Ozone depletion trumps greenhouse gas increase in jet-stream shift

From Penn State

English: Ozone Depletion comparison in North A...

English: Ozone Depletion comparison in North America from 1984-1997. Contrary to popular belief, the Ozone depletion does not affect exclusively the south pole. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Depletion of Antarctic ozone is a more important factor than increasing greenhouse gases in shifting the Southern Hemisphere jet stream in a southward direction, according to researchers at Penn State.

“Previous research suggests that this southward shift in the jet stream has contributed to changes in ocean circulation patterns and precipitation patterns in the Southern Hemisphere, both of which can have important impacts on people’s livelihoods,” said Sukyoung Lee, professor of meteorology.

According to Lee, based on modeling studies, both ozone depletion and greenhouse gas increase are thought to have contributed to the southward shift of the Southern Hemisphere jet stream, with the former having a greater impact. B, but until now, no one has been able to determine the extent to which each of these two forcings has contributed to the shift using observational data.

“Understanding the differences between these two forcings is important in predicting what will happen as the ozone hole recovers,” she said. “The jet stream is expected to shift back toward the north as ozone is replenished, yet the greenhouse-gas effect could negate this.” Lee and her colleague, Steven Feldstein, professor of meteorology, developed a new method to distinguish between the effects of the two forcings. The method uses a cluster analysis to investigate the effects of ozone and greenhouse gas on several different observed wind patterns.

“When most people look at ozone and greenhouse gases, they focus on one wind pattern, but my previous research suggests that, by looking at several different but similar patterns, you can learn more about what is really happening,” said Feldstein.

In their study, the researchers analyzed four wind patterns. The first wind pattern corresponded to an equatorwarda shift of the midlatitude westerlies toward the equator. T; the second pattern also described an equatorward shift, but included a strong tropical component. T; the third pattern corresponded to a poleward shift of the westerlies toward the South Pole with a weakening in the maximum strength of the jet; and the. The fourth pattern corresponded to a smaller poleward jet shift with a strong tropical component.

In addition to their novel inclusion of more than one wind pattern in their analysis, the scientists investigated the four wind patterns at very short time scales.

“Climate models are usually run for many years; they don’t look at the day-to-day weather,” said Feldstein. “But we learned that the four wind patterns fluctuate over about 10 days, so they change on a time scale that is similar to daily weather. This realization means that by taking into account fluctuations associated with the daily weather, it will be easier to test theories about the mechanism by which ozone and greenhouse gases influence the jet stream.”

The researchers used an algorithm to examine the relationship between daily weather patterns and the four wind patterns. They found that the first wind pattern — which corresponded to an equatorward shift of the midlatitude westerlies — was associated with greenhouse gases. They also found that the third pattern — which corresponded to a poleward shift of the westerlies — was associated with ozone. The other two wind patterns were unrelated to either of the forcings. The researchers found that a long-term decline in the frequency of the first pattern and a long-term increase in the frequency of the third pattern can explain the changes in the Southern Hemisphere jet stream.

“Ozone had the bigger impact on the change in the position of the jet stream,” said Lee. “The opposite is likely true for the Northern Hemisphere; we think that ozone has a limited influence on the Northern Hemisphere. Understanding which of these forcings is most important in certain locations may help policy makers as they begin to plan for the future.”

In addition to finding that ozone is more important than greenhouse gases in influencing the jet-stream shift, the scientists also found evidence for a mechanism by which greenhouse gases influence the jet-stream shift. They learned that greenhouse gases may not directly influence the jet-stream shift, but rather may indirectly influence the shift by changing tropical convection, or the vertical transfer of heat in large-scale cloud systems, which, in turn, influences the jet shift. The researchers currently are further examining this and other possible mechanisms for how greenhouse gases and ozone influence the jet stream as well as Antarctic sea ice.

The results will appear in the Feb. 1 issue of the journal Science.

