Note: Between flaccid climate sensitivity, ENSO driving “the pause”, and now this, it looks like the upcoming IPCC AR5 report will be obsolete the day it is released.
From a Technical University of Denmark press release comes what looks to be a significant confirmation of Svensmark’s theory of temperature modulation on Earth by cosmic ray interactions. The process is that when there are more cosmic rays, they help create more microscopic cloud nuclei, which in turn form more clouds, which reflect more solar radiation back into space, making Earth cooler than what it normally might be. Conversely, less cosmic rays mean less cloud cover and a warmer planet as indicated here. The sun’s magnetic field is said to deflect cosmic rays when its solar magnetic dynamo is more active, and right around the last solar max, we were at an 8000 year high, suggesting more deflected cosmic rays, and warmer temperatures. Now the sun has gone into a record slump, and there are predictions of cooler temperatures ahead This new and important paper is published in Physics Letters A. – Anthony
Danish experiment suggests unexpected magic by cosmic rays in cloud formation
Researchers in the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) are hard on the trail of a previously unknown molecular process that helps commonplace clouds to form. Tests in a large and highly instrumented reaction chamber in Lyngby, called SKY2, demonstrate that an existing chemical theory is misleading.
Back in 1996 Danish physicists suggested that cosmic rays, energetic particles from space, are important in the formation of clouds. Since then, experiments in Copenhagen and elsewhere have demonstrated that cosmic rays actually help small clusters of molecules to form. But the cosmic-ray/cloud hypothesis seemed to run into a problem when numerical simulations of the prevailing chemical theory pointed to a failure of growth.
Fortunately the chemical theory could also be tested experimentally, as was done with SKY2, the chamber of which holds 8 cubic metres of air and traces of other gases. One series of experiments confirmed the unfavourable prediction that the new clusters would fail to grow sufficiently to be influential for clouds. But another series of experiments, using ionizing rays, gave a very different result, as can be seen in the accompanying figure.
The reactions going on in the air over our heads mostly involve commonplace molecules. During daylight hours, ultraviolet rays from the Sun encourage sulphur dioxide to react with ozone and water vapour to make sulphuric acid. The clusters of interest for cloud formation consist mainly of sulphuric acid and water molecules clumped together in very large numbers and they grow with the aid of other molecules.
Atmospheric chemists have assumed that when the clusters have gathered up the day’s yield, they stop growing, and only a small fraction can become large enough to be meteorologically relevant. Yet in the SKY2 experiment, with natural cosmic rays and gamma-rays keeping the air in the chamber ionized, no such interruption occurs. This result suggests that another chemical process seems to be supplying the extra molecules needed to keep the clusters growing.
“The result boosts our theory that cosmic rays coming from the Galaxy are directly involved in the Earth’s weather and climate,” says Henrik Svensmark, lead author of the new report. “In experiments over many years, we have shown that ionizing rays help to form small molecular clusters. Critics have argued that the clusters cannot grow large enough to affect cloud formation significantly. But our current research, of which the reported SKY2 experiment forms just one part, contradicts their conventional view. Now we want to close in on the details of the unexpected chemistry occurring in the air, at the end of the long journey that brought the cosmic rays here from exploded stars.”
###
The new paper is:
Response of cloud condensation nuclei (>50 nm) to changes in ion-nucleation” H. Svensmark, Martin B. Enghoff, Jens Olaf Pepke Pedersen, Physics Letters A 377 (2013) 2343–2347.
In experiments where ultraviolet light produces aerosols from trace amounts of ozone, sulfur dioxide,and water vapor, the relative increase in aerosols produced by ionization by gamma sources is constant from nucleation to diameters larger than 50 nm, appropriate for cloud condensation nuclei. This resultcontradicts both ion-free control experiments and also theoretical models that predict a decline in the response at larger particle sizes. This unpredicted experimental finding points to a process not included in current theoretical models, possibly an ion-induced formation of sulfuric acid in small clusters.
FULL PAPER LINK PROVIDED IN THE PRESS RERLEASE: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/51188502/PLA22068.pdf (open access PDF)
LOCAL COPY: (for those having trouble with link above): Svensmark_PLA22068 (PDF)
(h/t to “me” in WUWT Tips and Notes)
Related articles
- EcoAlert: “Milky Way’s Cosmic Rays Have Direct Impact on Earth’s Weather & Climate” (dailygalaxy.com)
- Unexpected magic by cosmic rays in cloud formation (sciencedaily.com)
- Danish experiment suggests unexpected magic by cosmic rays in cloud formation (phys.org)
- Svensmark Effect Attacked: Study claims cosmic rays don’t effect clouds (junkscience.com)
- Ten Year Anniversary of the Climate Change Paradigm Shift (americanthinker.com)
- Spencer’s posited 1-2% cloud cover variation found (wattsupwiththat.com)
Added: an explanatory video from John Coleman –
And this documentary:
To my mind for this idea to work it also needs to be linked to changes in the jet.
