“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.”
![dutch-canal[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/dutch-canal1.jpg?resize=640%2C480&quality=83)
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.


Silver Ralph says: August 24, 2012 at 9:35 am
The question is, therefore, is what changes the positions of the jetstreams, and that has never been fully explained. Could this be a butterfly-wing effect, where a small solar change can produce a large change in jetstream trajectory? Who knows.
No it is not butterfly-wing effect.
It is position of Icelandic low, which depends on location of warm current down-welling, which depends of ice extent (summer or winter), which depends on the AMO (changes simultaneously across all of North Atlantic) which is driven by geo-solar cycle
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/GSC1.htm
Dr.S is also correct, Icelandic low is accompanied by high across Russia (Arctic Oscillation) and near the Azores (North Atlantic Oscillation)
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/new.ao.loading.gif
“What is the scale of these “longer periods of time”? When, for example, was cooling fully realised following the Dalton minimum? ”
I think that is an unrealistic demand given ocean cycling on the scale of 6 decades at a time plus internal system variability plus the paucity of global data from the time.
All we can do is watch and learn now that we have lots of varied modern sensors.
The most persuasive feature for me is that a lot of different climate parameters all changed trend around the same time as the sun came down from the peak of cycle 23 and there was a slight change in all those same parameters in the opposite direction at the time of the climate shift of the late 70s coincident with the renewed solar activity levels in cycle 21 after slightly quieter cycle 20.
The fact that so many things changed together in the late 90s and in the late 70s means that the data does indeed fit the solar signal but what we really do not yet know is the length of time before the full thermal effects work through the oceans.
I’d guess at ten years or so on the basis that the powerful El Nino of 1997/8 hit the Arctic ice in 2007 and the El Ninos of the early 2000s are just nwe getting Arctic ice back to or just a bit lower than the 2007 level.
After that, though La Ninas gained power relative to El Ninos and are still doing so.
On that basis the effects of past higher levels of solar activity should be almost out of the system by 2015 but we won’t see the effect of the recent very low minimum until around 2020.
CO2 will no doubt have a role but in my view infinitesimal.
Update on the Tesla museum story
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22212-securing-the-legacy-of-the-worlds-greatest-geek.html
“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?” – Leif S.
Given that sunlight incident upon bodies of water is efficiently absorbed, it may be that shallow surface waters would be least effected by thermal inertia and would not have much lag.
John Finn says:
August 24, 2012 at 12:31 pm
I’m not falling into any trap. If you could perhaps show some evidence of the the link between reduced solar activity and reduced ocean heat uptake working over longer periods of time that might be helpful.
Seeing as the last time we saw this kind of event was over 200 years ago the data will not be strong. We have to rely mainly on proxy records which certainly show (in most cases) a cooling during the LIA. But the premise of your question clearly displays the trap you fall into by not allowing for other climate factors.
Some of the factors that need to be considered during interglacial periods:
1. ENSO modification due to ocean oscillations (60 year period)
2. Atmospheric changes from reduced UV (172 year period with a smaller hit mid period)
3. Grand Minimum albedo changes (172 year period but of varying strength)
4. Ocean heat content changes due to gradual long term TSI changes (80-100 year period of small influence).
The grand minimum that occur every 172 years is the most interesting and least understood. Everyone is expecting constant returns of Maunder type events but fail to realize these extra strong events are relatively rare over the Holocene. I have used solar markers that also coincide (timing & strength) with all movements in the solar proxy record over the Holocene to predict the current solar cycle and next will be sub 50 SSN (as measured without the Waldmeier factor). This will be a grand minimum but a weaker version than the Dalton, so don’t expect too much ocean cooling. We are 3-4 years into a 30 year trend that at least will see a flatline in the temperature records with some cooling down the track. But we can expect wild weather in both extremes as the norm for the next 30 years because of what will become commonplace in our atmospheric patterns.
Geoff Sharp says:
August 24, 2012 at 6:35 pm
The grand minimum that occur every 172 years is the most interesting and least understood.
Plus do not occur every 172 years. If the last one was in 1810, then the next one would have been in during the cycle around 1982 when as everyone knows in a period of high solar activity.
predict the current solar cycle and next will be sub 50 SSN (as measured without the Waldmeier factor).
Which is no more a grand minimum than cycle 14. In general it is better to include the Waldmeier factor and apply it to the data before 1945.
Geoff Sharp says:
August 24, 2012 at 6:35 pm
The grand minimum that occur every 172 years is the most interesting and least understood.
Plus do not occur every 172 years. If the last one was in 1810, then the next one would have been in during the cycle around 1982 when as everyone knows in a period of high solar activity.
predict the current solar cycle and next will be sub 50 SSN (as measured without the Waldmeier factor).
Which is no more a grand minimum than cycle 14. In general it is better to include the Waldmeier factor and apply it to the data before 1945.
Leif Svalgaard says:
August 24, 2012 at 8:53 pm
Which is no more a grand minimum than cycle 14. In general it is better to include the Waldmeier factor and apply it to the data before 1945.
