![latest_512_4500[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/latest_512_450011.jpg?w=300&resize=240%2C240)
It’s known by climatologists as the ‘Little Ice Age’, a period in the 1600s when harsh winters across the UK and Europe were often severe.
The severe cold went hand in hand with an exceptionally inactive sun, and was called the Maunder solar minimum.
Now a leading scientist from Reading University has told me that the current rate of decline in solar activity is such that there’s a real risk of seeing a return of such conditions.
I’ve been to see Professor Mike Lockwood to take a look at the work he has been conducting into the possible link between solar activity and climate patterns.
According to Professor Lockwood the late 20th century was a period when the sun was unusually active and a so called ‘grand maximum’ occurred around 1985.
Since then the sun has been getting quieter.
By looking back at certain isotopes in ice cores, he has been able to determine how active the sun has been over thousands of years.
Following analysis of the data, Professor Lockwood believes solar activity is now falling more rapidly than at any time in the last 10,000 years.
He found 24 different occasions in the last 10,000 years when the sun was in exactly the same state as it is now – and the present decline is faster than any of those 24.
Based on his findings he’s raised the risk of a new Maunder minimum from less than 10% just a few years ago to 25-30%.
And a repeat of the Dalton solar minimum which occurred in the early 1800s, which also had its fair share of cold winters and poor summers, is, according to him, ‘more likely than not’ to happen.
He believes that we are already beginning to see a change in our climate – witness the colder winters and poor summers of recent years – and that over the next few decades there could be a slide to a new Maunder minimum.
It’s worth stressing that not every winter would be severe; nor would every summer be poor. But harsh winters and unsettled summers would become more frequent.
Professor Lockwood doesn’t hold back in his description of the potential impacts such a scenario would have in the UK.
He says such a change to our climate could have profound implications for energy policy and our transport infrastructure.
Although the biggest impact of such solar driven change would be regional, like here in the UK and across Europe, there would be global implications too.
According to research conducted by Michael Mann in 2001, a vociferous advocate of man-made global warming, the Maunder minimum of the 1600s was estimated to have shaved 0.3C to 0.4C from global temperatures.
It is worth stressing that most scientists believe long term global warming hasn’t gone away. Any global cooling caused by this natural phenomenon would ultimately be temporary, and if projections are correct, the long term warming caused by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases would eventually swamp this solar-driven cooling.
But should North Western Europe be heading for a new “little ice age”, there could be far reaching political implications – not least because global temperatures may fall enough, albeit temporarily, to eliminate much of the warming which has occurred since the 1950s.
You can see more on Inside Out on Monday 28th October on BBC1, at 7.30pm.
###
From http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/posts/Real-risk-of-a-Maunder-minimum-Little-Ice-Age-says-leading-scientist
==============================================================
Back in 2011, Lockwood said something totally dissimilar:
“The Little Ice Age wasn’t really an ice age of any kind – the idea that Europe had a relentless sequence of cold winters is frankly barking” – Dr Mike Lockwood Reading University
From: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/10/bbc-the-little-ice-age-was-all-about-solar-uv-variability-wasnt-an-ice-age-at-all/
I have a follow-on article coming up on UV observations in a couple of hours, don’t miss it.
Meanwhile the sun has recently gotten more active in the last couple of weeks, indicating a possible second peak in the current solar cycle is upon us, see details on the WUWT Solar reference page – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Allan MacRae says: October 30, 2013 at 7:53 am
Solar Cycle 24 looks more like a Dalton Minimum than a Maunder Minimum
lsvalgaard says: October 30, 2013 at 8:16 am
Based on what?
************
SSNmax circa 50 for Dalton (2 Solar Cycles) and circa 65? for SC24.
But SSN’s for the Maunder appear similar to the Dalton and SC24 – also 2 SC’s circa 60.
So I stand corrected, I think.
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/solar/image/annual.gif
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/space-weather/solar-data/solar-indices/sunspot-numbers/international/tables/
Allan MacRae says:
October 30, 2013 at 10:26 am
So I stand corrected, I think.
