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:
I wonder if we can trade Sun Spot derivitives?
Here are some more Facts about the decline in Solar sunspots and the Maunder Minimum. We should be concerned in the next 10 years, about a cooling climate. We are seeing the first effects of it already with longer winters and an increase in volcanic and earthquake activity. The ash from the volcanoes that goes into the stratosphere also leads to cooling of the planet. Time to push out Global Warming my the not so famous Al Gore and focus on how NOT to freeze to death. Another website to check out information on the sun would be Solar Cycle 24.com and for sea ice/ land ice news check out Cryosphere Today.com.
I am flabbergasted at this statement: "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"
Who are these "climate scientists" and what closet are they hiding in? There is a VERY strong correlation between solar activity and temperatures, so strong that it overwhelms any other variable. (the reader is left to google his own solar activity-temperature charts). Unless one does a whole lot of computer manipulations, one would conclude just by looking at the charts that solar activity is the only impact on temperatures.
Solar variation has historically been one of the important drivers of climate change... that is, until the past few decades, when there has been no increase in solar inputs (which have in fact been declining slightly), while the temperature has continued to rise. The trends have diverged.
See this graph.
Bill Imagine you have a Pot on a Gas Stove..and it has soup, if you notice the gas Flame at times goes from Blue to yellow, and then back to blue, that is allegorical to the Suns " Sun Spots" while the Twisting of the electro Magnetic Spots, causes CMEs , the Average Temperature of the SUN is not influenced by those CME ejections, True that for a Short term say 3-5 days IF those CMEs are Close to earth would cause some temperature changes, Climate is a Long term, so in the Long term those CME activities would have negligible effect, like the Gas Flame going from Blue to Yellow while the Soup is on a Boil would have almost No Measurable effect on its temperature.
I still don't understand the alarm-ism over global warming. Wouldn't higher temps mean a longer growing season? Wouldn't the thawing of the northern permafrost mean a vast increase in available farm land? Yeah, if you own beachfront property in New Orleans be worried, but on balance, global warming should be a plus for humankind as a species.
It means change for billions of people.
There will be winners and losers; probably more losers.
A potential increase in northern farmland may be great for Canada. If it is accompanied by the U.S. Midwest being reduced to a vast dust bowl, then the folks who live there may not be as excited about the idea.
A look at the map shows so many of the world's major cities are located on the coast. If sea levels rise significantly, how much would it cost to build seawalls completely around New York? Miami? Tampa? London? What if every U.S. coastal city finds itself in the same situation as New Orleans does now? (I was going to say, "find itself in the same boat as N.O.", but that seems to be one analogy too far....)
If snow and precipitation patterns are changed will we be able to continue providing water to the U.S. west at the level we do now?
This is the largest uncontrolled experiment in history. "If we spew 32 gigatonnes (that's ~71,000,000,000 pounds) of a greenhouse gas into the atmosphere every single year, for decades on end, what will happen?" is the open question.
I prefer that we not blindly change elements of our planet that we depend on for our survival and prosperity.
We are gambling the house, and we have no idea what the stakes are, nor what are the odds. We are gambling everything on a blind bet.
That's just stoopid. I'd like to think that we're better than that.
Goodness gracious Alan isn’t you blessed to have all these
wanta be experts denying global warming. Let’s deny all the fires and draughts burning
up all over earth. Then let us deny the record amount of a tornados tearing
down cities and homes, and the record levels of lightning strikes, mudslides
and floods. Moreover, everyone pretend
you don’t notice all the pestilence boring up trees and killing them and the
record amounts of rodents and strange new staph infections, diseases and
pestilence. Guess what I cannot get food to grow in the Midwest because my
garden areas that use to never flood has been planted twice and is flooded
again. My gardens now barely grow and have to be watered late in the summer
because it’s too hot by July. I use to
plant in May now I am flooded out twice in June but all you city folks don’t
realize whatever this genetically altered food they call corn grows here- isn’t editable and the farmers over
tilled and sprayed until it killed the earthworms and the bees. You know the
corn they pour in all your food cannot be eaten straight out of the field and
has to be processed. Hey, let’s deny over 100,000 people in Japan are without homes,
electricity, and everyone let’s pay a billion to take a doomsday shuttle to
Mars (to never survive it). Now everyone sit around and read how scientists
believe they can predict solar activity (this week) and then come up next week
why they are baffled they are wrong AGAIN… Everyone just sit on your butts and argue on
the internet as if you're and expert and don’t do a thing but talk and make fun
of Al Gore for warning you and lets skip the part of the solar maximum coming that
could knock out all electricity and plunge us all into the dark ages... Keep
spacing out online humanity like a bunch of internet addicts- to die. From the
dollmaker
While many have tried to correlate the naturally re-occuring 100K years, interglacial-glacial cycles with some form of planetary pattern of procession, it may be that such global Climate Changes are merely the result of some 100K year solar activity. One such pattern of procession discussed was the "Milankovitch cycles" , which were merely an correlative explanation (or theory) to explain the analysis of data collected from ice cores around the world (empirical evidence) which all conclusive demonstarte a pattern of glacial-interglacial cycles.
