Record solar UV irradiance in the tropical Andes
Nathalie A. Cabrol, Uwe Feister, Donat-Peter Häder, Helmut Piazena, Edmond A. Grin and Andreas Klein
High elevation, thin ozone layer, and clear sky produce intense ultraviolet (UV) radiation in the tropical Andes. Recent models suggest that tropical stratospheric ozone will slightly decrease in the coming decades, potentially resulting in more UV anomalies. Data collected between 4300 and 5916 m above sea level (asl) in Bolivia show how this trend could dramatically impact surface solar irradiance. During 61 days, two Eldonet dosimeters recorded extreme UV-B irradiance equivalent to a UV index (UVI) of 43.3, which is the highest ground value ever reported. If they become more common, events of this magnitude may have societal and ecological implications, which make understanding the process leading to their generation critical. Our data show that this event and other major UV spikes were consistent with rising UV-B/UV-A ratios in the days to hours preceding the spikes, trajectories of negative ozone anomalies (NOAs), and radiative transfer modeling.
Archive for the ‘ozone’ Category
The so called ‘Effective Height of Emission’ vs the Actual Height of Emission – which is more informative?Posted: July 13, 2014 by Rog Tallbloke in atmosphere, climate, Clouds, Energy, general circulation, ozone, radiative theory
The mainstream climatologists are fond of telling us that additional co2 increases the ‘Effective Height of Emission’ of radiation to space by ‘Greenhouse Gases’, and that this must cause a rise in surface temperature because the lapse rate from the average temperature of 255K at the ‘EEH’ to the surface will mean a higher temperature. That lapse rate is what is shown by the slanting red line from surface to tropopause in Fig 1 below.
But there are some problems with this theoretical scenario.
The 255K figure is derived from the 240W/m^2 solar shortwave radiation incoming to the Earth’s climate system AFTER a proportion has been removed to account for reflection by clouds. But the models underestimate the amount of solar radiation absorbed by clouds because the fundamental physics of light scattering in clouds is poorly understood.
Although we are told a change in the EEH ‘must’ change the surface temperature, no viable mechanism is offered to explain how this imperative ‘must’ will be enforced. The more rational proponents of the enhanced greenhouse effect hypothesis long ago abandoned trying to claim ‘downwelling longwave radiation’ heats the ocean, since nearly all LW emitted in wavelengths absorbed by water vapour and co2 is absorbed with a kilometre of the surface, all downwelling longwave from above a kilometre above the surface will be absorbed, converted to sensible heat, and convected back upwards before reaching the surface too. In any case, the 10% of LW reaching the surface from on high can’t penetrate the ocean surface by more than a few nanometres.
So much for radiative theory, but what can a look at the data for the vertical temperature profile shown in Fig 1 tell us that might be really useful?
The BBC reports – laced with the inevitable ‘warmist catchphrases’ – a trend in weather phenomena described in a recent research paper.
No surprise to find this:
‘The researchers believe humans are influencing the changes’
(but they haven’t found the mechanism)
‘There is compelling evidence that the expansion of the tropics is attributable to a combination of human activities, but we don’t know which is the primary factor.’
How compelling is that? It’s hard to keep a straight face.
Fangqun Yu and Gan Luo: Effect of solar variations on particle formation and cloud condensation nucleiPosted: April 10, 2014 by Rog Tallbloke in atmosphere, climate, Clouds, cosmic rays, Cycles, Electro-magnetism, Geomagnetism, Natural Variation, ozone, solar system dynamics
From the Hockey Schtick, via the GWPF, news of a new paper supporting the Svensmark hypothesis:
NEW PAPER CORROBORATES SOLAR-COSMIC RAY THEORY OF CLIMATE
10/04/14 The Hockey Schtick
A paper published today in Environmental Research Letters corroborates the Svensmark cosmic ray theory of climate, whereby tiny 0.1% changes in solar activity are amplified via the effect on cosmic rays and cloud formation, which in turn may control global temperatures.
