List of Figures

View Image Figure 1:
Variations in the global annual average surface temperature over 140 years from instrumental records. From IPCC (2001).
View Image Figure 2:
Variations in Northern Hemisphere surface temperature over the past millennium from proxy records (tree rings, corals, ice cores). From IPCC (2001).
View Image Figure 3:
Records derived from an ice core taken from Vostok, East Antarctica, showing variations in temperature (derived from deuterium measurements) and the concentrations of methane and carbon dioxide over at least 400,000 years. From Stauffer (2000).
View Image Figure 4:
Records of 10Be and ice-rafted minerals extracted from ocean sediments in the North Atlantic. From Bond et al. (2001).
View Image Figure 5:
From a paper by Eddy (1976) suggesting that winter temperatures in NW Europe are correlated with solar activity. Note the coincidence of the “Little Ice Age” with the Maunder Minimum in sunspots.
View Image Figure 6:
Northern Hemisphere land temperature, (stars) and solar cycle length (inverted, pluses). Both time series are smoothed using (1 2 2 2 1) filter weightings. From Friis-Christensen and Lassen (1991).
View Image Figure 7:
Northern Hemisphere temperatures (Mann et al., 1999) (thin line) and solar cycle length (inverted, dots and thick line), smoothed as in Figure 6. From Laut and Gundermann (2000).
View Image Figure 8:
Below: pattern of response in sea surface temperatures derived for solar variability. Above: time series of the magnitude of this pattern. From White et al. (1997).
View Image Figure 9:
Anomalies of sea surface temperature in peak years of the solar cycle. From van Loon et al. (2007).
View Image Figure 10:
Variation of low cloud cover (ISCCP-D2 data) and cosmic rays between 1984 and 2002. The green curve shows data obtained by applying assumed satellite recalibrations. Redrawn from Marsh and Svensmark (2003) by Gray et al. (2005).
View Image Figure 11:
Time series of annual mean 30 hPa geopotential height (km) at 30° N, 150° W (thin line with circles), its three-year running mean (thick line with circles) and the solar 10.7 cm flux (dashed line with squares). From Labitzke and van Loon (1995).
View Image Figure 12:
Time series of the mean temperature (K) of the 750 – 200 hPa layer in the northern hemisphere summer (solid line) and the solar 10.7 cm flux (10–21 Wm–2 Hz–1) (dashed line). From van Loon and Shea (1999).
View Image Figure 13:
Results from multiple regression analysis of NCEP zonal mean temperatures and zonal winds. From top: mean temperature; linear trend (K over 44 years); ENSO (max-min, K); NAO (max-min, K), solar cycle (max-min, K); volcanic eruption (effect of Mt. Pinatubo eruption, K) From Haigh (2003).
View Image Figure 14:
Difference in annual mean temperature between solar maximum and solar minimum derived from observational data. Above: SSU/MSU satellite data (grey shading denotes statistical significance as shown in the legend). Below: ERA reanalysis data for the period 1979 – 2001; light/dark shading denotes 95% and 99% significance. Note the different height ranges in the two panels. From Haigh et al. (2004).
View Image Figure 15:
A scatter plot showing for each year values of 30 hPa temperature at the north pole in Jan/Feb (ordinate), solar 10.7 cm flux (abscissa) and phase of the QBO (symbols, triangle for east and square for west). The horizontal and vertical lines, and the E & W labels, have been drawn to indicate regions of the diagram in which certain phases of the QBO predominate. From Labitzke and van Loon (1992).
View Image Figure 16:
Above: Annual and zonal mean zonal wind, u, as a function of latitude and pressure from NCEP Reanalysis. Below: difference in u between solar maximum and solar minimum. From Haigh et al. (2005).
View Image Figure 17:
Results from an analysis of NCEP zonal mean vertical (pressure) velocities. The coloured patches indicate the climatological mean at 500 hPa with upwelling (ω < 0) at the equator and sinking in the sub-tropics. The correlation curve shows at solar max positive ω (i.e. weaker ascent) at the equator and negative/positive values on the equatorward/poleward sides of the descending branches, indicating that these have moved polewards. From Gleisner and Thejll (2003).
View Image Figure 18:
Globally averaged energy budget of the atmosphere. Figure from External Link based on data from Kiehl and Trenberth (1997).