Wouldn't it be much more simply and definitely more easy to support that the reason for this global warming, and all major Climate Changes as recorded within the Vostok Station ice core sampling, as the result of perturbations in the solar condition rather than the ill-considered notion of increasing levels of greenhouse gas concentrations. It just makes so much more sense. Who could have guessed that what we considered to be a more constant source of life giving warmth is really the harbinger of Climatic Change control. Since no one was around to take measurements during the last glacial cycle, we may now be discovering (and experiencing) this for the first time.
If so, don't blame the greenhouse gases for global warming. However, there is no reason to panic either as it appears (per these ice core samples) that it will take 10K+ years to drive the temperature back down to a -12C difference (Ice Age conditions) from our interglacial maximum.
I don't know much about much, but I do know a little about a little. OWene of the little things I know is that fear sells. It keeps people from living their lives. It keeps people from moving around. It glues people to their televisions, stuffing their faces and biting the skin around their fingernails. And, it keeps people from spending their money.
We've had at least five serious ice ages. I'm pretty sure we'll have another one. Luckily for me, I have faith. I'd hate to be one of the people who don't. I think faith keeps me spending money at restaurants, and buying clothing to wear tomorrow while a lot of people are so afraid that the economy is going bust that they actually participate in the economic problem. I have faith that 2012 won't be the end of the world as we know it, just like I was sure 2000 wasn't going to throw us back to caveman status, and I knew the world wasn't going to end last May. I have faith that we'll put Islamic radicals in their place. I know we will survive it if we run out of oil, though I have faith that we won't. (I think most of the oil problem is just an excuse to raise prices at the pump, so a few rich people can soak us poor folk a little more. If it weren't then wouldn't politicians see that little things such as; mass transit wouldn't be allowed to raise their prices with every scare? They never set their prices back when the fear is over. Those sorry excuses for human beings don't care about the common man. They just want to a. Control our movement. and b. Keep making money. And, fear is the most effective way to do it because, "If you don't listen to G-d the way I say He's telling me to do things..." doesn't play well in North America.)
People make a lot of money keeping other people scared. Stop being scared. I wish I could give you some of my faith. I have it every time the weatherman predicts the weather incorrectly, and for all those fancy gizmos, that happens an awful lot. I'm not saying everyone should be a saint...I'm sure not, nor do I want to be, it would be way too much pressure. ( Personally, I sometimes wonder if I might be evil incarnate because I want Osama's bones retrieved. I'd like them to be buried over by Ground Zero, so I can occasionally go by and spit on them.) I'm just saying, don't be so worried, and you won't be so controlled by those who would smile at you like you are a stupid, stupid child, while they slip their hand in your pocket.
Plane Jane Let me get this right.
You have faith that your Larder will never run dry? That you wine cellar is self generating? That you can Spill fat in your Kitchen sink, and it will never get blocked? WOW what faith. can I have some of that also :-))
I don't know much about much, but I do know a little about a little. One of the little things I know is that fear sells. It keeps people from living their lives. It keeps people from moving around. It glues people to their televisions, stuffing their faces and biting the skin around their fingernails. And, it keeps people from spending their money.
