Thursday, 31 March 2016
Saturday, 26 March 2016
Here's a look at the proposals for the development of the weedy vacant site at the north end of Stoke town, between the former Irish Centre and the A500. The site is to be home to high-rise student flats serving the expanded Staffordshire University. I generally welcome this development, and the expansion of the university.
But I'd question the wisdom of the positioning of some of those balconies and windows, on health grounds. Many appear to be perched directly above the A500, one of our most heavily trafficked roads. Are we really happy to allow young people to live directly above the A500, seemingly without even the benefit of its concrete noise barrier? Especially given what we know about dangerous particulate pollution from diesel engines, and the fumes arising from the city's rapidly rising traffic congestion?
If I were living above the A500 like that, in a small difficult-to-ventilate flat, I might be very wary of opening the windows or sitting out on the balcony. Certainly not without first donning a Chinese-style smog-mask, and turning on a Maplins' gadget that would warn me of high levels of nitrogen dioxide and other toxic nasties.
Wednesday, 23 March 2016
True, but it's also very very old news in terms of science. Scientists have been tracking the increase in England since 1980...
Scotland shows much the same upward curve. Though there it appears to have started more gradually, and twenty years earlier in 1960. Possibly the difference is partly also due to their lesser urban heat-islands, and less light-pollution at night...
However, don't go taking today's 'news' literally and merrily planting your potatoes in mid-February. Take a look at the savage ups-and-downs of the actual recorded growing season lengths on those graphs, rather than at the computer-smoothed statistical trend line. Those jaggies reflect what gardeners know all too well, living on an island so sensitive to the warmth-giving powers of the North Atlantic Drift (aka 'The Gulf Stream'). We know that an essentially random tweak of an Atlantic ocean current, or a twist in a vortex of Arctic winds, can often decide the arrival date of spring. As H.W. Linderholm concluded, after surveying all the scientific literature on the topic to 2005...
"... several authors have found strong associations between large scale weather phenomena (e.g. the NAO [North Atlantic Oscillation]) and growing season variability, suggesting that global warming may not be the only explanation. Also, other factors like land use change may have been of importance. It must be kept in mind that the observed changes in GSL [growing season length] are not uniform; while increased GSL has been observed in low-to-mid latitudes, the GSL seems to decrease at some high latitude and altitude sites." ("Growing Season Changes in the Last Century", Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, March 2006).
How does it affect the local wildlife? Our wildlife has evolved to be highly adaptable to the variable timing of the arrival of spring. It thus seems unlikely that such natural variability will phase them, especially given how long it's been happening — the graph above shows it happening long before the Industrial Revolution. In our own time, a few extra years (per decade) in which there's an earlier arrival of a warm spring, and/or an extended Indian summer in Autumn, would seem to me to benefit almost all species.
Tuesday, 22 March 2016
"Stoke-on-Trent has seen the [UK's] biggest increase in rush hour congestion, [up by] 44% [since 2010]."Not good for either the economy (lateness, driver stress), health (think of all the particulates and dioxides, along main roads choked with idling stop-start traffic), or fuel efficiency and the environment generally.
And 1000s of 'old clunker' cars and vans have been taken off the roads over the last five years, already. So that's obviously not a strong solution to the problem.
Sunday, 20 March 2016
Animals don't think: "Oh, that's just cute Mrs. Fluffee Wuffles down there...". They think: "Uh oh, over forty slavering hairy carnivores regularly walk through this area like they own it, and half of them leave smelly shit behind... so I'm going elsewhere..."
Researchers have known for a long time now that dog-walking permanently scares away around a third of all the birds from conservation areas. Now it seems that a wider and clearer scientific case for banning dog-walking is developing. Especially in country parks and nature reserves, and on coastal and river paths. Dog walking in such areas clearly needs to be banned on ecological grounds, if our nature reserves are really meant for nature as intended.