View Image Figure 19:
Global, annual average radiative forcing contributions 1750 – 2005 from the IPCC fourth assessment report. From IPCC (2007).
View Image Figure 20:
The eccentricity, precession and tilt of the Earth’s orbit calculated to take place over 350,000 years. From Burroughs (1992).
View Image Figure 21:
(a) Daily-averaged total solar irradiance: all measurements made from satellites (b) Composite of measurements to produce best estimate of TSI. Figure courtesy of Claus Fröhlich (External Link
View Image Figure 22:
Reconstructions by various authors of total solar irradiance over the past 400 years. From Judith Lean, based on data from Wang et al. (2005); Lean (2000); Foster (2004).
View Image Figure 23:
(a) Black body functions at the emitting temperatures of the Sun and the Earth. The functions are scaled to have equal area to represent the Earth’s radiation balance. (b) Absorption by a vertical column of atmosphere. The gases responsible for the main absorption features are identified at the appropriate wavelengths. (Houghton, 1977).
View Image Figure 24:
Wavelength dependence of the altitude of one optical depth for absorption of solar radiation with an overhead Sun. After Andrews (2000).
View Image Figure 25:
Diurnal average solar heating rate (K d-1, log scale) as a function of altitude for equinoctial conditions at the equator showing contributions by the Schumann–Runge continuum and bands (SRC and SRB), the Herzberg continuum (Hz) and the Hartley (Ha), Huggins (Hu) and Chappuis (Ch) bands. After Strobel (1978).
View Image Figure 26:
Estimated changes in solar spectral irradiance from cycle minimum to maximum (blue) and from the Maunder Minimum to present day mean of the solar cycle (red) expressed as percentage changes (above) and energy changes (below). From Lean (2000).
View Image Figure 27:
Solar fluxes (left) and heating rates (middle and right). Top: solar minimum values; bottom: difference between solar min and max. The spectrum is divided into UV (220 – 320 nm), visible (320 – 690 nm) and near infrared (690 – 1000 nm) bands. The right hand column has a linear pressure scale for the ordinate so emphasising the troposphere. From Larkin (2000).
View Image Figure 28:
Above: Zonal mean concentration of ozone (ppmv) in January. Below: The annual cycle in the latitudinal distribution of zonal mean ozone column amounts. The units are 10–3 atm cm (1 atm cm = 2.69 × 1019 molecules cm–2). From Andrews (2000).
View Image Figure 29:
(a) Meridional cross section of solar cycle signal in ozone concentration from multiple regression of SAGE I and II data (% per 100 units of F10.7 radio flux, a typical solar cycle amplitude is 130 of these units). Shading denotes that the fit is not statistically significant. (b) Latitudinal profile of the solar cycle variations in column ozone (atm cm) derived from vertically integrated SAGE I and II data (over 20 – 50 km), and three column ozone data sets (ground-based, SBUV, and merged TOMS/SBUV data). Error bars on the TOMS/SBUV curve denote 2*sigma uncertainty in the fit. From Randel and Wu (2007).
View Image Figure 30:
Latitude-height section of percentage change in NOy (top) and O3 (bottom) calculated using a 2D model for November 1989, following the major solar proton event of October 1989. From Vlachogiannis and Haigh (1998).
View Image Figure 31:
(Above) Solar spectral irradiance as a function of wavelength and altitude for 57° N at the winter solstice. Values range from < 10–4 (violet) to > 6 (red) MWm–2 cm–1. (Below) as above but showing the difference between values at maximum and minimum periods of the 11-year solar cycle. Contour interval is 500 Wm–2 cm–1 ranging from <– 1500 (violet) to > 2500 (red). After Haigh (1994).
View Image Figure 32:
Global average surface temperature calculated using an EBM. Observational record (in red), model calculations with natural (solar and volcanic) forcings (in blue), difference when anthropogenic greenhouse gases are included (in green). After Crowley (2000).
View Image Figure 33:
Annual and decadal mean surface temperature from observations (black line) and calculated using GCMs. Each panel shows calculations using all forcings (pink) and only natural forcings (blue), the spread indicates uncertainties in the estimates. From IPCC (2007).
