AGU: Link found between cold European winters and solar activity

“Skaters can only do this race every 10 or 11 years because that’s when the rivers freeze up,” Sirocko said. “I thought to myself, ‘There must be a reason for this,’ and it turns out there is.”

Skaters take to frozen-over canals in the Netherlands in Feb. 2012. (Credit: De Vries)
From the American Geophysical Union

WASHINGTON – Scientists have long suspected that the Sun’s 11-year cycle influences climate of certain regions on Earth. Yet records of average, seasonal temperatures do not date back far enough to confirm any patterns. Now, armed with a unique proxy, an international team of researchers show that unusually cold winters in Central Europe are related to low solar activity – when sunspot numbers are minimal. The freezing of Germany’s largest river, the Rhine, is the key.

Although the Earth’s surface overall continues to warm, the new analysis has revealed a correlation between periods of low activity of the Sun and of some cooling – on a limited, regional scale in Central Europe, along the Rhine.

“The advantage with studying the Rhine is because it’s a very simple measurement,” said Frank Sirocko lead author of a paper on the study and professor of Sedimentology and Paleoclimatology at the Institute of Geosciences of Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany. “Freezing is special in that it’s like an on-off mode. Either there is ice or there is no ice.”

From the early 19th through mid-20th centuries, riverboat men used the Rhine for cargo transport. And so docks along the river have annual records of when ice clogged the waterway and stymied shipping. The scientists used these easily-accessible documents, as well as additional historical accounts, to determine the number of freezing episodes since 1780.

Sirocko and his colleagues found that between 1780 and 1963, the Rhine froze in multiple places 14 different times. The sheer size of the river means it takes extremely cold temperatures to freeze over making freezing episodes a good proxy for very cold winters in the region, Sirocko said.

Mapping the freezing episodes against the solar activity’s 11-year cycle – a cycle of the Sun’s varying magnetic strength and thus total radiation output – Sirocko and his colleagues determined that ten of the fourteen freezes occurred during years around when the Sun had minimal sunspots. Using statistical methods, the scientists calculated that there is a 99 percent chance that extremely cold Central European winters and low solar activity are inherently linked.

“We provide, for the first time, statistically robust evidence that the succession of cold winters during the last 230 years in Central Europe has a common cause,” Sirocko said.

With the new paper, Sirocko and his colleagues have added to the research linking solar variability with climate, said Thomas Crowley, Director of the Scottish Alliance for Geoscience, Environment, and Society, who was not involved with the study.

“There is some suspension of belief in this link,” Crowley said, “and this study tilts the argument more towards thinking there really is something to this link. If you have more statistical evidence to support this explanation, one is more likely to say it’s true.”

The study, conducted by researchers at Johannes Gutenberg and the Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science in Zurich, Switzerland, is set to be published August 25 in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union.

When sunspot numbers are down, the Sun emits less ultraviolet radiation. Less radiation means less heating of Earth’s atmosphere, which sparks a change in the circulation patterns of the two lowest atmospheric levels, the troposphere and stratosphere. Such changes lead to climatic phenomena such as the North Atlantic Oscillation, a pattern of atmospheric pressure variations that influences wind patterns in the North Atlantic and weather behavior in regions in and around Europe.

“Due to this indirect effect, the solar cycle does not impact hemispherically averaged temperatures, but only leads to regional temperature anomalies,” said Stephan Pfahl, a co-author of the study who is now at the Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science in Zurich.

The authors show that this change in atmospheric circulation leads to cooling in parts of Central Europe but warming in other European countries, such as Iceland. So, sunspots don’t necessarily cool the entire globe – their cooling effect is more localized, Sirocko said.

In fact, studies have suggested that the extremely cold European winters of 2010 and 2011 were the result of the North Atlantic Oscillation, which Sirocko and his team now link to the low solar activity during that time.

