Search

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 ∼10 ${\sim} 10$. It caused substantial dayside displacements of the bow shock and magnetopause, changes of 6RE $6{R}_{E}$ and 1.3−2RE $1.3-2{R}_{E}$, 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 ≥ ${\ge} $14 year monitoring intervals in New Zealand and Finland and represented ∼ ${\sim} $2‐year maxima in the United States during a period with several Kp≥ ${\ge} $7 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 ≤10s ${\le} 10s$ are required to capture these GMD/GIC. Plain Language Summary: We explore how disturbances in the Earth's magnetic field, known as geomagnetic disturbances (GMD), and the resulting geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) in power systems are influenced by different electrical currents and waves in near‐Earth space. One challenge is the lack of easily accessible data on GIC over long periods, which makes it hard to figure out what factors are most responsible for changes in GIC in different places. Also, there is limited research combining data from satellites with data collected on the ground to figure out exactly how GMD and GIC are generated. To tackle these issues, we looked at data collected by multiple satellites in different parts of near‐Earth space along with data from ground magnetometers and GIC measurements distributed around the world. Our results suggest that density pulses from coronal mass ejections, a particular type of structure in the solar wind, are important in causing significant disturbances in the Earth's magnetic field globally and contribute to some of the largest GIC seen in the mid‐latitude region of United States. We emphasize the importance of taking measurements with high sampling rates (≤10s) $(\le 10s)$ to accurately capture these disturbances and the resulting GIC. Key Points: A density pulse embedded in a coronal mass ejection drives global geomagnetic disturbances (GMD) and geomagnetically induced currents (GIC)Measured GIC's comparable to or exceed reference values in several regions, including 58.1 A in the mid‐latitude region of United StatesLarge‐amplitude density pulses are an important driver of GIC and GMD for mid‐latitude regions with large populations [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dipolarizing flux bundles (DFBs) have been suggested to transport energy and momentum from regions of reconnection in the magnetotail to the high latitude ionosphere, where they can generate localized ionospheric currents that can produce large nighttime geomagnetic disturbances (GMDs). In this study we identified DFBs observed in the midnight sector from ~7 to ~10 RE by THEMIS A, D, and E during days in 2015-2017 whose northern hemisphere magnetic footpoints mapped to regions near Hudson Bay, Canada, and have compared them to isolated GMDs observed by ground magnetometers. We found 6 days during which one or more of these DFBs coincided to within ±3 min with ≥6 nT/s GMDs observed by latitudinally closely spaced ground-based magnetometers located near those footpoints. Spherical elementary current systems (SECS) maps and all-sky imager data provided further characterization of two events, showing short-lived localized intense upward currents, auroral intensifications and/or streamers, and vortical perturbations of a westward electrojet. On all but one of these days the coincident DFB--GMD pairs occurred during intervals of high-speed solar wind streams but low values of SYM/H. The observations reported here indicate that isolated DFBs generated under these conditions influence only limited spatial regions nearer Earth. In some events, in which the DFBs were observed closer to Earth and with lower Earthward velocities, the GMDs occurred slightly earlier than the DFBs, suggesting that braking had begun before the time of the DFB observation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During space weather events, geomagnetic disturbances (GMDs) induce geoelectric fields which drive geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) through electrically-grounded power transmission lines. Alberta, Canada--located near the auroral zone and thus prone to large GMDs--has a dense network of magnetometer stations and surface impedance measurements to better characterize the GMD and ground conductivity, respectively. GIC monitoring devices were recently installed at five substation transformer neutrals, providing a unique opportunity to compare data to modeled GICs. GICs are modeled across the >240 kV provincial power transmission network during a moderate GMD event on 24 April 2023. GIC monitoring devices measured larger neutral-to-ground currents than expected up to 117 Amps during peak storm time, providing unequivocal evidence linking network GICs with GMDs. The model performs reasonably well (correlation coefficients >0.5; performance parameter >0.15) at four of five substations, but generally underestimates peak GIC values (sometimes by a factor >2), suggesting that the present model underrepresents overall network risk. The model performs poorly at one of the five substations (correlation = 0.46; performance parameter = 0.10), the reasons for which may be due to simplifications and/or unknowns in network parameters. Despite these underestimates, during this GMD, the model predicts the largest GIC at substations located in the northeastern part of the province (240 kV) or around Edmonton (500 kV)--regions which have significant electrical and industrial infrastructure. Further refinement of the network model with transformer resistances, more line and earthing resistances, and/or including lower voltage levels is necessary to improve data fit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]