Climate change in Northern Europe after the Maunder Minimum.
A scenario for temperature changes globally in 930-2100.

An analysis by Timo Niroma, Helsinki, Finland.

Some remarks about climate change. Supported evidence from Helsinki, Finland and Uppsala and Stockholm in Sweden.

A tentative scenario of the climate change from 930 to 2100.

Highest temperatures measured in Helsinki, Uppsala and Stockholm.

Helsinki 1829-2006 (1829-1843 calibrated)
Stockholm 1756-2003
Uppsala 1739-1999 (the environment changed in 2000, high buildings erected in all directions, temps not any more comparable)

The top years

Helsinki: 1934, 2000 / 7.2 degrees
Stockholm: 1934, 2000 / 7.8 degrees
Uppsala: 1934 (no comparable figures after 1999) / 7.2 degrees

This should be no surprise. These years are both from the decades (1930's and 1990's) that are generally held to be the warmest (at least in most of the Northern Hemisphere) after the general warming began in 1700 after the Little Ice Age and most probably its coldest part, the Maunder Minimum in 1640-1700. There are arguments that the 1990's were warmer than the 1930's but at least the Nordic countries show no difference. Furthermore there are indications that the current decade (from 2001 on) is not as warm as the other two decades. Some of the results that show that the 1990's to have been warmer seem to be a result of the heat island effect plus the bias caused by the addition of observation stations in larger cities that were not in the list in the 1930's.


Virtually as hot years added

Helsinki 7.1-7.2 degrees: 1934, 1938, 1975, 1989, 2000
Stockholm: 7.7-7.8 degrees: 1779, 1934, 1938, 1975, 1989, 2000
Uppsala: 7.1-7.2 degrees: 1775, 1779, 1934, 1938, 1989 (no comparable figures after 1999)

The mean temperatures of the years 1930-1939 are in all three places as high as the mean temperatures of the years 1989-2000. In the 1930's the years 1934 and 1938 are really in their own category, 1930 takes the third place being half a degree colder, but it is still the 11th warmest year, if we omit the 1700's. In contrast 1989 and 2000 (Uppsala 2000 assumed on good grounds) are really limiting years for the other hot period so that 1996 is in all the three places the coldest in the 1990's and the decline towards it and rise from it is rather symmetric. But how about 1975 (Uppsala 1975 was on the edge of being included here with an avg temp of 7.0 degrees)? It seems to have been the end of the cold period that began in 1950, but ... in 1976 the temperature fell by 3 degrees (!), and the cold continued until the end of the 1970's. Something seems to have happened in the Southern Hemisphere: the la Niņa dominated period shifted to an el Niņo dominated period.

But the real surprise comes from the Stockholm and Uppsala temperatures of the 1770's. (Helsinki measurements do not reach that far back.) It was not the eruption of Laki - which occurred in the 1780's. In fact ice core samples from Greenland covering the 1770's show that the acidity of the snow of that time was below normal. However, beryllium may have the key! Measurements of beryllium in those ice core samples indicate that the decade of 1770 was the 'sunniest' or least cloudy since the Maunder minimum ended. Svensmark may be right after all with his theory that cosmic rays affect cloudcover. The sun was at a very active level during that period which level was not reached again until the 1940's. By the way, there were only two long sunspot periods in the 1900's (1800's were full of them). The second one ended in 1976, the year after one of the warmest years in the Nordic countries.. A coincidence or a cause and effect? Who knows? IPCC, perhaps?


Next 5-6 years added

Helsinki 6.7-7.2 degrees: 1934, 1938, 1943, 1949, 1961, 1974-1975, 1989-1990, 2000
Stockholm: 7.5-7.8 degrees: 1775, 1779, 1794, 1822, 1934, 1938, 1949, 1975, 1989-1990, 1999-2000
Uppsala: 7.0-7.2 degrees: 1743, 1775, 1779, 1794, 1934, 1938, 1975, 1989-1990, 1999

Now there begins to show up some differences between the three places. Some are however not real differences, but are caused by the bias of the different length of the data from which the years are picked. Most clearly this is seen in the Helsinki data which lacks the 1700's. Helsinki was at time a small village and Finland in fact at that time was still a part of Sweden. Stockholm has here now the 12 and Helsinki and Uppsala the 10 most hot years. The real problem is however that the original data contains only 178 years from Helsinki, but Stockholm data has 248 years and Uppsala data 261 years. This leads to missing years both in the Stockholm and Uppsala data because the years of the 1700's takes precedence over some years in the 1900's which does not happen in the Helsinki data.

