An interesting tidbit from the Australian Antarctic Division (h/t to Trevor Gunter)
Scientists have long searched for linkages between solar variability and weather. The sun varies on a wide-range of time scales, most dramatically on an ~11 year cycle which is strongly associated with the number and extent of sunspots on the sun and the occurrence of aurora at high latitudes. While correlations of weather and solar variability have been reported, often-times to disappear when further measurements become available, no viable mechanism for the strongest associations has been confirmed. One difficulty is that the variable solar energy, despite sunspots and aurora being spectacular, is but a small fraction of 1% of the total solar energy. Any mechanism for changing weather and climate by solar variability must involve influencing the distribution of the energy within the weather system. One possible mechanism is via the Earth’s geoelectric field.
Thunderclouds separate electric charge with positive charges accumulating in the upper reaches of the cloud and negative charges near its base. The lightning generated drags current from the Earth and, perhaps counter-intuitively, it is easier for this current to return to the Earth in a less dramatic fashion via the 99% of the Earth not covered by thunderstorms at any particular time. Currents preferentially travel along lines of least resistance. At altitudes above ~90 km, the Earth’s atmosphere contains a sufficient density of free electrons for a global equipotential to be largely maintained. The Earth’s surface is another global equipotential. Conductivity in the region of the atmosphere between these boundaries generally increases with altitude, and is dominantly maintained by ionising radiation from cosmic rays. The variation in conductivity in the atmosphere is such that the path of least resistance at an altitude greater than ~5 km is via the ionosphere, where it may spread globally and return to ground via the global ‘fair-weather’ field.
Global thunderstorms maintain the lowest reaches of the ionosphere at a potential of ~250 kV with respect to the ground. This results in a very weak atmospheric current (3 pico-amps per meter squared) toward the Earth in the fair-weather regions of the globe, and near the ground maintains a substantive vertical electric field of some 100 volts per meter. Cosmic ray ionisation, the magnitude of which can be controlled by solar activity via the solar wind, modulates the resistance of this global electric circuit in which thunderstorms are the generators. By controlling the ease with thunderstorms can dissipate current it is feasible that solar activity may modulate the intensity of thunderstorm development, thus modulating the distribution of energy within the meteorological system.
High, dry regions with no thunderstorms, such as the Antarctic plateau, are ideal for monitoring the global geoelectric circuit. Additional solar influences on the geoelectric field occur at high latitudes, via the same processes that generate the aurora. In conjunction with Russian and American colleagues, we presently measure the geoelectric field at the Russian station, Vostok, on the Antarctic plateau. We have shown that solar variability can influence the geoelectric field measured at ground level in polar regions, and are continuing to develop research instrumentation and methods of testing the viability of a solar variability influence on weather and climate through modulation of the geoelectric circuit.
For more information, email: sas@aad.gov.au
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
On the subject of CERN and Svensmark, Jasper Kirby of CERN wrote a very good paper a year ago entitled “Cosmic Rays and Climate”. It is 44 pages on the solar influence on climate. There is plenty of evidence. It can be found at: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0804/0804.1938v1.pdf
We are due for a de Vries cycle cold event (210 year period) and a Bond event (1,470 year period). There is a good paper on the solar control of Alaskan glaciers at:
http://web.cortland.edu/barclayd/publications/GPC_2008.pdf
David Archibald (16:36:09) :
On the subject of CERN and Svensmark, Jasper Kirby of CERN […] There is plenty of evidence.
Kirby’s conclusion is:
“The question of whether, and to what extent, the climate is influenced by solar and cosmic ray variability remains central to our understanding of the anthropogenic contribution to present climate change. Real progress on the cosmic ray-climate question will require a physical mechanism to be established, or else ruled out.”
This honest assessment by Kirby is a far cry from ‘there is plenty of evidence’.
Leif Svalgaard (10:44:46) :
Ron de Haan (10:25:10) :
“Why don’t we wait for the outcome of this research. Who knows what they find out.
Fair enough.”
Except that proponents don’t seem to wait. And even if the SKY experiment turns out to work, does not mean that it works in the real atmosphere; so far the albedo measurements show that albedo does not track the solar cycle, so perhaps yet another mediator must be postulated. In the lab, I can get CO2 to absorb infrared light, does that prove AGW? .
