I didn't think auroras were frequent or predictable enough to support tourism.
It's been 20 years since I've seen one here in Minnesota, although I don't go looking very frequently. I've seen some good ones though.
It's been 20 years since I've seen one here in Minnesota, although I don't go looking very frequently. I've seen some good ones though.
> It's been 20 years since I've seen one here in Minnesota (...)
Note that there's a big difference between the "hot" area close to the poles, and further south. For example Tromsø sits at 69 degrees northern latitude, Minnesota around 49.
Going for a weekend trip - you'd have to be lucky, going for a couple of weeks, you'd be virtually guaranteed.
Only downside is that you can't see the aurora in spring-summer due to the polar day/midnight sun (just like you can't see the stars during the day).
Surprisingly little mention of Tromsø, Norway in the article - there's been a building winter tourism trade here since the 80s,and it still seems to be growing.
Unfortunately there's quite a bit of light pollution from the city - but it's not far to drive to more rural areas with better viewing.
I've lived for 10+ years at 59 degrees (Stockholm, Sweden) and never seen one clearly, even though I'm a night owl and watch the aurora reports, and none of the people I knew had ever seen one in that area. Where I am now at 50 degrees noone would even consider looking for them, it's so far south.
I also witnessed austral auroras on Kerguelen island for example, which is 49° south, because the south magnetic pole is rather close to it, but people on the Antarctic continent itself near the peninsula could not see any because although further south geographically, they were at a greater distance to the magnetic pole.