Comparative ionospheric impacts and solar origins of nine strong geomagnetic storms in 2010–2015

Wood, Brian E.; Lean, J.; McDonald, S. E.; Wang, Yiming

doi:10.1002/2015ja021953

Cited by 16 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is now well established that magnetic reconnection is the major mechanism of energy transfer from the solar wind to the Earth's magnetosphere (Dungey, ), which is significantly enhanced during an interplanetary CME and drives an extreme geomagnetic storm (Gopalswamy et al, ; Tsurutani et al, ; Tsurutani & Lakhina, ). Strong magnetospheric and ionospheric effects associated with magnetic storms have been reported in previous studies (Huang et al, ; Mannucci et al, ; Ngwira et al, ; Tsurutani et al, , ; Wood et al, , and references therein). The enhanced energy inputs into the upper atmosphere through Joule heating, particle precipitation, and solar irradiation also cause prominent atmospheric expansion and uplift the exobase to much higher altitudes.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Possible Influence of Extreme Magnetic Storms on the Thermosphere in the High Latitudes

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Solar and interplanetary events can create extreme magnetic storms, such as the Carrington storm in 1859 with intensity up to Dst ∼ −1,760 nT. The influence of an idealized, smaller Carrington-type storm on the thermosphere has been simulated using the nonhydrostatic Global Ionosphere-Thermosphere Model. For the storm conditions we simulated, the solar wind B Z and velocity were −50 nT and 1,000 m/s, respectively. The corresponding cross polar cap potential reached 360 kV, and the hemispheric power was 200 GW. Consequently, the hemispheric integrated Joule heating exceeded 3,500 GW, which is more than 70 times higher than normal conditions. The thermosphere variations at high latitudes were examined through the comparison of three cases: reference, storm with geomagnetic energy enhancement only, and storm with both solar and geomagnetic energy enhancement. At 400-km altitude, the neutral density increased by >20 times at certain locations and by >10 times globally averaged. The atmosphere experienced a temperature of 4000 K, more than 1,500 m/s horizontal wind, and exceeding 150 m/s vertical wind. In general, additional energy increase from solar irradiation resulted in 20-30% more perturbation in neutral density and temperature. The exobase (top boundary of the thermosphere) expanded to altitudes >1,000 km, and the buoyancy acceleration (difference between vertical pressure gradient force and gravity force) can be as large as 3 m/s 2 . The results will help to determine possible extreme responses to interplanetary coronal mass ejections for various phenomena occurring in geospace.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Possible Influence of Extreme Magnetic Storms on the Thermosphere in the High Latitudes

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The fitted results of the power‐law and log‐normal distributions are shown by the colored curves in Figure 3 and 4, respectively, and are listed in Table 2. Note that here we can't fit the data points with D st ≤–250 nT in SC 24, since the minimum D st in this SC is about –223 nT, which corresponds to the so‐called St. Patricks Day event on 2015 March 17 (Kataoka et al, 2015; Wood et al, 2016; Wang et al, 2016). There are several elements to understand in the figures and tables.…”

Section: The Super Geomagnetic Storm Repeat Intervals From Solar Cyclmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We fit the data points for D st ≤-50, -100, or -250 nT, and adjust the fitted parameters carefully to make the corresponding reduced chi-square value (χ ν ) close to 1, in which χ ν is used to test goodness of fit; χ ν =1 in principle indicates that the estimates best match the observations. The fitted results of the power-law and log-normal distributions are shown by the colored curves in (Kataoka et al, 2015;Wood et al, 2016;Wang et al, 2016). There are several elements to understand in the figures and tables.…”

Section: Solar Cycle 19 To 24mentioning

confidence: 99%

A statistical study of the likelihood of a super geomagnetic storm occurring in a mild solar cycle