The 2010 and 2011 European winters were so cold that they resulted in record lows for the month of November in certain countries. Some who dispute the occurrence of anthropogenic climate change argue that this two-year period shows that Earth’s climate is not getting any warmer. But climate is a complex system, Sirocko said. And a short-term, localized dip in temperatures only temporarily masks the effects of a warming world.

“Climate is not ruled by one variable,” said Sirocko. “In fact, it has [at least] five or six variables. Carbon dioxide is certainly one, but solar activity is also one.”

Moreover, the researchers also point out that, despite Central Europe’s prospect to suffer colder winters every 11 years or so, the average temperature of those winters is increasing and has been for the past three decades. As one piece of evidence of that warming, the Rhine River has not frozen over since 1963. Sirocko said such warming results, in part, from climate change.

To establish a more complete record of past temperature dips, the researchers are looking to other proxies, such as the spread of disease and migratory habits.

“Disease can be transported by insects and rats, but during a strong freezing year that is not likely,” said Sirocko. “Also, Romans used the Rhine to defend against the Germanics, but as soon as the river froze people could move across it. The freezing of the Rhine is very important on historical timescales.”

It wasn’t, however, the Rhine that first got Sirocko to thinking about the connection between freezing rivers and sunspot activity. In fact, it was a 125-mile ice-skating race he attended over 20 years ago in the Netherlands that sparked the scientist’s idea.

“Skaters can only do this race every 10 or 11 years because that’s when the rivers freeze up,” Sirocko said. “I thought to myself, ‘There must be a reason for this,’ and it turns out there is.”

###

Title:

“Solar influence on winter severity in central Europe”

Abstract:

The last two winters in central Europe were unusually cold in comparison to the years before. Meteorological data, mainly from the last 50 years, and modelling studies have suggested that both solar activity and El Niño strength may influence such central European winter coldness. To investigate the mechanisms behind this in a statistically robust way and to test which of the two factors was more important during the last 230 years back into the Little Ice Age, we use historical reports of freezing of the river Rhine. The historical data show that 10 of the 14 freeze years occurred close to sunspot minima and only one during a year of moderate El Niño. This solar influence is underpinned by corresponding atmospheric circulation anomalies in reanalysis data covering the

period 1871 to 2008. Accordingly, weak solar activity is empirically related to extremely cold winter conditions in Europe also on such long time scales. This relationship still holds today, however the average winter temperatures have been rising during the last decades.

Authors:

Frank Sirocko and Heiko Brunck: Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz;

Stephan Pfahl: Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science, ETH Zurich, Switzerland.

==============================================================

I hope to have a copy of the paper soon – Anthony

UPDATE: Dr. Leif Svalgaard provides the paper, as did the AGU press agent Kate Ramsayer per my emailed request, along with a copyright admonishment. Thank you both. Figure 6a and 6b are interesting:

From the paper:

In agreement with the 20th Century Reanalysis central European temperature observations from the CRUTEM3 dataset [Brohan et al., 2006] from winters directly following a sunspot minimum are also significantly lower than the average temperature during the remaining winter seasons (Fig. 6a). The relation between cold winter conditions and sunspot activity is thus not specific to rivers alone (which could also be affected by a number of additional factors, for example warm water from the numerous powerplants constructed along the river). The strong variations of the time series in Fig. 6a, which are largely independent of the sunspot cycle, show the important role of internal, stochastic variability of the atmosphere for European winter temperatures. The relation shown above holds true only for central European temperatures. When the CRUTEM3 winter temperature data are averaged over the whole Northern Hemisphere, no relation to the solar minima is found.

