“Hot enough for ya?” Get used to hearing that remark a lot more than you used to, or so say climatologists and atmospheric researchers. As this week’s Seven Days cover story “Totally Uncool” points out, Mother Nature’s warning signs are now big and obvious enough for even us nonscientists to notice.
The newest evidence? Today, the U.S. Department of Agriculture unveiled its new, 2012 Plant Hardiness Zone map. The Vermont map confirms what local growers have been saying for years: The Green Mountain State is becoming more temporate and now more resembles the climate of Virginia in the 1960s.
What’s worse, if greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase at their present rate, by 2080 Vermont will look and feel more like northern Georgia. The good news? More peach cobbler. The bad news: Say goodbye to real Vermont maple syrup.
According to the USDA, plant hardiness zone designations represent the average annual extreme minimum temperatures at a given location during a particular time period. They do not reflect the coldest it has ever been or ever will be at a specific location, but simply the average lowest winter temperature for the location over a specified time. Low temperature during the winter is a crucial factor in the survival of plants at specific locations.
“Compared to the 1990 version, zone boundaries in this edition of the map have shifted in many areas,” according to the USDA press statement. “The new map is generally one 5-degree Fahrenheit half-zone warmer than the previous map throughout much of the United States.”
Since 1970, the average temperature in New England has risen 2 degrees Fahrenheit, with average winter temperatures rising twice as fast — 4 degrees between 1970 and 2000. That’s according to Alan Betts, an atmospheric researcher from Pittford, Vt.
Precipitation in Vermont has also increased by as much as 20 percent, with more of it arriving as rain and less as snow. Overall, Betts warns Vermonters to expect rainier winters, earlier springs, hotter summers, longer and more persistent droughts, and heavier and more frequent and torrential “extreme” weather events such as Tropical Storm Irene.
Even under the most conservative estimates of future greenhouse gas emissions, Betts predicts that the Green Mountain State will be 3 degrees hotter by 2050 and 5 degrees hotter by century’s end. “If you want to look at what might be the most politically correct thing, you can say something’s happening,” Vermont gardening expert Charlie Nardozzi tells USA Today. “But the climate is changing. Spring is coming sooner and lasting longer. Fall lasts longer, and overall the weather is so much more erratic now.”
To find out what zone your home or business is located in, click here and enter your zip code. For more about the long-term effects of global warming on Vermont, check out this week’s cover story here.
Plant Hardiness Zone map courtesy of the USDA
This article appears in Jan 25 – Feb 1, 2012.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
My own unscientific and undocumented observations over twenty years agree with you are reporting. On the bright side a longer growing season and less brutal winter lows are not things I can complain about. On the downside a wet year can destroy more crops than a drought year. Hay crops at least.
This map will yet again change in a few years. Remember in the 70’s we were headed for an ice age? The global Warming mumbo jumbo has proven to be based upon junk science and manipulation of the data. http://www.dailytech.com/Clima… I wouldn’t waste too much sleep worrying about this!
Time to plant those vineyards and become famous for our excellent wine!
Where the hell did this come from ?
“What’s worse, if greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase at their
present rate, by 2080 Vermont will look and feel more like northern
Georgia”
What a crock of shit in an otherwise decent piece. Anywho, warm weather is ok with me, now excuse me while I go let my Suburban idle for a while.
Maybe he meant the Asian Georgia, the one the Russians are always threatening to invade?
Patricia, you may disagree with the overwhelming preponderance of verifiable scientific evidence supporting the conclusion that human activity is warming the planet, but there’s no disputing the fact that Vermont’s climate HAS changed over the last 40 years, and is projected to continue changing for the foreseeable future. There is NO scientific showing that this is some statistical aberration or blip and to continue to insist otherwise is to be in complete denial of the inevitable.
Clearly the earth is warming, however Ken… there is an overwhelming preponderance of verifiable scientific evidence that supports the conclusion that human activity has almost nothing to do with it other then stroke the anthrocentric ego of the latest catastrophe crowd.