View Image Figure 34:
Optimal fingerprinting technique in which geographical patterns of surface temperature change for different forcings are fitted to the observed time series. (a) results for different forcing factors, (b) derived magnitude of natural and anthropogenic forcings relative to that found from standard model runs. From Stott et al. (2003), redrawn by M. Lockwood (personal communication).
View Image Figure 35:
Results from GCM simulations of the response of middle atmospheric temperatures to the 11-year solar cycle variability in UV with different models in which the solar-induced ozone response was specified. From Matthes et al. (2003).
View Image Figure 36:
Results from GCM simulations of the response of middle atmospheric temperatures to the 11-year solar cycle variability in UV with a coupled chemistry scheme (shadings indicates statistical significance at the 10, 5 and 1% levels) From Haigh et al. (2004).
View Image Figure 37:
Estimates of percentage increase in ozone concentration from solar cycle minimum to maximum from satellite data (data points and horizontal bars) and a range of theoretical models (curves). The upper panel shows an average over most of the globe while the lower panel shows tropical data. From WMO (2007) based on data from Brasseur (1993); Haigh (1994); Egorova et al. (2004); Tourpali et al. (2003).
View Image Figure 38:
Illustrating the proposed mechanism whereby solar heating around the stratopause may influence the atmosphere below. (a) The solar heating anomalies change the strength of the polar stratospheric jet (U); this influences the path of upward propagating planetary waves which deposit their zonal momentum on the poleward side of the jet. (b) The effect of this is to weaken the Brewer–Dobson circulation and thus to warm the tropical lower stratosphere. From (Kodera and Kuroda, 2002).
View Image Figure 39:
Temperature of the NH polar lower stratosphere evolving through the winter as calculated in a stratosphere-mesosphere mechanistic model. Each panel shows the results from twenty different simulations for each of which the initial conditions were slightly altered. Right: control situation; Left: anomalous westerly momentum applied in the winter sub-tropics near the stratopause. From Gray et al. (2004).
View Image Figure 40:
Above: January field of zonal mean zonal wind (ms–1). Below: difference between fields at solar maximum and solar minimum of zonal wind calculated in a GCM. From Haigh (19961999). UV changes were prescribed according to Lean (1989), ozone changes from the results of the 2D model experiments of Haigh (1994).
View Image Figure 41:
Mean meridional circulation. Above: mean fields for January and July. Below: difference between values at solar maximum and minimum. From Larkin (2000); similar figures in Larkin et al. (2000).
View Image Figure 42:
Results from a simplified global circulation model showing how anomalous heating of the stratosphere can influence the jets through the depth of the troposphere. (a) zonal mean zonal wind in one hemisphere as a function of latitude and pressure from the control run; (b) difference between uniform stratospheric heating case and the control; (c) difference between equatorial stratospheric heating case and the control. Shaded areas are not significant at the 5% level. From Haigh et al. (2005).
View Image Figure 43:
Vertically-integrated budget of components of the momentum equation: transport by eddies (red), transport by the zonal mean circulation (blue), dissipation by surface stress (green), sum of the eddy and zonal components (black), net rate of change of momentum (cyan), i.e. the difference between the black and green curves. Top: control run; bottom left: difference between uniform stratospheric heating case and the control; bottom right: difference between equatorial stratospheric heating case and the control. From Haigh et al. (2005).
View Image Figure 44:
Sensitivity (in Wm–2 per 0.1 increase in fractional cloud cover) of radiation fields (from ERBE data) to cloud cover (from ISCCP data). The curve labelled ASR shows the response of absorbed solar radiation to the presence of cloud; that labelled OLR the response of outgoing longwave radiation. From Ringer and Shine (1997).
View Image Figure 45:
Ship tracks observed off the west coast of France by the MODIS instrument on the Aqua satellite on 27 January 2003. From External Link
View Image Figure 46:
(a) Variation of ionisation rate, and typical ion concentration, with height. (b) Variation with time of the neutron count rate at two surface stations: Climax, latitude 39.4° N and Huancayo, latitude 12.0° S. (Harrison and Carslaw, 2003)
View Image Figure 47:
Stages in process whereby atmospheric ionisation results in the formation of cloud droplets/crystals. Harrison and Carslaw (2003)