How will Solar Minimum affect weather and climate Take 2?

[jethro]

18 minutes ago, JeffC said:

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.

 

I get your point but is it that simple? There's a vast myriad of things which contribute to the energy budget, I'm not personally convinced that just one factor will have an enormous impact unless the minimum is deep and prolonged. Even taking into consideration just one single factor like the oceans, something like 75% of the earth is ocean, that's an enormous storage heater which won't respond quickly to a quiet sun. I think at best we'll see changes in weather patterns that may or may not make winters colder here, but overall, globally, I don't see the reduction in TSI being great enough to make a huge difference in temperature unless it lasts for decades like the Maunder.

[jethro]

If anyone fancies comparing the dates of previous deep minima and the weather in this country, here's a really handy site. It uses lots of different sources to glean what the weather was like prior to Hubert Lamb and the CET record.

 

https://www.booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/histclimat.htm

[JeffC]

1 hour ago, jethro said:

I get your point but is it that simple? There's a vast myriad of things which contribute to the energy budget, I'm not personally convinced that just one factor will have an enormous impact unless the minimum is deep and prolonged. Even taking into consideration just one single factor like the oceans, something like 75% of the earth is ocean, that's an enormous storage heater which won't respond quickly to a quiet sun. I think at best we'll see changes in weather patterns that may or may not make winters colder here, but overall, globally, I don't see the reduction in TSI being great enough to make a huge difference in temperature unless it lasts for decades like the Maunder.

agreed that the oceans will store heat, but only for so long, and that is driven by the amount of radiation they receive, and the temperature of the air above as well as mixing from storms etc. the Sea Surface temperatures do react to air temperatures hence the SST's are about as cold as they can get by march (If I recall correctly)

so depending on what the total energy budget is for the Earth, as defined by solar output (I think it's safe to discount  radiation from other stars at this point, in terms of high energy input to the energy budget for Earth ) then if that output drops by even not very much then it has to effect a change in the total energy available?

[jethro]

3 hours ago, JeffC said:

agreed that the oceans will store heat, but only for so long, and that is driven by the amount of radiation they receive, and the temperature of the air above as well as mixing from storms etc. the Sea Surface temperatures do react to air temperatures hence the SST's are about as cold as they can get by march (If I recall correctly)

so depending on what the total energy budget is for the Earth, as defined by solar output (I think it's safe to discount  radiation from other stars at this point, in terms of high energy input to the energy budget for Earth ) then if that output drops by even not very much then it has to effect a change in the total energy available?

Of course. I'm not saying there's no impact, I'm just not convinced it will have a massive impact unless the expected period of low solar output is protracted and deep. I do think the expectation that if it happens we'll have bitingly cold winters needs to be re-considered. Having looked at the historical weather, it shows that peculiar weather patterns happened, very wet weather was as common, if not more common than cold. Not sure that fills me with much joy.

[cheeky_monkey]

go and watch Gav's weather on youtube he has just posted a whole video looking at past solar minimum winters plus all the analogues for the winters just before and at true solar minimum

[JeffC]

On ‎01‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 00:36, cheeky_monkey said:

go and watch Gav's weather on youtube he has just posted a whole video looking at past solar minimum winters plus all the analogues for the winters just before and at true solar minimum

Finally got round to watching it - in a nutshell the conclusion is that it's inconclusive, depending on if we conclude that we are, or indeed are not at solar minimum.
 

 

 

[JeffC]

December may or may not be above or below average, January could be cooler or warmer than average and February may or may not be affected by a blocking pattern. All three months may be wetter or drier than average. Possibly bo

[JeffC]

7 hours ago, JeffC said:

December may or may not be above or below average, January could be cooler or warmer than average and February may or may not be affected by a blocking pattern. All three months may be wetter or drier than average. Possibly bo

Obviously that last sentence should have read "possibly both"!

[cheeky_monkey]

23 hours ago, JeffC said:

Finally got round to watching it - in a nutshell the conclusion is that it's inconclusive, depending on if we conclude that we are, or indeed are not at solar minimum.
 

