E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
AFP - Getty Images
The sun unleashes a powerful solar flare from the right side of its disk on June 7, as seen in this image from NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory. Scientists say the sun is heading toward a peak in its activity cycle in 2013 or so, but may enter a period of hibernation afterward.
Last updated 3:15 p.m. ET
The latest long-range space forecast predicts a prolonged drop in solar activity after the next peak — and scientists say that might cool down temperatures here on Earth, or at least slow down the warming trend a bit.
Scientists have studied sunspots and the sun's 11-year activity cycle for 400 years, and they're getting increasingly savvy about spotting the harbingers of "space weather" years in advance, just as meteorologists can figure out what's coming after the next storm.
Storms from the sun are expected to build to a peak in 2013 or so, but after that, the long-range indicators are pointing to an extended period of low activity — or even hibernation.
"This is important because the solar cycle causes space weather ... and may contribute to climate change," Frank Hill, associate director of the National Solar Observatory's Solar Synoptic Network, told journalists today.
In the past, such periods have coincided with lower-than-expected temperatures on Earth. The most famous example is the Maunder Minimum, a 70-year period with virtually no sunspots from 1645 to 1715. Average temperatures in Europe sank so low during that period that it came to be known as "the Little Ice Age."
The linkage between solar activity and climate change is still a matter of scientific debate. And even if there is a link, it's not clear how solar-caused global cooling might interact with industrial global warming due to greenhouse-gas emissions. Climate scientists say the swings in solar activity that they've studied so far have had little or no impact on temperatures or other climate indicators — and they don't expect to see a big impact even if the sun goes quiet for a decade or longer.
But if today's forecast is correct, solar physicists and climatologists will have a golden opportunity to find out for sure.
Hill said scientists had "no way of predicting" how long the hibernation period might last. "It may very well last as long as the Maunder Minimum ... if it occurs," he said.
Hill and other experts on solar activity announced the long-range forecast today at the annual meeting of the American Astronomical Society's Solar Physics Division, being conducted this week at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces, N.M.
How do they know?
The forecast is based on three indicators thought to be tied to long-range solar activity, the comparative rise and fall of sunspots over the activity cycle, as well as the brightness of those sunspots; patterns in the sun's internal "jet stream" of superheated plasma; and the pace of migration in the sun's magnetic field toward the poles, as seen in the sun's corona.
An unusually low number of sunspots have been observed during the current cycle, and the spots are fainter than average. Scientists say they have seen no sign of a characteristic east-west flow of internal plasma, which usually sets the stage for future increases in activity. And the magnetic "rush to the poles" appears to be slowing down.
All these signs suggest that the current solar cycle, Cycle 24, "may be the last one for quite some time," Hill said. The next upswing in solar storms, Cycle 25, may be "very much delayed ... very weak, or may not happen at all."
Beyond the climate effect, solar activity is known to have a significant potential impact on satellite operations, electric power grids and even exposure to radiation at high-altitudes. Solar storms can disrupt satellite signals or air-traffic navigation systems. In 1989, a solar outburst caused a widespread power outage in Quebec. And particularly strong solar flares have forced astronauts to take shelter in shielded areas of the space shuttle or the International Space Station.
Some observers have worried about the possibility of a massive geomagnetic super-storm like the one that swept over Earth in 1859, known as the "Carrington event." For those folks, the news that the sun appears to be settling down, coupled with indications that the 2013 solar maximum is not expected to be unusually strong, should be reassuring.
About that ice age ...
Hill and two other solar physicists involved in formulating the forecast, NSO researcher Matt Penn and Richard Altrock of the U.S. Air Force's coronal research program, said there was not yet enough data to firm up a climate connection to solar activity. But they and other scientists have noted that historic lulls in sunspots, such as the Maunder Minimum and another solar minimum between 1790 and 1830, coincided with cooler temperatures.
Gavin Schmidt, a climatologist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and one of the founders of the RealClimate blog, said the effects of solar activity on climate over the past 30 years have been "at the margin of what we can detect."
"They are detectable in the high atmosphere, but when you get down to the surface, there is so much other stuff going on that it's been really hard to get a clean signal," he told me.
One of the reasons why so little is known about solar effects on climate is that the sun's highs and lows have been within such a narrow range in recent history.
