
By WUWT Regular “Just The Facts”
If you aren’t familiar with Stratospheric Polar Vortexes, you can get acquainted here, here and here.
“A strong link exists between stratospheric variability and anomalous weather patterns at the earth’s surface. Specifically, during extreme variability of the Arctic polar vortex termed a “weak vortex event,” anomalies can descend from the upper stratosphere to the surface on time scales of weeks. Subsequently the outbreak of cold-air events have been noted in high northern latitudes, as well as a quadrupole pattern in surface temperature over the Atlantic and western European sectors, but it is currently not understood why certain events descend to the surface while others do not. This study compares a new classification technique of weak vortex events, based on the distribution of potential vorticity, with that of an existing technique and demonstrates that the subdivision of such events into vortex displacements and vortex splits has important implications for tropospheric weather patterns on weekly to monthly time scales. Using reanalysis data it is found that vortex splitting events are correlated with surface weather and lead to positive temperature anomalies over eastern North America of more than 1.5 K, and negative anomalies over Eurasia of up to −3 K. Associated with this is an increase in high-latitude blocking in both the Atlantic and Pacific sectors and a decrease in European blocking. The corresponding signals are weaker during displacement events, although ultimately they are shown to be related to cold-air outbreaks over North America. Because of the importance of stratosphere–troposphere coupling for seasonal climate predictability, identifying the type of stratospheric variability in order to capture the correct surface response will be necessary.” Mitchell et al. 2012 – Paywalled
During January 2014 the Northern Stratospheric Polar Vortex appears to have experienced a weak vortex event and displacement, i.e. here is a 10 hPa/mb – Approximately 31,000 meters (101,700 feet) Height Analysis showing the low pressure area of the Stratospheric Polar Vortex being displaced (squeezed) on January 7th;

and this Northern Hemisphere Temperature Analysis at 10 hPa/mb shows the Northern Stratospheric Polar Vortex apparently with two lobes on January 11th, 2014:

Northern Polar Wind at 10 hPa/mb also shows the Stratospheric Polar Vortex still displaced at present (if you click on the picture it will link to an animated version):

– NCEP / National Weather Service / NOAA – Click the pic to view animated at source
and when Polar Wind is overlaid with Temperature, you can clearly see the cold “air from very high altitudes” that descends “through the center of the vortex, moving air to lower altitudes over several months,” “NASA” (Click the pic to animate):

“Large regions in northern Asia, Europe and North America have been found to cool during the mature and late stages of weak vortex events in the stratosphere. A substantial part of the temperature changes are associated with changes in the Northern Annular Mode (NAM) and North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) pressure patterns in the troposphere. The apparent coupling between the stratosphere and the troposphere may be of relevance for weather forecasting, but only if the temporal and spatial nature of the coupling is known. Using 51 winters of reanalysis data, we show that the development of the lower-tropospheric temperature relative to stratospheric weak polar vortex events goes through a series of well-defined stages, including the formation of geographically distinct cold air outbreaks. At the inception of weak vortex events, a precursor signal in the form of a strong high-pressure anomaly over north west Eurasia is associated with long-lived and robust cold anomalies over Asia and Europe. A few weeks later, near the mature stage of the weak vortex events, a shorter-lived cold anomaly emerges off the east coast of North America. The probability of cold air outbreaks increases by more than 50% in one or more of these regions during all phases of the weak vortex events. This shows that the stratospheric polar vortex contains information that can be used to enhance forecasts of cold air outbreaks. As large changes in the frequency of extremes are involved, this process is important for the medium-range and seasonal prediction of extreme cold winter days.” Kolstad et al. 2010
Here is Northern Hemisphere – Vertical Cross Section of Geopotential Height Anomalies and the Northern Annular Mode (NAM) or Arctic Oscillation (AO) Index, which shows large positive Height Anomalies and the AO swinging negative in January:

And here is North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) Index for the prior 4 Months, showing a positive swing in mid-January:

So what caused the weak vortex event, displacement of the Northern Stratospheric Polar Vortex and cold air outbreaks?
There are several potential factors:
“A vortex displacement event is associated with anomalously high wavenumber-1 planetary wave activity entering the stratosphere and is characterized by a vortex with a comma-like shape that is shifting equatorward. Often this shifting occurs ‘‘top down’’ and the vortex has a baroclinic structure. Subsequently the Aleutian high, a weak anti- cyclone, encroaches over the pole and is especially dominant at lower levels.”
“A vortex splitting event is associated with anomalously high wavenumber-2 planetary wave activity entering the stratosphere. During such an event the vortex barotropically splits into two ‘‘daughter’’ vortices that tend to align along the 90°E – 90°W axis, with one centered over Siberia and the other centered over northeastern Canada (Matthewman et al. 2009, hereafter M09).”
“Analyses show that the most extreme vortex variability occurs most commonly in late January and early February, consistent with when most planetary wave driving from the troposphere is observed. Composites around sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) events reveal that the moment diagnostics evolve in statistically different ways between vortex splitting events and vortex displacement events, in contrast to the traditional diagnostics.” Mitchell et al. 2011
Planetary Wave 1 activity can be see on this Zonal Wave #1 Amplitude Jan, Feb, March Time Series;

and Planetary Wave 2 on this Zonal Wave #2 Amplitude Jan, Feb, March Time Series:

There was some Planetary Wave 2 activity in early January, however there was strong Planetary Wave 1 activity throughout much of the month.
A second likely factor in the weakening and displacement of the Polar Vortex is Eddy Heat, i.e. “strong negative fluxes indicate poleward flux of heat via eddies. Multiple strong poleward episodes will result in a smaller polar vortex, Sudden Stratospheric Warmings and an earlier transition from winter to summer circulations. Relatively small flux amplitudes will result in a more stable polar vortex and will extend the winter circulation well into the Spring.” NOAA
Here you can see that 10 day Averaged Eddy Heat Flux Towards The North Pole At 100mb neared a record daily maximum in early January:

A third potential factor in Polar Vortex behavior is that “geomagnetic activity (used as a measure of solar wind parameters)” plays a role in the “variability of large-scale climate patterns and on changes in the global temperature.”, i.e.: “We have found positive statistically significant correlations between global temperature and the distribution of surface temperature over Eurasia, the East and Equatorial Pacific and over the North Atlantic for the period 1966-2009 correspond to large-scale climate patterns defined by climate indices. We found very similar positive correlations between geomagnetic activity and the distribution of surface temperature in the mentioned regions. As an effect of geomagnetic storms, energetic particles penetrate from the magnetosphere into the region of the stratospheric polar vortex. The increase of temperature and pressure can be observed over northern Canada. The vortex shifts towards Europe, rotates counter-clockwise and the wind blows from the polar region over Greenland southwards. It diverts the warm flow proceeding northward over the Atlantic, eastward along the deep Icelandic low extending as far as the Barents Sea and takes part in warming Eurasia. The strengthened zonal flow from Siberia cools the western Pacific with the impact on the warming of the equatorial and eastern Pacific when also a distinct 1976-78 climate shift occurred. Processes in the Atlantic and Pacific play a significant role and a time delay (wind forcing over the previous 1-4 yr) appears to be the most important for the relocation of the oceanic gyres. Results showing statistically significant relations between time series for geomagnetic activity, for the sum of climate indices and for the global temperature help to verify findings concerning the chain of processes from the magnetosphere to the troposphere.” Studia Geophysica & Geodaetica, Bucha 2012
A Coronal Mass Ejection (CME); hit Earth around January 1st:
Ensemble WSA-ENLIL+Cone Model Evolution Movie for Median CME Input Parameters – Dynamic Pressure:

and the Magnetosphere was rocking and rolling:

However, potential influences of Solar activity on Polar Vorticity are speculative and in the past Leif Svalgaard has challenged the potential that Solar influences on the upper atmosphere could influence Earth’s climate.
Finally, we have the Wobbly Jet Steam hypothesis put forth by Jennifer Francis, of Rutgers University and other, i.e.:
“The Arctic is heating faster than the rest of the world, hurried along by the disappearance of polar sea ice. Bright white ice reflects energy back into space; dark blue water absorbs it. Arctic temperatures are about 2 degrees Celsius warmer there than they were in the mid-1960s. (The average temperature increase for the Earth’s atmosphere overall is about 0.7 degree C, since 1900.)
In other words, the temperature difference between the Arctic and North America is shrinking. That’s one factor causing wobbliness in the jet stream, the west-east current that circles the Northern Hemisphere, according to Jennifer Francis, research professor at Rutgers University. Normally, that river of air keeps low-pressure cold air contained above the Arctic and holds higher-pressure warm air above the temperate regions, where most people live.
Scientists tend to call the jet stream a “polar vortex,” Francis says.
A slowing in the jet stream has caused it to zigzag, carrying warmer temperatures farther north than usual—and Arctic cold farther south. “The real story,” Francis says, is that the jet stream is “taking these big swings north and south and that’s causing unusual weather to occur in a number of places around the Northern Hemisphere.” Bloomberg Businessweek
I am not sure which scientists beyond Jennifer Francis “tend to call the jet stream a ‘polar vortex,'” as these are two distinct and separate climatic phenomena, i.e.:
“The jet stream consists of ribbons of very strong winds which move weather systems around the globe. Jet streams are found 9-16 km above the surface of the Earth, just below the tropopause, and can reach speeds of 200 mph.” Met Office Whereas “the polar vortex extends from the tropopause (the dividing line between the stratosphere and troposphere) through the stratosphere and into the mesosphere (above 50 km). Low values of ozone and cold temperatures are associated with the air inside the vortex.” NASA
This graphic is helpful in seeing the height and location of the Polar Jet, one of the Jet Streams in relation to the Tropopause, down to which the Stratospheric Polar Vortex can extend:

Additionally, in the following image the Stratospheric Polar Vortex is delineated by the “Arctic Front”, whereas the Jet Stream is delineated by the “Polar Front”:
Jennifer Francis’ comment that “Scientist tend to call the jet stream a ‘polar vortex'” reminds me of this graphic:

But I digress, there are two key weaknesses in the Wobbly Jet Steam hypothesis. Firstly, there does not appear to be a correlation between Sea Ice Area and Extent and the Cold Air Outbreaks. Secondly, it seems highly suspect that the extent of Arctic Sea Ice in September and October could have a significant impact on Stratospheric Polar Vortex behavior in January.
From a correlation perspective, the prior most notable Polar Vortex associated Cold Air Outbreak was the January 1985 Arctic Outbreak:
“The January 1985 Arctic outbreak was the result of the shifting of the polar vortex further south than is normally seen. Blocked from its normal movement, polar air from the north pushed into nearly every section of the eastern half of the United States, shattering record lows in a number of states. The effects of the outbreak were damaging. At least 126 deaths were blamed on the cold snap and 90 percent of the citrus crop in Florida was destroyed in what the state called the “Freeze of the Century.” Florida’s citrus industry suffered $1.2 billion in losses ($2.3 billion in 2009 dollars) as a result of the inclement weather. The public inauguration of President Ronald Reagan for his second term was held in the Capitol Rotunda instead of outside due to the cold weather, canceling the inaugural parade in the process. (Because Inauguration Day fell on a Sunday, Reagan took a private oath on January 20 and the semi-public oath on January 21.)” NOAA
(An interesting aside, on January 12, 2014 “KinkyLipids” changed the Wikipedia January 1985 Arctic Outbreak page from ‘Arctic outbreak’ to ‘cold wave’, ‘Janaury’ to ‘Winter’ and “moved page Winter 1985 Arctic outbreak to Winter 1985 cold wave” because “Sources do not use the term ‘Arctic outbreak’. The term ‘cold wave’ matches other Wikipedia articles”. Not sure why one wouldn’t call “the outbreak of cold-air events” an “outbreak”, but you can visit the new Wikipedia “Winter 1985 cold wave” at the old January 1985 Arctic Outbreak link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_1985_Arctic_outbreak)
Regardless of what it’s called, the January 1985 Cold Air Outbreak occurred during a time of slightly above average Northern Sea Ice Area, where the January 2014 Cold Air Outbreak occurred during a time of slightly below average Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area:

Also, Arctic Sea Ice Extent was within two standard deviations of the 1981 – 2010 average for the entirety of 2013:

and there was signifacantly more Sea Ice Area prior to the recent the strong Cold Air Outbreaks occurred, versus 2012 when the Cold Air Outbreaks weren’t as strong:

Aside from the apparent lack of correlation between Cold Air Outbreaks and Arctic Sea Area and Extend, there is another aspect of Arctic Sea Ice that makes the Wobbly Jet Stream hypothesis even wobblier. The Arctic is mostly land locked and freezes over quickly in the Fall. Thus by December Sea Ice Extent has reached across much of the Arctic:

For the Wobbly Jet Stream hypothesis to be correct, either the approximately 1 Million Sq. km Sea Ice Area Anomaly in September and October must have a long lasting residual effect that lingers into January to disrupt the vortex, or the approximately 500K Sq km anomalies in November and December around the periphery of the Arctic are what must weakened and displaces the Stratospheric Polar Vortex.
Even Kevin Trenberth thinks the melting sea ice, warming Arctic, Wobbly Jet Steam causes cold January weather hypothesis is weak, i.e. “So with regards to the Arctic, there are certainly major changes in the Arctic Sea Ice. And those are biggest in the fall. We’ve had record low Arctic Sea Ice, about 40% decline in Arctic Sea Ice overall, since the 1970’s, in September. But the Arctic fills up in the winter time.” “And so at those times of years the Arctic Sea Ice it seems to me plays a much lesser role. The area affected is a lot less, simply because the arctic is land locked.”
So Planetary Waves, Eddy Heat, Geomagnetic Storms or Sea Ice, what do you think caused the weakening and displacement the Northern Stratospheric Polar Vortex in January 2014?
For an array of real time Northern Stratospheric Polar Vortex graphs and graphics please visit the WUWT Northern Polar Vortex Reference Page.
norah4you says:
February 1, 2014 at 6:12 pm
“One other important factor is that Earth’s axis tilt, oblikvidity varies in relation to our Earth’s rotation between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees. A factor forgotten (?) by many scholars still believing in human caused Global warming….”
The obliquity cycle is 41,000 years so while it is the reason for the seasons and one of the main reasons for interglacial periods, it cannot have any effect on the relatively short periods of climate change over the last couple of hundred years.
lsvalgaard says:
February 1, 2014 at 3:59 pm
“If solar activity were a primary factor in Stratospheric Warmings [SSW] one would expect that to occur in both the northern and the southern polar caps as solar-induced geomagnetic activity occurs equally in both hemispheres [being global and occurring at the same time in both polar caps].”
If only there was winter at both poles at the same time, as I fear SSW’s do not occur in summer.
“Firstly, there does not appear to be a correlation between Sea Ice Area and Extent and the Cold Air Outbreaks.”
I would say that it is negative AO and/or NAO episodes that are behind the cold outbreaks *and* the sea ice extent reduction.
R. de Haan says:
February 1, 2014 at 2:01 pm
—————————————
Ok, I watched. Now you watch the SAMPEX and tell me where the tail at the equator is coming from..
Movie of the changing radiation belts as measured by SAMPEX/LICA from January 1, 1998 to March 1, 2005.
check that SAMPEX animation of the radiation belts out JTF. Wish it was a bit slower so you could get a better feel for all the penetration locations. Also, wishing we could see the SAMPEX version of the radiation belts through solar cycle 24. SAMPEX came down the same year the Van Allen Belt Probles went up? I think..
“”and the Magnetosphere was rocking and rolling:”””
And if this action of the Van Allen Radiation belts is related to the above magnetopause region, that would be solar induced wave action and reconnection and much more..like heavy wet blankets overhead.
If Dr. S. is lurking nearby … found a couple of articles about bipolar regions and strangely tilt angles.. of these bipolar regions…and vertical magnetic fields and MRI on flux transportation..
“”A new dynamo pattern revealed by the tilt angle of bipolar
sunspot groups””
The above article was interesting, but on a different scale the article below says .. not it all .. but lots of it..
“”TURBULENCE IN THE OUTER REGIONS OF PROTOPLANETARY DISKS.
II. STRONG ACCRETION DRIVEN BY A VERTICAL MAGNETIC FIELD””
Jacob B. Simon1, Xue-Ning Bai2,3, Philip J. Armitage1,5, James M. Stone4, and Kris Beckwith1,6
Draft version August 14, 2013
We carry out a series of local, vertically stratified shearing box simulations of protoplanetary disks
that include ambipolar diffusion and a net vertical magnetic field. The ambipolar diffusion profiles we
employ correspond to 30AU and 100AU in a minimum mass solar nebula (MMSN) disk model, which
consists of a far-UV-ionized surface layer and low-ionization disk interior. These simulations serve as
a follow up to Simon et al. (2013), in which we found that without a net vertical field, the turbulent
stresses that result from the magnetorotational instability (MRI) are too weak to account for observed
accretion rates. The simulations in this work show a very strong dependence of the accretion stresses
on the strength of the background vertical field; as the field strength increases, the stress amplitude