This suggests a regional circulation pattern effect, as the authors state connected to figure 5a and 5b:

To identify the atmospheric circulation anomalies in the North Atlantic and European region associated with cold winters during solar minima, Fig. 5a shows the difference in the geopotential height fields at 500 hPa (Z500) between the winters directly following a year with a sunspot minimum and the remainder of the period 1871 to 2008, obtained from the 20th Century Reanalysis dataset [Compo et al., 1996]. A strong, statistically significant positive anomaly occurs over the eastern North Atlantic in the region of Iceland, while negative anomalies are found over the Iberian peninsula and over north-eastern Europe (the latter being not significant). These Z500 anomalies are associated with an enhanced northerly flow and cold air advection from the Arctic and Scandinavia

towards central Europe, leading to significantly negative temperature anomalies over England, France and western Germany (Fig. 5b). The centre of the cooling is in the region of southern England, the Benelux countries and western Germany down to middle Rhine area. Eastern and southern Germany are not effected as much as the above region. Accordingly, it is only the Rhine and possible some Dutch rivers that provide the possibility to reconstruct this specific temperature anomaly pattern, which corresponds to an anomalously negative NAO and a preference for blockings over the eastern North Atlantic.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
308 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tim B
August 23, 2012 3:21 pm

What’s interesting to me is if this invalidates “gridding” the land and ocean as a measure of temperature. Is it inhomogeneous enough that temperature readings need a regression analysis for each grid zone?

David Archibald
August 23, 2012 3:24 pm

Livingstone and Penn have forecast a peak amplitude of 7 for Solar Cycle 25, which compared to what we are used to would be like permanent solar minimum. Don’t worry about the heat sources keeping the Rhine warmer – the river has a large surface area.

Jim G
August 23, 2012 3:27 pm

Leif Svalgaard
August 23, 2012 at 11:34 am
MarkW says:
August 23, 2012 at 11:24 am
Thermal lag does not necessarily apply in that case.
“I note the weasel word ‘necessarily’. Either it does or it doesn’t”
I will ask the question again. The topic was thermal lag. Why is it not possible for thermal lag to show in the data during one time period and not in another when there are potential exogenous variables intervening in one period and not in another? Do you know for a fact that no other variables were involved in each period?

Mooloo
August 23, 2012 3:48 pm

I believe the Rhine has been straightened over the recent past (canals built, floodbanks etc) so that it flows faster than it used to. That would have a serious effect on freezing.

James from Arding
August 23, 2012 4:16 pm

Jim G says:
August 23, 2012 at 3:01 pm
LOL
Last word eh?
Please keep it up you blokes… At least the discourse is civil and very often I learn something more while having a quiet chuckle at the same time.

Bruce of Newcastle
August 23, 2012 4:36 pm

I’m reminded of Prof Mike Lockwood’s comments a couple years ago: low solar activity correlates with increased jet stream blocking.
We’ve been having a lot of this lately. Slowed progression of Rossby waves gives hot and cold extremes. The trouble is the climate change(TM) meme is that CO2 causes this. No, its a natural effect of the Sun.
Perhaps we can expect even more of this if sunspots go away completely.

August 23, 2012 5:40 pm

Stephen Wilde – I greatly respect your professional approach and keep up the good information. I can’t recall a single incident of you “overreacting”.

August 23, 2012 5:50 pm

Jim G says:
August 23, 2012 at 3:27 pm
I will ask the question again.
The question didn’t make sense the first time, nor the second, and still won’t the third.

DR
August 23, 2012 6:13 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
August 23, 2012 at 9:49 am
When one points out that a correlation between solar activity and weather/climate is poor, there is a persistent chorus of people crying “yeah, but you must take into account the lags in the system caused by the thermal inertia of the oceans”. Where is that lag here?

When a scientist points out that a correlation between solar activity and weather/climate is good, there is a persistent droning of one person quick to smear that scientist.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/01/spot-the-science-error/
http://ks.water.usgs.gov/waterdata/climate/

Mervyn
August 23, 2012 6:57 pm

“Climate is not ruled by one variable,” said Sirocko. “In fact, it has [at least] five or six variables. Carbon dioxide is certainly one…”
Why do I think this comment has been made in order to please the catastrophic man-made global warming alarmists?
I think there is enough empirical evidence that has demonstrated carbon dioxide has not driven climate change or global warming in past millennia and, contrary to the IPCC’s claim, that the key underlying driver of climate change is indeed the sun.
To date, the most convincing empirical evidence of the key drivers of climate change that has been suggested, in my opinion, is that put forward by Henrik Svensmark. To this day, I have yet to see a serious critique of Svenson’s work. Even Dr Jasper Kirkby’s CLOUD experiment lends weight to the validity of Svensmark’s theory.