“Not only are the results of this paper important for better understanding climate change, but this paper is also important because it uses a new approach to try to better understand climate change; it uses observational data on a short time scale to try to look at cause and effect, which is something that is rarely done in climate research,” said Feldstein. “Also, our results are consistent with climate models, so this paper provides support that climate models are performing well at simulating the atmospheric response to ozone and greenhouse gases.”

###

The National Science Foundation funded this research.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
SMS

Why should I believe anything any “so called” scientist says?

Ian W

The researchers used an algorithm to examine the relationship between daily weather patterns and the four wind patterns. They found that the first wind pattern in their computer model
I don’t suppose any of these ‘climate computer modelers’ ever stepped outside the computer room to empirically test their hypothesis expressed in algorithms before they rushed out the press release?
No I thought not.

RobW

“our results are consistent with climate models,”
Enough said. How bout them Yankees…

John West

“finding that ozone is more important than greenhouse gases in influencing the jet-stream shift”
Is it the ozone or is it solar UV variation?

Robert M

“according to researchers at Penn State”
Well, at least they put it at the beginning so that I didn’t waste my time. I don’t care what the folks at Penn State concluded from their research, I am very sure that the study is flawed, and the conclusions will support the needs of whoever paid…

corio37

“Important impacts on people’s livelihoods”. I’m guessing that’s not supposed to include getting richer, right?

I think the vertical convection of energy in cloud systems is transporting more CO2 into the upper atmosphere rather than increasing CO2 causing greater vertical convection.

TomRude

“this paper is also important because it uses a new approach to try to better understand climate change; it uses observational data on a short time scale to try to look at cause and effect, which is something that is rarely done in climate research,” said Feldstein”
O my gawd!!! Looking at the synoptic reality! What a novel approach… but it was short lived since “The researchers used an algorithm to examine the relationship between daily weather patterns and the four wind patterns. They found that the first wind pattern — which corresponded to an equatorward shift of the midlatitude westerlies — was associated with greenhouse gases.”
That is truly brilliant: what is the relationship between amount of equatorward shift and amount of greenhouse gas? Does the wind pattern changes when it is CH4 or CO2 since they both have different shelf life in the atmosphere? Cows versus cars… That must be for the next paper… LOL
And the pearl: “The other two wind patterns were unrelated to either of the forcings.”
As if patterns of atmospheric circulation were independent from each others… And that guy is a professor of meteorology? Wow. Penn is more like pain…

John Bell

“According to Lee, based on modeling studies, both ozone depletion and greenhouse gas increase are thought to have contributed to the southward shift of the Southern Hemisphere jet stream, with the former having a greater impact. ”
John Bell here: And ozone loss is thought to come from too much CO2 forcing water up higher in the atmosphere, according to some – therefore it is CO2 pushing jet streams around now. So CO2 can do anything in a model, but how can we go to the atmosphere and test this hypothesis, we can not, and that is why it is not science – just speculation.

Meh…
Time will tell.

H.R.

This is interesting. It’s a side-step from the “Oh my GAWD! We’re all gonna die!” CAGW pablum. This is coming perilously close to sideswiping the scientific method. Stay tuned.

“According to Lee, based on modeling studies, both ozone depletion and greenhouse gas increase are thought to have contributed to the southward shift of the Southern Hemisphere jet stream, with the former having a greater impact. B, but until now, no one has been able to determine the extent to which each of these two forcings has contributed to the shift using observational data.”
So many wrong things in this short paragraph……………..
They made the determination using modeling studies.
Pathetic.

john robertson

So what caused the Southern Hemisphere Jet Stream to shift southward at every other cycle in the past?
Do we have data?
Do we have any indication that there is anything unusual about the current jet stream behaviour?
How long have we been tracking the hemisphere jet streams?
Or do we need proxies of when they hit the Alps and Rockies?
Maybe everyone in penn state U should be in the state pen.