"If we were to see a return to what's called Maunder Minimum conditions in the next 50 years or so, that would be interesting," Schmidt said. "I think we'd learn a lot about solar physics and solar variability. ... It's going to be scientifically very exciting if all this pans out."
Even then, however, he estimated that the effect of greenhouse-gas emissions would be on the order of 10 times as great. "What you might see over a 20- to 30-year period is a slight slowdown in the pace of warming," Schmidt said. "In terms of how we should think about climate change prediction in the future, reducing emissions and so on, it really wouldn't make much of a difference."
But what about the Little Ice Age in the 1600s, when Swiss Alpine villages were reported destroyed by encroaching glaciers? Schmidt said that period also coincided with an upswing in volcanic emissions, which are known more definitely to contribute to global cooling.
"Parsing out how much of that was solar, how much of that was volcanic and how much of that was just noise ... that's tricky," Schmidt said.
Will this latest forecast be used to argue that we don't need to worry about global warming? Or will the effect of solar hibernation (if it even occurs) turn out to be a blip at best? Feel free to weigh in with your comments below.
More on solar weather:
- U.N. to upgrade space weather forecasts
- Sun unleashes 'spectacular' solar storm
- Solar cycle sparks doomsday buzz; don't panic
- Still more about space weather from msnbc.com
The studies presented at this week's SPD meeting in Las Cruces include "Large-Scale Zonal Flows During the Solar Minimum — Where Is Cycle 25?" by Frank Hill, R. Howe, R. Komm, J. Christensen-Dalsgaard, T.P. Larson, J. Schou and M.J. Thompson; "A Decade of Diminishing Sunspot Vigor" by W.C. Livingston, M. Penn and L. Svalgard; and "Whither Goes Cycle 24? A View From the Fe XIV Corona" by R.C. Altrock.
You can connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page or following @b0yle on Twitter. Also, give a look to "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.
Leave a Comment:
This is just the sort of news Arizona needs!!! Thanks for boosting our hope. Perhaps some cooler weather will increase our economy with the increase of snowbirds moving south, vacationing etc. :)
So this means my garden might not grow very well?
Indeed, "Point of Fact" your simpleton "big blankie covering the earth" illustration is halariously vapid in both theory and execution, but it does well illustrate the raging victim-of-propagana status so apparent in your user name here.
As Al Bullcrap Gore says, "man-made global=warming is proven science". What a joke! The UN and our own government funded and promoted the thesis that carbon dioxide causes global warming. The CO2 level is around 390 parts per million. It is harmful at 70,000 parts per million. Nature has a very nice way of handling rises in CO2. Our plants, trees, crops, grasses, algae, etc. must have CO2 to live. They through photosynthesis extract the carbon atom for growth and excrete the O2-oxygen into the atmosphere@! What a divine plan! Wonder who thought that up?? We folks breathe in the O2 in order to live. Only the government would find something wrong with this deal. Of course beside subsidizing scientists to attempt to prove that greenhouse gases effect climate, this same government subsidizes illegitimacy and peanuts. Anything the gov subsidizes, you get too much of!
Our biggest fear is global cooling. That would drive damn Yankees South with their "government is the answer attitudes". We really hope the Northeast remains habitable so they will stay up there and tax themselves to death. We know they would bring a lot of baggage to the South that we don't want or need. So lets increase green house gases if the sunspots subside and hope the gulf stream continues to make NYC habitable!
Spoken like a true southerner. No compliment intended. Your theory about how mother nature can handle excess carbon emissions is full of holes. Time to go back to school HD.
By the way, I wouldn't want to join you in the south any more than you would want me there.
Robin, Nature can handle excess CO2. Has for a few billion years. How do you think it was all cleaned out of the atmosphere and we now have oxygen to breath? This wasn't always a big blue marble. It was once a big red marble with green oceans.
Robin...Volcanoes! Dont fall for it Robin! Come back to logic, its not too late!
Al Gore is simply a messenger-
look back on C02 levels through history
55 million years ago- during an event called the PETM- C02 was at around 1000ppm- and global temperatures where 6- 9 degrees C warmer.
At the rate C02 is rising- we could reach 700ppm by about 2060- extrapolate the difference- a rise of at least 3 degrees C rise--- is possible- how will that effect us?
