Slashdot Mirror


Climate Changes Shift Springtime in Europe

gollum123 writes to mention a BBC article on a study of Europe's changing climate. The study collated information from 17 nations and 125,000 studies involving 561 species. The results indicate that, at least in Europe, 'Spring' is coming earlier and earlier every year. From the article: "Spring was beginning on average six to eight days earlier than it did 30 years ago, the researchers said. In regions such as Spain, which saw the greatest increases in temperatures, the season began up to two weeks earlier. The findings were based on what was described as the world's largest study of changes in recurring natural events, such as when plants flowered. The team of researchers also found that the onset of autumn has been delayed by an average of three days over the same period."

8 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. 30 years ago? by ZakuSage · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wasn't there a cooling trend in the 70s, that one that made everyone concerned about global cooling? Wouldn't that skew their results? How is it compared to say 50 years ago?

  2. What about the other seasons? by mveloso · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do the other seasons move as well?

  3. Climate changes or light changes? by JonLatane · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If this study is based upon when plants flowered, it may not be as much climate change as it is light change. This is not to say that the climate has not changed, only to say that plants flowering is not most directly attributed to temperature.

    Assuming I am not mistaken in my recollection of AP Biology, plants flower based upon the longest period of darkness that they percieve. That is to say, when certain enzymes in plants are not exposed to IR light for a certain period of time (varying based upon the plant), processes including flowering occur.

    So, this may not be based as much upon climate change as much as light change, which could easily be caused by increasing urbanization (city lights and such providing enough light to change these processes).

  4. Nature emits more CO2 than humans... by Sarcastic+Begger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...but the trouble with human emissions is that they coinside with destrction of the Earths natural Carbon Sink mechanisms, eg. deforestation of the Amazon which has reached a crutial tipping point and the so-called Mega-fires have already started, as not reported on Slashdot (sniff).

    --
    The Almighty was heard while overseeing His children; "Oi! Don't Make Me Come Down There!"
  5. The funny part... by jopsen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The funny part is the it's America that's responsable for the climate changes... Most if not all of Europe takes part in international campaigns against CO2 polution. I Denmark (Europe) one Gallon of (car) fuel cost 7.12 USD. - What do you pay? - And how does that affect the environment?

  6. ... or something else? by kripkenstein · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If this study is based upon when plants flowered, it may not be as much climate change as it is light change.

    Good point (and good elaboration of it). Now, TFA mentions that they observed "542 plants and 19 animal species". Which doesn't go against the issue that you raise, since changes in plants can lead directly to changes in animals dependent upon them. So, it might not be climate change but something else that affects plants. However, I am not sure I agree about light being the necessary culprit; when you say

    So, this may not be based as much upon climate change as much as light change, which could easily be caused by increasing urbanization (city lights and such providing enough light to change these processes).

    - I am led to wonder how many plants are actually affected by light from cities. I'm no expert, so I won't venture a specific guess. But there are other options besides light: radio waves, noise (from planes), etc., which in theory might affect plants (again, not an expert here). I would guess that more plants are bathed by radio waves than by lights, FWIW. So, on the one hand, we know light affects plants, but don't know (I think) about the other factors; yet the other factors may affect more plants, and therefore might be easier to correlate with a mass change in plant behavior.

    Interesting questions. Hopefully someone here knows more.

  7. Re:The Earth did cool 1940 - 1970 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    And now we have a lot of ship traffic polluting the air with sulfate and other aerosols, due to increased global trade. Crappy heavy oil no one wants have used in neihbourhood power plants... A middle sized container ship polutes the air as much as a thousand trucks for comparison. Without that the earth would be around one degree warmer.

  8. Re:Is it us or is it mother nature? by Sloppy · · Score: 2, Interesting
    And what happens if we actively try to combat global warming only to find out later it was a natural trend?
    Then we congratulate ourselves for, once again, defeating Mother Nature by bending Her laws to serve Our desires. Muahahaha!
    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.