I’ve mentioned this solar data on WUWT several times, it bears repeating again. Yesterday, NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center released their latest data and graph of the interplanetary geomagnetic index (Ap) which is a proxy for the activity of the solar dynamo. Here is the data provided by SWPC. Note the graph, which I’ve annotated below.
At a time when many predicted a ramp up in solar activity, the sun remains in a funk, spotless and quiet. The Ap value, for the second straight month, is “3”. The blue line showing the smoothed value, suggests the trend continues downward. To get an idea of how significant this is in our history, take a look at this data (graph produced by me) from Dr. Leif Svalgaard back to the 1930’s.
The step change in October 2005 is still visible and the value of 3.9 that occurred in April of this year is the lowest for the entire dataset at that time. I’m hoping Dr. Svalgaard will have updated data for us soon.
Click for a larger image
Why is this important? Well, if Svensmark is right, and Galactic Cosmic Rays modulated by the sun’s magnetic field make a change in cloud cover on Earth, increasing it during low solar magnetic activity, we are in for some colder times.
There’s a presentation by Jasper Kirkby, CLOUD Spokesperson, CERN, which shows what we currently know about the correlations between Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCR’s) and variations in the climate.
The CLOUD experiment uses a cloud chamber to study the theorized link between GCR’s and cloud formation in Earth’s atmosphere. Kirkby talks about the results from the first CLOUD experiment and the new CLOUD experiment and what it will deliver on the intrinsic connection between GCR’s and cloud formation. This is from the Cern, one of Europe’s most highly respected centers for scientific research.
Kirkby’s one hour video presentation is hosted here. It is well worth your time to view it.
h/t to Russ Steele
Sponsored IT training links:
Guaranteed success in SY0-201 exam with help of N10-004 practice test and up to date 70-640 exam dumps.
Now if only they would divert 1/100th of the dough being thrown away on dendro, we’d actually be onto something relating to climate.
Great read. Thanks
Updated 2009 Dec 08 2201 UTC
Joint USAF/NOAA Report of Solar and Geophysical Activity
SDF Number 342 Issued at 2200Z on 08 Dec 2009
Analysis of Solar Active Regions and Activity from 07/2100Z to 08/2100Z: Solar activity was very low. No flares occurred during the past 24 hours. The solar disk was void of sunspots.
Solar Activity Forecast: Solar activity is expected to be very low.
Geophysical Activity Summary 07/2100Z to 08/2100Z: The geomagnetic field was quiet.
Geophysical Activity Forecast: The geomagnetic field is expected to be quiet for the next three days (09-11 December).
http://www.solarcycle24.com/
After an Un.God.Ly hot summer in Tx, we’re all freezing our noogies off this December. If the trend continues, mid-January will be incredibly cold.
OOooooOOoooh. Goreble warming! More weather extremes! The sky is falling!
Cold ahead with a warming tax!
Thank you WUWT, for doing the Lord’s work. You and Blankfein at Goldman. LOL.
Unfortunately, looking at that graph, I feel colder already.
Massive blizzard, colder than normal temps here today in Iowa. But it’s only weather, not climate.
Would it be possible for the solar geomagnetic activity to affect the dynamo inside the earth by interacting with its magnetic field? Could it be possible that this reduced magnetic interaction be responsible for the increased tectonic activity during solar minimum? Is it just possible that a weaker interaction between the two magnetic fields could have the interior of the earth cool down slightly and this cooling would be responsible for the increased tectonic activity, because of a small volume change due to cooling?
I can see something is low but what exactly is ap and index of?
REPLY: more on the Ap index here http://www.nwra.com/spawx/ap.html
Anthony,
In the last couple of years now the tempratures seems fairly stable and I kind of expected them start dropping visibly.
What is the expected lag between this reduced sun activity and until we actually get lower temps?
Looks like two simultaneous experiments – one tiny one called CLOUD and another much larger one.
Oh Crap! Now I’ll have glacier-side property!
Journalists: check the official solar predictions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SSN_Predict_SWPC.gif
Do you still rely on model predictions? You see, the solar cycle is way out of sync, extremely strange! I would expect a similar temperature drop the start of this century exactly as we saw in the start of the previous century when Titanic unfortunately hit the ice berg. If we go Maunder, our civilisation may hit an “ice berg” too…
Is it an all time low, or merely the lowest on record. Either way it allows for an interesting opportunity to disconfirm Svensmark’s hypothesis. But let’s not lapse into warmist type hyperbole and confirmation bias.