Pamela Gray
August 23, 2012 7:07 pm

I love this old description of blocking highs. Reading it will leave one with the impression that powerful intrinsic forces are at play. Puny changes in various solar indices and teeny increases in anthropogenic CO2 cannot match the grand march of pressure systems, either to keep them going, or to stall them. Enjoy the complete absence of references to human induced change on extreme weather events.
http://authors.library.caltech.edu/11172/1/ELLjas49.pdf

August 23, 2012 7:24 pm

DR says:
August 23, 2012 at 6:13 pm
“Where is that lag here?”
When a scientist points out that a correlation between solar activity and weather/climate is good

With a very misleading Figure and a implausible lag for the detailed correlation, some complaint seemed justified. Judge for yourself: http://ks.water.usgs.gov/waterdata/climate/

August 23, 2012 8:09 pm

Mervyn says:
August 23, 2012 at 6:57 pm
To date, the most convincing empirical evidence of the key drivers of climate change that has been suggested, in my opinion, is that put forward by Henrik Svensmark. To this day, I have yet to see a serious critique of Svenson’s work.
Then read this and weep:
http://www.purdue.edu/discoverypark/climate/assets/pdfs/Relationship%20of%20Lower-Troposphere%20Cloud%20Cover%20and%20Cosmic%20Rays_%20An%20Updated%20Perspective.pdf

August 23, 2012 8:19 pm

Another paper to add to the growing list that supports changes to atmospheric circulation as a direct result of solar UV changes. I will add it to my list of growing evidence that can be fount at:
http://tinyurl.com/2dg9u22/?q=node/128
http://tinyurl.com/2dg9u22/?q=node/236
I keep a running record of the EUV values which shows the current levels to be not much higher than the SC22/23 minimum. This is how a solar grand minimum can have a longer term effect on circulation and pressure patterns across the globe, which we have witnessed for the last 3-4 years that will continue.
EUV is one form of UV measurement that can be used as a proxy for other UV wavelengths that all have a part to play in atmospheric change. The EUV graph and prediction for the next NH winter can be found at:
http://tinyurl.com/2dg9u22/?q=node/270

August 23, 2012 8:54 pm

Geoff Sharp says:
August 23, 2012 at 8:19 pm
EUV values which shows the current levels to be not much higher than the SC22/23 minimum. This is how a solar grand minimum can have a longer term effect on circulation and pressure patterns across the globe, which we have witnessed for the last 3-4 years that will continue.
“Mg II emission is frequently used as a proxy for spectral solar irradiance variability from the UV to EUV associated with the 11-yr solar cycle (22-yr magnetic cycle) and solar rotation (27d).”
http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de/gome/gomemgii.html
And does not show anything out of the ordinary. Its value now is consistent with the current sunspot number. My own analysis revealed a glitch on January 1st, 2002, but after correction, the index again shows nothing special going on, and a good match to F10.7 which is also a good proxy for EUV.

August 23, 2012 9:17 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
August 23, 2012 at 8:54 pm
Geoff Sharp says:
August 23, 2012 at 8:19 pm
EUV values which shows the current levels to be not much higher than the SC22/23 minimum.
http://www.spacewx.com/About_MgII.html
“Mg II […] describes the solar EUV variability that directly affects the Earth’s thermospheric density”
And does not show anything out of the ordinary. Its value now is consistent with the current sunspot number, which is getting close to the predicted 70 for SC24. Hardly a Grand Minimum [yet].