The last sentence of the last paragraph is only in mathematical sense wrong, but in practice it is not. We have again a new result: the 1800's was a cold century. In fact this is pretty well known, but usually it is assumed that it was only colder than the 1900's. And those who are interested in climate data know as well that it still was warmer than the Maunder minimum in the 1600's. But this data clearly indicates that even the 1700's was warmer than the 1800's. This fact can also be seen in www.kolumbus.fi/tilmari/gwuppsala.htm . Of the top 32 temperatures 7 are from the 1700's, 1 from the 1800's and 24 from the 1900's. And in fact, surely 3-4 of the Helsinki temps from the 1900's should be replaced by temps from the 1700's. So the relationship would be about 10-1-21 for the three centuries. And still more: the first part of the 1700's is totally lacking. However, it is so near the Maunder minimum that the doubling of the 1700's figure is a little questionable.

Now we see what happens, when we lower the temp limit a little more. 1700's are now represented by still more years and decades. The warm 1743 in Uppsala is a real surprise. Can 7.0 degrees be possible only 40-50 years after the probably coldest times during the last 1000 years? We cannot get any confirmation from Stockholm or Helsinki, but are there other possible checks? At least one confirmation can be found: Years 1743-1744 were exceptionally warm in St. Petersburg. So we need an explanation. It was not Lanzarote. That island erupted already 10 years earlier. But sun had just in 1743 ended its first moderately high cycle - could it have caused an ENSO event, similar to what happened 1975?

We have now both 1775 and 1779 on our list of warm years from both Swedish cities. Third on the row would be 1773 half a degree colder. Now we really see that there are three warm decades with really hot years after the Maunder minimum: the 1770's, 1930's and 1990's. They really are all three of equal warm. The cold period between the 1930's and 1990's has been a problem to CO2 global warming believers. Now they should have a problem to explain the cold 1800's. Let's ask IPCC why the 1770's had an equal temperature with the 1990's. In case they are at all interested in the 1700's. Lowering the limit brings into the list also the year 1794 both in Stockholm and Uppsala. So our top ten temperatures list contains temps from three different decades in the 1700's. Quite a surprise from the point of claiming the uniqueness of the 1900's. Soon after that began the Dalton Minimum, with a peaky end in 1822, the only top-ten year in the whole 1800's.

In Helsinki the added years are 1943, 1949, 1961, 1974 and 1990. 1974-1975 and 1989-1990 are now pairs which makes them the more interesting, because QBO (quasibiennial oscillation) has a tendency of a bit lowering and heightening the temps in every other or every fourth year. However the 1974-1975 are in the middle of a cold period and the collapse in 1976 is what results when the cold from the SH takes over. NH is ready to begin warm, but is dampened. Only the el Niņo's in the early 1980's has the power to warm also the NH (a lapse of el Niņo's still causes the NH cold winters in 1985-1987). The hot years in 1989-1990 then begin the warm period that globally lasted till 1998, and in the Nordic countries till 2000.

This led to the Kyoto treaty in 1997 and to Mann's reconstruction of the unfamous hockey stick in 1998-1999, which unfortunately became the icon the Third IPCC report in 2001. The much more moderate fourth IPCC report in 2007 has got rid of the hockey stick, but now when Al Gore has taken the position as the leading evangelist of the global warming, the new facts that the globe has not warmed since 1998, that there is no evidence of a global sea level rise during the last 50 years backed by the evidence of no change in the length of the day which would result from a rising sea level, that the ice field around the south pole has been greater than any time after 1979, just to mention a few facts, has not caught any attention of the media. North pole ice decrease in July-October 2007 was noted, but not the greater than 2006 ice field from January to June and again in November and December. The low hurricane season in 2006 and a new low record in 2007 are among the omitted topics.