Pamela Gray

So much is wrong with this paper I can’t even begin to critique it. Hindcast anyone????? Estimating the amount of energy it takes to shift the JET STREAM? Anyone??? Bueller? Bueller??

William McClenney

Very interesting! They used an AlGoreithm! AlGoreithms are not used in models. And they used a cluster analysis, on high density measurements no doubt from clusters of drones sampling CO2, and well, of course, ozone depletion. Yep, you can take this one to the CAGW bank!
/sarc off
PlayStation 4?

davidmhoffer

TomRude;
That is truly brilliant: what is the relationship between amount of equatorward shift and amount of greenhouse gas?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And they detected this using observational data based on a ten day fluctuation.
One has to wonder if:
a) they didn’t explain themselves properly
b) they explained themselves properly, they just didn’t stop to think how absurd that is
c) this is an experiment to see how absurd your science can be and still get published

Pamela Gray

Who the hell is letting these people get Ph.D.’s ??????? They’re like someone who doesn’t know the difference between Last minus First and linear regression trend calculations!!!!! Today, I just can’t suffer stupid. Had to do it at work all day. Ain’t doin it here. Not today. This little Irish lass is ready to eat nails! Let me out of the stable! Please!

anarchist hate machine

Why does that image show ozone depletion in the *north* pole? Or am I just making a stupid mistake?

Brent Walker

The Extreme and Far UV emissions provide the energy to create Ozone in the upper stratosphere, mesosphere and lower thermosphere and the various nitrogen oxides in those locations. Over time the more EUV and FUV emissions there are the greater the depth of the Ozone column. The more Ozone there is the more the jet streams move to the poles and the less depth to the Rossby waves (loopiness of the jet stream). What we are seeing at present is a long term reduction of about 40% in the EUV and FUV emissions and a reduction in Ozone resulting even in a hole in the Ozone layer in the last two Northern Hemisphere springs. So the jet streams are migrating towards the equator and the Rossby waves are getting deeper.
If you look at today’s map of the jets streams in both the Northern and Southern hemisphere you will see the jet stream that in the summer normally crosses Australia either just below the continent or at least across Melbourne is currently crossing NSW and Southern Queensland. Also the lower polar jet stream is rising almost from Antarctica to partially link up with the jet stream crossing the continent before diving to below the South Island of New Zealand – in other words a rather extreme loop but one which has caused weather forecasters to suggest there may be some summer snow on the alps in northern Victoria and some rather wild weather in NSW. Also there are parts of the Northern Hemisphere jet stream that appear to have crossed the equator into the Southern Hemisphere in the Pacific. You have to look at both the northern and southern hemisphere jet stream maps to see this.
How the Ozone layer affects the jet streams is not fully understood. But planetary waves and gravity waves are thought to play a part. But it may be as simple as the lower Ozone levels allow more infra-red heat to radiate from Earth into space. This means less is being trapped in the stratosphere and these slightly lower temperatures in the stratosphere then cause a general shift in the jet streams toward the equator where the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere are warmer.
Until recently climate scientists were blaming increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 for causing the gradual migration of jet streams towards the poles in the last three decades of the 20th Century. Given that atmospheric levels of CO2 are still increasing and the jet streams are now moving towards the equator they have had to revise their theories. Also there is no talk of CFC’s affecting the Ozone layer this time. That 1970’s scare was mostly furphy given that the solar cycle at that time was fairly weak.

anarchist hate machine

Oops. Nevermind.

Lawrie Ayres

I’m not a scientist so bear with me. The computer model that led to their determination is consistent with climate models which have been shown to be seriously flawed. Where does that leave their findings? As an aside does Penn State U ban the reading of material outside the prescribed dogma of the warmists? Apparently so because the plethora of research showing the minor role of CO2 in the overall scheme of things leaves one thinking that AGW was a first stab that didn’t really go anywhere but was the catalyst for some very interesting work in more important climate drivers. Pity no one reads the work as policy makers are currently making fools of themselves and making us poor at the same time.