The point is that at the ‘entrance’ to the Maunder Minimum we also had similar low cycles so it is too early to tell.
Leif, your prediction of SSNmax for SC24 in ~2005 was quite good, about 70 as I recall.
In December 2006, NASA predicted SC24 would be an active one at ~160. A bit high.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/21dec_cycle24.htm
NASA in 2006 predicted SC25 to be very low. I have not found an update. From their graph, it looks like SSNmax of about 60.
http://science1.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2006/10may_longrange/
Solar Cycle 25 peaking around 2022 could be one of the weakest in centuries..
May 10, 2006: The Sun’s Great Conveyor Belt has slowed to a record-low crawl, according to research by NASA solar physicist David Hathaway. “It’s off the bottom of the charts,” he says. “This has important repercussions for future solar activity.”
Have you made any prediction for SC25?
Allan MacRae says:
October 30, 2013 at 11:38 am
Have you made any prediction for SC25?
A highly speculative one is here: http://www.leif.org/research/apjl2012-Liv-Penn-Svalg.pdf
Come 2016 we should see the new polar field build and from then on I think we can predict with some confidence, not before.
In reply to:
lsvalgaard says:
October 30, 2013 at 10:17 am
William Astley says:
October 30, 2013 at 9:19 am
The solar large scale magnetic field has dropped 50% which by the way supports Lockwood’s assertion that it rose 50% from 1900 to 1985.
You are misrepresenting Lockwood. He claimed in the Nature paper you linked to that the field rose 130% [by a factor of 2.3]
William:
I did not misread Lockwood. There are two solar components that affect aa, the poloidal and toroidal fields. The poloidal field has dropped by 50%. The toroidal field (open flux) creates coronal holes and CME both of which create the solar wind bursts which removes cloud forming ions and also disturbs the geomagnetic field.
It appears the toroidal field is in the process of dropping, if it is, aa will continue to drop reaching a level that is a factor 2.3 lower than its peak retracing the rise.
The following paper assumes their two year observation of the sun represents normal typical solar activity. There are ignoring the fact that the magnetic field strength of newly formed sunspots is decaying linearly which is anomalous, indicating the sun is in a very unusual state. i.e. There needs to a physical explanation of why the magnetic field strength of newly formed sunspots is decaying linearly.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.8422
Detection of Equatorward Meridional Flow and Evidence of Double-Cell
Meridional Circulation inside the Sun
It is necessary to explain why the magnetic field strength of newly formed sunspots is decaying linearly. Thinking in terms of the tachocline model where it is assumed the magnetic flux tubes are created at the tachocline, that model for the normal solar state uses the residual sunspots to move down to the tachocline to form the next cycle of sunspots. Now if the above paper is correct and the magnetic flux tubes are formed at the tachocline, then the residual sunspot magnetic flux is no longer travelling done to the tachocline.
As I have stated before it appears we are going to observe how a once in around 6000 to 10,000 year special solar magnetic cycle change causes a Heinrich event.
William Astley says:
October 30, 2013 at 11:57 am
I did not misread Lockwood. There are two solar components that affect aa, the poloidal and toroidal fields. The poloidal field has dropped by 50%. The toroidal field (open flux) creates coronal holes and CME both of which create the solar wind bursts which removes cloud forming ions and also disturbs the geomagnetic field.
Lockwood is talking about the Open Flux. You are confusing toroidal and poloidal.
It appears the toroidal field is in the process of dropping, if it is, aa will continue to drop reaching a level that is a factor 2.3 lower than its peak retracing the rise.
The open flux is already down to where it was in 1901.
Now if the above paper is correct and the magnetic flux tubes are formed at the tachocline, then the residual sunspot magnetic flux is no longer travelling done to the tachocline.
You are totally confused. The simplest explanation that fits the observations is that the flux tubes are not formed at the tachocline.
As I have stated before it appears we are going to observe how a once in around 6000 to 10,000 year special solar magnetic cycle change causes a Heinrich event.
It appears that there is no evidence for that. Especially since those events are not caused by the Sun in the first place.