That said I do worry it might be about to get a lot colder, and we are just not preparing for that scenario.
Apparent Siberian blast set to strike Copenhagen and the Climate-Change summit
http://www.iceagenow.com/Siberian_Blast_about_to_hit_Europe_and_The_Summit.htm
If this actually happens there will be some incredible irony as they wrap things up.
Thanks for the update!. Really chilling, as “The chilling stars”. This is real, all the rest, copenhagen etc. is forgettable monkey business.
I take it that these two graphs are supposed to be plots of the same basic data but with different time resolutions, so the top one is a more smoothed version of what really looks like the bottom one.
Also I take it this data is Solely a property of the sun and its environs, at least as observed from earth; in other words, it is not subject to modifications by earth events (but may be a causal factor in those earth events.
That is pretty dramatic (to me anyway) change in something that we tend to think of as relatively immutable.
We sure are living in interesting times. I’m eager to see what Dr Svalgaard has to tell us about this ongoing decline; just don’t try “Mike’s Trick” on us Leif, we are up on that now.
Even a prolonged period of cooling will not put off the True Believers. They’ll just say that a cool sun is masking a runaway warming trend that’s all our fault, and it’ll shoot off again just as soon as the Scottish and Northern English ice-cap melts.
George E. Smith (11:01:23) :
Makes you wonder what the “Solar Constant” really means…
Anthony –
First – another big thank you for your work, most especially on the emails material and on the Darwin temperature record (when you add that to the Swedish professor’s comments on Fennoscandinavia I raises huge questions over the reality of global warming in the past 50 years).
However, in relation to the low AP, cosmic rays and climate – I have some comments:
* Svensmark and colleagues seem to have abandoned their work on cloud correlations in favour of cloud chambers – which is a shame – both are necessary, but the latter locks up all that expertise for several years underground, when just a fraction of the CERN millions would provide for a better surveillance of the satellite record on clouds and correlations with GCR flux;
* That correlative work was getting difficult after cycle 22 and was harder to establish for cycle 23 – we still don’t know why. In my own survey (reported in ‘Chill’) there seems to have been a break point around 2001 when cloud cover increased by 2% globally after falling by 4% over the period 1980-2000 (and allowing extra sunlight to the ocean – quite enough to drive all the late 20th century warming);
* GCR are not the only relevant factor related to a low AP – during the Little Ice Age/Maunder Minimum, there is evidence that the jetstream shifted southward, and Drew Shindell at NASA was working on correlations of the solar wind and UV-induced chemistry in the upper atmosphere to changes in the polar vortex which then affected the jetstream.
* the jetstream redistributes cloud cover – and a spatial change can be just as important as a percentage change – it also directs the vortices that suck heat out of the oceans upper waters and then dump it on land.
I suspect that when the AP low for several decades, the shifts noted above lead to a gradual cooling down of the planet – especially in the northern hemisphere where the oceans store heat at depth – and then as the AP recovers, so do the oceans, but slowly – as in ‘recovery from the LIA’ and the upward trend of the last 150 years.
Would love to get some feedback on this supposition. Leif did tell me he thought Shindell abandoned the work because of changes to the solar proxy – but that did not make a lot of sense, since it is the AP we are discussing, and the recent pattern would tell us that when sunspots disappear, the AP is low – as also does the be-10 and c-14 record (which Leif doesn’t trust either!). So – lots to discuss.
Oh! Hide the decline!!!!
The top graphs starts in 2000 the bottom graph in 1930 so they are different time series.
REPLY: Yes, so? This is clearly identified in the body of the post. Both are valid. – A
[snip – thread bombing]
Amir Netz (10:57:21): What is the expected lag between this reduced sun activity and until we actually get lower temps?
Possibly in the range from 3 to 9 years. Stephen E. Schwartz has estimated the characteristic time constant for our planet to be 8.5 years
http://www.ecd.bnl.gov/steve/pubs/HeatCapacity.pdf
Natural ocean cycles may “hide the decline” though… 🙂
I don’t really see any correlation with temperature. It was very warm in the late 90’s when the solar index was very low (yes due to El Nino, but still), and temperatures didn’t budge in the 2000’s when the solar index was very high. So why do we think we are in for a cold spell now?
You’ve just exposed my trump card that I was going to use on those AGW’ers.
“That said I do worry it might be about to get a lot colder, and we are just not preparing for that scenario.”
Therein–since Al’s quoting Shakespeare today–lies the rub, and you’ve put your finger right on the sore spot. Those who fail to plan for the future are less likely to have a satisfactory one.