NASA announced that a massive solar flare that erupted Sunday should strike Earth some time tonite in the early AM hours (Correction, has struck Earth, details follow).
“This eruption is directed right at us and is expected to get here early in the day on Aug. 4,” said Leon Golub of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. “It’s the first major Earth-directed eruption in quite some time.”
The solar eruption, called a coronal mass ejection, was spotted by NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory, which captures high-definition views of the sun at a variety of wavelengths. SDO was launched in February and peers deep into the layers of the sun, investigating the mysteries of its inner workings.
“We got a beautiful view of this eruption,” Golub said. “And there might be more beautiful views to come if it triggers aurorae.”
When a coronal mass ejection strikes Earth, solar plasma streams down the lines of force in Earth’s electromagnetic field, striking the upper atmosphere, where oxygen and nitrogen molecules become excited like the gas in neon signs, becoming aurorae, and triggering geomagnetic storms. Depending on the strength of the CME, aurorae can grow in size and brightness from the polar regions down to more temperate latitudes.
NASA and satellite manufacturers, however, are far more worried about damage to orbiting satellites.
The interwebs is coming alive with the first major solar storm of SC24. After remaining dormant since 2006, the Sun is finally coming alive.
UPDATE:
WATCH VIDEO: A solar eruption sends a wave of plasma hurtling towards Earth on August 1st, 2010. The event was captured by NASA satellites
Proton flux and magnetometer readings are showing beautiful spikes:
The Kp index has hit a 6 on its 0 to 9 scale. Based on this early data, this is classed as a moderate solar storm, not a major one as NASA and NOAA had earlier announced. There is minimal risk of damage to satellites.
UPDATE 2: WUWT commenter R. Gates notes that the Moscow Neutron Monitor is showing a huge drop in cosmic rays coincident with this CME, which is what you’d expect.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
There are some more rumblings…
http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/
GVP Weekly Volcanic Activity Report for July 28-August 3, 2010
A new Weekly Volcanic Activity Report from the Smithsonian and USGS Global Volcanism Program! Highlights from this week’s report include:
• Things are getting a little noisy in Colombia. I mentioned a few weeks ago about a possible explosion at Nevado del Ruiz. Now we have reports of increased seismicity under nearby Cerro Machín and ash plumes from Nevado del Huila. After a few centuries of relative quiet, it looks like the volcanoes of the Colombian Andes are looking more lively.
• Also in South America, a gas plume was spotted at Chile’s Planchon-Peteroa. This is the second time this year that increased gas emissions have been noted at the volcano that hasn’t erupted since 1998.
• Shiveluch on the Kamchatka Peninsula in Russia continues to rumble – ash plumes were produced from pyroclastic flows and steam-and-gas plumes reaching 4 km / ~13,100 feet were spotted as well.
This could be really bad, this thing is BIG, really BIG. Its not predicted to erupt real soon, but they think it might within the next 50 years.
Scientists predicting Elbrus eruption: Voice of Russia
http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/08/02/14236033.html
Erik’s comments:
Active volcanism in the Caucasus Mountains
http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/2010/08/active_volcanism_in_the_caucas.php
I’ve looked for further info on this large volcano and found almost nothing. Deepening solar minimums and volcano’s make me a little nervous, sorry.
Gail is correct, there are five Russian ones on yellow and orange alert.
radun says:
August 5, 2010 at 3:05 pm
Your video map cannot therefore be a reliable reference for assessment of Vuk’s correlation!
Thanks to the miracle of Google Earth, we can visualize the intensity map of the Arctic at the surface and even read off the actual values. Here are 1000 AD and 1950 AD:
http://www.leif.org/research/Geo-Br-1000-1950-GE.png
The little smiley shows the Denmark Strait.
One can read off the data every 50 years, and plot the result:
http://www.leif.org/research/GEO-F-CALS7K.png
The red cicles shows the GUFM 1590-1995 model results.
As you can see, the ‘correlation’ breaks down for earlier times. This should put this issue to bed for good.
1) there is enough data to reconstruct intensity
2) the intensity [or Z which is virtual identical to the intensity in the Arctic because of the field being nearly vertical] does not correlate neither with solar activity nor with temperatures.