Allan MacRae says: October 30, 2013 at 11:38 am
Have you made any prediction for SC25?
lsvalgaard says: October 30, 2013 at 11:43 am
A highly speculative one is here: http://www.leif.org/research/apjl2012-Liv-Penn-Svalg.pdf
Come 2016 we should see the new polar field build and from then on I think we can predict with some confidence, not before.
DECREASING SUNSPOT MAGNETIC FIELDS EXPLAIN UNIQUE 10.7 cm RADIO FLUX
By extrapolating our sunspot formation fraction to the predicted
peak of Cycle 24 (in mid-2013) the sunspot formation
fraction would be approaching 0.5. This suggests a rather small
SSN for this cycle, in agreement with some recent Cycle 24
predictions (Svalgaard et al. 2005; Hathaway 2012). And while
there is no physical mechanism which suggests that we should
extrapolate further, it is fascinating to see that the sunspot formation
fraction would drop below 0.2 by 2020. This would
suggest that although magnetic flux would be erupting at the
solar surface during Cycle 25, only a small fraction of it would
be strong enough to form visible sunspots or pores. Such behavior
would be highly unusual, since such a small solar maximum
has not been observed since the Maunder Minimum. During
that period from roughly 1645 to 1715, few sunspots were
observed, although cosmic-ray studies suggest the Sun did have
a functioning magnetic activity cycle (Usoskin et al. 2001);
this is consistent with the scenario provided by our fit extrapolation.
A recent study of sunspot records suggests that the
Maunder Minimum began with two small sunspot cycles with
roughly the same amplitude as predicted by our extrapolation for
Cycle 25 (Vaquero et al. 2011). Finally, it is interesting to note
that there seems to be a strange lack of the normal precursors for
Cycle 25 as observed with helioseismic and coronal emission
line indicators (Hill et al. 2011; Altrock 2011).
************
Thank you Leif. You suggest, at a highly speculative level, that SC25 looks very weak.
You and NASA are apparently in approximate agreement, although it is still very early in the game.
This suggests that I should consider moving south – ‘way south.
Best regards, Allan
lsvalgaard says:
October 28, 2013 at 3:34 pm
Our colleague Tamitha Skov has been producing excellent space weather and forecasting videos on her own time. The latest involves the recent solar activity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbrtIBja-Qs5
—-
That’s pretty cool stuff there Dr. S.
The linked video, describes four shocks, that were Earth directed at the time. How bout that. She uses some cool solar imaging that I have not seen before.
More about that stuff that doesn’t penetrate the supersonic solar wind. Or not..
Though this does not describe our star exactly, once again we have many similarities. In this model no external disk formed..but we do have a stronger quadrupole region for or example..
Full 3-D MHD calculations of accretion flow Structure in
magnetic cataclysmic variable stars with strong and
complex magnetic fields
Zhilkin A.G.1;2, Bisikalo D.V.1, Mason P.A.3;4
15 Oct. 2012
Abstract
.. Our models have an aligned dipole plus quadrupole magnetic field centered on the white dwarf primary. We find that for a sufficiently strong quadrupole component an accretion spot
occurs near the magnetic equator for slightly less than half of our
simulations while a polar accretion zone is active for most of the rest of the simulations.
For two configurations, accretion at the dominant polar region and at an equatorial zone
occurs simultaneously. Most polar studies assume that the magnetic field structure is dipolar, especially for single pole accretors. We demonstrate that for orbital
parameters and magnetic field strengths typical of polars, accretion flow patterns
are widely variable in the presence of a complex magnetic field.
We suggest that it might be difficult to observationally determine if the field is a pure dipole or if it is complex for many polars, but there will be indications
for some systems. Specifically, a complex magnetic field should be considered
if the there is an accretion zone near the white dwarf’s spin equator (assumed
to be in the orbital plane) or if there are two or more accretion regions that cannot be fit by a dipole magnetic field. For asynchronous polars, magnetic field constraints are expected to be substantially stronger, with clearer indicators of complex field geometry due to changes in accretion
flow structure as a function of azimuthal angle….
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1210.3999v1.pdf
I saw one of the first posters say, “I can already hear the Leif blower spinning up.”
