Climate – the interplanetary connection and beyond
Francis Sedgemore, Tuesday 4 October 2011 at 12:49 UTC
Last week I referred to a recent article in the Earth science trade rag Eos concerned with natural climate variability, and how one distinguishes this from anthropogenic effects. In the 6 September 2011 issue of the same journal, Nathan Schwadron and Harlan Spence look at the interplanetary space environment, and ask to what degree this affects the terrestrial ecosphere and climate.
Experts on space weather and plasma physics, Schwadron and Spence are particularly interested in the flux of ultra-high-energy charged particles known as galactic cosmic rays (GCRs) incident on Earth. Charged particles are affected by magnetic fields, so the GCR flux is heavily influenced by the level of solar activity, which gives rise to and determines the behaviour of the interplanetary magnetic field, and its interaction with Earth’s internally-generated magnetic field. Solar activity varies on different timescales, including the 11-year Schwabe cycle, the Gleissberg cycle of 70–100 years (an amplitude modulation of the Schwabe cycle), and also much longer cyclical variations and secular trends.
Of particular interest to climate scientists are anomalies such as the Maunder Minimum in solar activity of 1645–1715, which coincided with unusually cold winters in Europe and North America. Measurements of an isotope of Beryllium found in Antarctic ice cores shows a correlation between the weak Sun of the Maunder Minimum, and a reduction in solar magnetic field strength and rise in GCR activity much larger than we are currently experiencing.
Peaks in the Beryllium record have also been detected 35,000 and 60,000 years ago, but the cause of these changes remains unknown. It has been suggested that the maxima are related to geomagnetic field disruptions and reversals, but this doesn’t explain the regional rather than global nature of the ostensibly related climate change.
What is clear is that many of the long-term variations in cosmic ray flux may be due to changes in the interplanetary environment and beyond. This may add a further complication in understanding the Earth system, but Schwadron and Spence argue that it is essential in a detailed study of an interlinked planetary ecosystem that supports and brings about life.
The writers conclude by asking whether we are heading towards a new Maunder-like minimum in solar activity. All we can say with confidence is that, while such large changes may not occur over the next decade, history suggests that the interplanetary environment over the coming century will be quite different from that of the past 50 years.
Feed the writer! 

Wednesday 5 October 2011 at 09:33 UTC
I’m not a scientist although I certainly accept climate change. Recollecting my geography from a long time ago, I wonder whether we might need to look at the possible coincidence of a number of causations for climate change rather than emphasising one. There seems little doubt that man’s activity is an important factor but if this is linked with such other changes as the variation in the earth’s orbit, the inclination of the earth’s rotation and solar activity, there may be scope for a better expanation?
Wednesday 5 October 2011 at 10:41 UTC
Richard – you need to consider the timscales and amplitudes involved in such variations. This is the subject of palaeoclimatology, and researchers have a good handle on such matters. Current climate change is too fast and too great in degree to be explained by long-term natural variations, the effects of which tend to be subtle. Short-term variations such as the Gleissberg cycle do need to be studied more, and could well have relevance for practical climatology as it relates to the here and now.
But note what I say here. The implication of the research approach described is that short-term natural variations could lead us to significantly underestimate the degree of anthropogenic climate change.