Gail Combs
August 23, 2012 10:35 pm

Leif said:
“As far as UV and solar wind were concerned, the cycles in the middle of the 19th century were similar to the last 5 cycles. That is the important piece. Now, if UV and solar wind have nothing to do with the climate, I agree that this is irrelevant.”
____________________________
Stephen Wilde says: August 23, 2012 at 1:03 pm
Now you have shifted from comparing 1900 to 2012 to comparing the mid 19th century with the late 20th.
Well the late 20th was further along the solar induced recovery from the LIA and so for the same activity levels one would expect more warmth in the late 20th….
__________________________
This all reminds me of what Gerald Roe (and Henry P) stated about the Milancovitch cycles.

…. Gerard Roe realized a trivial mistake that had previously been done. And a similar mistake is being done by many people all the time – scientists as well as laymen; alarmists as well as skeptics. The problem is that people confuse functions and their derivatives; they say that something is “warm” even though they mean that it’s “getting warmer” or vice versa.
In this case, the basic correct observation is the following: If you suddenly get more sunshine near the Arctic circle, you don’t immediately change the ice volume. Instead, you increase the rate with which the ice volume is decreasing (ice is melting). Isn’t this comment trivial?
http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/07/in-defense-of-milankovitch-by-gerard.html

You are never going to get the same temperatures but you may get the same rate of change in the temperatures.
And I say “May” because the solar cycles are just one variable.The ocean oscillations/ENSO are going to be a big factor, Vukcevic/NASA point out another possible variable, the geomagnetic field + ozone, Svenmark points out another Cosmic Rays/clouds,
Dr. Nir J. Shaviv adds another twist to Svenmark’s theory

….most cosmic rays are accelerated in the vicinity of spiral arms. The solar system, however, has a much longer life span such that it periodically crosses the spiral arms of the Milky Way. Each time it does so, it should witness an elevated level of cosmic rays. In fact, the cosmic ray flux variations arising from our galactic journey are ten times larger than the cosmic ray flux variations due to solar activity modulations, at the energies responsible for the tropospheric ionization (of order 10 GeV). If the latter is responsible for a 1°K effect, spiral arm passages should be responsible for a 10°K effect—more than enough to change the state of earth from a hothouse, with temperate climates extending to the polar regions, to an icehouse, with ice-caps on its poles, as Earth is today. In fact, it is expected to be the most dominant climate driver on the 108 to 109 yr time scale….

Why anyone would think there is “A Control Knob” for the climate completely escapes me. If there was it would already be darn obvious by now.

August 23, 2012 11:23 pm

Gail Combs says:
August 23, 2012 at 10:35 pm
Why anyone would think there is “A Control Knob” for the climate completely escapes me. If there was it would already be darn obvious by now.
The problem is that all the pseudo experts peddling their various pet theories claim to have the whole truth and that their particular ‘mechanism’ is THE most important one, while in reality nobody has a clue.

August 23, 2012 11:23 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
August 23, 2012 at 8:54 pm
And does not show anything out of the ordinary….
Current EUV levels are around 1.4000E+10. The corresponding period of SC23 saw levels at least double this value.
The blinkers need to come off.

August 23, 2012 11:45 pm

Stephen Wilde says
Nothing in nature gives complete symmetry
Henry says
Well, I think my graphs actually do show symmetry, that was my point,
http://www.letterdash.com/henryp/global-cooling-is-here
and from this I can also conclude that my own data set is much more trustworthy than anything on the “market”. There are just too many “special interests” at stake.
They even put my pension fund money in that green energy that will never work. In the meantime, when they are all screaming “climate change” due to global warming, what is actually happening is a completely natural process where by temperatures on earth will drop by a bit until a certain time and then, only in 2045, it will start going up again…..
I would take a bet that that data in the past on the level of the nile coincides with the coldest periods in Europe being when the Nile was at its lowest level.
In fact, assuming my dataset is correct, we have already dropped by 0.2 degrees C globally since 2000 and it is now sliding further down, gathering up speed, as my plots show. Surely, by 2045 we will be back where we were in the winter of 1944. Some of us might be old enough to remember how cold it was then.
In fact, in certain places, like Kimberley (South Africa) and Anchorage (USA, Alaska) we have already dropped by about 1.5 degrees C on average since 2000. I did not check England due to climate gate (what can I trust?) but I did check Dublin for you. Dublin has fallen by o.5 degrees C on average since 2000.
Now, if it was me living in Anchorage, I would seriously start looking at my tables and move to a place where it is a bit warmer. Note that it is going to get colder still. More CO2 is not going to stop the “fall”.
Unfortunately. CO2 is just a red herring. It moves up with warming, due to warming, (since 1945, when CO2 recording began!) but it will soon start dropping.
A good scientist is recognised by his predictions coming true. But why not check my results? Anyone here is free to check my results, for example, on Anchorage. I could not believe my eyes when I saw it. I checked a 2nd station, just to be sure (because there were two weather stations in Anchorage with good records) . It was frightening, to me, as it does not at all follow the prediction of the warmists that the arctic is warming.
Or you can check Dublin, for that matter, if you live there.
Let me know if your results are different to mine.

