Solanki, Krivova, Vieira: Crucial new solar paper

Posted: December 27, 2010 by tallbloke in climate, Solar physics

A good find over at the Hockey Schtick alerts us to a new paper by Max Planck Institute chief solar physicist Sami Solanki and co-authors Krivova and Vieira.

Between 2005 and 2010 these scientists have developed and validated a model which can accurately reconstruct not only TSI, but the spectral components within it. EUV is found to have increased by 50% since the Maunder Minimum. The model has nine(!) free parameters and is constrained by comparison with empirical data. The difference between the model output and the measured TSI is shown below.

Krivova, Vieira, Solanki Model-TSI difference

On the question of how much TSI has increased the Authors say:

“We now find a value of about 1.25 W/m-2 as our best estimate for the 11-yr averaged increase in the TSI between the end of the Maunder minimum and the end of the 20th century”

According to a calculation done at The Hockey Schtick, this would account for around 0.44C of warming from 1850 (don’t know if this includes the usual divide by 4), but this is not the whole story. Because the model is also able to reconstruct spectral irradiance, the Authors have been able to determine that the extreme and of the Ultra Violet part of the spectrum has increased much more radically, by around 50%.

The authors point out:

“Averaged over 11 years, Ly-α irradiance has increased by almost 50% since the end of the Maunder minimum.”…”the main processes through which the Sun affects global climate remain uncertain. Whereas the total solar irradiance is the main external source of energy entering the Earth’s climate system, solar UV irradiance governs chemical and physical processes in the Earth’s upper atmosphere.”

Krivova, Vieira, Solanki: Lyman alpha

This promises to give stonger backing to researchers such as Erl Happ who are finding that ozone production, which is strongly affected by solar UV levels, have a large influence on the climate through creating changes in cloud cover which affect surface insolation and pressure differentials which drive winds and precipitation. Erl points out that good work has been done in this area by mainstream scientists who don’t yet realise the source of the variation, such as:

Stratosphere‐troposphere coupling and annular mode variability
in chemistry‐climate models
Edwin P. Gerber et al
Received 29 December 2009; revised 28 April 2010; accepted 5 May 2010; published 22 September 2010

The puzzle of how apparently small changes in total solar irradiance strongly affect the Earth’s climate have just taken another step forward.

  1. erlhapp says:

    Hi Tallbloke,
    Here is a potted version of the dynamics that I observe:
    TSI change has little climate effect because it is cloud cover that mediates the energy received at the surface.
    Variations in the inflow of NOX at the polar vortexes is the primary driver of the ozone content of the stratosphere and the upper troposphere and this determines cloud cover because it modulates the temperature of the atmosphere from about 500hPa upwards where specific humidity varies little.
    Change in the distribution of the mass of the atmosphere in response to the solar wind determines the flow rate at the vortexes.
    Change in UV mediates the chemical constitution of the air from the tropopause upwards and influences the degree of inflation of the atmosphere and that conditions the response of the atmosphere to the solar wind (changes in distribution of mass).
    When the atmosphere is compact (low solar wind, small solar cycles) the response to the solar wind is greater. However, there is a relaxation of the ring current and atmospheric mass returns to the poles, enhancing the vortex flow, reducing stratospheric ozone content, cooling the upper atmosphere, increasing cloud cover, cooling the sea, weakening the westerlies, enhancing the flow of the polar easterlies and cooling the Earth.

    In addition, researchers have already discovered that the composition of the material flowing in via the polar vortexes varies with solar activity. But I think that the effect on the stratosphere is secondary to the effect of the change in the rate of flow.
    This theory accords with the observed tendency for surface temperature to vary with the strength solar wind (as measured by Geomagnetic activity indices) over long periods of time.

  2. tallbloke says:

    Hi Erl, thanks for dropping by. I assume from his recent comment on WUWT that Leif disagrees about the effect of UV on the atmospheric chemistry:

    “EUV does not reach the surface, and does not even produce ozone in any significant amount [the air is way too thin in the thermosphere – millions of times thinner than in the stratosphere].”

    Maybe we had a misunderstanding about which frequencies we were talking about.

    I’d like you to do a guest post here. I could use your comment above as the basis, plus some of what I’ve gleaned from reading your longer paper. Let me know.