Should it be thought to be extraordinary to link the temperatures on Earth to solar activity? After all, a giant ball of fire at the center of the solar system that supplies light, heat, and gravity to keep our planet in orbit around itself should be the first likely source of planetary heat. What we do to trap that energy either intentionally or unintentionally is relatively minor in its impact compared to the enormous energy released from the sun each minute of the day. The way that global warming has been portrayed, it would lead the naive to think that if we continue to pump COx into the atmosphere, Earth's temperature would rise to the point of incineration. What we are really talking about is perhaps a couple of degrees. The effects of those degrees is sufficiently bothersome that the the discussion about global warming has become both inaccurate and alarmist. The real source of heat is the sun, and if people would pay attention to the fact that not only has the temperature of Earth been rising but that the temperature on Venus and Mars has also risen, they would begin to connect the dots and realize that it is the sun's activity that is the root cause.
This does not mean that we should not make efforts to reduce pollution. With more people contending for the limited space on Earth, even if the sun's activity remained unchanged, a change in atmospheric COx would produce a rise in surface temperatures on Earth. That alone would merit some changes with respect to the way we use fossil fuels, how we use computers, how much toast we consume, how many lattes we drink, etc. Putting, however, things in perspective would help a great deal to minimize the gross inaccuracies with respect to how the matter has been treated in the press.
The problem is that most of the man made global warming "geniuses" have no interest in the actual cause of the fluctuation of the Earth's temperature. They are only interested in helping foster the myth that our pitiful little efforts are causing significant climate change. Why? It's simple. If the majority falls for this then the liberal/progressive/socialists will be right there to "help" us out of the situation into their new world order.
If it does indeed get cooler I would be stoked. You see, I love to snowboard, and when it is nice and cold the snowboarding gets fantastic. Cooler summers wouldn't bother me too much because the trout I love to pursue thrive in cooler waters along with the insects that they enjoy consuming. I would like to believe the scientists have this figured out correctly, but meteorologists don't seem to get it right all that often. Guess it will be like usual, wake up and see what it's doing outside. It sure would be nice if I could get away with only getting it right half the time at my job. Maybe I shouldn't be too hard on the poor forecasters, it's a big world and an even bigger universe. The odds of mankind having it all nailed down in the blink of an eye that we have existed are pretty minimal.
So even the most extreme of the global warming scammers are indirectly admitting that the sun has more to do with global temperatures than man's economic activities. Me thinks that this elaborate deception is starting to unravel. It's too bad, because where I live we were already freezing our touchies off.
evidence of cooling of earth during solar minimums are a matter of FACT, not some vague speculation by a bunch of Al Gore lovers. it is proven historical fact. so for all the fans of global warming, hope that your theory is true or start moving south, it can get really cold under an ice cap.
The "slow down of the warming trend" already hit Duluth, MN! We're ahead of the times....LOL
Brought to you by the same gov't scientists who predicted 12-14 major hurricanes each year post Katrina. They have to predict something to justify their jobs.
Why do you say alarmists? Economykiller. What are you afraid of? The scriptures read, that the earth shall melt with fervent heat and it will be cleansed by fire and the waves shall exceed their bounds. Is the second coming dreadful for you? For some of us it will be a great day, that is if I go repent of all I need to. I better hurry, the glaciers really are melting as is the ice cap and Greenland. Oh one more item, one of the signs of the times is that people will deny the signs of the times.
I'm not a scientist, so therefore not an expert, but I've been alive long enough to know that weather and climate are cyclical. I don't believe for one minute that Al Gores theory on global warming is more than just part of that cycle. Sometimes I don't think common sense matters to anybody anymore!
So what you are saying is I should burn my old tires in the backyard then? No? This climate is so confusing.
Ahhh, 2 stars for Jack, and 2 stars for Bill. By the time I quickly read through all these comments, i got a headache and don't want to read any more. although i don't really know too much about global warming or the cold!! coming. alas, i will just go to bed, say my prayers, and hopefully have a good nights sleep. Pleasant dreams, friends.
Solar System Science is of course a mystery that cannot be solved in one lifetime, therefore it may never be revealed what effect the Suns Cycle has on Earth. Spectulation and guess coupled with arrogant deciet is what got us into the "Man made Global Warming" conundrum that we are currently being held hostage with, please do not give the powers that be (the fascist) a new Science guess to use against the Human. At least not before they can explain the power behind the Jet Streams and their counter clockwise rotation, not their gradient movement up and down but the actual power behind their flow. Go get'em science.