Oh, the frustration of explaining science to people who don’t understand science. Yet, while that may sound pretentious, it is the reality I face on a daily basis when I try to explain chemistry, geology, and physics to people who have no background or understanding of the later. I have a graduate degree in geochemistry, have worked directly on projects impacted by rapidly changing climates (Alaska’s glaciers), have published in peer reviewed journals, and now work professionally on projects relating to these disciplines, and I have NEVER met anyone in all of my academic and professional care that disputes the CO2 levels have steadily increased since the industrial revolution, the earth is warming, and the world’s climates are changing. PERIOD. In fact, in most of the professional projects I work on we now HAVE to include in our environmental assessments the influence that global climate change may have on the various projects in the future. Now why would a client be required to spends 100s of thousands to literally millions of dollars to conduct a comprehensive study to characterize the effects that global climate change may have on the project if it was all just “junk science and manipulation of data”? This is not academia. These clients are companies that need to protect there bottom line, and would love to see the facts that global climate change is a farce and merely 10s of thousands of scientists from the around the world are just making things up. Oh wait, that is what the oil and gas industry already does, but for the rest of the world’s industries that don’t produce products that directly exacerbate the problem, they have to follow the lines of science.
Patricia, the theoretical possibility of a rapid cooling (new ice age) still is a possibility. Do some research on the North Atlantic Conveyor Belt to learn about the possibility that warming climates could cause rapid cooling in the polar regions. With that said, the conveyor belt is not slowing down (perhaps slightly speeding up), but the conceptual model that controls this process and what things can influence it are still the same. Therefore, consider the science behind the process to hopefully understand how and why an ice age could occur.
Jcarter, show me some, or a little, or even one piece of evidence (not sponsored by an oil and gas company) that “overwhelmingly” supports the notion that humans have nothing to do with climate change. Please, it would a be a major breakthrough to the 10s of thousands of scientists that CAN show we are the driver… And it needs to be from a science journal that specializes in this field of science. I too, have read some of the garbage out there (very often sponsored by the oil and gas companies), yet my favorite was a article essentially discussing how there is no such thing as climate change, but the kicker is that is was printed in an Anatomy and Physiology Journal!! Now tell me, how the heck does a doctor who specialized in human anatomy have any clout when it comes to reporting on climate change?? And the answer is simple, he has none, hahaha. That’s why it was printed in an Anatomy journal!!
So there you go, do a little research patricia and Jcarter, educate yourself on the topic and be very cautious about the sources you consider as fact, and then may be a real conversation will emerge. I might even embark on a little talk of solar forcing and where it fits into the whole equation… but then again I wouldn’t want any research to get in the way of someone’s idling gas-guzzler. The American way: Because I can!!
“Jcarter, show me some, or a little, or even one piece of evidence (not
sponsored by an oil and gas company) that “overwhelmingly” supports the
notion that humans have nothing to do with climate change.”
Almost nothing. The contribution is minimal. CO2 due to respiration, sure there are 6 times population today then there was 150 years ago and every person exhales CO2 constantly. I dispute that it is all due to the burning of fossil fuel. I also dispute there is “alot” more too this then natural cycles. There have very clearly been periods warmer, and with higher levels of CO2 in the history of the earth, and yet there was not cataclysmic ending and levels returned to “normal”. As a Geologist, you should recognize this planets amazing ability to maintain homeostasis and the nearly infinite contributing factors that add up to an observable effect. As I stated above, is there climate change…sure. Are humans the major contributer… that is doubtful. Millions of tons of CO2 are released due to melting permafrost… melting because the earth has been warming as part of it’s normal cycle. High CO2 causes less plant stomata and therefore less water vapor released in the air… With millions of factors, some on enormous scale it is foolish to blame climate change on humans. Problem is, as with any problem, most people have to place blame, especially on something they can influence. It’s human nature. You have obviously come across scientific articles published in peer reviewed journals that call into question some prevailing theories. As a person with a science background you are also aware that ANY piece of data that contradicts the hypothesis means the hypothesis must be thrown out. Blast that scientific method!
Do you even realize that northern Georgia is mountainous and can get quite cold in the winter?