Because a weaker waving and more unstable jet would lead to more cloud cover. Due to the warm and cold air blocks meeting over larger areas. Also a weaker jet in summer means you get a increase in weak and floppy lows forming. Which leads to a increase in capping and so more cloud cover forming in layers rather then the towering Cumulus cloud.
Also along with a more waving jet there also seems to be a increase in wind shear. Which along with reducing the forming of hurricanes it also helps to spread the cloud cover over a larger area. You only need to look at the Fulldisk satellite images of the lndian ocean to see this in action.
Thankyou for your perseverance, Professor Svensmark!
“One could speculate endlessly, but before we settle for the GCR, TSI, SCL or any other variable as a primary cause for the decadal global temperature change, it is of fundamental importance to understand all the causal or coincidental geo-solar, factual or apparent links.”
Exactly. Everything affects everything.
Stephen Wilde says:
“Interesting but still doesn’t explain the circulation changes between zonal and meridional jets with varying degrees of atmospheric ‘blocking’.”
True, I don’t see what cloud variation has to do with the AO changing, especially at the kind of scales that it changes at.
Henrik Svensmark,
Congratulations on the publication of your new research on cosmic ray interaction with the Earth-Atmosphere System.
Going forward, I hope you still have the energy, enterprise and entrepreneurial skills to keep your line of research alive.
I find it encouraging that there is a significant line of research which is independent and orthogonal to the myopic AGW research. Your efforts are a wakeup signal to the AGW biased climate community which is the basis of the unbalanced and manipulated IPCC assessment processes.
Mr Svensmark, it is possible that you are inspiring new generations of scientists to actively seek orthogonal and independent paths.
: )
John
” David says:
September 4, 2013 at 9:35 am
Absolutely, it was always going to be magnetic/gravitational modulation of cosmic rays together with solar activity.
Piers Corbyn isn’t looking so silly now is he?
Of course the warmists are going to attempt to blame the pause on this effect which may be difficult if the cloud cover records don’t match the temperature plateau.
REPLY: Piers looks silly because he makes grandiose forecast skill claims that are so vaguely written they can compete with Jeane Dixon style astrological forecast language, not because he believe is cosmic ray modulation – Anthony”
I am no expert on Piers Corbyn .
But for the record, Piers Corbyn does not endorse Svendmarks theory of cosmic rays controlling climate.
Corbyn has said its only the Sun/Earth/Moon magnetic connection that controls weather and climate.
Anthony I wish you would further examine Corbyns forecasts.
They are very specific.IMO too specific as he could have a better track record if he fudged dates more.
Im amazed by what he accomplishes.(Although I havent properly audited his entire forecasts.Nor has this site)
Whats impressive is his prediction of specific extreme weather events.
Bill Parsons says:
September 4, 2013 at 9:37 am
Does Svensmark suggest that the level of cosmic radiation is in flux – or that fluctuations in the sun’s energies cause variations in the earth’s magnetic shield?
==========================================
I dont think they do but here is some food for thought.
The sun is like a wave machine in a pool. When waves are high they consume things passing by and redirect them. When there are no waves the items skip readily across it.
As a child I used to skip rocks on a pond and on a river. When the river or pond has waves the rock doesn’t make it across the pond. When its calm it is very easy to get the rock to skip across the pond. Solar wind are waves of energy. When the solar output is low there are few waves to collect these particles and they strike the planet. When solar wind is high the number of particles is significantly lower.
Just one more external force which has an effect on our climate
richardscourtney says:
September 4, 2013 at 2:22 pm
Very well said. The modern mind is not well-suited for the patience necessary for science. Svensmark is a remarkable exception. Both Alarmists and Skeptics tend think that the next article will provide the solution if we only exercise our ingenuity fully.
Ulric Lyons says:
September 4, 2013 at 3:46 pm
True, I don’t see what cloud variation has to do with the AO changing, especially at the kind of scales that it changes at.
========================
Look to the planets heat budget. Right now the poles are cooling rapidly so the energy is pushing out from the poles. Remember the flow of energy is always negative to positive. In a cooling world the wind shear and jets will reflect the strength of the negative position. In a warmer world it becomes less negative and thus the shift will be equatorial to poles moving the jets as less energy is exerted against the equatorial jets.
Bill H says:
“Right now the poles are cooling rapidly..”
The Arctic has been cooler this summer due to a more positive AO/NAO, but look what happened last summer. If we get a whole bunch of cool summers this decade, we’ll see much warming in the Arctic. I didn’t really follow the rest of your comment.
Stephen, Ulric & Bill,
It seems reasonable to me that an increase in low tropospheric cloud cover could affect air circulation patterns & mean global temperature.
Consider the case of the hothouse Cretaceous, with its equable climate, showing little temperature gradient from the equator to the poles. Contrast that situation with the icehouse world of today & even moreso of glacial phases. The colder, drier world is windier, with storm tracks possibly farther south.