increases….
…Furthermore,
the stress has a non-negligible component due to a magnetic wind. For sufficiently strong vertical
field strengths, MRI turbulence is quenched, and the flow becomes largely laminar, with accretion
proceeding through large scale correlations in the radial and toroidal field components as well as
through the magnetic wind. In all simulations, the presence of a low ionization region near the disk
mid-plane, which we call the ambipolar damping zone, results in reduced stresses there….
The video should have loaded at video number 25 of 41 for the changing radiation belts as measured by SAMPEX/LICA from January 1, 1998 to March 1, 2005.
I even used the share>current video>link provided..
http://youtu.be/ALknK0haG2E
As a climatology non-expert it seems to me (and using Occam’s razor), the proximal cause of the Polar Vortex displacement is the Bering Sea High (BSH) shown in the GFS 10-hPa Height Analysis (above). That high pressure would strengthen during a strong period of negative (strengthening cool phase) PDO. The strong BSH would also force the sea ice extent anomaly seen locally in the Bering Sea on 1/31/2014 NSIDC sea ice extent north polar map.
http://www.jisao.washington.edu/pdo/
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
A strong BSH, being anti-cyclonic, would thus be a “kicker” to the cyclonic PV, and cause it to expand out (bulge) into the NA continent (angular momentum stuff). The emergence and position of the “bulge” (wobble?) would thus be dependent on the meanderings and strength of the BSH.
So, in this scenario, the long-term (50-60 years) oceanic heat cycles, with chaotic behavior on short time scales (weeks) of the BSH would provide variability in the PV “wobbles” occurrences.
Good post. Thanks.
This analysis enters the circle of reasoning at a convenient place but not necessarily the best place. At the altitude of the Stratosphere atmospheric density is quite low. One ought to consider the source of the air entering this region and ask what is going on there shortly before and during stratospheric variability and anomalous weather patterns at the earth’s surface.
———-
An aside:
It is difficult to tell when a person is just a “lazy writer” or whether she has a Swiss cheese knowledge base. Case in point: “Bright white ice reflects energy back into space; dark blue water absorbs it.” [Jennifer Francis]
Surely she knows that water is essentially colorless. The physics is pretty widely known so I will assume she is a lazy writer and not clueless.
Here is a possible piece to the puzzle. I had noted a potential correlation with moon phases and polar sea ice growth or retardation. Watching the daily Antarctic sea ice changes is where I first noted this in June of last year. Then in the last several months of 2013, I noted a somewhat similar effect in the Arctic. The Antarctic sea ice appears to move with the ascending mid moon, with the effect leading to ice gain, or on the descent as it is now, it leads to less sea ice loss. What I noticed in the Arctic is that on the dark of the moon, the growing sea ice experienced a slump in growth rate. It has just done this again, and I had predicted this several weeks ago on the basis of what the NSIDC, DMI, or JAXA graphs have shown over the last 3 months. I had forecast a slump in growth rate for Friday/Saturday of this week. The slump started on Wednesday, a bit early. This is the 3rd time in a row over the last 3 months.
Two weeks ago, I had also made a forecast that Antarctic sea ice is likely to see it,s minimum shortly after the 8th of this month. The reason for the thought is that if the growth rate is truly affected positively after the mid moon, then the occurrence of this effect landing on the 8th of this month, which is not far from the normal average minimum, could well hold the sea ice extent minimum of this year very close to the extent of the sea ice on the 8th of this month.
Mycroft says:
February 1, 2014 at 4:04 pm
<i<But isn’t winter also the period when the Northern Lights are at their highest activity?
No, it is just that you see the aurorae best when it is dark.
Like, the Moon is more important than the Sun because the Moon shines for us in the dark when we need it, while the Sun shines during the day when it is light anyway.
Darn a’s and i’s. They are not even close on the keyboard. Sorry.
dmacleo says:
February 1, 2014 at 4:44 pm
“not going to pretend I understand it all but last week or so wasn’t there indications the vortex “drop” could happen again in first week or so of Feb?”
Maybe this is what you saw: http://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/models/gfs/
Click on the “2m Temperature Anomaly”
Then Click on “Loop” near the bottom
When the map appears, move the slider for “Set Animation Speed” to about ¼