Theo Goodwin

‘“When most people look at ozone and greenhouse gases, they focus on one wind pattern, but my previous research suggests that, by looking at several different but similar patterns, you can learn more about what is really happening,” said Feldstein.
In their study, the researchers analyzed four wind patterns. The first wind pattern corresponded to an equatorwarda shift of the midlatitude westerlies toward the equator. T; the second pattern also described an equatorward shift, but included a strong tropical component. T; the third pattern corresponded to a poleward shift of the westerlies toward the South Pole with a weakening in the maximum strength of the jet; and the. The fourth pattern corresponded to a smaller poleward jet shift with a strong tropical component.
In addition to their novel inclusion of more than one wind pattern in their analysis, the scientists investigated the four wind patterns at very short time scales.’
Novel conclusion in climate science, alright. Looks like an intelligent shift in focus toward empiricism. Eventually, they will have as many patterns as Baskin-Robbins has flavors. Science is hard; always has been and always will be. So-called climate scientists, alarmists, are woefully unaware of this truth and it shows in their work.

MattS

Pamela Gray,
“Who the hell is letting these people get Ph.D.’s ??????? ”
Didn’t you know that you can get Ph.D.s from a Crackerjack box?

Pamela Gray

Between the two potential chicken and egg systems, the jet stream affecting oceans, or oceans affecting jet streams, I look at stored energy available. Me thinks the relatively dense sloppy slurpy stuff called water (and there are how many tons of it?) has far more energy available to affect jet stream position and loops (how dense and energy absorbent is that made-of-air ribbon thingy anyway?) than the jet streams have on oceans. I have no Ph.D. after my name, no meteorology course under my belt, yet I can figure that the oceans have my vote. Once again, who the hell let this person do research???? And on my &^%$* dime!

Hamish Grant

The best bit had to be “……to try to look at cause and effect, which is something that is rarely done in climate research”. So a climate scientist is happy to drop this as a throwaway line in a comment. I love it.

William McClenney

You can get YOUR copy of “4 winds to the sheets” by sending a certified check for $1 zillion to the National Science Foundation, just pay shittin’u and groping charges to Nob Menendez care of the ruling family of oil rich Gutter.
But WAIT, if you cough-up now, we’ll throw-in, or -up (your choice), an indeterminate number of never before seen (or known) specially modified infinity drones which can cluster in your Playstation 4 atNOsphere for as many years as you select.
Not available in stores………….

Brent Walker – Thanks for your analysis. You say “Until recently climate scientists were blaming increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 for causing the gradual migration of jet streams towards the poles in the last three decades of the 20th Century.”. Do you have a link for that?
If correct, then what we have is a set of “scientists” who saw jet streams migrating towards the poles while CO2 was rising, and blamed CO2. Now, they see jet streams migrating away from the poles while CO2 is rising, and quite naturally blame CO2. “Quite naturally”??? Yes, it’s quite natural that if you are using climate models in which the only factor affecting climate is CO2, then quite naturally CO2 is responsible for everything that happens. Could the sun and cosmic rays actually be the cause of jet stream migration? No, because they are not coded into the models. Could ocean oscillations actually be the cause of jet stream migration? No, because they are not coded into the models. Could any other natural cycle actually be the cause of jet stream migration? No, because none are coded into the models. And so on and so on …….

usurbrain

Penn St. Used to have a good Weather Science dept.
Look at this site. – http://www.stormsurfing.com/cgi/display_alt.cgi?a=glob_250
Now please, anyone, explain to me how Ozone changes rapidly enough to cause the Jet stream to shift as far as it does in such a short period of time? (Or CO2 for that matter?) I would bet on Solar effects or Magnetic flux changes (which all AGW’sts ignore.) The Sun is an awful big magnet (or source of some form of “magnetic” like influence – can I say Dark Energy?). Look at how far it effects particles in the solar system – out beyond Pluto.