The authors find cosmic ray variations due to changes over solar cycles may have as much as 10 times larger effect than previous studies have estimated. The paper also finds that a tiny 0.2C temperature increase increases the cosmic ray induced cloud condensation nuclei by around 50%, thus acting as a natural homeostatic mechanism.
The Royal Society, in collaboration with the NAS has published a long document about the evidence and causes of climate change. Section’s 4 & 5 deal with the Sun. Count the misleading statements and omissions:
4. What role has the Sun played in climate change in recent decades?
The Sun provides the primary source of energy driving Earth’s climate system, but its variations have played very little role in the climate changes observed in recent decades. Direct satellite measurements since the late 1970s show no net increase in the Sun’s output, while at the same time global surface temperatures have increased (see Figure 2).
Figure 2. Measurements of the Sun’s energy incident on Earth show no net increase in solar forcing during the past 30 years, and therefore this cannot be responsible for warming during that period. The data show only small periodic amplitude variations associated with the Sun’s 11-year cycle. Figure by Keith Shine. Source: TSI data from Physikalisch-Meteorologisches Observatorium Davos, Switzerland, adjusted down by 4.46 W m-2 to agree with the 2008 solar minimum data from Kopp and Lean, 2011; temperature data from the HadCRUT4 dataset, UK Met Office, Hadley Centre (larger version)
The effects of solar irradiation changes on the migration of the Congo Air Boundary and water levels of paleo-Lake Suguta, Northern Kenya Rift, during the African Humid Period (15 ka – 5 ka BP),
Annett Junginger, Sybille Roller, Lydia A. Olaka, Martin H. Trauth,
Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, Volume 396, 15 February 2014, Pages 1-16, ISSN 0031-0182, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2013.12.007.
Abstract: [first sentence from long A.]
The water-level record from the 300m deep paleo-lake Suguta (Northern Kenya Rift) during the African Humid Period (AHP, 15-5ka BP) helps to explain decadal to centennial intensity variations in the West African Monsoon (WAM) and the Indian Summer Monsoon (ISM).
Comment left at Steve Goddard’s by Mike Sanicola
I’m a professional infrared astronomer who spent his life trying to observe space through the atmosphere’s back-radiation that the environmental activists claim is caused by CO2 and guess what? In all the bands that are responsible for back radiation in the brightness temperatures (color temperatures) related to earth’s surface temperature (between 9 microns and 13 microns for temps of 220K to 320 K) there is no absorption of radiation by CO2 at all. In all the bands between 9 and 9.5 there is mild absorption by H2O, from 9.5 to 10 microns (300 K) the atmosphere is perfectly clear except around 9.6 is a big ozone band that the warmists never mention for some reason.
I’m retired so I don’t need to keep my mouth shut anymore. Kept my mouth shut for 40 years,
Yep. Lots of void, no evidence for the posit. I’m still waiting for the missing primary dataset, if it can be directly measured. Proxy is wiggle matching. Ozone, sure, been known for 100 years. Angstrom reported it from Sweden.
A new paper in the Royal Meteorological Soc quarterly a review paper finds that stratosperic ozone recovery in the southern hemisphere will have a strong effect on surface temperatures.
Climate System Response to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion and Recovery
Michael Previdi1,*, Lorenzo M. Polvani1,2
We review what is presently known about the climate system response to stratospheric ozone depletion and its projected recovery, focusing on the responses of the atmosphere, ocean and cryosphere. Compared to well-mixed greenhouse gases (GHGs), the radiative forcing of climate due to observed stratospheric ozone loss is very small: in spite of this, recent trends in stratospheric ozone have caused profound changes in the Southern Hemisphere (SH) climate system, primarily by altering the tropospheric midlatitude jet, which is commonly described as a change in the Southern Annular Mode. Ozone depletion in the late twentieth century was the primary driver of the observed poleward shift of the jet during summer, which has been linked to changes in tropospheric and surface temperatures, clouds and cloud radiative effects, and precipitation at both middle and low latitudes.
Northern hemisphere ozone receives little attention.