This paper attempts to explain the failure of GC models to reproduce Cretaceous climate by their neglect of clouds & CCNs of biological origin. Needless to say it wasn’t welcomed by the Team.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/320/5873/195.abstract
Ulric Lyons says:
September 4, 2013 at 5:43 pm
Bill H says:
“Right now the poles are cooling rapidly..”
The Arctic has been cooler this summer due to a more positive AO/NAO, but look what happened last summer. If we get a whole bunch of cool summers this decade, we’ll see much warming in the Arctic. I didn’t really follow the rest of your comment.
==================================
Think of it this way. The power exerted outward from the poles controls flows. If you have high flow you will have high air turnover and thus warming (or what you perceive as warming) This is deceptive as the fact is, the cold is being pushed deeply towards the equator. (negative to positive flow – energy physics). The Ocean oscillations will amplify or buffer the intensity of the change.
When the planet is warming their is less energy at the poles and thus less flow. This allows the equatorial jets to expand and move upward. this expands the areas of warmer or temperate zones.
It is only when the planets energy budget comes close to equilibrium that balance is found between the polar and equatorial jets. Right now the polar jets are much stronger than they were just 10 years ago. yes it is cooling, But the ice formation in the arctic is delayed until the heat budget returns closer to equilibrium. Given the Antarctic increase this year we are nearing that dream balance. The arctic is always about 2 years behind the antarctic (im not sure why) but here we are and i expect the ice rebound to become very rapid the next few years.
To add to my last post, the sun is now beyond solar max and cooling will continue at the poles. Depending on the severity of the continued cooling the energy imbalance may slow ice formation for a few more years. The key is ocean oscillations. What are they now and how will they amplify or buffer what is going on. Were on the cooling side of many of them. This leads me to believe that ice will rebound significantly the next few years in the Arctic as the Antarctic has done. There simply wont be much heat available to continue the melt.
Stephen Wilde says: September 4, 2013 at 2:55 pm
While there is little doubt the climate system is full of self-regulatory mechanisms I’d have to note that surely this (cosmic ray effect) is a question of degree and timing – how much there is and how long the process takes.
If some event resulted in a steady escalation of cosmic ray reaching earth over a prolonged period, the cloud formation may escalate over that time period, with the climate eventually reaching a new normal and stabilizing (or fluctuating) around that level of temperature, cloud cover etc. Until the cosmic ray flux changes again.
If there is no initial thermal effect then the creation of an extra cloud molecule in one place will be canceled by the dissipation of another cloud molecule elsewhere.
This may eventually occur: More clouds = cooler climate = less water vapour in the air = less chance of droplet nuclei forming. But then (for that level of cosmic ray flux) the thermostat has been set at a new level.
Well that’s odd..
The potential heat loss due to increased cloud cover is precisely the heat that Trenbreth has lost..
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Thanks, Anthony and “me”.
This is good news!
So the sun is the centre of the climate universe, and not humans.
Bill H says:
September 4, 2013 at 6:53 pm
The missing heat is hiding in water vapor in the sky instead of sea water deep in the oceans.
Hallelujah, it’s Cosmic Rays,
Hallelujah, they’re making clouds.
Hallelujah, Man’s not to blame,
Burning coal now without any shame.
oldseadog says:
September 4, 2013 at 10:37 am
oldseadog,
Politicians will never let this go. It means they can get more taxes and they are always interested in getting more taxes. If the ‘blame’ for the taxes can be transferred to a scientific concept few understand, it is the best of all worlds.
Any HAMS in the crowd? If you are a HF radio operator you know the myth about a constant sun is a myth. Solar min, you can barely reach your neighbors. Solar max you can reach around the world with less power than a light bulb. Sunspots are your measure, not TSI.
This can’t be right… there’s no way to tax, cap or trade cosmic rays.
How are the eco-nazis going to push their Luddite agenda now?
The leap made too far. I think folks are over-playing their hand re: a tiny difference causing a huge chain of events. Anthony’s color commentary is a good example of such a leap that is entirely unsubstantiated by the research article. What is important is the presence or absence of equatorial clouds and at a certain time span of the day. If cloud seeding is to measurably affect ENSO which then measurably affects land temperatures, any variance of something external like cosmic rays needs to be greater than the noise of natural intrinsic variation.
So no I am not buying this as proof of a Solar-Earth climate connection. It may indeed be yet another teeny tiny thing everybody goes gaga over….just like they did with anthropogenic CO2.
“There is no doubt that AR5 will be obsolete when it is published; the problem will be getting MSM and the politicians to say so.”
The Alarmists Report 5 needs to be balanced with a Realists Report 1 containing the recent papers
not in the AR5.
Do any of the satellites have laser sounders tuned to sulfuric acid and water vapor molecules so that we could scan the atmosphere to see if this reaction is taking place?