Zhuang

Wang

Shen

et al. 2018

Earth and Planetary Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The activities of geomagnetic storms are generally controlled by solar activities. The current solar cycle (SC) 24 is found to be mild; compared to SCs 19‒23, the storm occurrence and size derived by averaging the occurrence number and Dst around the solar maximum are reduced by about 50‒82% and 36‒61%, respectively. We estimate separately, for SC 19 to 24, the repeat intervals between geomagnetic storms of specific Dst, based on fits of power‐law and log‐normal distributions to the storm data for each SC. Repeat intervals between super geomagnetic storms with Dst≤‒250 nT are found to be 0.36‒2.95 year(s) for SCs 19‒23, but about 20 years based on the data for SC 24. We also estimate the repeat intervals between coronal mass ejections (CMEs) of specific speed (VCME) since CMEs are known to be the main drivers of intense storms and the related statistics may provide information about the potential occurrence of super geomagnetic storms from the location of the Sun. Our analysis finds that a CME with VCME≥1860 km/s may occur once per 3 and 5 months in SC 23 and 24, respectively. Based on a VCME‐Dst relationship, such a fast CME may cause a storm with Dst=‒250 nT if arriving at the Earth. By comparing the observed geomagnetic storms to storms expected to be caused by CMEs, we derive the probability of CME caused storms, which is dependent on VCME. For a CME faster than 1860 km/s, the probability of a CME caused storm with Dst≤‒250 nT is about 1/5 for SC 23 or 1/25 for SC 24. All of the above results suggest that the likelihood of the occurrence of super geomagnetic storms is significantly reduced in a mild SC.

show abstract

“…Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC) of NOAA initially forecasted that the CME would at most cause a very minor geomagnetic disturbance labeled as G1, a scale used by SWPC to measure the intensity of geomagnetic storms. However, the CME produced the largest geomagnetic storm so far, at G4 level with the provisional D s t value of −223 nT, in the current solar cycle 24 [ Kataoka et al , ; Wood et al , ]. The major geomagnetic storm was called the “2015 St. Patrick's Day” event as its main phase and peak occurred on 17 March, and the surprising CME was selected as a campaign event by International Study of Earth‐affecting Solar Transients (http://solar.gmu.edu/heliophysics/index.php/03/17/2015_04:00:00_UTC), a program under Scientific Committee on Solar Terrestrial Physics, and also by Coupling, Energetics and Dynamics of Atmospheric Regions (http://cedarweb.vsp.ucar.edu/wiki/index.php/2015_Workshop:The_March_17_2015_great_storm).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the propagation of a geoeffective coronal mass ejection during 15–17 March 2015

Wang

Zhang

et al. 2016

JGR Space Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The largest geomagnetic storm so far, called 2015 St. Patrick's Day event, in the solar cycle 24 was produced by a fast coronal mass ejection (CME) originating on 15 March 2015. It was an initially west‐oriented CME and expected to only cause a weak geomagnetic disturbance. Why did this CME finally cause such a large geomagnetic storm? We try to find some clues by investigating its propagation from the Sun to 1 AU. First, we reconstruct the CME's kinematic properties in the corona from the SOHO and Solar Dynamics Observatory imaging data with the aid of the graduated cylindrical shell model. It is suggested that the CME propagated to the west ∼33°±10° away from the Sun‐Earth line with a speed of about 817 km s−1 before leaving the field of view of the SOHO/Large Angle and Spectrometric Coronagraph (LASCO) C3 camera. A magnetic cloud (MC) corresponding to this CME was measured in situ by the Wind spacecraft 2 days after the CME left LASCO's field of view. By applying two MC reconstruction methods, we infer the configuration of the MC as well as some kinematic information, which implies that the CME possibly experienced an eastward deflection on its way to 1 AU. However, due to the lack of observations from the STEREO spacecraft, the CME's kinematic evolution in interplanetary space is not clear. In order to fill this gap, we utilize numerical MHD simulation, drag‐based CME propagation model (DBM) and the model for CME deflection in interplanetary space (DIPS) to recover the propagation process, especially the trajectory, of the CME from 30RS to 1 AU under the constraints of the derived CME's kinematics near the Sun and at 1 AU. It is suggested that the trajectory of the CME was deflected toward the Earth by about 12°, consistent with the implication from the MC reconstruction at 1 AU. This eastward deflection probably contributed to the CME's unexpected geoeffectiveness by pushing the center of the initially west‐oriented CME closer to the Earth.

show abstract

Comparative ionospheric impacts and solar origins of nine strong geomagnetic storms in 2010–2015

Cited by 16 publications

References 81 publications

Possible Influence of Extreme Magnetic Storms on the Thermosphere in the High Latitudes

Possible Influence of Extreme Magnetic Storms on the Thermosphere in the High Latitudes

A statistical study of the likelihood of a super geomagnetic storm occurring in a mild solar cycle

On the propagation of a geoeffective coronal mass ejection during 15–17 March 2015

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About