Fairly recently a partial view of the north has become available, still incomplete, model output, nevertheless this might be eye opening.
The images used here are from NASA  are tilted partial northern hemisphere. Image left here is making the geography clear, barely makes the Mediterranean, southern US or Japan.
Fingers of ozone reaching far south has been known for a long time, pre-dates satellites, is rarely mentioned.
Satellite sensing is restricted by how it has to be done: the only proper way is by transmission through the atmosphere, which means from the ground. Reason: measurement uses the difference in absorption between a pair of spectral lines where a light source shining through, daytime the sun, night-time reflected sunlight, the moon, hence remote sensing has no data night side.
Last night I attended a lecture at the university’s chemistry dept. by Susan Solomon, IPCC lead author and architect of the Montreal Protocol on CFC’s. The subject was:
Surprises in Radiative Forcing: What Chemicals Are Changing Our Recent Climate?
In it she outlined an explanation for the ‘hiatus’ or ‘standstill’ in global warming since around the turn of the millennium. I’ll give only a brief synopsis here, since the vid I made of the whole lecture is uploading on youtube and will be added to the post soon. Basically, Prof Soloman says the hiatus is due to a combination of two factors: A reduction in stratospheric water vapour concentrations, and the effect of volcanic SO2 based aerosols getting into the stratosphere from smaller than expected volcanoes.
I think the second of these is pretty dubious myself, but hey, she’s supposed to be the expert.
This is the first of two guest posts from Tim Cullen on the fascinating subject of photon production in planetary atmospheres:
The concept of a “fluorescing atmosphere” is generally dismissed as cranky [or just plain crazy] by most pundits and commentators.
Therefore, I am extremely grateful to Professor Mark A. Smith and Hiroshi Imanaka for publishing a truly remarkable paper on the Geochemical Society website that clearly illustrates that photons are produced in the atmosphere.
The blue emissions are indicative of atomic hydrogen [but there are other atmospheric atomic gases that emit blue photon – such as helium] and are produced in many ways [including]:
a) Electrons colliding with atomic gas particles.
b) Solar photon colliding with atomic gas particles.
c) Atomic gas particles recombining to form molecules.
Using the Ion-Neutral Mass Spectrometer (INMS) on Cassini, we now know that even in the ionosphere, there is a rich and complex organic chemistry unparalleled in any known atmosphere (Waite, 2005; Waite, 2009).
My thanks to Nils-Axel Morner for sending me a copy of his new paper ‘Solar Wind, Earth’s Rotation and Changes in Terrestrial Climate’ published yesterday in Physical Review & Research Inernational. This is a great paper, full of interest, drawing together disparate dynamic phenomena into a comprehensible whole. Niklas is fully up to date with the latest research from Nicola Scafetta and the talkshop, incorporating planetary motion into the scheme encompassing the wider ‘frame of reference’ in which terrestrial climate change occurs. This is what will enable the new climate science to move beyond the constricted and constipated thinking of the current climate science mainstream.
My thanks to Clive Best for offering this analysis from Ken Gregory as a repost here at the talkshop. There’s already an active discussion of it on WUWT, but we’ll run it anyway, as its importance is high.
Water Vapor Decline Cools the Earth – NASA Satellite Data
Original article at http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=483
An analysis of NASA satellite data shows that water vapor, the most important greenhouse gas, has declined in the upper atmosphere causing a cooling effect that is 16 times greater than the warming effect from man-made greenhouse gas emissions during the period 1990 to 2001.
The world has spent over $ 1 trillion on climate change mitigation based on climate models that don’t work. They are notoriously poor at simulating the 20th century warming because they do not include natural causes of climate change – mainly due to the changing sun – and they grossly exaggerate the feedback effects of greenhouse gas emissions.
Most scientists agree that doubling the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, which takes about 150 years, would theoretical warm the earth by one degree Celsius if there were no change in evaporation, the amount or distribution of water vapor and clouds. Climate models amplify the initial CO2 effect by a factor of three by assuming positive feedbacks from water vapor and clouds, for which there is little direct evidence. Most of the amplification by the climate models is due to an increase in upper atmosphere water vapor.