Bill H

OK….
Disjointed… no logical path… no provable Cause/Effect relationship… AND PUBLISHED because its a PU scientist…
One Word….. MODEL
One Acronym: GIGO (Garbage In = Garbage Out)
Can anyone get these folks a dose of REALITY?

higley7

I fail to believe that a small concentration of ozone at altitude can drive the behavior of the Southern jet stream. It is similar to claiming the trace gas CO2 drives anything. There is simply too little gas to do what they claim.

Paul Westhaver

Penn State… the place that covered up child sex abuse and enabled Michael Mann’s destruction of credible science.
Oh right… that place…
So I guess now that there hasn’t been any global warming for 20 years we have to believe in yet another rehashed phony green panic.
See what happens when you BS the public for 20 years? You get to be known as a BS-er.
Credible science is the loser. Heck, there could be a catastrophe looming, but I won’t know because I don’t believe the BS anymore.

TomRude

Appreciate how the little density atmosphere at jet stream level is moving all lower tropospheric denser air masses even sometimes from east to west in northern hemisphere if one cares to check on satellite images… And the faster jet streams also get a more convoluted trajectory in winter… Dust drives landslide and if you blow on the dust, landslide will change direction… tail wags dog too/sarc off.

Bill H

higley7 says:
January 31, 2013 at 7:48 pm
I fail to believe that a small concentration of ozone at altitude can drive the behavior of the Southern jet stream. It is similar to claiming the trace gas CO2 drives anything. There is simply too little gas to do what they claim.
=============================================
Physics seems to be something that these folks are short on.. Probably Grant seeking warmers pandering like our politicians do… just my 2 Cents..

Justthinkin

Don’t know about you,but if I lived in the Southern hemisphere,I would be more worried about a NORTHERN shift in the jet stream.

Rhoda R

As more and more evidence comes out that the ocean currents are affecting weather the alarmists are trying desperately to link to that through atmospheric CO2 aka ‘green house gasses’.

thunderloon

Uh… the reason there’s an ozone “hole” over the south pole is because its the south pole

Brian Johnson UK

In another life Sukyoung Lee would be seen standing high up on a large tree branch, chainsaw in hand and severing the branch between himself and the tree……….

davidmhoffer

Look folks, there’s holes at both poles. If you don’t believe me just take any globe out of its stand and have a look.

Geoff Sherrington

So what about the Antarctic There’s a series of pictures at http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/ozone.php
I can’t see much sense in them. I’ve never seen much sense in the chemistry, but then as a chemist I have not specialised in any studies that give you reason to believe me. It’s quite unscientific to say this, but there’s something wrong with the “feel” of the data, in the way that you feel when a critical factor has been left out of a series of equations and it’s hard to balance.
I’d love to see WUWT devote a special page to the ozone layer. Can’t guarantee that it will all fit on the usual sized page, though.

David Cage

There is nothing in the work that tells us that ozone depletion causes the change rather than the change causes ozone depletion that I can see. Any correlation does not tell us the first thing about which is the cause and which the effect. They taught us that at thirteen in my day but no climate scientist seems to be aware of this any more. When climate scientists were told in 2002 that the effects were zonal not global they rewarded their peers by removing them from the professions by a total removal of all grants. My lack of faith in climate science has reached a new low from a base line I thought could sink no lower.

Richard111

Anything seems to have a ‘forcing’ these days. Ozone has a very limited half life, in the order of 30 minutes or so. With no sunlight at either pole for several months a ‘hole’ is bound to develop.

David Jones

“Climate models are usually run for many years; they don’t look at the day-to-day weather,” said Feldstein. “But we learned that the four wind patterns fluctuate over about 10 days, so they change on a time scale that is similar to daily weather. ”
Who’ld have thunk it??????????????
And someone needed a grant t come up with that?? Who doles out the grants in America??

