Solar Climatic Effects (Recent Influence) - Summary

http://www.co2science.org/subject/s/summaries/ solarrecin.htm

Solar Climatic Effects (Recent Influence) - Summary

Thanks for posting this. I see NASA/Goddard announced an interesting-sounding related study today:

Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:10 AM

RELEASE: 03-106

NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE

Since the late 1970s, the amount of solar radiation the sun emits, during times of quiet sunspot activity, has increased by nearly .05 percent per decade, according to a NASA funded study.

'This trend is important because, if sustained over many decades, it could cause significant climate change,' said Richard Willson, a researcher affiliated with NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University's Earth Institute, New York. He is the lead author of the study recently published in Geophysical Research Letters.

'Historical records of solar activity indicate that solar radiation has been increasing since the late 19th century. If a trend, comparable to the one found in this study, persisted throughout the 20th century, it would have provided a significant component of the global warming the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports to have occurred over the past 100 years,' he said.

NASA's Earth Science Enterprise funded this research as part of its mission to understand and protect our home planet by studying the primary causes of climate variability, including trends in solar radiation that may be a factor in global climate change.

The solar cycle occurs approximately every 11 years when the sun undergoes a period of increased magnetic and sunspot activity called the 'solar maximum,' followed by a quiet period called the 'solar minimum.'

Although the inferred increase of solar irradiance in 24 years, about 0.1 percent, is not enough to cause notable climate change, the trend would be important if maintained for a century or more. Satellite observations of total solar irradiance have obtained a long enough record (over 24 years) to begin looking for this effect.

Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) is the radiant energy received by the Earth from the sun, over all wavelengths, outside the atmosphere. TSI interaction with the Earth's atmosphere, oceans and landmasses is the biggest factor determining our climate. To put it into perspective, decreases in TSI of 0.2 percent occur during the weeklong passage of large sunspot groups across our side of the sun. These changes are relatively insignificant compared to the sun's total output of energy, yet equivalent to all the energy that mankind uses in a year. According to Willson, small variations, like the one found in this study, if sustained over many decades, could have significant climate effects.

In order to investigate the possibility of a solar trend, Willson needed to put together a long-term dataset of the sun's total output. Six overlapping satellite experiments have monitored TSI since late 1978. The first record came from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Nimbus7 Earth Radiation Budget (ER experiment (1978 - 1993). Other records came from NASA's Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitors: ACRIM1 on the Solar Maximum Mission (1980 - 1989), ACRIM2 on the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (1991 - 2001) and ACRIM3 on the ACRIMSAT satellite (2000 to present). Also, NASA launched its own Earth Radiation Budget Experiment on its Earth Radiation Budget Satellite (ERBS) in 1984. The European Space Agency's (ESA) SOHO/VIRGO experiment also provided an independent data set (1996 to 1998).

In this study, Willson, who is also Principal Investigator of NASA's ACRIM experiments, compiled a TSI record of over 24 years by carefully piecing together the overlapping records. In order to construct a long-term dataset, he needed to bridge a two-year gap (1989 to 1991) between ACRIM1 and ACRIM2. Both the Nimbus7/ERB and ERBS measurements overlapped the ACRIM 'gap.' Using Nimbus7/ERB results produced a 0.05 percent per decade upward trend between solar minima, while ERBS results produced no trend.

Until this study, the cause of this difference, and hence the validity of the TSI trend, was uncertain. Willson has identified specific errors in the ERBS data responsible for the difference. The accurate long-term dataset, therefore, shows a significant positive trend (.05 percent per decade) in TSI between the solar minima of solar cycles 21 to 23 (1978 to present). This major finding may help climatologists to distinguish between solar and man-made influences on climate.

NASA's ACRIMSAT/ACRIM3 experiment began in 2000 and will extend the long-term solar observations into the future for at least a five-year minimum mission.

For more information on the Internet, visit: http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/2003/ 0313irradiance.html

For more information about ACRIM on the Internet, visit: http://www.acrim.com

Elvia H. Thompson Headquarters, Washington March 20, 2003 (Phone: 202/358-1696)

Krishna Ramanujan Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. (Phone: 301/286-3026)

You posted hundreds of lines to tell us that the sun has an impact on climate. I'm afraid that falls into the, well, duh!!?, category. I hate to break this to you, but the whole reason we have weather and climate in the first place is the sun. Think about it.

The Well, Duh? category also includes the statements that solar variation only is required to explain the climate record, and that anthropogenic warming, if it exists at all, is insignificant compared to solar variation.

Still, the most part of the statements show that scientist doing real science with real scientific data are not finding the 'AGW signal appearing in the noise', for the parsimonious reason that it is not required to explain the world's climate.

Well, Duh?

ROTFL. Titan, you pathetic little troll, kindly get your head out of your ass. You are in no position to teach anyone anything about this issue since you don't know the first thing about it yourself. First of all, the anthropogenic component is the ENTIRE problem. Natural GHG emissions are naturally sequestered by the atmosphere/ocean system. It is the extra material we are adding that is the problem.

LOL. Did Daly tell you to say that? Coming from a man who can't even understand the most basic concept - see your idiotic comment above - you should tuck your tail between your legs and skulk off in shame.

Bullshit. If you mean sequestered meaning millenia then you're taling out of your arse.

The oceans for example hold some 38000 gigatons on carbon (which puts our 5 gigatons in some sort of perspective). Normal changes in solar radiation would change the amounts of oceanic carbon by much more than we could ever produce.

But then what would we have to moan about?

YOu produce no facts. No evidence. And no shame.

LOL. Let's see. I recall telling you that most of the warming was occurring at high northern latitudes. I provided you with clear evidence of this. Did you forget?

No more than saying that because the earth holds more plutonium than a nuclear bomb, you don't have to worry about a nuclear bomb.

Except they don't.

Think back to the Vostok ice core data and all the arguments about whether CO2 leads the temperature increase or lags it. For many of the trolls around here, and they seem to be breeding, if CO2 lags the temperature increase it means that CO2 increase today is meaningless. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

David, you of all people should know that REGIONAL Warming is not GLOBAL

The point made previously that most of the observed warming has occurred in the northern hemisphere was also previously raised by this individual. However, it is important to realize that orbiting satellites (the uncontested final word in accuracy) have been monitoring global temperatures continuously for the last 22 years and do not show a warming upper atmosphere, which is where a greenhouse effect does it's thing. The northern hemisphere data has been biased badly by near-surface temperatures recorded at ground stations from what used to be a large number of rural recording stations. However, due to urban sprawl and the encroachment of asphalt and concrete there has been an upward distortion of ground temperatures that has nothing to do with the greenhouse effect (the 'urban heat-island effect