1. Are recent solar heavy element abundances consistent with helioseismology? Sarbani Basu H.M. Antia

2. The Abundances ElementGS98AGS05Caffau et al. (2010) Grevesse et al. (2010) C8.52±0.068.39±0.058.50±0.068.43±0.05 N7.92±0.067.78±0.067.86±0.127.83±0.05 O8.83±0.068.66±0.058.76±0.078.69±0.05 Fe7.50±0.057.45±0.057.52±0.037.50±0.04 Z/X0.0230.01650.02090.0181

3. Envelope models, CZ base and Y forced to have helioseismically determined values

6. Serenelli et al. (2009) OP opacities give “better” results than OPAL

8. The outer part of the CZ: The ionization zones

9. OPAL MHD EFF (GS) CEFF (GS/AGS) CEFF (other) GS98 AGS Caffau et al.

10. More constraints: The initial helium abundance The current CZ helium abundance Y ini  =0.273 ± 0.006 (random) ± 0.002 (systematic) (Serenelli & Basu 2010) Y  =0.2485±0.0035 (Basu & Antia 2008) ModelInitial YCurrent Y GS980.27680.2464 AGS050.26010.2296 Caffau et al. (Lodders)0.27250.2425 Caffau et al. (GS98)0.27220.2423 Grevesse et al 20100.26650.2363 Caffau et al. with GS opacities 0.26960.2395

11. CONCLUSIONS Although the Caffau et al. (2010) solar metallicities are not as high as those of GS98, the match to helioseismology is of a similar quality. The Caffau et al. (2010) also demonstrate the importance of using opacities calculated with the correct relative abundances of elements. We should also calculate the equation of state for the relevant mixture. Unfortunately, that is not easy to do!