Note the Stop/Start button at the top left
Click stop as the bright pink color spills from Texas into Mexico and the Gulf of Mexico
About Friday of this coming week, most of North America is going to be cold.
lsvalgaard on February 1, 2014 at 8:44 pm
“while the Sun shines during the day when it is light anyway”
– LOL!
@goldminor
The serious physical problem you would have to overcome with your Moon phase observation-explanation is that lunar tidal forces diminish rapidly toward the poles (cosine of lat).
Nice work, I had asked for more weather information here a while ago and you have delivered.
lsvalgaard says:
February 1, 2014 at 3:59 pm
If solar activity were a primary factor in Stratospheric Warmings [SSW] one would expect that to occur in both the northern and the southern polar caps as solar-inducedgeomagnetic activity occurs equally in both hemispheres [being global and occurring at the same time in both polar caps]. However, SSW are almost exclusively a Northern Hemisphere phenomenon [I know of only one case of a southern SSW].
Yes, SH SSWs are rare but not unheard of. In fact the majority of the SH ones have occurred during an active solar flux. 2002 SSW had F10.7 around 160. You don’t see many SSWs in the SH due to topography, less mountainous terrain to create the wave action. So, it must have relied on the solar activity to induce some kind of warming mechanism at the Stratosphere.
http://www.igp.gob.pe/its/file.php?nf=IGP-1-1-1-1359998202.pdf&sub=1
“So Planetary Waves, Eddy Heat, Geomagnetic Storms or Sea Ice, what do you think caused the weakening and displacement the Northern Stratospheric Polar Vortex in January 2014?”
It has been one strong PV to break down, and maybe by the end of this week, a true SSW (not sure if it will make it a technical Major SSW though) will occur around the 5th, just looking at berlin ecmwf strat forecasts. We have been seeing a 1-2 punch from wave1 and 2 for several weeks now and the PV has slowly taken the punches, and kept its form for the most part. If not, then we could be looking for a Early Final Warming event later in the month.
What is interesting is that the ‘journalists on this site’ no matter who, have produced many hypotheses over the years (this includes alarmist articles) but no-one has been able to definitively prove any of them. The commenters therefore spend Joules of energy speculating about the cause(s) of their observations. I guess it shows just how little is known about our planet.
Joel O’Bryan says:
@goldminor
The serious physical problem you would have to overcome with your Moon phase observation-explanation is that lunar tidal forces diminish rapidly toward the poles (cosine of lat).
===
Not at all. Tidal effects are global , the usual trivial account being two opposing “bulges” on each side of the planet. For a high tide to occur at some location water has to come from somewhere else. Tides are mostly a _horizontal_ bulk displacement of water, a longitudinal wave.
Water has different temperature in different places, so tides also represent bulk displacement of energy.
Currently with the sun close to its annual extreme, the lunar declination also hits an extreme. Combine this with lunar eccentricity (perigee/apogee) being at an extreme.
Lunar distance changes by up to 15% . Since tidal forces are inv. r^3 that implies a change of 40% , a huge change.
All these factor come into play to produce the once in 18.6 year extreme tides such as the one that coincided with Sandy hitting NY coast. Early Jan storms in UK also hit an unusually strong high tide. (The perigee pattern peaks about twice a year and is stronger in winter when perihelion increases lunar eccentricity).
The atmosphere also experiences tidal forces, so it is probably no coincidence that these storms and tides happened at the same time.
In relation to polar vortex, the wavenumber=2 pattern is also typical of tidal influence.
A weak sun allows more ozone to form above 45km and towards the poles.
More ozone means warmer (or rather less cold) temperatures above 45km and towards the poles.
The descending stratospheric polar vortex draws down that ozone towards the surface, warming the lower stratosphere in the process and in doing so lowers tropopause height towards the poles.
The lower polar tropopause height above the poles relative to the tropopause height above the equator pushes cold air masses outward from the poles to cause greater global cloudiness and reduce the proportion of solar energy able to enter the oceans which in turn leads to a cooling climate system.
An active sun does the opposite.
http://www.newclimatemodel.com/how-the-sun-could-control-earths-temperature/
I am amazed that in the polar vortex reference there is no discussion of plasma interactions.