The Satellite Data
The NASA water vapor project (NVAP) uses multiple satellite sensors to create a standard climate dataset to measure long-term variability of global water vapor. NASA recently released the Heritage NVAP data which gives water vapor measurement from 1988 to 2001 on a 1 degree by 1 degree grid, in three vertical layers.1 The NVAP-M project, which is not yet available, extends the analysis to 2009 and gives five vertical layers. Water vapor content of an atmospheric layer is represented by the height in millimeters (mm) that would result from precipitating all the water vapor in a vertical column to liquid water. The near-surface layer is from the surface to where the atmospheric pressure is 700 millibar (mb), or about 3 km altitude. The middle layer is from 700 mb to 500 mb air pressure, or from 3 km to 6 km attitude. The upper layer is from 500 mb to 300 mb air pressure, or from 6 km to 10 km altitude.
The global annual average precipitable water vapor by atmospheric layer and by hemisphere from 1988 to 2001 is shown in Figure 1.
The graph is presented on a logarithmic scale so the vertical change of the curves approximately represents the forcing effect of the change. For a steady earth temperature, the amount of incoming solar energy absorbed by the climate system must be balanced by an equal amount of outgoing longwave radiation (OLR) at the top of the atmosphere. An increase of water vapor in the upper atmosphere would temporarily reduce the OLR, creating a forcing of more incoming than outgoing energy, which raises the temperature of the atmosphere until the balance is restored.
Figure 1. Precipitable water vapor by layer, global and by hemisphere.
This is content promoted from Suggestions to a full article.
Image credit NOAA. GMD Lidar: Mauna Loa, Hawaii
This is a followup to an old post whose subject has come up again.
Since recently I was at the Mauna Loa site where the data comes from, I have a particular interest in studies that have come from there. In this case it has to do with green laser beams that are fired vertically to measure stratospheric aerosols/particulates.
Recently, as shown on WUWT this week, there are claims that mid-size volcanic emissions into the stratosphere are responsible for the non-warming since 1998.
Earlier, Judith Curry [see 1, below] carried a good commentary on the subject of warmist scientists responded to the question of non-warming since 1998. Curry was responding to an article by Paul Voosen . Curry pointed out the lack of certainty evidenced by specific comments. Voosen complained in a comment that she misinterpreted the comments.
The difference in view is very interesting, and very significant.
My thanks to contributor ‘Scute’ for this interesting news, just in:
NASA can’t get enough cosmic rays. (Copied RSS feed below). First it was ATTREX kicking off last month. And now the preliminary verdict is in from ballooning across Antarctica where they found “large numbers of cosmic rays”. All very welcome but why play it all down in AR5 chapter 7 while all this was going on behind the scenes?
Feb. 4, 2013
NASA’S SUPER-TIGER BALLOON BREAKS RECORDS WHILE COLLECTING DATA
WASHINGTON — A large NASA science balloon has broken two flight
duration records while flying over Antarctica carrying an instrument
that detected 50 million cosmic rays.
Tags: met office, space weather
There aren’t many jobs on offer at the MET Office these days, maybe belt tightening is the order of the day as they ready for privatisation. But it seems that having shot their mouths off about the Sudden Stratospheric Warming that we already knew was linked to the current cold snap, they’ve realised they need someone who knows something about the subject before they get made to look silly. Again. Finding a bright young astrophysics/Earth sciences graduate with Fortran skills might be a bit of a challenge though:
Generic role: Scientist
Profession: Science and Engineering
12 month fixed-term, Full time at Met Office, Exeter
Closing date for applications: 8 February 2013
Space Weather is a developing area of work at the Met Office. The all Hazards guidance now provided by Met Office forecasters includes alerts of space weather events. We have also signed a Memorandum of Agreement with the NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center which covers exchange of data, development of space weather services, forecaster training and collaboration on space weather research. One initial focus of Met Office space weather research is the development of a thermosphere / ionosphere data assimilation system.
