Cosmic Rays and Global Warming
description
Transcript of Cosmic Rays and Global Warming
![Page 1: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Cosmic Rays andGlobal WarmingCosmic Rays andGlobal WarmingA.D.Erlykin1,2, G. Gyalai3, K. Kudela3,
T. Sloan4 and A.W. Wolfendale2
A.D.Erlykin1,2, G. Gyalai3, K. Kudela3,T. Sloan4 and A.W. Wolfendale2
1. Lebedev, Moscow2. University, Durham3. Academy, Kosice4. University, Lancaster
1. Lebedev, Moscow2. University, Durham3. Academy, Kosice4. University, Lancaster
21st ECRS Kosice, 200821st ECRS Kosice, 2008
![Page 2: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Low cloud cover anomalies and CR intensity(Huancayo) – Svensmark (2007)
![Page 3: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Global monthly cloud anomalies(Svensmark, 2007)
a : high clouds (<440 h Pa)
b : middle (440 – 680 h Pa)
c : low (>680 h Pa)
clou
d an
omal
ies
(%)
clou
d an
omal
ies
(%)
clou
d an
omal
ies
(%)
cosm
ic ra
ys (%
)co
smic
rays
(%)
cosm
ic ra
ys (%
)
year
Red Cosmic Rays (Huancayo)Blue Cloud cover
(b)
(a)
(c)
![Page 4: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
A Basic Problem for LCC, CR correlation
TypicalCumulusTypicalCumulus
( 10m)
( 1m)
sharptransition
diffuse transition
1km
Much of CR-induced cloud will be below ( and above ) the existingcloud – and will not contribute to the measured LCC.
0.4km
![Page 5: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Peak to peak 11 year cycle inNM data vs VRCO comparedwith ionization calculations ofUsoskin and Kovaltsov (2006).
Peak to peak 11 year cycle inNM data vs VRCO comparedwith ionization calculations ofUsoskin and Kovaltsov (2006).
![Page 6: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Dip depth vs VRCODip depth vs VRCO
NM
Us. et al.
![Page 7: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Ions as condensation centres for clouds ?
CR produce ~ 3 ion pairs cm-3s-1 in the lower
atmosphere. Lifetime is ~ 50sec, so ~ 150cm-3.
Clouds have ~ 100 droplets cm-3 so a link
would appear to be obvious.
But
Supersaturations in atmosphere far too lowfor ions to be at an advantage. Aerosols (saltparticles, dust, industrial emissions…) dominate.Sizes 10-1(10±2).~~
![Page 8: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Z = 0
Z = 1000
Effect of charge and radius on
supersaturation. 5 x 10-18g ofdissolved salt.
Effect of charge and radius on
supersaturation. 5 x 10-18g ofdissolved salt.
![Page 9: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Charges on drops
A literature survey gives the following mean charges (e)in the normal atmosphere:
Can be much higher in thunderclouds.
![Page 10: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Evidence from radioactive ‘events’
Chernobyl
~~
April 26, 1986 2 Mt of fall-out.No increase in cloud cover.(ions cloud droplets) 3%~
![Page 11: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
CC
an
om
aly
(%)
CC
an
om
aly
(%)
![Page 12: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Nuclear Bomb Tests
Eg. BRAVO - Bikini Atoll, March 1, 1954. ~ 15 Mt radioactive particles, 10 - 100
300 miles from Ground Zero, dose rate ~ 100 Rh-1, after 4 days. Yields 5.107 ions cm-3 s-1
Averaging over space and time and allowingfor size distribution yields.
10-4~
![Page 13: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Radon
Radon is an important contributor to atmosphericionization over land.
Indian ‘hot spots’, particularly in the SW.
Scans of low CC over tworegions show no excess and
25%
![Page 14: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Cosmic rays or Solar Irradiance ?
Evidence from the powerspectra
SSN
![Page 15: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
CR and its powerspectrum
![Page 16: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Low Cloud CoverLow Cloud Cover
![Page 17: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
![Page 18: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Temperature Changes
![Page 19: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
CR – change over last 40 yearstoo small to affect temperature.CR – change over last 40 yearstoo small to affect temperature.
![Page 20: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Different responses of clouds to solar input - Voiculescu et al. (2006)
Faction of Globe having correlation of CC with UV or CR ionization(+ correln. minus – correln.)
![Page 21: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
![Page 22: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Time dependence of cloud cover :
‘Extended Edited Cloud
Report Archive’
(Warren & Hahn via Norris,
2004), in comparison with
Climax CR rate.
![Page 23: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Cloud Top Pressure
Extra solar energy at SSN max. increases cloud heights – and
increases HCC. Just as expected for SI – opposite to expectation
for Cosmic Ray Ionization.
![Page 24: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Conclusions
1. Cloud Geometry – saturation.
2. Radon, Chernobyl & Bomb tests – no signal.
3. Charges on condensation nuclei far too small.
4. No change of dip with CR rigidity.
5. High Cloud Cover in anti-phase with CR.
6. HCC vs time (last 50 years) anti-correlated with CR.
Causal correlation of LCC and CR highly unlikely, because
![Page 25: Cosmic Rays and Global Warming](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813c0c550346895da57b44/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
LCC and SI probably related because
1. Power spectra match better than for LCC & CR.
2. Energetics much more reasonable (108 x).
3. Geographical distribution of stronger correlations,
fits LCC vs SI.
4. From 1960 to present : Temperature profile fits SSN
better than CR.