New study finds that a Carrington class solar event could cause global cooling of more than 3C

A paper recently published in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics finds that “a solar proton event, if it took place in the near future with an intensity similar to that ascribed to the Carrington Event of 1859”. Based on the results of the study it would be expected to have a major impact on atmospheric composition throughout the middle atmosphere, resulting in significant and persistent decrease in total ozone, resulting in a “significant [global] cooling of more than 3C”.

From the paper: Solar energetic particle events, frequently referred to solar proton events (SPEs), occur when protons and other particles emitted by the active Sun are accelerated to very high energies (for protons up to 500 MeV) either close to the

Sun’s surface during a solar flare or in interplanetary space by magnetic shock waves associated with coronal mass ejections (Reames, 1999). They typically last for a few days. The high energy protons are deflected, when they enter the Earth’s magnetic field, and upon penetrating the atmosphere can cause massive ionization including significant production of HOx and NOx (Sepp¨al¨a et al., 2004; Jackman et al., 2009).

Based on the modeling done here, and while the Carrington Event of 1859 lasted only 2 days, the proton event caused persistent changes in atmospheric ozone lasting up to several months, the authors predict such an event could cause a “cooling of up to 5 K in eastern Europe and Russia to a somewhat smaller decrease of about 3 K for the Southern Hemisphere in Argentina.” as shown in figure 9 below:

Fig. 9. Left panel: polar stereographic projection of changes in surface air temperature for the NH for November resulting from the Carrington-like Event. Right panel: same for the SH. Hatched areas show 95% statistical significance.

Influence of a Carrington-like event on the atmospheric chemistry, temperature and dynamics

M. Calisto, P. T. Verronen, E. Rozanov, and T. Peter

Abstract: 

We have modeled the atmospheric impact of a major solar energetic particle event similar in intensity to what is thought of the Carrington Event of 1–2 September 1859. Ionization rates for the August 1972 solar proton event, which had an energy spectrum comparable to the Carrington Event, were scaled up in proportion to the fluence estimated for both events. We have assumed such an event to take place in the year 2020 in order to investigate the impact on the modern, near future atmosphere. Effects on atmospheric chemistry, temperature and dynamics were investigated using the 3-D Chemistry Climate Model SOCOL v2.0. We find significant responses of NOx, HOx, ozone, temperature and zonal wind. Ozone and NOx have in common an unusually strong and long-lived response to this solar proton event.

The model suggests a 3-fold increase of NOx generated in the upper stratosphere lasting until the end of November, and an up to 10-fold increase in upper mesospheric HOx. Due to the NOx and HOx enhancements, ozone reduces by up to 60–80% in the mesosphere during the days after the event, and by up to 20–40% in the middle stratosphere lasting for several months after the event. Total ozone is reduced by up to 20 DU in the Northern Hemisphere and up to 10 DU in the Southern Hemisphere.

Free tropospheric and surface air temperatures show a significant cooling of more than 3 K and zonal winds change significantly by 3–5 m s−1 in the UTLS region. In conclusion, a solar proton event, if it took place in the near future with an intensity similar to that ascribed to of the Carrington Event of 1859, must be expected to have a major impact on atmospheric composition throughout the middle atmosphere, resulting in significant and persistent decrease in total ozone.

From the concluding remarks:

Comparing the outcome for temperature and dynamics modeled with SOCOL with results of Jackman et al. (2007), who investigated the SPE of October/November 2003 using

their 3-D TIME-GCM, we see that these results are in good qualitative agreement. They show that shortly after the event happened, the southern hemispheric polar region has a decrease in temperature throughout the entire mesosphere, similar to our results for the northern hemispheric polar region.

The difference between their results and ours is in the intensity of the changes. For the temperature a decrease of more than 3K is shown in this work while Jackman et al. (2007)

depict a decrease of up to 2 K. The fact that our results show a larger effect can be due to the intensity of the solar proton event. The Carrington-like event presented in this paper

represents an event that is more intense than the SPE of October/ November 2003.

The qualitative agreement of our results, modeled with the 3-D CCM SOCOL, for the changes in NOx, ozone, temperature and dynamics, with those obtained by Thomas et

al. (2007) and Jackman et al. (2007), corroborates the finding that solar proton events of this strength have intense atmospheric interactions in a broad altitude range starting from

80 km down to 30 km, with repercussions for surface air temperature.

The latter range from a cooling of up to 5K in eastern Europe and Russia to a somewhat smaller decrease of about 3K for the Southern Hemisphere in Argentina. Therefore

it is important to analyze the impact of energetic particles with a 3-D CCM to ensure that the dynamical and transport aspects are properly taken into account. In this paper,

the solar proton event was placed during equinox. We think that the impact could even be larger if it would happen during earlier winter because the polar vortex prevents the exchange of fresh air from the mid-latitudes with the polar region.