We've had at least five serious ice ages. I'm pretty sure we'll have another one. Luckily for me, I have faith. I'd hate to be one of the people who don't. I think faith keeps me spending money at restaurants, and buying clothing to wear tomorrow while a lot of people are so afraid that the economy is going bust that they actually participate in the economic problem. I have faith that 2012 won't be the end of the world as we know it, just like I was sure 2000 wasn't going to throw us back to caveman status, and I knew the world wasn't going to end last May. I have faith that we'll put Islamic radicals in their place. I know we will survive it if we run out of oil, though I have faith that we won't. (I think most of the oil problem is just an excuse to raise prices at the pump, so a few rich people can soak us poor folk a little more. If it weren't then wouldn't politicians see that little things such as; mass transit wouldn't be allowed to raise their prices with every scare? They never set their prices back when the fear is over. Those sorry excuses for human beings don't care about the common man. They just want to a. Control our movement. and b. Keep making money. And, fear is the most effective way to do it because, "If you don't listen to G-d the way I say He's telling me to do things..." doesn't play well in North America.)
People make a lot of money keeping other people scared. Stop being scared. I wish I could give you some of my faith. I have it every time the weatherman predicts the weather incorrectly, and for all those fancy gizmos, that happens an awful lot. I'm not saying everyone should be a saint...I'm sure not, nor do I want to be, it would be way too much pressure. ( Personally, I sometimes wonder if I might be evil incarnate because I want Osama's bones retrieved. I'd like them to be buried over by Ground Zero, so I can occasionally go by and spit on them.) I'm just saying, don't be so worried, and you won't be so controlled by those who would smile at you like you are a stupid, stupid child, while they slip their hand in your pocket.
It's nice to be vindicated, but this could be much worse than Global Warming. We might be able to mitigate and reduce man made warming, but there is little we can do about this, for obvious reasons. Here's a link to a similar story that's perhaps not as sugar-coated as you find here.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/14/ice_age/
I don't understand your reference to "man made warming" in your statement. This very reference should preclude the consideration of Climate Change due to any solar influence. If you are a diehard AGWer, then the prediction that changes in the solar activity affecting the climatic condition should be automatically discounted based on this AGW expectation as an overriding influence due to excessive greenhouse gas levels.
However, if it is validated that this decreasing solar activity can override the proposed AGW effect, then the AGW premise of cause and effect relative to greenhouse gas concentration is totally incorrect. You can't have it both ways. What is it that you really believe ?
Ha! Mr Bauer,
Much like a theologist, you perhaps read more into my statement than is there. I feel vindicated because through all the AGW hype I've felt that there were indications we are headed into a cooling period rather than a warming one. You should reread my statement. I said we "MIGHT" be able to mitigate AWG warming (if it exists). Most AWGers disregard the effect of the Sun, which is kind of like believing that the climate is being influenced by some imaginary friend. The cause and effect of solar activity on greenhouse gas is direct. The Infrared radiation that is absorbed and dispersed by CO2 comes from the sun. Less Solar activity means less infrared radiation for the CO2 to absorb. It also means less radiant heating of the planet in general. Though I'm not trying to have it "both ways", it is possible to understand that CO2 can absorb and radiate in the infrared wavelength due to its molecular structure. However, what effect this can have is, at best, a guess.
Climate researchers do not disregard the effect of the sun. However, the sun's inputs have not been increasing in recent decades, so it cannot explain the recent warming trend.
Belfrey Some are confused between Climate and temperature, not to also forget that Our Studies of the Suns cyclical events are Still developing, that is why so much effort is put into Solar Satellites that now allow Scientist to view the Sun in its totality, You might be aware that there is still no solid explanation as to why the Suns outer cell is so Hot compared to its surface temperature, So we still have so much to learn.
What also needs to be understood is enclosed in this Adage " The Room is cool but i am HOT and sweating so why is that" Does our Planet suffer from an " Illness" , does it have a fever, Some seem not to want to accept the " Local cause and effect" Just blame the " Neighbours" that is a shame but that is " human"
"... there was not yet enough data to firm up a climate connection to solar activity. ... "
What an assinine statement... I'm pretty sure solar activity is the dominant force in both global warming and cooling!
It's an important one, but it can't explain the warming seen in the recent decades, because solar inputs have not been increasing over that time.
MWP Same as your Body temperature is governed by the Rooms right? Iregardless if you are running a fever?