Brent Walker

In response to Mike Jonas – try the IPCC 4th Assessment Report. But there are many papers on this phenomena

Jack Savage

“Understanding the differences between these two forcings is important in predicting ……who will get the most funding…..”
I have to agree with some of the posters here. My belief in the ability of “climate scientists” like these is approaching zero. I now greet almost every one of these sort of papers with a snort of derision from the outset.
This is not good.

The main reason for this paper, “help policy makers”.
I can’t believe you guys missed that.Must have been
all that ozone and co2 smoke!! [:{\….
Alfred

Yeah, right.?
Modelled or from empirical measurement?

digger

Brent Wrote
“Also there is no talk of CFC’s affecting the Ozone layer this time. That 1970′s scare was mostly furphy given that the solar cycle at that time was fairly weak.”
In the industry I am in, we use quite expensive, cascade based ultra-cold refrigeration systems going all the way down to -150 deg C. It has become pretty obvious to many on the service side of the industry that a lot of the systems that use all the newer “environmentally friendly” gases that everyone was forced to go to, just do not last as long. The lifespans seen, across multiple manufacturers, has been cut almost in half in many cases. Considering the amount of energy, resource and cost that goes into manufacturing these instruments one could hardly make a case that it has benefited the environment. Add to that some of the key gas manufacturers have taken the opportunity to develop custom gases to meet the “environmental demand” that are as dear as poison (>> $1000 kg), one can understand their commitment to the CFC phase out and the introduction of expensive newbies.
As a side, the high cost of gases, regulatory requirements & hence repair costs forces many people now just to buy a new unit and not fix old ones. Again, another completely “environmentally unfriendly” result of a green agenda gone wrong.

Ian W

Brent Walker says:
January 31, 2013 at 6:56 pm
The Extreme and Far UV emissions provide the energy to create Ozone in the upper stratosphere, mesosphere and lower thermosphere and the various nitrogen oxides in those locations. Over time the more EUV and FUV emissions there are the greater the depth of the Ozone column. The more Ozone there is the more the jet streams move to the poles and the less depth to the Rossby waves (loopiness of the jet stream). What we are seeing at present is a long term reduction of about 40% in the EUV and FUV emissions and a reduction in Ozone resulting even in a hole in the Ozone layer in the last two Northern Hemisphere springs. So the jet streams are migrating towards the equator and the Rossby waves are getting deeper.
If you look at today’s map of the jets streams in both the Northern and Southern hemisphere you will see the jet stream that in the summer normally crosses Australia either just below the continent or at least across Melbourne is currently crossing NSW and Southern Queensland. Also the lower polar jet stream is rising almost from Antarctica to partially link up with the jet stream crossing the continent before diving to below the South Island of New Zealand – in other words a rather extreme loop but one which has caused weather forecasters to suggest there may be some summer snow on the alps in northern Victoria and some rather wild weather in NSW. Also there are parts of the Northern Hemisphere jet stream that appear to have crossed the equator into the Southern Hemisphere in the Pacific. You have to look at both the northern and southern hemisphere jet stream maps to see this.
How the Ozone layer affects the jet streams is not fully understood. But planetary waves and gravity waves are thought to play a part. But it may be as simple as the lower Ozone levels allow more infra-red heat to radiate from Earth into space. This means less is being trapped in the stratosphere and these slightly lower temperatures in the stratosphere then cause a general shift in the jet streams toward the equator where the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere are warmer.
Until recently climate scientists were blaming increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 for causing the gradual migration of jet streams towards the poles in the last three decades of the 20th Century. Given that atmospheric levels of CO2 are still increasing and the jet streams are now moving towards the equator they have had to revise their theories. Also there is no talk of CFC’s affecting the Ozone layer this time. That 1970′s scare was mostly furphy given that the solar cycle at that time was fairly weak.

