Search for: All records

Abstract A variety of magnetosphere‐ionosphere current systems and waves have been linked to geomagnetic disturbance (GMD) and geomagnetically induced currents (GIC). However, since many location‐specific factors control GMD and GIC intensity, it is often unclear what mechanisms generate the largest GMD and GIC in different locations. We address this challenge through analysis of multi‐satellite measurements and globally distributed magnetometer and GIC measurements. We find embedded within the magnetic cloud of the 23–24 April 2023 coronal mass ejection (CME) storm there was a global scale density pulse lasting for 10–20 min with compression ratio of . It caused substantial dayside displacements of the bow shock and magnetopause, changes of and , respectively, which in turn caused large amplitude GMD in the magnetosphere and on the ground across a wide local time range. At the time this global GMD was observed, GIC measured in New Zealand, Finland, Canada, and the United States were observed. The GIC were comparable (within factors of 2–2.5) to the largest ever recorded during 14 year monitoring intervals in New Zealand and Finland and represented 2‐year maxima in the United States during a period with several Kp7 geomagnetic storms. Additionally, the GIC measurements in the USA and other mid‐latitude locations exhibited wave‐like fluctuations with 1–2 min period. This work suggests that large density pulses in CME should be considered an important driver of large amplitude, global GMD and among the largest GIC at mid‐latitude locations, and that sampling intervals are required to capture these GMD/GIC. 

Abstract We investigate the timing and relative influence of VLF in the chorus frequency range observed by the DEMETER spacecraft and ULF wave activity from ground stations on daily changes in electron flux (0.23 to over 2.9 MeV) observed by the HEO‐3 spacecraft. At eachL‐shell, we use multiple regression to investigate the effects of each wave type and each daily lag independent of the others. We find that reduction and enhancement of electrons occur at different timescales. Chorus power spectral density and ULF wave power are associated with immediate electron decreases on the same day but with flux enhancement 1–2 days later. ULF is nearly always more influential than chorus on both increases and decreases of flux, although chorus is often a significant factor. There was virtually no difference in correlations of ULF Pc3, Pc4, or Pc5 with electron flux. A synergistic interaction between chorus and ULF waves means that enhancement is most effective when both waves are present, pointing to a two‐step process where local acceleration by chorus waves first energizes electrons which are then brought to even higher energies by inward radial diffusion due to ULF waves. However, decreases in flux due to these waves act additively. Chorus and ULF waves combined are most effective at describing changes in electron flux at >1.5 MeV. At lowerL(2–3), correlations between ULF and VLF (likely hiss) with electron flux were low. The most successful models, overL = 4–6, explained up to 47.1% of the variation in the data.