Final Revised Paper (PDF, 1740 KB)   Discussion Paper (ACPD)

H/t to The Hockey Schtick

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

132 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David Ball
September 26, 2012 7:49 pm

Who would CARE what the temperature would be? I think there would be more pressing problems.
REPLY: Excellent point, we probably would lose the technological capability to measure and record the cooling – Anthony

MarkW
September 26, 2012 7:56 pm

I don’t remember reading about a similar cooling event following the 1859 Carrington even.

E.M.Smith
Editor
September 26, 2012 8:01 pm

@Anthony:
I still have a LIG thermometer ( mercury too!) from back in the ’70s in my chemistry kit somewhere… So after The Event, I’ll send you the readings… Got any carrier pigeons? 😉

September 26, 2012 8:03 pm

The thing with Carrington level events being rare on a once in 500 year frequency, is that only tells us how many times we happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, the events could be much more common given how narrow a firing arc we have to be in to get hit.

E.M.Smith
Editor
September 26, 2012 8:07 pm

W:
Sweden shows cooling in the decade following, but with some amount of jitter…
http://chiefio.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/upps_www.pdf
( I link to it in: http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/picking-cherries-in-sweden/ )
First graph here, and the drought level in Colorado further down, both show a decade scale cooling as well:
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/drought-is-not-a-global-warming-sign/
Looks like solar particle events might well have some kind of impact.

temp
September 26, 2012 8:18 pm

We know the study is wrong because only man can cause holes in the ozone layer.

Steve Oregon
September 26, 2012 8:19 pm

I wonder, is it possible for alarmists to eventually swing so far the other direction that they end up exaggerating the future cooling as badly as they do with warming today?
And skeptics have to respond,, “Oh for heavens sake, just a few years ago you alarmist were telling us it was warming. That was after years earlier when you claimed it was cooling. Now you’re starting all over again?”
Some of the younger alarmists will have participated in every chapter.
Will they claim they were going with the best science every time?
So they are always right when they are always wrong ???
Eeeek!

Nerd
September 26, 2012 8:19 pm

Solar cycle was relative quiet at that time. Are you sure it is carrington itself that caused global cooling?
I’d say we’d need another event like that to see of that happens but that would have been pointless anyway.

September 26, 2012 8:21 pm

REPLY: Excellent point, we probably would lose the technological capability to measure and record the cooling – Anthony
Aren’t there still a few max/min thermometers left? And pencil and paper?
We may lose the computing power, and we may go to less technological record keeping, but hopefully there will still be scientists out there who will want future civilizations to see what we went through.
Imagine how much less we’d know about events if people in 1859 hadn’t written anything down. If they were able to make measurements WITHOUT computers, maybe we should be stocking up on whatever they used. Or developing shielding for what we have now.
Think of ways those data loggers and that equipment can be shielded. We’ve got an idea of the levels (the ionization rates for the August 1972 solar proton event) as a baseline, don’t we?

September 26, 2012 8:29 pm

Steve Oregon says:
September 26, 2012 at 8:19 pm
I wonder, is it possible for alarmists to eventually swing so far the other direction that they end up exaggerating the future cooling as badly as they do with warming today?
==================================================================
If they can figure out a way make it Man’s fault and so increase control via regulations and taxes, then yes. (Of course then, as now, the Sun would have to be ignored.)

smaugtheworm
September 26, 2012 8:36 pm

Haven’t you heard the debate is over. Warmers said the sun doesn’t affect climate. Duh!

Docwat
September 26, 2012 8:42 pm

I get that electronics made of Integrated circuits will be dead. What about discrete components such as resisters, capacitors, diodes, and transistors? My friend has 4 model T Fords restored, so we will have transportation until the gas runs out.

David Ball
September 26, 2012 8:44 pm

henrythethird says:
September 26, 2012 at 8:21 pm
I’d be more concerned about biker bill wanting to use my skull for a soup bowl.
I was probably in the last year that the slide rule was taught/used. Ahh, the slide rule. Didn’t Buzz use one of these to calculate the few seconds of fuel left as the eagle approach the lunar surface?