Here pops In Helsinki also the year 1961. It shouldn't be there, because the 1960's was the coldest decade after the 1930's till today. But because it is we need some explanation. We could accuse the all-time (since the Little Ice Age) high sunspot maximum in 1957-1958. Maybe it had something to do with this, but I have in mind a nore likely explanation. In the summer 1960 we had in Helsinki and surroundings the biggest thunderstorm ever recorded in Finland. All this pave way to the year 1961, but the real big thing may be after all be a little surprise. The greatest ever nuclear bomb was blasted by the Soviet Union in 1960 in Novaja Zemlja, just a few hundred kilometers from Finland's Lappland to the northeast. Its blasting power (it was in atmosphere, not underground) can be compared to great volcanic explanation, added only with the radioactivity, including for example CO2 that has 14C.

Now we have also the 1940's: the warm years were 1943 and 1949. In fact we can see that the 1930's warmth continued till the 1940's after a 3 year's cessation in 1940-1942. The avg temp in 1930-1939 was 6.0 degrees, in 1943-1949 5.8 degrees, in 1962-1970 4.8 degrees and in 1989-2000 6.1 degrees.

Because of the bias caused by the 1700's included in Uppsala and Stockholm the new addition brings only 1949 and 1990 to Stockholm and now the 1975 plus 1990 to Uppsala. Added is in both cities also the year 1999.

The top ten, included only years after 1828.

Helsinki 6.7-7.2 degrees: 1934, 1938, 1943, 1949, 1961, 1974-1975, 1989-1990, 2000
Stockholm: 7.4-7.8 degrees: 1934, 1938, 1943, 1949, 1975, 1989-1990, 1999-2000, 2002
Uppsala: 6.8-7.2 degrees: 1934, 1938, 1943, 1949, 1975, 1989-1990, 1999(-2000?)

By removing the 1700's we have now again harmony between these three cities. The 1961 Novaja Zemlja(?) does not appear in further Scandinavia, and have now the 1975 (Uppsala is more inland than Helsinki and Stockholm, which may cause its lesser effect). The Stockholm 2002 may be a heat island effect. Uto which is a very small island in the middle of Nordic Baltic Sea halfway between Helsinki and Stockholm, shows only a very small noisy warming. But both Stockholm and Uppsala would have 3-4 warmer years than these during the omitted 1700's. At the 11th place in all these places in this list is the year 1930.


****************************************************************

A 1200 years perspective

THE FOLLOWING IS RATHER TENTATIVE, BUT BASED ON SUNSPOT CYCLES AND MUCH WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE TEMPERATURES. I have combined data that I have gathered since the end of the 1980's. (Compare the most cited page I ever written to internet (in 1998): "The 200 year sunspot cycle is also a weather cycle" in the sunspot web page listed at the end of this story).

years
930-1010 very warm / 1010-1100 a small cooling
1130-1210 warm / 1210-1300 cold
1330-1410 a small warming / 1410-1500 very cold (Sporer minimum)
1530-1610 a small warming / 1610-1700 very cold (Maunder minimum)
1730-1810 warm / 1810-1900 cold
1930-2010 very warm / 2010-2100 a small cooling

(Remark: None of periods are wholly in the category that the description implies, it is the mean temp of the whole period that counts. We can take as an example the 1950's and 1960's when it was more accurately said warm than very warm, but still surely much warmer than ever in the 1800's. I have very carefully studied the end of the Maunder minimum (see the uppsala.htm) and the Eddy (1976) value of 1715 is a little crude: The sun began to have regularly spots almost exactly 1700 and at the same time the ice in the North Atlantic began to melt year by year, the "normal" sun with its about 11-years cycles recovered fully about 1720.))
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Comments should be addressed to timo.niroma@pp.inet.fi

For more information about sunspots:
Goto http://personal.inet.fi/tiede/tilmari/sunspots.html or
Click here.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

To see more climate (and other) pages:
Goto index