Geoeffectivity of Coronal Mass Ejections

  • H. E. J. Koskinen
  • K. E. J. Huttunen
Chapter
Received:
Accepted:
Part of the Space Sciences Series of ISSI book series (SSSI, volume 22)

Abstract

Coronal mass ejections and post-shock streams driven by them are the most efficient drivers of strong magnetospheric activity, magnetic storms. For this reason there is considerable interest in trying to make reliable forecasts for the effects of CMEs as much in advance as possible. To succeed this requires understanding of all aspects related to CMEs, starting from their emergence on the Sun to their propagation to the vicinity of the Earth and to effects within the magnetosphere. In this article we discuss some recent results on the geoeffectivity of different types of CME/shock structures. A particularly intriguing observation is that smoothly rotating magnetic fields within CMEs are most efficient in driving storm activity seen in the inner magnetosphere due to enhanced ring current, whereas the sheath regions between the shock and the ejecta tend to favour high-latitude activity.

Keywords

coronal mass ejections magnetic clouds interplanetary shocks magnetic storms geomagnetic indices 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Borovsky, J. E., and Funsten, H. O.: 2003, J. Geophys. Res. 108(A6), 1246, doi: 10.1029/2002JA00 9601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bothmer, V., and Schwenn, R.: 1994, Space Sci. Rev. 70, 215.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  3. Burlaga, L., Fitzenreiter, R., Lepping, R., Ogilvie, K., Szabo, A., Lazarus, A., et al.: 1998, J. Geophys. Res. 103(A1), 277.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  4. Burlaga, L., Sittler, E., Mariani, F., and Schwenn, R.: 1981, J. Geophys. Res. 86, 6673.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carrington, R. C.: 1859, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. XX, 13.ADSGoogle Scholar
  6. Cliver, E. W., and Svalgaard, L.: 2004, Solar Phys. 224, 407.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  7. Dungey, J. W.: 1961, Phys. Rev. Lett. 6, 47.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  8. Fairfield, D. H., and Cahill Jr., L. J.: 1966, J. Geophys. Res. 71, 155.ADSGoogle Scholar
  9. Gopalswamy, N., Yashiro, S., Kaiser, M. L., Howard, R. A., and Bougeret, J.-L.: 2001, J. Geophys. Res. 106(A12), 29219.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  10. Gopalswamy, N.: 2006, Space Sci. Rev., this volume, doi: 10.1007/s11214-006-9102-1.Google Scholar
  11. Gosling, J. T.: 1990, in C. T. Russell, E. R. Priest, and L. C. Lee, (eds.), Physics of Magnetic Flux Ropes. Geophys. Monogr. 58, 3518.Google Scholar
  12. Gosling, J. T.: 1993, J. Geophys. Res. 98, 18937.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gosling, J. T., and McComas, D. J.: 1987, Geophys. Res. Lett. 14, 335.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gosling, J. T., McComas, D. J., Phillips, J. L., and Bame, S. J.: 1991, J. Geophys. Res. 96, 7831.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hale, G. E.: 1931, Astrophys. J. 73, 379.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  16. Hodgson, R.: 1859, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. XX, 15.ADSGoogle Scholar
  17. Huttunen, K. E. J., and Koskinen, H. E. J.: 2004, Annales Geophysicae 22, 1729.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Huttunen, K. E. J., Koskinen, H. E. J., and Schwenn, R.: 2002, J. Geophys. Res. 107(A7), doi: 10.1029/2001JA900171.Google Scholar
  19. Huttunen, K. E. J., Schwenn, R., Bothmer, V., and Koskinen, H. E. J.: 2005, Annales Geophysicae 23, 625.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kamide, Y., Baumjohann, W., Gonzalez, W., Tsurutani, B. T., Daglis, I. A., Brekke, A., et al.: 1998, J. Geophys. Res. 103, 6917.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  21. Kozyra, J. U., Liemohn, M. W., Clauer, C. R., Ridley, A. J., Thomsen, M. F., Borovsky, J. E., et al.: 2002, J. Geophys. Res. 107(A8), doi: 10.1029/2001JA000023.Google Scholar
  22. Lynch, B. J., Zurbuchen, T. H., Fisk, L. A., and Antiochos, S. K.: 2003, J. Geophys. Res. 108(A6), doi: 10.1029/2002JA0009591.Google Scholar
  23. Mayaud, P. N.: 1980, Geophys. Monogr, 22, AGU, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  24. McAllister, A. H., Martin, S. F., Crooker, N. U., Lepping, R. P., and Fitzenreiter, R. J.: 2001, J. Geophys. Res. 106, 29185.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  25. Neugebauer, M., and Goldstein, R.: 1997, in N. Crooker, J. A. Joselyn, and J. Feynman, (eds.), Coronal Mass Ejections, Geophys. Monogr. 99, 245.Google Scholar
  26. Reiner, M. J., and Kaiser, M. L.: 1999, J. Geophys. Res. 104(A8), 16979.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  27. Richardson, I. G., and Cane, H. V.: 2003, J. Geophys. Res. 108(A4), 1356, doi: 10.1029/2002JA009817.Google Scholar
  28. Skoug, R. M., Bame, S. J., Feldman, W. C., Gosling, J. T., McComas, D. J., Steindber, J. T., et al.: 1999, Geophys. Res. Lett. 26(2), 161.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  29. Schwenn, R., Rosenbauer, H., and Mühlhäuser, K.-H.: 1980, Geophys. Res. Lett. 7, 201.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tousey, R.: 1973, Space Res. XIII, 713.ADSGoogle Scholar
  31. Tsurutani, B. T., Gonzalez, W. D., Tang, F., Akasofu, S. I., and Smith, E. J.: 1988, J. Geophys. Res. 93, 8519.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tsurutani, B. T., Gonzalez, W. D., Lakhina, G. S., and Alex, S.: 2003, J. Geophys. Res. 108(A7), 1268, doi: 10.1029/2002JA009504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Webb, D. F., Cliver, E. W., Crooker, N. U., St. Cyr, O. C., and Thompson, B. J.: 2000, J. Geophys. Res. 105, 7491.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  34. Wu, C. C., and Lepping, R. P.: 2002, J. Geophys. Res. 107(A10), 1314, doi: 10.1029/2001JA000161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhang, J., Liemohn, M.W., Kozyra, J. U., Lynch, B. J., and Zurbuchen, T. H.: 2004, J. Geophys. Res. 109, A09101, doi: 10.1029/2004JA010410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zwickl, R. D., Asbridge, J. R., Bame, S. J., Feldman, W. C., Gosling, J. T., and Smith, E. J.: 1983, in M. Neugebauer, (ed.), Solar Wind Five, NASA Conf. Publ., 2280, 711.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. E. J. Koskinen
    • 1
    • 2
  • K. E. J. Huttunen
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Physical SciencesUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Space Research UnitFinnish Meteorological InstituteFinland
  3. 3.Space Sciences LaboratoryUniversity of California in BerkeleyBerkeley

Personalised recommendations