August 24, 2012 12:59 am

@Henry P:
Trust the Garden as thermometer. The tomato never lies:
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/cold-alaska-summer-hurting-farmers-and-fresh-produce-lovers

Cold Alaska summer hurting farmers and fresh produce lovers
Suzanna Caldwell | Aug 06, 2012
Cold weather in Southcentral Alaska isn’t just affecting people’s moods. It’s seriously hurting vegetable crops in the Matanuska Susitna Valley, one of the state’s major farming regions.
Most crops are several weeks behind schedule, according to farmers, the result of a chilly spring and a summer that’s nearly breaking cold-temperature records.
Pyrah’s Pioneer Peak Farm, a popular pick-it-yourself destination near Palmer, would normally see five times as many people as it has, says owner Ted Pyrah. There’s just not much for customers to pick right now, he says, and most vegetables are small.
While farmers can handle cloudy weather and a good amount of rain, there’s not much they can do when temperatures dip. Plants simply aren’t maturing fast enough, putting many farmers in a lurch.
The yield’s way down, the production numbers are not there,” says Arthur Keyes, owner of the South Anchorage Farmer’s Market and Glacier Valley Farm in Palmer. “It’s so cold, we need heat. We don’t need rain, we need the sun.”

Looks like the “facts in the ground” confirm your statement about Anchorage and colder…

John Finn
August 24, 2012 1:03 am

TomRude says:
August 23, 2012 at 2:01 pm
If you want my opinion, it’s a lot of hot wind from this Sirocko fellow…
(I know I thought someone would have done it before…)
Of course the sun influences winters: Lockwood found that in SE England and now it is documented for the Rhine river between Mayence and Coblenz. We are not entirely sure though HOW it can proceed so selectively on a meteorological basis… /sarc

By shifting circulation patterns. Even Schmidt and Mann (2001) acknowledge that solar activity influences global weather patterrns. However, that doesn’t change earth’s energy balance so will not affect the overall ‘global’ temperature, That’s why UAH temperatures are still at the elevated levels of the previous decade despite the significant reduction in solar activity.

Ed Zuiderwijk
August 24, 2012 1:21 am

I have a bet going with my brother-in-law for a bottle of something that we will see another Elfstedentocht (11 cities skating race, the one refered to above) by 2015.

August 24, 2012 1:32 am

John Finn says:
August 24, 2012 at 1:03 am
By shifting circulation patterns. Even Schmidt and Mann (2001) acknowledge that solar activity influences global weather patterrns. However, that doesn’t change earth’s energy balance so will not affect the overall ‘global’ temperature, That’s why UAH temperatures are still at the elevated levels of the previous decade despite the significant reduction in solar activity.
You are falling into the same trap as your previous comments. It is important to realize more than one driver. Reduced UV will provide sudden atmospheric changes that batter some areas with severe cold and others with warmth, but the longer term effects from reduced ocean heat uptake (albedo changes) work over longer time periods.

August 24, 2012 2:22 am

Only 5 or 6 variables to influence climate????
This man knows nothing.