4.7 Article

The Carrington event not observed in most ice core nitrate records

Journal

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS
Volume 39, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2012GL051603

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. International Space Studies Institute in Bern, Switzerland
  2. Natural Environment Research Council
  3. Arctic Section of the U.S. NSF
  4. Directorate For Geosciences
  5. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences [1135432] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  6. Office of Polar Programs (OPP)
  7. Directorate For Geosciences [1023672] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  8. Natural Environment Research Council [bas0100024] Funding Source: researchfish
  9. NERC [bas0100024] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Carrington Event of 1859 is considered to be among the largest space weather events of the last 150 years. We show that only one out of 14 well-resolved ice core records from Greenland and Antarctica has a nitrate spike dated to 1859. No sharp spikes are observed in the Antarctic cores studied here. In Greenland numerous spikes are observed in the 40 years surrounding 1859, but where other chemistry was measured, all large spikes have the unequivocal signal, including co-located spikes in ammonium, formate, black carbon and vanillic acid, of biomass burning plumes. It seems certain that most spikes in an earlier core, including that claimed for 1859, are also due to biomass burning plumes, and not to solar energetic particle (SEP) events. We conclude that an event as large as the Carrington Event did not leave an observable, widespread imprint in nitrate in polar ice. Nitrate spikes cannot be used to derive the statistics of SEPs. Citation: Wolff, E. W., M. Bigler, M. A. J. Curran, J. E. Dibb, M. M. Frey, M. Legrand, and J. R. McConnell (2012), The Carrington event not observed in most ice core nitrate records, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L08503, doi: 10.1029/2012GL051603.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available