 

 

In a nutshell the conclusion was that colder winters tended to happen just after solar minimum not just before or at solar minimum..due to lag in atmospheric response  

[jonboy]

3 minutes ago, cheeky_monkey said:

In a nutshell the conclusion was that colder winters tended to happen just after solar minimum not just before or at solar minimum..due to lag in atmospheric response  

It is what you would expect as it takes time for these responses to work through the atmosphere. The interesting element is that we have come of a very low maximum so will the effect of a very low minimum be even greater? We don't have that sort of hard data to judge it by. The next 10 years are going to be very interesting especially if the next cycle is slow to uptake and as some think the next maximum may be the same or slightly lower than the last.

[Methuselah]

9 minutes ago, cheeky_monkey said:

In a nutshell the conclusion was that colder winters tended to happen just after solar minimum not just before or at solar minimum..due to lag in atmospheric response  

If I'm assessing things correctly, there ought be two effects: the direct effect of UV on the PFJ, leading to meandering and/or high-latitude blocking events; and the lagged effect due to thermal lag, causing God-knows-what?

There's no denying that a period of great interest is incoming.

[cheeky_monkey]

19 minutes ago, jonboy said:

It is what you would expect as it takes time for these responses to work through the atmosphere. The interesting element is that we have come of a very low maximum so will the effect of a very low minimum be even greater? We don't have that sort of hard data to judge it by. The next 10 years are going to be very interesting especially if the next cycle is slow to uptake and as some think the next maximum may be the same or slightly lower than the last.

seems we do though..i spent 10 mins online looking at it appears the sun was as quiet as it is now from the late 1800's through to the early 1900's..then activity increased slowly until the peak 1960s and has fallen again recently..also temps seem to follow the suns activity until the 1980s where the pattern breaks..even though sun activity starts to fall temps have continued to rise at an accelerating rate

Edited October 5, 2018 by cheeky_monkey

[Yarmy]

15 minutes ago, Ed Stone said:

If I'm assessing things correctly, there ought be two effects: the direct effect of UV on the PFJ, leading to meandering and/or high-latitude blocking events; and the lagged effect due to thermal lag, causing God-knows-what?

There's no denying that a period of great interest is incoming.

It's not thermal lag, but the lag (approx 1 year) between solar activity and geomagnetic activity down here on Earth that has been mooted. The lag is clearly seen here:

http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/SC24web/SC24.html

 

[Methuselah]

48 minutes ago, Yarmy said:

It's not thermal lag, but the lag (approx 1 year) between solar activity and geomagnetic activity down here on Earth that has been mooted. The lag is clearly seen here:

http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/SC24web/SC24.html

 

Does the total incoming solar-radiation (W/m^2) not reduce at deep solar minima?

[Yarmy]

33 minutes ago, Ed Stone said:

Does the total incoming solar-radiation (W/m^2) not reduce at deep solar minima?

Yes, but not by much. The average varies by about 1 to 2 Watts per square metre over the course of a solar cycle between about 1360W/sq. m and 1362W/sq. m.

That equates to an effect of about  +/- 0.1C on the global temperature, so almost negligible unless there are other amplification factors. 

[Don]

3 hours ago, cheeky_monkey said:

In a nutshell the conclusion was that colder winters tended to happen just after solar minimum not just before or at solar minimum..due to lag in atmospheric response  

Interestingly there seems to be a difference between odd and even numbered solar cycles with odd favoring colder winters more than even (no idea why!)?  We are now in an even numbered cycle, so perhaps less chance of colder winters this time compared to the solar minimum in 2009?

[Methuselah]

2 hours ago, Yarmy said:

Yes, but not by much. The average varies by about 1 to 2 Watts per square metre over the course of a solar cycle between about 1360W/sq. m and 1362W/sq. m.

That equates to an effect of about  +/- 0.1C on the global temperature, so almost negligible unless there are other amplification factors. 

So it could (should sufficient amplification occur in the right place) perhaps increase continental cooling by a further 0.5C, over and above whatever the meandering PFJ produces...?

Edited October 5, 2018 by Paul

[Gael_Force]

3 hours ago, Don said:

Interestingly there seems to be a difference between odd and even numbered solar cycles with odd favoring colder winters more than even (no idea why!)?  We are now in an even numbered cycle, so perhaps less chance of colder winters this time compared to the solar minimum in 2009?

This reminded me of something  @lorenzo posted a while back so went looking for a link.

