German Researcher On Possible Consequences Of A Solar Grand Minimum…”Weakest Cycle In Almost 200 Years”

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Die kalte Sonne website presents an article on a potential approaching solar grand minimum.

The Sun in June 2013 – on the way to a grand minimum? New study on the possible consequences

by Frank Bosse

Solar activity has also been very modest this month. One has been able to observe only 48% of the mean value of the activity of the previous cycles for the current cycle, the sunspot number was only 52,5. Here’s how it looks graphically:

Sunspot number (SSN) versus months after the start of the cycle.

With respect to the previous month, with 78.7 it is a significant decrease. This is clear when compared to Cycle No. 5, which here has long been used as a reference for a weak 11 year Schwabe cycle. In the middle curve it is plain to see that statistically, the maximum is already passed. And in the case of the current SC24? An anyswer may be provided by the polar magnetic field of the sun, the poles reverse at the maximum:

 

Source: leif.org

The difference between the field strength of the northern and southern polar fields has clearly reversed signs, meaning the SC24’s maximum is most likely history. It had already occurred in November 1997 with a SSN of 96.7 . The comparison of the summed sunspot anomaly taking into account the the discontinuity of the counting method about 1945 shows that the current SC 24 is the weakest in almost 200 years:

 

In our monthly series in consideration of solar activity, a number of authors have been brought up who think it’s probable that the sun is headed for a grand minimum similar to the Maunder- Minimums of 1649-1715. That may already manifest itself in 2020. There have already been studies that attempt to project the impacts on global temperatures. Included here is a study from Meehl et al. 2013. As an input the authors look at an approximately 0.25% reduction in Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) between 2020 and 2070:

Source: Meehl et al. 2013

They fed this into a climate model. Result: global temperatures could drop around 0,2…0,3 degrees Celsius with local peak values of up to 0.8°C, especially in the middle and upper latitudes of the northern hemispheres:

Source: Figure 3c of Meehl et al. 2013.

The model used by Meehl et al. employs a high climate sensitivity with respect to greenhouse gases, foremost CO2, and it is thus little wonder that the shown cooling with respect to the warming on top of it in the simulation only has a temporary effect and a moderate braking effect. The questions that a critical observer may ask are the following:

  1. Is the magnitude of sensitivity with regards to GHG in the model really assured when we consider the current stagnation of global temperatures since at least 2001 – while CO2 has steadily increased?
  2. Is the TSI in the paper, viewed as the “motor”, solely what one could expect to act or does spectral variation (especially UV) make an additional contribution? The same needs to be asked about the significantly increasing galactic cosmic radiation.

We see: Forecasts are very difficult – especially when they concern the future.”

 

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

13 responses to “German Researcher On Possible Consequences Of A Solar Grand Minimum…”Weakest Cycle In Almost 200 Years””

  1. Ed Caryl

    “Thus, a future grand solar minimum could slow down but not stop global warming.”
    The obligatory nod to AGW. That had to be inserted to get it published. Our grandchildren will wonder, ” Where’s the warming?”

  2. Ian W

    In 2030, as the ice calves off the Mississippi glacier into the frozen waters of the Gulf of Mexico the watching climate ‘scientists’ will say to each other – “When this lot melts it is going to get really really warm!”

  3. Merlin

    This points out the true from the false as much as CO2 is known to be a driver of green house gases GW people fail to mention the declining gases of CH4 and CFC’s outside of the increase I’m the last century in solar radiance CFC’S where more responsible for ozone depletion and subsequent warming by allowing solar radiance to have a greater effect also lost is the fact that volcanism also declined now these combined factors are now in remission my greatest fear is a return to GT reminiscent of the Maunder Minimum effecting crops livestock feed basically food shortages leading to disease and global pandemics

  4. DirkH

    Leif Svalgaard says that x % of TSI change lead to x/4 % change in temperature.

    So a change from 1361 to 1358 W – 3 W or 0.2 % – would imply 0.05% change in temperature; or from say 288 K to 287.856 K average temperature. That’s even close to what Meehl et al found with their climate model.

    That’s not enough to explain a LIA. The TSI change doesn’t cut it. Now what’s lacking in their model and in Leif’s energy calculation is of course the Svensmark mechanism and unknown consequences of a shift in the Solar spectrum (UV varies much more than TSI over a solar cycle).

    One of these must amplify the effect to explain the LIA. I think this mechanism will reveal itself in the coming years.

  5. TimiBoy

    All I can say about the coming Cooling is that I am very pleased I live in Australia…

    1. Bernd Felsche

      Ditto

    2. Glenn

      And I am glad I work and invest in the oil and natural gas fields of western Canada 😉 some cheap nat gas companies out there, just sayin!

      1. Bernd Felsche

        France’s President would rather freeze the frogs than to allow fracking in France.

  6. Mr. Africa

    “…. when we consider the current stagnation of global temperatures since at least 2011 …”

    I think perhaps you meant to put 2001?

    1. DirkH

      The German original says 2001. Typo in Pierre’s translation.

  7. R. de Haan

    Ed Caryl
    14. Juli 2013 at 17:22 | Permalink | Reply
    “Our grandchildren will wonder, ” Where’s the warming?”

    I am wondering for a long time now where the warming is. In fact I am waiting for it since they came up with the subject.

    For more than one reason you don’t have to refer to the grand children to make this point. To refer to the children is used by our centralist warmista’s to get the moral high ground to their plea. All we can do is give the kids a good education. We can’t influence the weather the will experience. So in these terms we have nothing to offer but the arrogance and foolishness of a political doctrine that only has the objective to “get your money and make your life miserable”.

    I say screw them all.

  8. Weekly Climate and Energy news Roundup | Watts Up With That?

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close