Rubbish, SC14 was not affected by the Waldmeier factor and measures around 65 SSN. SC5/6 are much better examples of the current SC24 trend.
http://tinyurl.com/2dg9u22/images/sc5_sc24.png
Plus do not occur every 172 years.
Agreed, but on average this is the case. I try to keep it simple as not even you understand the concepts, as shown in the previous challenge to you.
http://tinyurl.com/2dg9u22/?q=node/216
Leif Svalgaard says:
August 24, 2012 at 8:53 pm
Which is no more a grand minimum than cycle 14. In general it is better to include the Waldmeier factor and apply it to the data before 1945.
Rubbish, SC14 was not affected by the Waldmeier factor and measures around 65 SSN. SC5/6 are much better examples of the current SC24 trend.
http://tinyurl.com/2dg9u22/images/sc5_sc24.png
Plus do not occur every 172 years.
Agreed, but on average this is the case. I try to keep it simple as not even you understand the concepts, as shown in the previous challenge to you.
http://tinyurl.com/2dg9u22/?q=node/216
Geoff Sharp says:
August 24, 2012 at 9:39 pm
“Which is no more a grand minimum than cycle 14. In general it is better to include the Waldmeier factor and apply it to the data before 1945.”
Rubbish, SC14 was not affected by the Waldmeier factor and measures around 65 SSN. SC5/6 are much better examples of the current SC24 trend.
As the scale of the sunspot number is arbitrary, you can deal with the Waldmeier factor by either increasing the old values before 1945 or by decreasing the new values after 1945. There is general agreement in the SSN community to leave the current values alone [as they are used in operational program] and increase the older values.
The data for SC5 and 6 are so uncertain that they can hardly be compared to anything. Here is what Wolf thought SC5 looked like: http://www.leif.org/research/Wolf-SC5.png
Leif Svalgaard says:
August 24, 2012 at 10:21 pm
I am not interested in debating which way the Waldmeier factor should apply. My points stand.
The SC5 data is not 100%, but the SC6 data is strong. Your SC14 comparison is running out of legs the further we get into SC24.
Leif Svalgaard says:
August 24, 2012 at 6:21 am.
Thanks for that. I’d made a similar plot some years ago and noticed that the later events are bang in the middle of a minimum whereas earlier events could apparently occur kind of at random. I wonder if we see a confounding factor at work: increasingly during the last century there was a conflict between economic interest and the sporting wishes: the canals had to be kept open for transport. So, if in the end the waters had frozen over (because efforts to keep open water had failed) and a contiguous stretch of ice existed along the whole of the route, you would probably expect extra cold winters for the more recent events. I wonder if there are any data around that could test this idea; the three events during WW2 look conspicuous to me in that respect: were no attempt made to keep the waters open then? Another confounding factor may be a number of power stations that now cause some stretches of water to freeze over much later than they otherwise would do.
Geoff Sharp says:
August 24, 2012 at 11:22 pm
I am not interested in debating which way the Waldmeier factor should apply.
There should be no debate. You should just do the right thing and follow the accepted procedure.
The SC5 data is not 100%, but the SC6 data is strong. Your SC14 comparison is running out of legs the further we get into SC24.
On the contrary: http://www.leif.org/research/SC14-and-24.png
Geoff Sharp says:
August 24, 2012 at 11:22 pm
but the SC6 data is strong.
Actually not: Wolf cites Bode saying that he saw the sun in 1815 covered with more spots and faculae “than he had ever seen before”. Fritsch reported that in 1817 he often saw days with more than 100 spots, some visible to the naked eye. Stark observed on 115 days in the year 1815 on which there were spots on 109 and no spots on 9 days. For 1816 the numbers were 109 days with spots and 6 without. Hardly Grand Minimum Stuff.
“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.”
The AO was more negative than the NAO was in 1963, 2010 and 2011 winters, and that is why these winters had impacts all round the Northern Hemisphere. I bet looking at monthly land temperatures only for latitudes 40 to 60 deg North would give a different result.
Many cold Northern Hemisphere winters happen on and just after solar cycle maxima, including several that froze the Rhine, in 1684, 1695, 1740, 1830, 1838, 1895, 1917 and 1929. So sunspots don’t seem to be the issue, while low points in the Ap index are a far better correlation.
Ed Zuiderwijk says
three events during WW2 look conspicuous to me in that respect: were no attempt made to keep the waters open then?
