Large equatorial eruptions that carry ash into the medium to higher altitudes are what cause cooling. The hadley cells spread the ash across the equatorial region as their currents gather the ash at lower altitudes and distribute it at the higher altitudes. Conversely, the direction of circulation of mid latitude currents tend to keep the ash located at their respective latitudes.
Equatorial eruptions tend to spread the ash across an area where the sun creates the most heat, resulting in more significant cooling.
Mid latitude eruptions tend to keep the ash localized across an area of less solar heating. The mid latitude regions don't get as much heat from the sun, meaning less cooling.
This is what happened in the 1800s with the year without a summer. That volcano is right on the equator.
Has an eruption recently happened at the equatorial region? Hmmmm.
Ben Franklin speculated that the 1783 Laki fissue in Iceland caused noticeable cooling summer 1784. Tenmei in Japan was concurrent. Neither is equatorial.
it's even more complicated than that idea unfortunately. @mmc7 is no longer responding at her blog since 2020, but it's all still there for the moment anyway.
She was getting somewhat confused by the axis-shifts and Earth's orientation in 2018, after tracking summer-solstice changes since 2006 from her house near Dallas. I've read every word over there and think it's the only thing that can explain all the variety of phenomenon we're seeing on Earth. Once you witness sunrise-sunset on the summer solstice as far "north" as they actually are; your 3-D conceptual will kick-in per things like orbital considerations, more sun-facing for the poles in their summer months, shifts and inertial effects on large bodies of water (tsunamis), torque on the continental plates, etc. Once you personally witness the sun rising and setting even further "north" AFTER the solstice for a few weeks, you'll know things are very strange. Have a friend who spoke with an oil geologist in Nevada, at a bar down the road from a giant prehistoric petrified fish roadside attraction. He described what @mmc7 has documented as having occurred at least 11 times that they understand from deep drilling and study of cores.
forgot: check out YouTubes on Thwaites Glacier on western Antarctica. Quite a bit of concern about the melt going on there.
@mmc7's thesis is that the ice on that continent provides a sort of gyroscopic-anchor for Earth's spin. Loss of that mass is what causes axis-shifts. She presumed that the first big one was in 2004 causing the earthquake and tsunami back then since her neighbors began complaining in the summer of 2005 that they were getting summer sun in their north-facing windows. They asked her to figure out what was going on.
Sulfur Dioxide in the STRATOSPHERE -- not a well-understood layer, with far less predictable cycles than the troposphere. The chemical analysis is the usual spin for defenders of global warming: the volcano cooled the planet in the short-term but *warmed* it in the long-term due to SO2 and CO2. These analyses almost always ignore the obvious physical effects of particulate matter blocking sunlight -- basically what millions of people saw and suffered through!
Another issue that is glossed over is the 1 degree Celsius cooling which caused snow in June 1816 in New England. How could a single degree of cooling as "global average" cause such a big effect in entire regions (Europe and China were other areas)? Are they averaging 24-hour temperatures? Sea surface and land surface?
And finally the converse: if a 1 degree fall in "global temperature" caused such incredible effects in 1816 (and a few subsequent years), why aren't we seeing massive changes from the 1 degree rise that has been measured in recent years? There are clearly multiple variables that are resonating in some situations and not others.
Law of unintended consequences - Stop and start the world economy for two years. Stop and start emissions and see what effect that has on the climate.
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/
Or perhaps entirely intended - at least by some people.
Large equatorial eruptions that carry ash into the medium to higher altitudes are what cause cooling. The hadley cells spread the ash across the equatorial region as their currents gather the ash at lower altitudes and distribute it at the higher altitudes. Conversely, the direction of circulation of mid latitude currents tend to keep the ash located at their respective latitudes.
Equatorial eruptions tend to spread the ash across an area where the sun creates the most heat, resulting in more significant cooling.
Mid latitude eruptions tend to keep the ash localized across an area of less solar heating. The mid latitude regions don't get as much heat from the sun, meaning less cooling.
This is what happened in the 1800s with the year without a summer. That volcano is right on the equator.
Has an eruption recently happened at the equatorial region? Hmmmm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_eruption_of_Mount_Pinatubo
15N and VEI 6 -- does this qualify as "recent"?
Ben Franklin speculated that the 1783 Laki fissue in Iceland caused noticeable cooling summer 1784. Tenmei in Japan was concurrent. Neither is equatorial.
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/18358#page/372/mode/1up
Look up iceagefarmer.com he's been talking about this for years. We're currently in a Grand Solar Minimum, a mini ice age.
it's even more complicated than that idea unfortunately. @mmc7 is no longer responding at her blog since 2020, but it's all still there for the moment anyway.
https://axischange.wordpress.com/2019/01/07/1-2019-need-sun-position-in-southern-hemisphere-important/
She was getting somewhat confused by the axis-shifts and Earth's orientation in 2018, after tracking summer-solstice changes since 2006 from her house near Dallas. I've read every word over there and think it's the only thing that can explain all the variety of phenomenon we're seeing on Earth. Once you witness sunrise-sunset on the summer solstice as far "north" as they actually are; your 3-D conceptual will kick-in per things like orbital considerations, more sun-facing for the poles in their summer months, shifts and inertial effects on large bodies of water (tsunamis), torque on the continental plates, etc. Once you personally witness the sun rising and setting even further "north" AFTER the solstice for a few weeks, you'll know things are very strange. Have a friend who spoke with an oil geologist in Nevada, at a bar down the road from a giant prehistoric petrified fish roadside attraction. He described what @mmc7 has documented as having occurred at least 11 times that they understand from deep drilling and study of cores.
forgot: check out YouTubes on Thwaites Glacier on western Antarctica. Quite a bit of concern about the melt going on there.
@mmc7's thesis is that the ice on that continent provides a sort of gyroscopic-anchor for Earth's spin. Loss of that mass is what causes axis-shifts. She presumed that the first big one was in 2004 causing the earthquake and tsunami back then since her neighbors began complaining in the summer of 2005 that they were getting summer sun in their north-facing windows. They asked her to figure out what was going on.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7575229/
Grand Solar Minimum
Great article as always. Spaceweathernews.com has a lot of sun/earth related weather info you might find interesting.
Sulfur Dioxide in the STRATOSPHERE -- not a well-understood layer, with far less predictable cycles than the troposphere. The chemical analysis is the usual spin for defenders of global warming: the volcano cooled the planet in the short-term but *warmed* it in the long-term due to SO2 and CO2. These analyses almost always ignore the obvious physical effects of particulate matter blocking sunlight -- basically what millions of people saw and suffered through!
Another issue that is glossed over is the 1 degree Celsius cooling which caused snow in June 1816 in New England. How could a single degree of cooling as "global average" cause such a big effect in entire regions (Europe and China were other areas)? Are they averaging 24-hour temperatures? Sea surface and land surface?
And finally the converse: if a 1 degree fall in "global temperature" caused such incredible effects in 1816 (and a few subsequent years), why aren't we seeing massive changes from the 1 degree rise that has been measured in recent years? There are clearly multiple variables that are resonating in some situations and not others.
And after 1816, nothing interesting happened in Ely ever again.