  3. Brian H says:

    Leverage is all!
    “Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world.” -Archimedes
    Some things have longer stronger lever arms than others, it seems …

    Erl, I’m wondering if the “Diurnal Bulge” figures into your flow calculations at all. AFAIK, it tracks the sun 2 hours trailing, and tapers away in both polar directions. It’s huge, hundreds of km high, I gather. Might modulations in how it interacts with longer duration structures as it moves by say something about how they are energized?

  4. Olavi says:

    EUV stops in thermosphere warming and puffing it up. Puffed thermosphere is insulation to lower atmosphere. If we loose all solarwind and most of EUV, we find the new ice age.

  5. Joe Lalonde says:

    Brian H says:
    December 28, 2010 at 4:39 pm
    Leverage is all!
    Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world.” -Archimedes

    A lever is actually part of a whole circle that can be bigger or smaller depending on the lever arm.

  6. Joe Lalonde says:

    Changing of isotopes in a structure also changes the dynamics of density and the previous characteristics of how it interacted changes.
    H2 16O and H2 18O are water but are totally different. H2 160 will bond with salt and has a lighter density where H2 180 will not. In previous Ice Ages H218O settled on the ocean bottoms as per ocean core sample findings. Ruth Curry(oceanographer) found “freshwater” at the oceans floor and saltwater changes to the surface of oceans.

    This is simular to Oliver’s iron sun and stating some atomic particles are pulled to the suns core. Rotation and fragmentation have kept the particles suspended by centrigugal force.

  7. Joe Lalonde says:
    December 29, 2010 at 2:08 am
    Abut those “levers”, or “legs” of a triangle, or the Sin y + Cos y, the resultant force, the hypothenuse of a triangle of charges. As in your comment:
    Joe Lalonde says:
    December 29, 2010 at 12:02 pm
    The generalized difference: The relative arrangement of atoms in a solution is equal to pH, an arrangement of charges. Absolute “neutrality” it is a “self calming” artifact, it doesn´t exist. We “name it” to describe to ourselves, unconsciuosly of course, a comfortable “world” around us. We just don´t want a fleeting universe. 🙂

  8. Joe Lalonde says:

    Hey Dude! 🙂

    Put the points and triangles together and they form a circle as well!

  9. The preference to models also comes from our necessity of going back to bed with no remorses. 🙂
    Joe Lalonde says:
    December 29, 2010 at 1:22 pm
    Circles?, what circles? pi it is indeterminate because our “cicles” have holes, three of them, three gaps. 🙂
    Note: This is the proper “Glass Bed Game”

  10. Joe Lalonde says:

    Should I be putting a chastity belt on my wife near you? 🙂
    Na, she’s not that good looking! LOL.

  11. Tenuc says:

    Pi has no relevance in dynamic systems like planetary orbital motion. In kinematic situations, π = 4 which makes squaring the circle a trivial task.

    See The Extinction of Pi by Miles Mathis…

  12. Joe Lalonde says:

    Tenuc says:
    Your right, pi is not correct for use with energy. In rotation, energy bends and depending on speed is the compacted. Atmospheres were created after the planet was formed into a ball by compressed and escaping gases trapped and incorporating with the atmospheres rotation.
    The amazing thing with water is that it carries trace elements and are subject to gravity by the gases passing through the planet. It is more complex with gases carrying a great deal of energy.
    Science failed by not understanding stored energy is by compressing gases into a liquid takes less space than just trapping gases.

  13. Joe Lalonde says:

    Tenuc says:
    Forgot to incorporate the cooling debris that has a great deal of water in the form of ice that was hitting this planet at that time as well.

  14. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Be careful about discarding pi. God works in a sphere, not in a box. Much of the work in electrical fields is done with the use of pi. Energy is transferred in bundles and not in a linear manor. While much of modern science work is done without the use of pi, much of modern science is somewhat wrong and needs to be redone. Mathematicians dislike pi as it is not an exact figure and requires real work to use it. Besides it allows for a fudge factor to correct the math to match reality. 😀 pg

  15. Joe Lalonde says:

    P.G. Sharrow says
    Before Adolfo gets to it…Pi is delicious when there is flavour added. 🙂

    I’m not dismissing pi totally, only for energy rotation and planetary slowdown are not exact circles but curvatures that are not exact rings.

  16. […] the period of record. Chief Solar physicist at the Planck Institute Sami Solanki thinks it’s around 1.5W/m^2 since the end of the little ice age. Dr Leif Svalgaard thinks it’s less from his study of […]