Does it really matter if you believe in global warming or not? Our current way of life is not sustainable and we need to change fast. If you're someone who thinks gloabal warming is a hoax it doesn't mean that we can continue to be wastefull and inefficient.
As for this article I hope, it is correct. Only because it means we have a reduced risk of solar storms messing with our satelites and electrical grids.
Quick-! Call "Mr. Green" Al Gore- he's GOT to find a way to profit from this phenomenon-
I think it's Providence. But the human beings on Earth had better get used to climate change.
From Jack: "Global Warming is nothing to be concerned about unless you live on the coast. There are too many people on the planet anyway. We need some culling."
There have been a number of dumb things that have been said in this discussion so far, but I believe this is the dumbest. I just have this picture of all the people who live on the coasts around the world, glumly going out every morning and watching the ocean slowly rise around their houses, until eventually they disappear underwater. Obviously they won't ever try to move, will they? They certainly wouldn't ever take their guns and try to move into Jack's neighborhood, so why should he care?
The people who deny that global warming is going on can at least come up with some shreds of evidence to support their case. But I can't say the same about people who say "if it warms up now, it's no big deal and we'll be able to handle it." A major difference between now and the previous major climate shifts is that we have a vast agricultural industry that is specialized to grow crops in specific zones. If it gets too hot to grow wheat in Kansas anymore, do you really think it'll be easy to shift all the production to Manitoba? Are we really up to handling all the migration and wars that will result?
Global warming hucksters no longer use the term. Since climate predictions are about as reliable as predictions of The Rapture, the current term is "climate change". That means no matter what happens, it can be blamed on human activity.
it is a moot point as believers will continue to believe, doubters will continue to doubt, and ANYONE THAT MAKES LESS THAN $200M & VOTES REREPUBLICAN ... WILL STILL BE A MORON ...
Give it a rest Troll. Most Republicans make far less than 200k, but they do work. How about this, "anybody who is on welfare, medicaid, and SSI who votes Republican is a moron!@ Now that is believable.
It's a bad idea to muck up the air. Despite the heatwave in the east, the pacific northwest is experiencing it's coolest June in recorded history. There's still deep snow in places where I haven't seen it this late in the year since I started paying attention to it. The excessive hot and cold is probably just natural variation that occurs all over the world. It's a bit stormier than usual this year, but in the geological scheme of things a few years or decades does not a trend make. And that quiet yellow dwarf could simply burp without warning at any time and incinerate the Earth. Worry about that now.
Al Gore's going to be so disappointed.
It was solar activity that was warming us up all along!
Not any common gases found in the atmosphere naturally.
But, who would have ever thought of that.
Not him.
It would be incredibly foolish to use this as an excuse not to control greenhouse gas emissions. As Gavin Schmidt noted, the human-caused warming could exceed the slight solar cooling (if it happens at all) by a factor of 10. There were very few sunspots in 2008-2010, and yet global average temperatures remained at or near record highs.
Sunspots are cooler areas of the sun compared to the surrounding area. Therefore your comment is oxymoronish.
The higher activity in the areas surrounding the sunspots more than makes up for the cooler spots, so the total energy output of the sun slightly increases during periods of high sunspot activity. You can actually see the brighter areas around the sunspots in some photographs or with a properly equipped solar telescope.
What Eric said.
Before accusing someone's comment of being "oxymoronish" (a simply dreadful mangling of the English language), perhaps consider a bit of research first?
The simple numerical model I built a couple of years ago shows that even if we get a Dalton style solar minimum, the solar heat stored in the oceans will see us through for a good while. Of course, that will be wilfully misinterpreted by the pro AGW camp to show the Sun has little effect on climate….
I would expect to see a 0.3-0.5C drop in the Northern Hemisphere over the next 25 years if the Sun stays quiet and we get a few more big volcanoes. Of course, that drop would be bigger than the Southern hemisphere will see.
Bad, but not catastrophic.
Drop? With C02 levels by 2035 at near 450ppm- The highest in 35 million years? You must be kidding, right?
At 450 ppm C02- you really see the sun to play that dominant a factor- science proves otherwise. Sadly you are very misinformed.