The answer of course to the question of “How does the ozone hole affect the Jetstream?” is that it doesn’t. The ozone hole is another indication of weak UV and EUV.
As Pamela Gray says:
January 31, 2013 at 7:11 pm
Between the two potential chicken and egg systems, the jet stream affecting oceans, or oceans affecting jet streams, I look at stored energy available. Me thinks the relatively dense sloppy slurpy stuff called water (and there are how many tons of it?) has far more energy available to affect jet stream position and loops (how dense and energy absorbent is that made-of-air ribbon thingy anyway?) than the jet streams have on oceans. I have no Ph.D. after my name, no meteorology course under my belt, yet I can figure that the oceans have my vote. Once again, who the hell let this person do research???? And on my &^%$* dime!

The place on the Earth where there is the most energy is the equatorial regions between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn as they are receiving direct insolation all year from the Sun. The hot SSTs lead to towering convective storms up to 12 miles or more in the atmosphere lifting the tropopause to 60,000 – 70,000 ft . These are the updrafts of the Hadley cells when the Sun’s energy especially, in the short wave frequencies, is high then the light penetrates deep into the oceans heating them. As the sea surface temperatures increase the convection increases. The Hadley cells grow and push the Ferrel cells the temperate convective bands poleward causing the Jetstreams to become latiduninal and reducing the depth of the Rossby waves. At the same time the increase in the EUV/UV increases the amount of ozone being formed in the upper atmosphere reducing the size of the ozone holes at the poles. When the EUV/UV reduces then the Hadley cells reduce the Ferrel cells move equatorward and the jetstreams become loopy with large Rossby waves making them more meridonal.
The ozone level and the Jetstream meridonality are effects of the same cause – the lowered level of EUV / UV short wave radiation from the Sun.
We then see the knock on effects of that in the formation of blocking (omega) highs due to the ocean temperatures in the North Atlantic and Rossby waves in the Jetstream. These blocked Rossby waves lead to areas that are having dry polar air drawn equatorward or wet tropical air drawn poleward resulting in areas of continual rain and storms and areas of continual drought. The increased length of the meridonal Jetstream increases the amount of cloud formation in the frontal systems as their track is longer leading to higher albedo and cooler SSTs. This is just the pattern that can be seen at the moment. It is probable that the same pattern with blocking highs as last year will pertain and in the northern hemisphere the areas that had drought in the mid-west will have more drought and the areas that had lots of rain such as NW Europe. will continue to receive lots of rain Similarly the rather bad weather in the southern hemisphere will repeat although due to the lack of land masses and mountains they tend not to get the same blocking highs but rather unseasonable and extreme weather as loops in the Jetstream pass them.

Gail Combs

Uzurbrain says:
January 31, 2013 at 7:38 pm
Penn St. Used to have a good Weather Science dept.
Look at this site. – http://www.stormsurfing.com/cgi/display_alt.cgi?a=glob_250
Now please, anyone, explain to me how Ozone changes rapidly enough to cause the Jet stream to shift as far as it does in such a short period of time?….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Changes in Ozone and Stratospheric Temperature graph

The graph above shows total ozone and stratospheric temperatures over the Arctic since 1979. Changes in ozone amounts are closely linked to temperature, with colder temperatures resulting in more polar stratospheric clouds and lower ozone levels. Atmospheric motions drive the year-to-year temperature changes. The Arctic stratosphere cooled slightly since 1979, but scientists are currently unsure of the cause….
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/features/200402_tango/

Ozone is formed when intensive ultra-violet radiation from the Sun breaks down O2 into two oxygen atoms. These highly reactive oxygen atoms can then react with more O2 to form O3 ‘intensive ultra-violet radiation’ = EUV

Ozone formation
O2+ hν ( >~6eV) –> O + O
(EUV starts process)….
Chapman Equations (cont.)
Formation and destruction of Ozone
O2 + hν(EUV) → O + O : J2
O3 + hν(UV) → O2+ O : J3
O +O+M
→ O2 + M : k11
O + O2 + M → O3 + M : k12
O + O3 → O2 + O2 : k13
http://people.virginia.edu/~rej/MAE494/Part-2-07.pdf

