From UCD/Scripps:
Reduced Energy from the Sun Might Occur by Mid-century; Now Scientists Know by How Much
UC San Diego scientists review satellite observations of nearby Sun-like stars to estimate the strength of the next “grand minimum” period of diminished UV radiation

The Sun might emit less radiation by mid-century, giving planet Earth a chance to warm a bit more slowly but not halt the trend of human-induced climate change.
The cool-down would be the result of what scientists call a grand minimum, a periodic event during which the Sun’s magnetism diminishes, sunspots form infrequently, and less ultraviolet radiation makes it to the surface of the planet. Scientists believe that the event is triggered at irregular intervals by random fluctuations related to the Sun’s magnetic field.
Scientists have used reconstructions based on geological and historical data to attribute a cold period in Europe in the mid-17th Century to such an event, named the “Maunder Minimum.” Temperatures were low enough to freeze the Thames River on a regular basis and freeze the Baltic Sea to such an extent that a Swedish army was able to invade Denmark in 1658 on foot by marching across the sea ice.
A team of scientists led by research physicist Dan Lubin at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego have created for the first time an estimate of how much dimmer the Sun should be when the next minimum takes place.
There is a well-known 11-year cycle in which the Sun’s ultraviolet radiation peaks and declines as a result of sunspot activity. During a grand minimum, Lubin estimates that ultraviolet radiation diminishes an additional seven percent beyond the lowest point of that cycle. His team’s study, “Ultraviolet Flux Decrease Under a Grand Minimum from IUE Short-wavelength Observation of Solar Analogs,” appears in the publication Astrophysical Journal Letters and was funded by the state of California.
“Now we have a benchmark from which we can perform better climate model simulations,” Lubin said. “We can therefore have a better idea of how changes in solar UV radiation affect climate change.”
Lubin and colleagues David Tytler and Carl Melis of UC San Diego’s Center for Astrophysics and Space Sciences arrived at their estimate of a grand minimum’s intensity by reviewing nearly 20 years of data gathered by the International Ultraviolet Explorer satellite mission. They compared radiation from stars that are analogous to the Sun and identified those that were experiencing minima.
The reduced energy from the Sun sets into motion a sequence of events on Earth beginning with a thinning of the stratospheric ozone layer. That thinning in turn changes the temperature structure of the stratosphere, which then changes the dynamics of the lower atmosphere, especially wind and weather patterns. The cooling is not uniform. While areas of Europe chilled during the Maunder Minimum, other areas such as Alaska and southern Greenland warmed correspondingly.
Lubin and other scientists predict a significant probability of a near-future grand minimum because the downward sunspot pattern in recent solar cycles resembles the run-ups to past grand minimum events.
Despite how much the Maunder Minimum might have affected Earth the last time, Lubin said that an upcoming event would not stop the current trend of planetary warming but might slow it somewhat. The cooling effect of a grand minimum is only a fraction of the warming effect caused by the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. After hundreds of thousands of years of CO2 levels never exceeding 300 parts per million in air, the concentration of the greenhouse gas is now over 400 parts per million, continuing a rise that began with the Industrial Revolution. Other researchers have used computer models to estimate what an event similar to a Maunder Minimum, if it were to occur in coming decades, might mean for our current climate, which is now rapidly warming.
One such study looked at the climate consequences of a future Maunder Minimum-type grand solar minimum, assuming a total solar irradiance reduced by 0.25 percent over a 50-year period from 2020 to 2070. The study found that after the initial decrease of solar radiation in 2020, globally averaged surface air temperature cooled by up to several tenths of a degree Celsius. By the end of the simulated grand solar minimum, however, the warming in the model with the simulated Maunder Minimum had nearly caught up to the reference simulation. Thus, a main conclusion of the study is that “a future grand solar minimum could slow down but not stop global warming.”
– Robert Monroe
The Earth has been in a long-term cooling trend for over 6,000 years, since the peak warmth of the Holocene Climatic Optimum. We are now in the coldest 10% of the past 10,000 years, according to Greenland ice and sediment core studies. The current warming trend is just a natural recovery from the coldest period of the past 10,000 years, the Little Ice Age (1350 to 1850 AD). This inconvenient truth echos the fluctuations of long glacial and short interglacials periods of the past 2.6 million years. Only 125,000 years ago the Eemian interglacial featured warmer weather and higher sea levels than any disclosed by observation or proxy studies during the Holocene interglacial – without any amplification or diminution by fluctuating atmospheric CO2 levels. During each interglacial, as temperature peaked, cooling commenced. No runaway mechanism noted. Markedly inconvenient, no?
“The cooling effect of a grand minimum is only a fraction of the warming effect caused by the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. After hundreds of thousands of years of CO2 levels never exceeding 300 parts per million in air, the concentration of the greenhouse gas is now over 400 parts per million,”
That same hundreds of thousands of years of CO2 levels from ice core records show that CO2 increases were lagging behind temperature increases. So you can’t draw any conclusion of warming effect of CO2. But Lubin et al keep repeating the same unsupported claim as if repetition is a substitute for scientific observations. They must be a big fan of Lewis Carroll:
“Just the place for a Snark!” the Bellman cried,
As he landed his crew with care;
Supporting each man on the top of the tide
By a finger entwined in his hair.
“Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
That alone should encourage the crew.
Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
What I tell you three times is true.”
(The Hunting of the Snark)
actually the paleo ice cores show that when co2 is low is when the planet starts to warm and when co2 is high is when temps start to drop.
This reminds me of studies of sun-like stars by Sallie Baliunas and her co-worker Willie Soon at Harvard-Smitsonian Center for Astrophysics in Massachusetts. I was very interested in their work two decades ago and later, and even received emails from both regarding some questions I had.
See this interview with Sallie Baliunad here:
>Stars in Her Eyes<
http://reason.com/archives/1998/10/01/stars-in-her-eyes
Sallie Baliunas is an unsung heroine. Former director of the historic Wilson Observatory where legendary astronomers Hale, Hubble and Wilson had worked. She studied sun’s influence on climate and climate models since 1983 before Svensmark and before AGW became fashionable. A vocal skeptic since 1995. Judith Curry, Jo Nova and Jennifer Marohasy followed her lead
Notice the disclaimer at the start, that it will not ‘halt’ AGW.
Just to make sure that you don’t get the wrong idea when reading the rest.
Got as far as but not halt the trend of human-induced climate change.
Zzzzzzz
The IUE satellite was launched on January 26, 1978. It had an expected lifetime of 3 years, with a goal of 5 years, but exceeded that beyond anyone’s wildest dreams. When it was shut down on September 30, 1996, it had been in continuous operation for 18 years and 9 months.
https://science.nasa.gov/missions/iue
This satellite was operational during the last part of solar cycle 21, all of solar cycle 22 and half of solar cycle 23?
I defer to Dr. S. ….not again, please….
As long as the predominant pattern in the oceans is evaporation, not absorption, we will be warm, more or less. Climate warming in one sentence.
It strikes me that many “climate scientists” will still be claiming it is only a “pause” in man-made global warming when the glaciers return and overwhelm their house.
Again the paper’s very first sentence is a hysterical slogan. As always with these papers. Someone somewhere has ordered this – someone who no climate scientist dares disobey.
So solar grand minima are significant enough to be detectable on stars many lightyears distant – but are still overwhelmed by the effect of CO2? Not convinced.
So, instead of looking at the historical evidence of what happens in a grand solar minimum they choose to create an elaborate computer climate model once more. They never seem to learn.