"events strongly affect ozone at 60–80 km, leading to extremely large (up to 90%) short-term ozone depletion. This impact is comparable to that of large, but much less frequent, solar proton events. On solar cycle timescales, we find that EEP causes ozone variations of up to 34% at 70–80 km. With such a magnitude, it is reasonable to suspect that EEP could be an important part of solar influence on the atmosphere and climate system."
"On solar cycle scales, we find that EEP causes significant ozone variations of up to 34% at 70–80 km. As ozone is important to atmospheric heating and cooling rates, this level of ozone variation could significantly affect the local mesospheric temperature balance6. Our results emphasize the importance of the EEP effect on mesospheric ozone and significantly improve our understanding of the impacts of the energetic particles on the atmosphere."
"Most studies have concentrated on the so-called indirect particle precipitation effect caused by the production of odd nitrogen (NOx) in the polar upper atmosphere, its subsequent transport to lower altitudes inside the wintertime polar vortex, depletion of ozone in the stratosphere and effects on the radiative balance of the middle atmosphere10, 11, 12, 13. These effects may further couple to atmospheric dynamics and propagate downwards by changing polar winds and atmospheric wave propagation through wave—mean flow interaction14, 15, 16. Several studies have suggested links between the EPP indirect effect on ozone and regional wintertime tropospheric climate variability."
"Our results show that the direct, HOx-driven effect of EEP is causing significant, previously unaccounted for, ozone variability in the mesosphere that are observable on solar cycle timescales. Although these effects from EEP-HOx have not been considered in atmospheric and climate models to date, dynamical changes in the mesosphere and stratosphere have been reported as a result of SPEs and the indirect EEP impact on ozone19, 21."
"Considering the magnitude of the direct ozone effect, tens of percent in wintertime polar regions, it is reasonable to suspect that EEP could be an important contributor to the Sun-climate connection on solar cycle timescales. For comparison, the 11-year variability in UV radiation has a less than 10% effect on annual mean mesospheric ozone at mid-to-low latitude22, 23, 24. Thus, more research should be directed towards better understanding the potential further effects from EEP and its role in the overall Solar influence on climate. Currently, in most high-top climate models the solar input does not include EEP and it is completely missing from low-top models."Ozone is the 3rd most influential greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, after water vapor and CO2, as illustrated by the large cooling effects upon the stratosphere in this illustration:
3. Stratospheric cooling rates: The picture shows how water, cabon dioxide and ozone contribute to longwave cooling in the stratosphere. Colours from blue through red, yellow and to green show increasing cooling, grey areas show warming of the stratosphere. The tropopause is shown as dotted line (the troposphere below and the stratosphere above). For CO2 it is obvious that there is no cooling in the troposphere [or warming!], but a strong cooling effect in the stratosphere. Ozone, on the other hand, cools the upper stratosphere but warms the lower stratosphere. Figure from: Clough and Iacono, JGR, 1995; adapted from the SPARC Website. Please click to enlarge! (60 K) [Source] [Rebuttal] [Ozone O3 is shown as a cooling agent in the upper stratosphere, but a warming agent in the upper troposphere to lower stratosphere] |
In addition to the large effects on ozone as a potential solar amplification mechanism, this paper begs the question how much of the alleged ozone hole over Antarctica is related to solar activity vs. man-made CFCs? As this paper notes, these solar effects on ozone are most pronounced over the poles where the Antarctic ozone hole is located. In addition, the wide variations in the Antarctic ozone hole from year to year indicate solar activity is more likely responsible rather than a continuous effect from CFCs. Is this why no significant trend in the ozone hole has been found now 30 years after the Montreal Protocol to outlaw CFCs?
Excerpts from full paper:
Missing driver in the Sun–Earth connection from energetic electron precipitation impacts mesospheric ozone
-
- Nature Communications
- 5,
- Article number:
- 5197
- doi:10.1038/ncomms6197
- Received
- Accepted
- Published
I claim to be the first to have proposed just such a mechanism:
ReplyDelete"The sun causes latitudinal climate zone shifting with changes in the degree of jetstream zonality / meridionality by altering the ozone creation / destruction balance differentially at different height above the tropopause. The net result is a change in the gradient of tropopause height between equator (relatively high) and poles (relatively low).
The cause appears not to be raw solar power output (TSI) which varies too little but instead, the precise mix of particles and wavelengths from the sun which varies more greatly and affects ozone amounts above the tropopause.
That allows latitudinal sliding of the jets and climate zones below the tropopause leading to changes in global cloudiness and albedo which alters the amount of energy getting into the oceans."
from here:
http://www.newclimatemodel.com/new-climate-model/
I have been pointing out for some time that the reverse sign effect of solar variation on ozone in the mesosphere (less ozone when the sun is active, more ozone when it is inactive) works down through the polar vortices to affect tropopause heights above the poles relative to the heights above the requator and thereby influence jet stream meridionality, global cloudiness and the proportion of solar energy that is able to enter the oceans to fuel the climate system.
ReplyDeleteThis paper says that the reduction in ozone occurs most when the sun is active, just as I proposed.
That reverse sign ozone response is the distinguishing feature of my New Climate Model and they appear to have confirmed it.
Stephen,
DeleteHave you created computer code of your model to try hindcasting/projecting?
MS.
ReplyDeleteNo, that is beyond my capability but you can hindcast and project from my simple conceptual model by running through the sequence of real world events and comparing to the sequence set out in my model.
Applying the sequence works well right back to the Maunder Minimum and accounts for observations during the recent 'pause'.
Also note the sections about falsification and predictive skill.
It goes back to this:
ReplyDelete"My proposition is that instead the latitudinal shifts are a result of two
separate
forces acting together (hence the high mobility of the jets latitudinally)
when the
sun is more active with one being a cooling effect at high levels over the
poles
pulling the jets poleward and the other being a warming effect at low levels
over
the equator pushing the jets poleward at the same time. The cooling effect
appears to be dominant over longer time periods to give the observed cooling
of
the stratosphere and mesosphere when the sun is more active. Nonetheless
there
is still overall system warming with the more active sun because of the
extra
energy going into the oceans due to the jets shifting poleward thereby
reducing
total cloudiness and albedo as shown in the illustration at the head of this
article."
from here:
http://climaterealists.com/attachments/ftp/How%20The%20Sun%20Could%20Control%20Earths%20Temperature.pdf
25th October 2010
At that time I was referring to UV and solar protons but in later comments I
extended that to the general mix of wavelengths and particles which would
include the charged electrons referred to in this new paper.