Henry says
yes, I suspect that there may have been some reasons for the resistance not to keep those waterways open, but, OTOH you also do need the cold as well to get it all frozen up. According to my own results
http://www.letterdash.com/henryp/global-cooling-is-here
around 1945 was the end of a 50 year cooling cycle. So, the cold was there. And the cycle changed (at great speed). At that stage, automatic temperature recording did not exist and I suspect few thermometers even had calibration certificates. So I don’t know how they can say they know exactly how cold it was back then. In fact 1944 is remembered by many in Europe as the hunger winter. In Friesland were many rich farmers so they may have escaped the worst. As we know, back then in Holland many people lost their lives, simply because of hunger. What I do know for sure is that 1995 was the end of the warming period, i.e. maximum energy input. If 1997 was the last time we had an Elfstedentocht – which was when earth energy output was actually the greatest, i.e. the warmest – then that makes sense only if you look at the acceleration of cooling, or the deceleration of warming, or even vice versa, as well as ambient temperatures. The speed of cooling or warming itsself also causes certain predictable weather patterns. We also know that in 2012 we almost had an Elfstedentocht. At the moment acceleration of cooling is now more or less the same as it was in 1912 (it is a 100 year cycle). It appears there was an Elfstedentocht in 1910 and in 1913. I think your bet is right. 2013 is my bet. But if there is no race by 2015, we will probably have to wait a bit again…(after that, the acceleration/deceleration you also need will not be there for some time- if you can follow my thinking)
vukcevic says: August 24, 2012 at 12:55 pm
No it is not butterfly-wing effect.
It is position of Icelandic low, which depends on location of warm current down-welling, which depends of ice extent (summer or winter), which depends on the AMO (changes simultaneously across all of North Atlantic) which is driven by geo-solar cycle.
———————————————
You are falling into the same trap as everyone else, Vuk. The position of the Icelandic Low is determined by the track of the jetstreams, and not vice versa.
.
Silver Ralph says:
August 25, 2012 at 9:56 am
The position of the Icelandic Low is determined by the track of the jetstreams, and not vice versa.
From http://www.nc-climate.ncsu.edu/edu/k12/NAO/body
“The Icelandic Low is a semi-permanent low pressure area sitting close to Iceland, while the Azores (Bermuda) High is a semi-permanent high near the Azores. The Icelandic Low and Azores High fluctuate in strength and position over a period of months and years, and their variations can have an effect on weather in the eastern United States by shifting the location of the jet stream which affects temperature and precipitation patterns over the southeastern United States”
The winds are determined by the pressure patterns, not the other way around.
Silver Ralph says: August 25, 2012 at 9:56 am
……
Irminger sea (winter) and Nordic Seas (summer) are regions of the intense ocean – atmosphere interaction. Here the sea surface and atmospheric temperature differential means ocean stored heat is release at rates of several hundred watts per square meter, resulting in deep water convection. Warm air raises and diverts jet-stream. Ice coverage prevents sea surface contact with the atmosphere above, hence movement of the Icelandic low back and forth.
Ulric Lyons says
Many cold Northern Hemisphere winters happen on and just after solar cycle maxima, including several that froze the Rhine, in 1684, 1695, 1740, 1830, 1838, 1895, 1917 and 1929.
Henry says
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/23/agu-link-found-between-cold-european-winters-and-solar-activity/#comment-1064815
Sorry, I see now there also was an Elfstedentocht in 1917. There was also one in 1929. So, we have a chance for an Elfstedentocht every winter until 2018. After that we will have to wait another 11 or 12 years again. Believe it or not, this is science and not wishful thinking.
HenryP says:
August 25, 2012 at 10:22 am
Believe it or not, this is science and not wishful thinking.
like: http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Death/Masakichi.html
I love this paper and its “kind of’s”, “could be’s”, “sort of’s” and other types of language used whenever correlations fall to the 70’s range. What was very interesting is the comment regarding the AO driving wind and pressure systems to different locations in the Arctic. Seems that the Arctic has cold and warm currents (which everyone here should know about) that fluctuate warmer or colder depending on factors related to incoming warm currents and open ocean warming up cold currents. The AO is fickle in that sometimes the winds and pressure systems drive ice to these warm areas, and sometimes the less warm areas in the basin and THAT has a lot (weasel word) to do with how much ice melts when and where during the melt season.
Were someone in the AGW crowd to say that it must be CO2, you would have to start with the overall state of the ice (it has a memory) at the beginning of the melt season, then look at location of wind and pressure systems AND the co-morbid state and location of Arctic currents, then take a step back to wind and pressure system direction and strength, then another step back to the AO. You would then have to find how and when, if at all, the anthropogenic portion of CO2 enters into that string of events with enough joules and the mechanism needed to change the events it tries to enter in order to say the trend is due to CO2.
Else we are still at the mercy of the null hypothesis.
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110008253_2011008656.pdf
Leif Svalgaard says
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/23/agu-link-found-between-cold-european-winters-and-solar-activity/#comment-1064858
Henry says
Either you are ignorant or you want to be. The 12 years difference has nothing to do with a solar cycle. It is because you are then in the middle of the cooling cycle, in the bottom of the curve, so acceleration is more or less zero and speed of cooling is constant.
Does similar data exist for the freezing over of the Great Lakes??
HenryP says:
August 25, 2012 at 10:22 am
” So, we have a chance for an Elfstedentocht every winter until 2018. After that we will have to wait another 11 or 12 years again.”
With the larger Ap index drop in solar cycles being typically just after the minima, the early 2020’s would be a very likely period to see some colder N. Hemisphere winters.