has anybody checked to see if the Polar Plasma Fountain and the Polar vortex are lined up??
Especially considering that there are Birkeland Currents.
“A Birkeland current is a set of currents which flow along geomagnetic field lines connecting the Earth’s magnetosphere to the Earth’s high latitude ionosphere. In the Earth’s magnetosphere, the currents are driven by the solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field and by bulk motions of plasma through the magnetosphere (convection which is indirectly driven by the interplanetary environment).”
And the Polar Fountain.
“Polar wind or plasma fountain is the permanent outflow of ionized gas (plasma) from the polar regions of the magnetosphere,[2] caused by the interaction between the solar wind and the Earth’s atmosphere. The solar wind ionizes gas molecules in the upper atmosphere to such high energy that some of them reach escape velocity and pour into space. A considerable percentage of these ions remain bound inside Earth’s magnetic field where they form part of the radiation belts.”
And the Aurora.
“Auroras are now known to be caused by the collision of charged particles (e.g. electrons), found in the magnetosphere, with atoms in the Earth’s upper atmosphere (at altitudes above 80 km). These charged particles are typically energized to levels between 1 thousand and 15 thousand electronvolts and, as they collide with atoms of gases in the atmosphere, the atoms become energized. ”
All connected by Sprites and other types of electrical discharges…
“Sprites are sometimes inaccurately called upper-atmospheric lightning. However, sprites are cold plasma phenomena that lack the hot channel temperatures of tropospheric lightning, so they are more akin to fluorescent tube discharges than to lightning discharges.”
Connected to the sun by a Flux tube that is modulated by flux transfer events causing the magnetosphere to ring making substoms and plasmoids in the magnetotail. all of this affecting the climate and weather on earth….
goldminor: “Here is a possible piece to the puzzle. I had noted a potential correlation with moon phases and polar sea ice growth or retardation. ”
Detailed spectral analysis reveals perigee lunar cycles in Arctic ice extent.
http://climategrog.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=757
Polar spacecraft measures “auroral fountain” flowing out as solar wind flows in…
“On Sept. 23, though, nature and NASA’s planners were on the same schedule. On Sept. 22, the sun belched forth a CME, a roiling bubble of plasma (electrified gases) that sailed along with the solar wind on a collision course with Earth. TIDE’s plasma gun already had been scheduled to be operating, and Polar’s orbital position was above the northern hemisphere, when the CME arrived.
“The amount of upwelling ions is a function of solar wind pressure or activity,” Spann said.
The Earth’s plasma “fountain” So when the CME hit, it squeezed Earth’s magnetic field, squirting particles stored in the magnetotail up the field lines towards the Earth’s poles.
Left: The polar auroral fountain sprays ions – oxygen, helium, and hydrogen – from Earth’s upper ionosphere into deep space. The loss is miniscule compared to the immense ocean of air covering our world, but is significant in terms of what drives space weather around our world. (NASA)
As UVI showed an explosion in auroral brightness, TIDE measured a significant increase in oxygen and hydrogen ions rising from the Earth.
“What we are finding is that the magnetosphere, the space environment within Earth’s magnetic field, is usually indirectly driven,” Spann said. “When that energy is released and it rushes forward there is a time delay.
However, “with these large pressure pulses from CMEs, we are seeing the magnetosphere respond practically instantly. It’s like you hit it with a bat. Everything rings at the same time.”
http://science1.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/1998/ast08dec98_1/
A long and erudite way of saying that we dont know what the **** is going on.
So Planetary Waves, Eddy Heat, Geomagnetic Storms or Sea Ice, what do you think caused the weakening and displacement the Northern Stratospheric Polar Vortex in January 2014?
Kits, cats, bags and wives,
How many went into St. Ives?
I do not understand why more rain clouds can not be combined with the the severity of ionizing radiation. I do not see any other reason.
http://terra2.spacenvironment.net/~raps_ops/current_files/rtimg/dose.15km.png
http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/atmosphere/radbud/gs19_prd.gif
Polar vortex restricts the flow air from the the pole. Now, he is so shifted that air from the Arctic Circle have free access to North America. 17 km.
http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/70hPa/orthographic=28.39,110.01,481