So O3 is formed when EUV splits O2 into O + O. Oxygen in this state is highly reactive and gloms onto another O2 molecule to form O3. More on UV link
The next question is how does UV and EUV vary?
graph

Between 2004 and 2007, the Solar Irradiance Monitor (blue line) measured a decrease in ultraviolet radiation (less than 400 nanometers) that was a factor of four to six larger than expected (black line). In the visible part of the spectrum (400 to 700 nanometers), SIM showed a slight increase in comparison to what was expected. Measurements (red) from another ultraviolet radiation-sensing instrument called SOLSTICE compare well with those from SIM

I can not find the chart I was looking for but this NASA PDF has something similar.

SUMMARY
* The Sun is always active in the EUV
* Current spectral models are lacking.
* Flares are complicated (and really interesting) in the EUV
SDO (all instruments) and the relatively simple Sun in the 1st year of operations are helping us unravel the solar EUV spectral irradiance variability.

The EVE data is held by Colorado.edu link
the Solar Dynamics Observatory Mission blog has done a plot over a couple days time graph from this link.
The other piece of information everyone ignores is the variation in Total Solar Irradiance on a daily basis graph

Daily variation in solar output is due to the passage of sunspots across the face of the Sun as the Sun rotates on its axis about once a month. These daily changes can be even larger than the variation during the 11-year solar cycle. However, such short-term variation has little effect on climate. The graph above shows total solar irradiance on a daily basis. The plot is based on data collected by the ACRIM III instrument, which is currently in orbit. (Graph by Robert Simmon, based on data from ACRIM III)
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/SORCE/sorce_03.php

Yet we can see in this graph the effect on temperature of the air and sand during a total eclipse graph

Giant Breach in Earth’s Magnetic Field Discovered
NASA’s five THEMIS spacecraft have discovered a breach in Earth’s magnetic field ten times larger than anything previously thought to exist. Solar wind can flow in through the opening to “load up” the magnetosphere for powerful geomagnetic storms. But the breach itself is not the biggest surprise. Researchers are even more amazed at the strange and unexpected way it forms, overturning long-held ideas of space physics.
“At first I didn’t believe it,” says THEMIS project scientist David Sibeck of the Goddard Space Flight Center. “This finding fundamentally alters our understanding of the solar wind-magnetosphere interaction.”
The magnetosphere is a bubble of magnetism that surrounds Earth and protects us from solar wind. Exploring the bubble is a key goal of the THEMIS mission, launched in February 2007. The big discovery came on June 3, 2007, when the five probes serendipitously flew through the breach just as it was opening. Onboard sensors recorded a torrent of solar wind particles streaming into the magnetosphere, signaling an event of unexpected size and importance….

In other words, despite the pronouncements of the solar and atmospheric experts they know diddle squat about the sun and how it effects the climate on earth.

Chuck Nolan

“Not only are the results of this paper important for better understanding climate change, but this paper is also important because it uses a new approach to try to better understand climate change; it uses observational data on a short time scale to try to look at cause and effect, which is something that is rarely done in climate research,” said Feldstein. “Also, our results are consistent with climate models, so this paper provides support that climate models are performing well at simulating the atmospheric response to ozone and greenhouse gases.”
————–
“Use observational data on a short time scale”
Since “looking for cause and effect on short time scales” is not a new approach to their scientific method, I’d have to say the new approach must be “using observational data” to “better understand climate change”.
I wonder if the observational data was from the models?
Dummies…and here you thought the science was settled.
While these brilliant scientists on their own figured out another “new approach to better understand climate change.”
Thank goodness someone is finally looking at short time scales.
One other note they mention: “changes in the Southern Hemisphere jet stream.”
I thought the SH temp and snow were doing ok.
cn