September 26, 2012 8:47 pm

”New study finds that a Carrington class solar event could cause global cooling of more than 3C”
WOW!!! It’s not enough bullshine produced by IPCC and Hansen, for the terminal bullshine addicts – now need to dig old lies from 1883. Shell we name it ”Guano addiction”
Because somebody produced a big lie 130y ago; not to go to waste; demand for crap is now bigger than ever. They should state on the label: how many calories per wheelbarrow /is it fattening… Go for it gays, from both camps; demand controls supply.
The TRUTH: the planet wasn’t getting warmer – it’s not going to get colder. ”Self-adjusting mechanism” and my formulas are fanatically ignored. the truth will win, time is against the Bulshine producers and their addicts.

David Ball
September 26, 2012 8:48 pm

no offense biker bill, ……

RACookPE1978
Editor
September 26, 2012 8:49 pm

E.M.Smith says:
September 26, 2012 at 8:01 pm
@Anthony:
I still have a LIG thermometer ( mercury too!) from back in the ’70s in my chemistry kit somewhere… So after The Event, I’ll send you the readings… Got any carrier pigeons? 😉

Will telegraph systems still work?
Turn the internet “on” for a dot, “off” for a “dash” ….. Heck, it’s binary.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)
September 26, 2012 8:53 pm

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/7x.html (bold added)

The period from 2,000,000 – 14,000 B.P. (before present) is known as the Pleistocene or Ice Age. During this period, large glacial ice sheets covered much of North America, Europe, and Asia for extended periods of time. The extent of the glacier ice during the Pleistocene was not static. The Pleistocene had periods when the glacier retreated (interglacial) because of warmer temperatures and advanced because of colder temperatures (glacial). During the coldest periods of the Ice Age, average global temperatures were probably 4 – 5 degrees Celsius colder than they are today.

4-5°C colder during the coldest periods of glaciation.
And “New study finds that a Carrington class solar event could cause global cooling of more than 3C”.
With a cooling of up to 5°C (5K) in Eastern Europe and Russia (including Siberia), places where increasing glaciation at the end of the current interglacial would be expected to start.
Offhand that seems a pretty slim safety margin. And the several months of cooling could happen around late winter and spring, when the seasonal snow and ice should be melting off at the marginal areas around the Arctic? Tipping point, perhaps?

September 26, 2012 9:01 pm

the way I understand a carrington event only those electronic things that are turned on at the time of impact will be wiped because of power surges that is why they are trying to get the power companies to setup emergency shut down procedures for thier most sensitive equipment so that the power is out for only a few days instead of months.

September 26, 2012 9:05 pm

RACookPE1978 says:
September 26, 2012 at 8:49 pm

Will telegraph systems still work?

Dunno, some of the gear caught fire from it.

September 26, 2012 9:06 pm

David Ball says:
September 26, 2012 at 7:49 pm
Who would CARE what the temperature would be? I think there would be more pressing problems.
REPLY: Excellent point, we probably would lose the technological capability to measure and record the cooling – Anthony

Actually no it’s not a good point, because if it happens during winter and without power you and billions of others would wish it was 5° C warmer. Remember no power = no home heating sources outside of wood burning stoves = millions freeze to death.

September 26, 2012 9:13 pm

MarkW says:
September 26, 2012 at 7:56 pm
I don’t remember reading about a similar cooling event following the 1859 Carrington even.
Indeed there wasn’t any. That puts the whole thing into the realm of fairy tales.
REPLY: Leif, thermometry was pretty crude then with thermometer exposure variances being so poor that the noise was often greater than the signal. – Anthony

davidmhoffer
September 26, 2012 9:13 pm

Hold on.
A Carrington even WOULD cause a drop in temperatures of 3 degrees?
Well if that is true, by extension, the Carrington event in 1859 DID reduce temperatures by 3 degrees.
And if THAT is true, then the next question would be:
How long would it take for temps to recover? 10 years? 100 years? How much of the “warming” during the instrumental record is just a recovery from the Carrington event in 1859?
On the other hand, I question the results of this study for the simple reason that we DON’T have evidence (historical or otherwise) for such a massive amount of cooling in that time period.

David Ball
September 26, 2012 9:16 pm

boballab says:
September 26, 2012 at 9:06 pm
Uhmmm, that is what I was talking about. No power? It would be anarchy.

David Ball
September 26, 2012 9:18 pm

How long to repair the grid if this occurred?

September 26, 2012 9:28 pm

Oregon:
Your post was so good I had to repost part of it. Thank you!
Steve Oregon Wrote:
And skeptics have to respond, “Oh for heavens sake, just a few years ago you alarmist[s] were telling us it was warming. That was after years earlier when you claimed it was cooling. Now you’re starting all over again?”
Some of the younger alarmists will have participated in every chapter.
Will they claim they were going with the best science every time?
So they are always right when they are always wrong ???
-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Priceless!

1 2 3 6