Quote

7] Geomagnetic activity is primarily driven by the solar wind which encounters the Earth's magnetic field at the magnetopause. Solar wind is emitted from the Sun either as high‐speed wind streams from corotating interactive regions (CIRs) of coronal holes, transient wind streams associated with coronal mass ejections (CMEs), or slow solar winds from the borders of coronal holes [Emery et al., 2009]. High‐speed solar wind generated from CIRs tends to recur with a ∼27 day periodicity and is most prominent in the descending phases of SCs. It has been noticed that the characteristics of the ∼27 day periodicity in the geomagnetic aa index are different during the decay phases of even‐ and odd‐numbered SCs [Cliver et al., 1996]. Studies have shown that recurrent activity was stronger following even‐number maxima [Bumba and Hejna, 1991; Hapgood, 1993; Rangarajan, 1991] and prominent 27 day recurrent geomagnetic activity tends to persist longer during the decline of even‐numbered SCs than in odd‐numbered ones [Sargent, 1985, 1986]. If, as postulated, geomagnetic activity has an impact on the NAO and near surface climate, the 27 day recurrence events may have a detectable effect on the interannual and longer‐term variations of the NAO. Thus, a step toward examining such a possibility would be to examine whether or not the aa‐NAO relationship becomes more distinct during the declining phase of even‐numbered SCs.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2011JD015822

[JeffC]

Yay, kickstarted some excellent debate and info...keep it coming ladies and gents...

[Don]

On 05/10/2018 at 21:28, Gael_Force said:

This reminded me of something  @lorenzo posted a while back so went looking for a link.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2011JD015822

Thanks for the link.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

On 01/10/2018 at 00:36, cheeky_monkey said:

go and watch Gav's weather on youtube he has just posted a whole video looking at past solar minimum winters plus all the analogues for the winters just before and at true solar minimum

They are not comparable, we are entering a Grand Minima.....Schwabe minima have no bearing

 

BFTP

[JeffC]

10 hours ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

They are not comparable, we are entering a Grand Minima.....Schwabe minima have no bearing

 

BFTP

Glad you've restarted the discussion BFTP, I was about to go digging for it! 

Scientific opinion is divided regarding the grand minima theory, are there any specifics which bring you to the conclusion that this is a likelihood or is it an educated hunch? 

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

13 minutes ago, JeffC said:

Glad you've restarted the discussion BFTP, I was about to go digging for it! 

Scientific opinion is divided regarding the grand minima theory, are there any specifics which bring you to the conclusion that this is a likelihood or is it an educated hunch

Hi Jeff, of course we won’t know for sure until we go through it.  But for me there is plenty of evidence showing the effects......I think the division is mainly was it localised cooling eg Western Europe or more widespread and will current warming (if man made) override it or (if natural) will we see a reverse.  What is gaining rapid support is that the solar effect is getting a lot more attention.....and quite rightly so.

My view is we are at the precipice....winters to be more like 40s to 70s levels on step down one (from now) and step down 2 later in 2020s as we approach minima of 25 winters of Grand Minima standard “Dickensian style”.  I think Volcanic activity and major eruption to trigger second step down as I believe there is good statistical evidence of major eruptions during deep minima.  It is statistical so could be coincidental....but is a v good stat

BFTP

Edited October 21, 2018 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[jethro]

Morning all, given that one of the known impacts of a quiet sun upon our weather is to encourage long periods of one type of weather, whether it be hot/cold/wet/dry, couldn't it be argued that we're already seeing some impact from the current quieter than usual solar cycle? Let's face it, the summer we had and the current autumn isn't our usual mediocre weather.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

5 minutes ago, jethro said:

Morning all, given that one of the known impacts of a quiet sun upon our weather is to encourage long periods of one type of weather, whether it be hot/cold/wet/dry, couldn't it be argued that we're already seeing some impact from the current quieter than usual solar cycle? Let's face it, the summer we had and the current autumn isn't our usual mediocre weather.

Yes indeed...I referred to this sometime long ago calling it ‘rut weather’ ie a pattern gets stuck in a rut.  Yes LIA circulation pattern is imo taking firmer and firmer hold, jetstream becoming ever more meridional. See my sig...LIA footprint

 

BFTP