Leif Svalgaard says: August 5, 2010 at 11:14 pm
…………………
You are graph is wrong! It is at odds with Z values calculated by Zurich database. It shows steep decline 1500-2000, which is not correct. Further more resolution of your map is far too low to make any sensible conclusion either way. Colour maps may be pretty (in this case even that is doubtful), numbers are required to prove or disprove the case.
Initially you need to produce numbers for the last 400 years, to see that there is a good agreement between databases, which it is not, so prior to 1600 could be only a at best speculative and unreliable estimate.
Your task is to bring down correlation for which we have data, not to base your case on speculative estimates for era of no data available!
Last 400 years is good enough to establish good base to start from for considering the present and near future, but it should be noted I did not make any claims for period before 1600.
You also contradict yourself about 10B proxy accuracy, and now numbers there either.
No bona fide numbers, NO contest.
Correlation as shown in my work is still unquestionable!
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC1.htm
I do not whish to spend any more time on your futile attempts to use questionable distant past to bring down the unquestionable most recent one.
See you another time another place.
Leif Svalgaard says: August 5, 2010 at 11:14 pm
“Thanks to the miracle of Google Earth, we can visualize the intensity map of the Arctic at the surface and even read off the actual values. Here are 1000 AD and 1950 AD:”
There is a serious doubt about what you claim can be taken seriously:
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=userrecentposts&user=radun
Leif Svalgaard says: August 5, 2010 at 3:37 pm
Here is how to calculate the field at any point:
http://www.leif.org/research/CALS7K.txt
the data file is here http://earthref.org/cgi-bin/er.cgi?s=erda.cgi?n=413
Your CALS7K data base is no good. Here is plot at 5 year resolution for the known period 1600-1950.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/G-C.htm
The model is so BAD even for the years where there is a solid and reliable record.
So I take it the big storm was abig bust; I didn’t notice anything much hitting my house and I waited all day.
Vuk etc. says:
August 6, 2010 at 11:41 am
Your CALS7K data base is no good. Here is plot at 5 year resolution for the known period 1600-1950. The model is so BAD even for the years where there is a solid and reliable record.
The CALS7K is an update of GUFM1 and supersedes it, so any disagreement is due to defects in the earlier model.
But you would not be the first to prefer an old, obsolete data set because it ‘fits better’.
To repeat: there are NO measurements in the Arctic before 1882. All is based on paleomagnetic intensities [which are not bad]. The CALS7K incorporates much more data that the obsolete GUFM1, so is the best data we have, produced by the foremost experts in the field [Monika Korte (Potsdam) and Cathy Constable]. I know both and they don’t come any better.
You cannot be serious! I know you are joking, since CALSK database is a joke.
London has one of the most accurate magnetic records of 20th century.
Strange that CALSK data base stops at 1950 ?! Perhaps your friends think we due for a magnetic reversal ?
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/L-GMFz.gif
vukcevic etc. says:
August 7, 2010 at 1:17 am
You cannot be serious! I know you are joking, since CALSK database is a joke.
Of course, I’m serious. The CALS7K2 data base is state-of-the-art, the best we have of the geomagnetic field in the past, e.g. before 1882 when there were NO intensity measurements in the Arctic whatsoever. CALS7K2 is not meant as a description of the small-scale features of the field today.
Next time one of these storms applies for my attention I’m going to demand a pretty good resume before they get the position. I’m sick of these endless disappointments.
In other words, I’d say the Age of Chicken Little is becoming a crashing bore.
6 level 2 (orange) and 14 level 1 (yellow) alerts in Indonesia.
http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/
But…
I’ve just done a lot of looking at past eruptions compared to solar cycles and it doesn’t look like we should expect as many larger eruptions during this ramp up from minimum as we had on the ramp down. For example we had VEI-4’s CHAITEN, OKMOK, KASATOCHI,
REDOUBT, SARYCHEV PEAK in 2008-2009.
You just never know, this was a deeper, longer minimum.
Looking at cycle 20, which is what I think we’ll get out of cycle 24, though a more elongated 20, the volcanism wasn’t real bad. A cluster of VEI-4’s around the minimums before and after cycle 20. The eruptions after 20 made it cold and snowy as we remember. But it could have been a lot worse if there had been a VEI-5 and/or 6 thrown in.
It is very interesting that the VEI-5’s and 6’s of the 1900’s seem more clustered around the ramp down of larger cycles like 18-19 and 21-22. Working just like a big ‘ol thermostat for Planet Earth.
I’m going to quit worrying about it so much.