Tags: climate change, climate policy, david cameron, Global Warming, guy leech
The Rt. Hon. David Cameron MP
10 Downing Street
London SW1A 2AA
18th January 2013
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY POLICIES
Dear Prime Minister,
Like you I read PPE at Oxford and I was lucky enough to be taught Economics by Professor Wilfred Beckerman. He has an interest in the economics of environmentalism, having worked in that field with the World Bank in the 1960s, advised the Labour Party on it and he was a member of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution from 1970 to 1973. He wrote an excellent book in 1974 called “In Defence of Economic Growth” which was a rebuttal of the famous Club of Rome 1972 book “The Limits to Growth”.
In 2002, Prof. Beckerman published a book called “A Poverty of Reason: Economic Growth and Sustainable Development”. If you or your advisers on environmental policies haven’t read it before, I thoroughly recommend it as a succinct and massively sensible analysis of many environmentalists’ arguments by a brilliant economist and excellent teacher. He is still going strong at 87; he’s still teaching at UCL, mainly on ethical issues in Economics which he touches on in this book when addressing the mistakes made by many environmentalists about intergenerational ethics, rights and basic economics when considering issues like resource depletion, climate change and the precautionary principle.
My thanks to commenter ‘scute’ for this NASA news feed item:
NASA CHASES CLIMATE CHANGE CLUES INTO THE STRATOSPHERE
WASHINGTON — Starting this month, NASA will send a remotely piloted
research aircraft as high as 65,000 feet over the tropical Pacific
Ocean to probe unexplored regions of the upper atmosphere for answers
to how a warming climate is changing Earth.
The first flights of the Airborne Tropical Tropopause Experiment
(ATTREX), a multi-year airborne science campaign with a heavily
instrumented Global Hawk aircraft, will take off from and be operated
by NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base in
California. The Global Hawk is able to make 30-hour flights.
Water vapor and ozone in the stratosphere can have a large impact on
Earth’s climate. The processes that drive the rise and fall of these
compounds, especially water vapor, are not well understood. This
limits scientists’ ability to predict how these changes will
influence global climate in the future.
An excellent article by E.M. Smith, the ‘Chiefio’
Originally posted on Musings from the Chiefio:
The title is a bit of a play on words. In common U.S. English, there’s a frequent phrase that came, I think, from High School Sports (and eventually made it into movies). In one movie, it involves cats vs. dogs. “Cats Rule, Dogs Drool”.
But I could have causality backwards here. Perhaps the movie came first?
At any rate, this posting has two ‘themes’, if you will. First, the Tropopause dominates what happens (i.e. it “rules” while the rest of the atmosphere is along for the ride). Second, that there are things that drive the tropopause, just like there are “rules of the road”, there are physics rules that tell us how the tropopause will behave. Two sides of one coin. What are the rules that drive the tropopause, and why does that dominate the meaning of the air?
Atmosphere, Stratosphere, Mesosphere, Troposphere
My kingdom for a sphere…
View original 4,806 more words
This is interesting. Reductions in the temperature of the lower stratosphere have hitherto been assumed to be a result of the ‘thickening’ of the troposphere by the increase in carbon dioxide, leading to increased absorption of surface emitted long-wave radiation and thus ‘global warming’. Now Susan Solomon, IPCC lead author seems to be introducing strong uncertainty into the issue. Extreme Ultra Violet light from the Sun is known to destroy ozone. EUV was at a long term peak while the Sun was highly active in the late C20th. This appears to raise the possibility that as well as being at least partly (possibly mainly) responsible for the ‘ozone hole’ which developed over the poles, more of the incoming solar radiation was reaching the surface due to this effect, thus contributing to late C20th warming.
Uncertainties in the evolution of stratospheric ozone and implications for recent temperature changes in the tropical lower stratosphere
- Susan Solomon
- Paul J. Young
- Birgit Hassler
|Journal publication date||14/09/2012|
|Journal||Geophysical Research Letters|
|Number of pages||4|