewhere. Quite a lot of it comes from Africa but an even larger proportion comes from countries like Spain and Holland, both of which were also badly affected by past Grand Minimums. The likelihood is that our supply chain from those countries would be compromised too - if there's less food available, there's less food to export. This summer alone led to some crops such as lettuce failing completely in Spain. As a whole, we import around 50% of our food and the figure is rising, most of it is imported from other NH countries who are likely to see their weather shortening the growing season or long spells of cold & wet/hot & dry weather too. Post Brexit, I cannot see the EU rushing to help a compromised food supply chain in this country if the drop in production is producing problems in their own countries.

Thanks jethro, you've added a few angles I didn't consider. 

[JeffC]

Interesting to see in the solar and aurora thread that the  hemisphere is cooling rapidly.

[BornFromTheVoid]

10 hours ago, JeffC said:

Interesting to see in the solar and aurora thread that the  hemisphere is cooling rapidly.

What do you mean by the hemisphere? Did you mean to say thermosphere?

[JeffC]

3 hours ago, BornFromTheVoid said:

What do you mean by the hemisphere? Did you mean to say thermosphere?

Lol, yes, blasted autocorrect on my phone...apologies, I should have checked. I'll pop a funny story on the did you know thread re that type of thing.

[Jed Fischer]

On 24/09/2018 at 09:55, 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.

According to the experts there is another dimension to the Grand Solar Minimum.  This is to do with the solar wind decreasing as the sun goes quiet.  This leaves the earth more susceptible to bombardment from cosmic rays.  Also UV drops.  Apparently these issues affects not only cloud formation but also the frequency of volcanic eruptions.  If this is true, then there is a positive feedback effect all helping to cool the planet.  Interestingly we are seeing a few eruptions at the moment.  

[JeffC]

On 04/01/2019 at 16:05, Jed Fischer said:

According to the experts there is another dimension to the Grand Solar Minimum.  This is to do with the solar wind decreasing as the sun goes quiet.  This leaves the earth more susceptible to bombardment from cosmic rays.  Also UV drops.  Apparently these issues affects not only cloud formation but also the frequency of volcanic eruptions.  If this is true, then there is a positive feedback effect all helping to cool the planet.  Interestingly we are seeing a few eruptions at the moment.  

Yep indeed, we do seem to have some activity, although I'm not sure if the current eruption rate is above normal...

[Optimus Prime]

On 04/01/2019 at 16:05, Jed Fischer said:

If this is true, then there is a positive feedback effect all helping to cool the planet.  Interestingly we are seeing a few eruptions at the moment.  

In that case, don't you mean 'negative feedback'?

[JeffC]

6 hours ago, Optimus Prime said:

In that case, don't you mean 'negative feedback'?

I guess that depends on the way you look at it? 

It's a feedback which relies on negative results, i.e. Reducing values of some metrics, but increasing others making it positive. What I think Jed is meaning is that the process is being positively driven through various different resulting changes, although on the face of it they wouldn't necessarily be automatically connected.(?)

I can see a link with Ozone and UV and cloud formation all being collateral effects, but unless there's a geomagnetic change, or there is some contraction of tectonic plates or some other external factor it's an interesting feedback which creates that phenomenon. 

[Gray-Wolf]

When you look at the output of SO2 from Eruptions I think you'll find the output dwarfed by the annual human SO2 burden into the atmosphere?

Seeing as we are now reducing our human produced SO2 we might find that any reductions from source might be matched by our clearing atmosphere.

I think all of the impacts that a proposed maunder like minimum could have will be more than offset by both AGW and the reduction in the particulate/sulphate side of that polluting?

If we are lucky it might slow the rate at which we are warming but 'warming' is not the issue before us but that of increasingly extreme weathers and abnormal stuck weathers leading to extreme flooding/drought/wildfires/dust storms etc.

 

[Rambo]

6 hours ago, Gray-Wolf said:

but that of increasingly extreme weathers and abnormal stuck weathers leading to extreme flooding/drought/wildfires/dust storms etc.

 

Which could equally be attributed to lower solar output......the trouble is, no one knows...yet

[JeffC]

will be interesting to see if the winds as forecasted today from end of Jan - end of May according to Glosea output come to fruition. Then following on from that what, if any, aspects of it can be attributed to low solar cycle...

[karyo]

This thread has gone quiet.

[Methuselah]

It's having an identity crisis. Another year goes by! ♨

[lassie23]

It looks like it will give us BBQ winters

[Methuselah]

The Solar Cycles have slowed down. IOW, we'll be 'on the cusp' for a while yet. 

[Yarmy]

Well, if you assume the solar cycle is approximately 11 years long (it actually varies between 8 and 14 years: 11 is just the average), then the last winter which matched this one was 2007/08 which was also a period of low solar activity and the UK Winter was...well above average.

Feb 09/Dec 09/Jan 10/Feb 10/Dec 10 all occurred after solar minimum (which was Oct 08). One suggestion is that HLB is correlated with low geomagnetic activity and that index lags solar activity by a year or so.

Or it's just a coincidence and everyone's chasing unicorns.

 

[Mokidugway]

Cycle 25 indicates increased activity ,no proven link with thunderstorms  but it could be a good thing

[JeffC]

Thanks for resuscitating this thread @karyo, I think all bets are off given how this winter has foxed even the best of them!

[BornFromTheVoid]

Another study to add to the mix...

Insignificant influence of the 11-year solar cycle on the North Atlantic Oscillation
The North Atlantic Oscillation is the dominant mode of variability of atmospheric circulation outside of the tropics in the Northern Hemisphere in winter. To understand and attribute this mode of variability is of great societal relevance for populated regions in Eurasia. It has been widely claimed that there is a robust signal of the nearly periodic 11-year solar cycle in the North Atlantic Oscillation in winter, which thereby raises the possibility of using the solar cycle to predict the circulation years in advance. Here we present evidence that contradicts this claim. First, we show the absence of a solar signal in the North Atlantic Oscillation in the instrumental record prior to the mid-1960s, and a marginally significant signal thereafter. Second, from our analysis of a global chemistry–climate model repeatedly forced with the sequence of solar irradiance since the mid-1960s, we suggest that the solar signal over this period might have been a chance occurrence due to internal variability, and hence does not imply enhanced predictability.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-018-0293-3