I started laughing to myself when I saw that because I knew I wouldn’t get through this page without seeing “the Leif Blower” as it’s so accurately nicknamed, make an utter fool of himself and every looptard who tried to back science into a bottle and put in the stopper with this Magic Gas thing.
Here’s one I love from the Leif Blower: “A warm rock illuminated by a gigantic light, simply decides to cool and warm, utterly independently of known boundary constraints of proportionate physics; and screw that giant heat source.
“This is the era of Magic Gais, boys, who needs reality based thinkin! There’s GRANT MONEY, and the supply is only limited by the lies you’ll tell! It’s your lifestyle or your legacy, yew decide!”
====
I’ve grown so disgusted by bloviating hicks who tried to tell us all a giant light was on in the sky, and the sun isn’t the controlling factor of the temperature of the earth –
one thing occurred to me recently about ALL these LIARS:
They all make great claim that they’re the messenger of some light.
But wherever you look when you check the stories they told you, there’s only darkness.
They swore to you.
They censored your writings,
They made great pretense of potential “illegality” of expression of opinion,
The entire cadre of wackos associated with this world, cultural fiasco of crime fraud and pure evil,
assigned themselves gate keepers for you as to whether you have permission to know how a light works.
Well we all see, clearly, in the light of unfolding reality:
Nearly every last one of these “messengers of light” frauds has been proven utterly, utterly off in loon-tuneville from the
very
first
assertion.
People trying to claim a frigid gas bath warms, a warm rock immersed in it.
People trying to claim a nitrogen/oxygen frigid fluid bath with a one percent shot of phase change refrigerant – water – was the source of a mysterious light, nobody could understand but hicks whose work you wouldn’t sign your name to drunk.
A mysterious light was being given off by a class of gas, and we all had to shut up and “give the experts the respect they deserve.”
They deserve to be tarred and feathered, every one who ever claimed he actually believed in the giant magic gas light in the sky.
This fraud has cost humanity untold billions and just plain dignity, and anybody who’ll tell you they think there’s a giant magic infrared light on in the sky only believers can grasp, deserves to have his face spit into and mocked personally to his face.
The same goes for these wackos claiming the laws of physics got magically plundered for grant money’s sake, and the sun’s now, not even capable of holding up it’s end of simple, classical thermal/thermodynamic facts.
I guess we all see who the real “messengers of light” turned out to be
versus who the “messengers of darkness” turned out to be.
It’s just been a massive plunder of humanity’s trust in others. It’s been a massive plunder by people who have insulted the entire human race
claiming “we understand the magic light in the gas. You don’t.”
While billions of dollars have been bilked from us all and freedoms from freedom of speech to simply using fire,
have come under the thrall of evil, manipulative, Academics and media trash whose sole claim to importance is that they’re important because they’re important.
It’s been evil like nobody’s business and the creepy crawlies that infest the entire thing are only offset by a VERY FEW who told everybody from the beginning:
There’s no magic light
in the magic gas.
It’s a lie from messengers of darkness who swear to you, they are messengers of a light.
Well we checked.
The Magic Gas Light Liars Club
has had it’s face rubbed in it’s lying stupidity,
and sheer evil
not for the last time by a long, long shot,
There was supposed to be a period at the end of
“not for the last time by a long, long shot.”
Steven R. Vada says: October 31, 2013 at 8:18 am & 8:33 am
Sorry you missed your period Steve. 🙂
WTF are you trying to say?
Professor Mike Lockwood seeks to correct those who, like Paul Hudson, misrepresent his work: “Unfortunately, I now find myself in the position of being cited as predicting that the current rapid decline in solar activity will plunge the world into a “Little Ice Age”. This is very disappointing as it is not at all supported by the science.”
Read his article at http://www.carbonbrief.org/5162.aspx
I’ll see your “We’re all to vapid to know” and raise you
“Let’s see you find somebody who can do this.”
The twenty minute mark where he says …..this….black….line..
iframe=true&width=80%25&height=80%25
Magic Gas believers have the credibility of carnival barkers.