Plants and climate change

[Paul mabbott]

Woodland Trust has commissioned a report on the possible effects of climate change on native species ...
The Woodland Trust - what's new

[Adam Cheeseman]

Paul,

Have you come across this? I have recently joined the committee for the London Reedbed HAP and we are currently reviewing it under instruction fronm the London Biodiversity Partnership that states that at least one new action must address global warming/climate change.

We were discussing this point the other day and all the usual factors came up, sea level rise, increase in salinity for coastal beds, ability of reedbeds to survive in a warmer British climate with the temperature increases, etc. I sat back and listened to all the well reasoned points and then threw my spanner in the works.

What if, as a result, the gulf stream slows down or stops and we get a lot colder given our geographic position?

Everyone was stumped and nobody could answer this, they hadn't even considered that global warming could just as easily mean that we could get colder and the implications that might have given the wide range of climate change models that have been hypothesized.

How many more BAPs, HAPs, and SAPs are being written or reviewed without considering that global warming might not mean a warmer climate for us.

Cheers,

Adam

[Chiltern Chris]

Hi,

Why not look at this site which has looked at the effect of climate change on 400 species within Europe from the Biodiversity Spatial Planning Climate Change Project - BRANCH

Cheers,

Chris

[IanS]

There is an awful lot of debate on various weather related sites on disruption to the gulf stream and from what I can gather, climate scientists are skeptical that we would release enough fresh water to stop the normal current conveyer belt. I think if I was involved with looking at climate change possibilities, this wouldnt be high on my agenda. I think in the short to medium term its not going to happen. I'd still be far more concerned about some of the other issues you mention. No doubt this will spark an interesting debate on here too!

[Hornbeam]

I'm very much with you Adam. The switching off of the gulf stream is not being considered now but it certainly was a few years ago. I seem to remember Nigel Calder and the Weather Machine. The "The Day After Tomorrow" film showed the whole thing with a greatly accelerated time span, but still...

We should remember that Britain is on the same latitude as Labrador and that northern Britain is further north than Moscow. It is only the Gulf Stream that keeps us as warm and as wet as we are. There is every possibility that global warming will melt north polar ice and Greenland glaciers. All that fresh water will effect the salinity of the north Atlantic and that could switch off the Gulf Stream.

Why don't we hear about that? Why do we constantly hear about carbon footprints? What does that mean? Why are we only told that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that traps heat? Why are we not told that at the same time it partially provides cooling global shading by blocking harmful solar radiation and heat? Why do the scientists, climatologists and other prophets of doom not put all of the pieces together?

Because they are sheep who all bleat in tune.

[IanS]

Originally Posted by Hornbeam

Why do the scientists, climatologists and other prophets of doom not put all of the pieces together?

Because they are sheep who all bleat in tune.

Bit harsh there. This is a massive jigsaw puzzle for humans to solve. Current indications all point to a warmer earth and that this will happen in a short space of time. Science does run on consensus so its not surprising that much research all points in the same direction. 'Bleating in tune' as you put it.

I still think that planning for a much warmer UK should be the default action for anyone involved in these matters.