The chaotic nature of climate has been discussed often enough here, so the concept of “albedo tracking the solar cycle” cannot be defended as such. “The solar cycle contributing to albedo ” might, and we would still need a chaotic model to see this.
It would be naive to expect any single input driver to be in one to one correspondence with long range climate changes as it is for for CO2. It is a synergy that is being played out.
In any case the albedo measured by Palle et al covers a very small time frame for anybody to be able to conclude much, except that currently it is rising. Do you have other data? Have you seen any current measurements?
anna v (00:19:39) :
In any case the albedo measured by Palle et al covers a very small time frame for anybody to be able to conclude much, except that currently it is rising. Do you have other data? Have you seen any current measurements?
Not yet. They are busy reducing their latest measurements. I can’t wait.
“Have you seen any current measurements?”
Big Bear updated their site in the last year. A little graphic compares curves of Earthchine and the ISCCP project.
http://www.bbso.njit.edu/Research/EarthShine/
ISCCP results are running higher than Palle’s but are considered ‘broadly in agreement’.
I don’t know about the deep thinkers but 2% increase in cloud cover seems like it might just be a significant player. I wonder what the noctilucent cloud contribution might be.
“Kirby’s conclusion is:”
Why, standard boilerplate in publicly funded research; suitable for the opening paragraph of the ‘current’ study as well as motivation for ‘further research’ as a concluding remark.
This says nothing whatever about any evidence presented in the paper. One might have presented results or have simply outlined a funded proposal.
gary gulrud (09:11:24) :
Thanks
ISCCP results are running higher than Palle’s but are considered ‘broadly in agreement’.
I don’t know about the deep thinkers but 2% increase in cloud cover seems like it might just be a significant player. I wonder what the noctilucent cloud contribution might be.
go to http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/Earth_temp.html
and change the albedo by 2% to see the effect in the toy model. It is a 0.64C change in global temperature.
gary gulrud (09:29:06) :
One might have presented results or have simply outlined a funded proposal.
Before wasting everybody’s mental bandwidth, go read the article and find out…
I have only caught up with this discussion now.
A good way into the vast literature on the phenomena being researched by the Australia’s Antartic Divison is the university web page of Brian Tinsley, Professor of Physics at the University of Texas Dallas
here http://www.utdallas.edu/nsm/physics/faculty/tinsley.html
Here’s a quote from it:
“About half of the global warming over the past century can be accounted for by changes in the sun and the solar wind, and there are well documented correlations of climate during past millennia with cosmic ray flux changes. These can be understood in terms of electrical interactions between cloud droplets and aerosol particles responding to solar wind-induced changes in atmospheric ionization and in the latitude distribution of Jz, as discussed above.
In a recent collaboration with Dr. Gary Burns of the Australian Antarctic Division we have confirmed with high statistical significance small changes in Antarctic surface pressure with small solar wind-induced changes in Jz, which are consistent with our hypothesized effects on Jz on cloud cover. In the Arctic the Jz changes are of opposite sign, as are the correlated pressure changes. Further, there are pressure changes that correlate with Jz changes due to changes in the current output of low-latitude thunderstorm generators, that have the same sign in the Arctic as in the Antarctic, as expected from theory. The implication is that global changes in Jz produce global changes in suitable types of clouds, and in some cases changes in precipitation.”
Have in mind when considering the question “Does the Sun affect Climate?” that it is necessary to consider all of the ways in which solar activity impacts climate: the Sun’s gravitational and electromagnetic fields, the Sun’s plasma output and the Sun’s radiation output.
The interaction effects between these classes of variables can be highly significant, sometimes amplyfying , sometimes damping each other. It is no good just considering any one class of these variables eg radiation , plasma, in isolation from the others and in without regard to interaction effects amongst them all. In addition, there is, of course, the climate periodicities that arise from phase synchronisation between the several large atmospheric/oceanic oscillations which are, afterall, the proximal cause of the Earth’s climate dynamics.
“go read the article and find out…”
That’s right Leif, I did inorder that our friends here did not have to waste their time.
Richard Mackey (01:11:26) “Have in mind when considering the question “Does the Sun affect Climate?” that it is necessary to consider all of the ways in which solar activity impacts climate […] interaction effects […] phase […]”
A refreshing deviation from the pervasively-malicious, strictly-narrow linear-view that is undermining the sustainable defense of civilization – thank you Richard for sharing your grip on paradox.