Sunspots Do Really Affect Weather Patterns, Say Scientists

Ronald Bailey

A new study in the journal Science by a team of international of researchers led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research have found that the sunspot cycle has a big effect on the earth's weather. The puzzle has been how fluctuations in the sun's energy of about 0.1 percent over the course of the 11-year sunspot cycle could affect the weather? The press release describing the new study explains:

The team first confirmed a theory that the slight increase in solar energy during the peak production of sunspots is absorbed by stratospheric ozone. The energy warms the air in the stratosphere over the tropics, where sunlight is most intense, while also stimulating the production of additional ozone there that absorbs even more solar energy. Since the stratosphere warms unevenly, with the most pronounced warming occurring at lower latitudes, stratospheric winds are altered and, through a chain of interconnected processes, end up strengthening tropical precipitation.

At the same time, the increased sunlight at solar maximum causes a slight warming of ocean surface waters across the subtropical Pacific, where Sun-blocking clouds are normally scarce. That small amount of extra heat leads to more evaporation, producing additional water vapor. In turn, the moisture is carried by trade winds to the normally rainy areas of the western tropical Pacific, fueling heavier rains and reinforcing the effects of the stratospheric mechanism.

The top-down influence of the stratosphere and the bottom-up influence of the ocean work together to intensify this loop and strengthen the trade winds. As more sunshine hits drier areas, these changes reinforce each other, leading to less clouds in the subtropics, allowing even more sunlight to reach the surface, and producing a positive feedback loop that further magnifies the climate response.

These stratospheric and ocean responses during solar maximum keep the equatorial eastern Pacific even cooler and drier than usual, producing conditions similar to a La Nina event. However, the cooling of about 1-2 degrees Fahrenheit is focused farther east than in a typical La Nina, is only about half as strong, and is associated with different wind patterns in the stratosphere.

Are these new findings relevant to scientific analyses of man-made global warming? The Christian Science Monitor reports:

For those wondering how the study bears on global warming, Gerald Meehl, lead author on the study, says that it doesn’t – at least not directly....

Global warming is a long-term trend, Dr. Meehl says in a phone conversation. By contrast, this study attempts to explain the processes behind a periodic occurrence. But, he says, a model finally able to reproduce a complex phenomenon observed in the real world does suggest that our climate models – the same ones we use to predict what will happen to global climate as we ratchet up co2 concentrations – are improving. And that will, inevitably, have an affect on the climate discussion.

A recent paper in Eos considers the evidence that we could be in for an extended period with few sunspots:

Why is a lack of sunspot activity interesting? During the period from 1645 to 1715, the Sun entered a period of low activity now known as the Maunder Minimum, when through several 11- year periods the Sun displayed few if any sunspots. Models of the Sun’s irradiance suggest that the solar energy input to the Earth decreased during that time and that this change in solar activity could explain the low temperatures recorded in Europe during the Little Ice Age.

Doesn't the Eos paper suggest that sunspot activity may not just affect weather but climate too?

Ronald Bailey is a science correspondent at Reason magazine and author of Liberation Biology (Prometheus).

 

What does this forecast, guess if you will, mean to us. To me it means be worried about reduced growing seasons for the food we humans eat. Traditionally nations and peoples will go to war, fight for their food, if times get hard for them. Add in that we are unilaterally disarming in the USA, and now we can be more worried. Last, it might be a good time to stock up on warmer clothes and such things, like even long johns or sleeping bags. Heck make that another kind of present, for example, like a birthday or even a wedding present.

Now the good news. Our ancestors made it during the mini-ice age, if that even comes to pass in today's future. So can we, too. Of course the population was less back then. So we will survive, but may not be too happy, either.

I myself have been studying this sunspot stuff for over 4 decades, and have been a Marine, so I try to plan ahead, just in case. And now seems like a good "just in case" time. Said another way I am less interested in what present day politicians say about global warming, than I am in the potential practical actions I should take for me and my Family, if any actions at all.. The last mini-ice age was over a half-century long, so planning ahead may be wise. My, and your, main dilemmas are the dual use idea, like how to I use "X" in either situation.

The hard part is not trusting much of what the scientists say these days. Scientists have the same dilemma even Leonardo da Vinci had. It's called seeking funding. I suspect even the people back in da Vinci's time had the same problem.

Last, even President Eisenhower warned about this during his more famous military industrial complex article circa 1960. The second half of the article warned about the scientific industrial complex.